Unrealistic Goal Weights (Long post)

springtrio

Well, I gave this a shot today (net calories, that is). I must say...I feel more energized and less hungry though. I just wish I didn't feel so guilty about eating those extra ones.

_GlaDOS_

No, it is not setting 1,200 as our BMR, the 1,200 is creating a deficit so we can lose weight!
BMR is what your body will burn if you don't do anything.. so obviously you need to eat less than that to lose weight!
for example my BMR is around 1,700 so eating 1,200 means I have a deficit of 500 a day = 3500 a week = 1lb loss a week

This, I have discovered, is not how BMR works.

For example, my BMR is about 1650. This is the number you should think of that your body needs to "survive". To maintain my current weight, however, I need to eat about 2,100 calories. You should base your deficit on the calories you need to maintain your weight, and eat at LEAST your BMR calories (Your BMR calories should be the lowest deficit you should go basically). I have to gradually work up to this now, since I've been trying to live off of a 1000-1200 calorie deficit. And I didn't lose weight with that deficit. It also probably depends on how much and how hard you exercise. Now, maybe if you're super obese, it would be different. This is how I have come to understand it, anyway...

AlsDonkBoxSquat

I was set for 1200 and I worked out. I would eat back at least half my exercise calories every day and on days that I didn't exercise tried to fall within 50 calories of 1200. the first month was tough for me because my normal portion size was one and a half times what it should have been (6 oz instead of 4 oz), but once I got used to actually consuming healthy portions and really started packing on the veggies those 1200 days didn't bother me at all. I'm now up to 1400 as my base for maintenance. I successfully lost about 30 pounds in 4 months and am down to a 13% body fat with a sustainable lifestyle. this isn't something that I suggest for everyone, everyone is different, but this is what worked for me. Yes I lost about 5 or 6 pounds of lean mass along the way, but now I have a healthy starting point from which I can put some of that back on.

Wow...13% bf is considered pretty much on the border of the lowest safe level/dangerous level for females... You should easily have super visible 6 pack muscles by now. Most females have them show around 17% if they have enough lean muscle

I've been working with my pt and I'm still very safe. I had eating disorders as a teen, so this time I wanted to make sure that I was getting to an optimal weight and bf% for me and my body. I think that I've finally settled into maintenance and am excited to see the scale start going up as I put on a little more lean mass. As it stands I probably would have a cut 6 pack right now, but I like wine and ice cream . . . until I get rid of them I'll just have to settle for "you can tell it's there." I need a new picture for my profile. I'm not really worried about my bf%, I have reserves in my donk.

Rompa_87

I was set for 1200 and I worked out. I would eat back at least half my exercise calories every day and on days that I didn't exercise tried to fall within 50 calories of 1200. the first month was tough for me because my normal portion size was one and a half times what it should have been (6 oz instead of 4 oz), but once I got used to actually consuming healthy portions and really started packing on the veggies those 1200 days didn't bother me at all. I'm now up to 1400 as my base for maintenance. I successfully lost about 30 pounds in 4 months and am down to a 13% body fat with a sustainable lifestyle. this isn't something that I suggest for everyone, everyone is different, but this is what worked for me. Yes I lost about 5 or 6 pounds of lean mass along the way, but now I have a healthy starting point from which I can put some of that back on.

Wow...13% bf is considered pretty much on the border of the lowest safe level/dangerous level for females... You should easily have super visible 6 pack muscles by now. Most females have them show around 17% if they have enough lean muscle

I've been working with my pt and I'm still very safe. I had eating disorders as a teen, so this time I wanted to make sure that I was getting to an optimal weight and bf% for me and my body. I think that I've finally settled into maintenance and am excited to see the scale start going up as I put on a little more lean mass. As it stands I probably would have a cut 6 pack right now, but I like wine and ice cream . . . until I get rid of them I'll just have to settle for "you can tell it's there." I need a new picture for my profile. I'm not really worried about my bf%, I have reserves in my donk.

I only express concern because my background is in sport and nutrition Psychology and basically the scientific literature reports that for females somewhere between 10-13% body fat is the essential fat levels for females. Basically when you start going into or below this level it will start affecting your hormonal responses, damage your vital organs etc. So while you are just on the safe side border now make sure you do not lose any more bf

gardenimp

My BMR is 1749.5/day...So doing the math eating 1200 calories a day puts me at a 549.5 calorie deficit a day. 549.5 X 7 days gives me a weekly deficit of 3846.5. Since one pound equals 3500 calories (give or take) I am set to lose 1 pound a week. Kudos if your BMR is higher but not everyone here is 'just doing 1200" I've done research on alot of other sites and listened to a variety of trainers opinions.

And what matters is results. I'm closing in on 50 pounds right now so this formula is working for me.

Your BMR is you being in a coma. It's the energy it take just to exist. As soon as you get up of bed, you spend more energy. So in fact your deficite is more around 1000 to 1500 calories a day.

You are to take you BMR *1.2 for sedentary (sitting all day job), 1.375 for active jobs (on your feet and/or walking) and 1.55 for physically challenging jobs (construction workers). Like I state previously, I have done my homework and it is working for me.

If what you are doing is working for you, then continue. I don't believe people should judge every persons journey with their own indiviual experiences. Everyone is different and each person need to find what works for them.

callmecorinne

I have been on this site for going on 2 years now and am only now just starting to lose weight...I aim for 1200 calories a day and am 5'4. I may only NET 1000 when I exercise...but it is working for me. At 1200-1400 I stay the same, at 1500 I fluctuate, and anything above that I begin to gain. I have tested many methods over the past 2 years....testing each one for at least a month, so I know what works for MY body....or what doesn't. I am within 10 pounds of my goal, at which I will slowly start raising my calories to maintain when I get within the 2-5 pound range from goal. Until then, I am going to do what works since it has taken me 2 years to find it!

AGREED! Everyone's body is different and if you found a method that is working for you. (As it seems to be, phenomenally) Then more power to you!

patrick323

I think, also, that people with more substantial weight to lose CAN afford to have a higher deficit. If a person is looking to drop 10 to 15 pounds; I think that doing it slowly with weight training and replenishing burnt calories (within a minor deficit goal) is likely to work for them. I'd be very happy once I was to the point where I could worry about toning. Right now it's just shredding for me.

Rompa_87

It is very possible for larger people to lose more weight and more quickly than someone who is already lean. There is no doubt about this fact.

However, just putting this out there that any high calorie deficit diet will damage your metabolism regardless of whether you are lean with 10-15lbs to lose or 200+lbs. This is one of the primary reasons why when people finally shed their weight quickly from a crash diet they are likely to gain almost all their weight back once they start eating normally again. Their metabolism slowly needs to repair itself and they have likely lose so much lean muscle mass that it will take a long time to undo the damage.

So the question is this. What is more important to you, losing 50+lbs by beach season so you can look good in you bikini or changing your lifestyle so that you lose weight and continue keeping it off forever? If it is the latter then lose weight slowly. figure out your BMR and eat at that level until you stop losing weight. Cut 100 calories from that and then continue eating at that level until you stop losing weight again and repeat.

Sure you won't be in awesome shape by next beach season and it might take you years to get to your ideal weight. Think about it though, did you gain 100's of lbs in 6 months? Very unlikely. It took years of overeating of not exercising enough and eating too much. Why do you expect it is a better idea to undo that damage in a matter of months? Make small changes over time and live the lifestyle you are aiming for.

sonjalucia

Rompoc...

What about for someone like myself who can only really do abdominal and arm exercises? I am 2 months post meniscus/ACL
/MCL surgery and am not yet cleared to do cardio (need to knee to straighten first)

I am 5'3 and went from 165 the daycbefore surgery to 140 with clean eating only. I'm finding myself stuck now at 140 eating at 1,200 and am looking for smart ways to try upping the cals... Perhaps calorie cycling for 2 weeks.

Your thoughts?

patrick323

It is very possible for larger people to lose more weight and more quickly than someone who is already lean. There is no doubt about this fact.

However, just putting this out there that any high calorie deficit diet will damage your metabolism regardless of whether you are lean with 10-15lbs to lose or 200+lbs. This is one of the primary reasons why when people finally shed their weight quickly from a crash diet they are likely to gain almost all their weight back once they start eating normally again. Their metabolism slowly needs to repair itself and they have likely lose so much lean muscle mass that it will take a long time to undo the damage.

So the question is this. What is more important to you, losing 50+lbs by beach season so you can look good in you bikini or changing your lifestyle so that you lose weight and continue keeping it off forever? If it is the latter then lose weight slowly. figure out your BMR and eat at that level until you stop losing weight. Cut 100 calories from that and then continue eating at that level until you stop losing weight again and repeat.

Sure you won't be in awesome shape by next beach season and it might take you years to get to your ideal weight. Think about it though, did you gain 100's of lbs in 6 months? Very unlikely. It took years of overeating of not exercising enough and eating too much. Why do you expect it is a better idea to undo that damage in a matter of months? Make small changes over time and live the lifestyle you are aiming for.

I did slightly UP my calorie intake after week one (i'm just ending week two) because i was losing as much as 2lb a day some days and I realize that as thrilling as that is, it's probably a little rapid. The weight loss did decrease slightly but still at a substantial rate. I really like this at first for a good motivator.

Do you think that low to moderate resistance workouts - a few times a week (a 'core' workout, swimming, etc) will suffice for lean muscle resistance exercising for a bit until I think I'm ready to switch from 2 to 3 cardio workouts a day to a strength training day which will surely drain me of more energy making these multiple cardio workouts hard to do (this is when I'd eat more I suppose) ??

Also, the way I eat now, is precisely the way i hope to eat from now on and have zero plans or desire to fall back into poor eating habits which were 2 very high cal meals , one late afternoon, one late night).

littlemili

So explain this.

I was eating 1300 plus exercise calories, until I plateaued. Tried eating more (net 1400), nothing happened. Stopped eating back exercise calories (netting anything from 500-1200), weight started coming off at a normal rate again.

Then went away for 5 weeks and ate whatever I wanted with no idea of calories, macros or my weight. Lost 2lbs in that time despite eating a ton - much slower than normal loss but still losing. So clearly my metabolism is fine and not damaged by netting under 1200 every day, or I would gain it straight back.

babyblake11

No, it is not setting 1,200 as our BMR, the 1,200 is creating a deficit so we can lose weight!
BMR is what your body will burn if you don't do anything.. so obviously you need to eat less than that to lose weight!
for example my BMR is around 1,700 so eating 1,200 means I have a deficit of 500 a day = 3500 a week = 1lb loss a week

this is way off. you burn 1200 a day laying in bed. if you get up and do daily things you burn ALOT more. and thats not including exercise.

Crystalchaos72

No, it is not setting 1,200 as our BMR, the 1,200 is creating a deficit so we can lose weight!
BMR is what your body will burn if you don't do anything.. so obviously you need to eat less than that to lose weight!
for example my BMR is around 1,700 so eating 1,200 means I have a deficit of 500 a day = 3500 a week = 1lb loss a week

BMR is what your body needs if you were in bed all day or in a coma......that is not correct. I am not a medical professional but it is a fact........if you google it and calculate it , it will tell you the same thing.

As a sidenote, I would starve if I only ate 1200 a day, sometimes am hungry even after eating 2000.....I eat all my exercise cals back......and am currently the smallest I have been in my adult life

lcarter25

What about me

I did the weight i want to be (short goal) 150lbs so 68kg it said i should eat1795?

currently im eating 1200 and my exercise

VolatileChocolate

MFP does work out your cal deficit based on BMR its on your Goal page, there are also other sites that have the calc on it. It all depends how much you want to lose each week and will calc what deficit you need to eat. Which is why they also tell you to eat the exercise cals as its based on you doing nothing.

I'm around 248 lbs and my BMR is about 2100-2200 so for me to burn off 2lbs a week my cals are set at 1280cals, if I want to lose 1.5lbs a week than its 1560cals etc etc. I'm happy with 1280cals, sometimes I eat more sometimes less. I'm sorry but at nearly 18st its unlikely I'm going to go into stavation mode just because now n again I don't eat all my exercise cals - Yes maybe if I was doing it constantly but also I'd have to do this over a period of time before this happened.

As long as I'm drinking plenty of water, eating healthy and listening to my bodies needs - eat something if I'm actually starting to feel hungry rather than either mindless grazing or ignoring the hunger.

Yesterday i burned 1000 cals off with exercise - it wld be impossible for me to eat that many extra cals - its would have had to been junk with high cal and not healthy, which is then defeating the object.

AlsDonkBoxSquat

[I only express concern because my background is in sport and nutrition Psychology and basically the scientific literature reports that for females somewhere between 10-13% body fat is the essential fat levels for females. Basically when you start going into or below this level it will start affecting your hormonal responses, damage your vital organs etc. So while you are just on the safe side border now make sure you do not lose any more bf

Thanks! Yeah, we've discussed that I'm boarder line essential, that's one of the reasons that I went into maintenance. Knowing that I'm denser than most of the people I know, I decided to base my weight loss on bf% instead of weight, it's a more sensible measurement for me. With 109 pounds of lean mass a goal of 115 for me is incredibly unreasonable. Now at 15% lean mass loss per pound that would take me to 107.5 and 115 which is just crazy, but for many 5'3" women 115 isn't an unreasonable goal.

Back to topic though, I understand what you're saying, however I sort of feel like my metabolism was stagnant for so long it really needed that boost in the first few weeks. I was set at 1200, ate back at least half my exercise calories, and worked out like a crazy person trying to get at least 400/day.
On the other hand my mother and I sat down and discovered that she probably wasn't eating enough calories, and she's pretty inactive. We set her up at a higher caloric intake because I think that's what will help her metabolism grab hold. I don't have any science behind it, I'm certainly not a professional, I was just thinking "okay, my tatter tots are killing me, so lets get that calorie count down. If she's been eating like that for a long time she's in starvation mode, lets get that calorie count up."