Confused about net calories

laurad8911

Hi all,

So today, with exercise calories, I was "supposed to eat" almost 1900 calories and I ate 1780 something (which was actually kind of difficult, but I want to avoid starvation mode since I'm only a bit overweight and pretty active)....I burned 555 at the gym, and on day's I don't work out MFP says I should be eating 1340 calories a day. However, I just calculated my BMR using the calculator on this site, and it said my BMR is over 1400. So shouldn't I be eating more than 1340 on days I'm not working out? Also, I did a "net calories" report of the last two days (I'm very new to MFP) and it says my net calories are less than 1200 both days....does that mean after working out my body had 1200 calories left to operate on? Is that bad because its less than my BMR? I'm honestly confused about what net calories even exactly means in this context. If anyone could shed some light on this issue for me it would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Laura

F.Y.I. Not sure if this is necessary but to provide context, I'm 5'6", 21 years old, CW: 153, GW: 140, body fat: 27-28%

Monica_has_a_goal

I'm new too. .been here 6 weeks and I still dont understand it completely .. wish i could help.

Crystal_Pistol

Here's a quick and dirty the way I understand it (from doctors, dieticians, nutritionists, trainers, etc LOL):

For me, I burn 2100 calories living and in my "sedentary" office work based life. My calore reccomendation is 1200 a day. This means I need 14700 calories a week to maintain my weight as is. A pound is 3500 calories, so for each 3500 calorie deficit I create from the my weekly total, I will lose a pound. The deficit can be through any means, though a combination deficit means I won't be eating away at muscle over the long run and I'll be increasing my body's ability to burn by builing it (muscle) instead. Basically:

14700 weekly calories required to be me, "as is"
-8400 weekly calories I'm taking in (my daily allotment for the whole week)
=6300 weekly calorie deficit

Divide this by 3500 and I can expect to lose 1.8 pounds a week.

Hope this was helpful.

Crystal_Pistol

Oh- and BMR is what you need to exist if you didn't move. You need more calories than that to move around and live during the day. You can get a clearer picture of what you need according to your "added" activity here: http://www.bmrcalculator.org/
That might help you see the net calories thing more clearly.

Autumn1206

I am no expert, but for women I think the rule of thumb is no less than 1200 calories consumed, regardless of your burn. I go up and down a bit on my burns depending on what I am doing that day, and generally as long as I consume at least 1200 calories I don't get the red message. It's harder than it would seem at first to eat that much. There is a school of thought that recommends consuming your recommended daily intake - say 1340 for someone my size and level of activity outside of working out, PLUS calories to cover your work out, so if you burn 555 calories, the school of thought recommends that you consume a total of 1895 calories if I am adding in my head correctly. That's a lot of peanuts :noway:

rachelthefinn

OK. I don't think this will help you much, but I wanted to just put my experience in here. I recently joined a gym and they offer (for a fee, of course) a test that will tell you how many calories you burn at rest and how many you burn with your lifestyle (excluding exercise). I had to wear a mask that measured my O2 intake and CO2 output for 20 minutes to measure my metabolism. According to MFP, I burn 1499 calories at rest. According to the test I did at the gym, I burn 1815. With my lifestyle, I can burn up to 2360. With exercising 5 days a week, they estimated I could burn 2547 a day. But the calorie goal per day that they gave me was 1875. They did NOT add calories burned onto what I can eat, as this wouldn't allow me to lose any weight. The trainer said he moved the number up from 1815 to 1875 so I wouldn't dip into starvation mode and start losing muscle tissue.

Knowing this now with more detailed information, there is no way to set MFP to my calorie goal...so I just need to keep it where it is (1813) and work from there. The trainer also said that I should be getting no more than 40% of my calories from carbs, and 30% from protein and 30% form fat. This is WAY off of what MFP says....

Again, not sure that this helps you at all, unless you want to go get this test done so you know your BMR for sure.

Gsc122

I think it depends on what your goals are.if your looking to lose weight over everything else then you want to run a deficit.without a doubt. However, I don't think consumed calories combined with working out factor the way you think they do with starvation mode.I've always understood starvation mod was purely based off how much you eat and how often. Exercise based deficits were a non factor. For example my wife has to be at around 1100 calories to lose weight.she does that by consuming over 1200, then exercising her way back down below 1100.she's been losing weight and hasn't entered starvation mode as far as I can tell.

Now if your goal is actually to get fit over weight loss, builds muscle etc, then its a bit different.to build your body requires the building blocks.this is usually in the form of a protein. You'd want to speak to a real nutritionist but generally speaking this method also runs high on calories and carbs.the thought is the more muscle you have the higher your metabolic rate the more calories you need to maintain your weight the more fat you'll burn naturally through out the day.

beedo30

If you feel like reading click the link, more info about calorie intake and will help you "wrap" your head around things.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121703981