An easier way to setup goal calories - eating for who you wi

myopus

Bumping; hoping for future success stories posted here.

jan5555

like this approach!

ernurse77

To make sure that I understand this correctly, this formula tells me that in order to maintain a weight of 150lbs I need to eat 2516 calories with my current activity level? If I wanted to maintain my unhealthy weight of 180lbs I would need to eat 2739 calories per day? I am having a mental block thinking that a 223 calorie defecit isn't going to be enough to loose the weight.

My BMR at 180lbs is 1584, activity is 1155
My BMR at 150lbs is 1455, activity is 1061

When I entered the new calorie goal of 2516, MFP calculated my weight loss to be 0.5lbs per week??????? :noway: :frown:

This method is precisely to get over the situation many put themselves in when they eat below their current BMR, which just causes it to lower anyway, and you plateau.
Made doubly-worse by not eating back any exercise calories.

Remember on above - future activity calories are based on that weight, you'll burn more now because you weigh more.
Also be aware that the activity level estimates are usually half what you would get anyway, looking at calorie burn even from more accurate HRM.

And MFP's math on weight loss would no longer apply because they are looking at their BMR/maintenance calculation on current body with NO exercise, minus a future body BMR/maintenance including exercise.
So must leave their math out of it.

Just confirm activity levels. Sleep is easy, everyday.

Are you really going to do a Hard 1 hr everyday, or was that 3 days / week. With 3 days weight lifting at Medium and only 45 each.

All of that must be avg back out to 7 days / week. Just in case that was missed.

I alternte my cardio days with my weight days. I set an original goal of 30 minutes for cardio and weights, but many times go as long as an hour. Sleep is easy?!?!?!?!?! I miss the days of easy sleep! I have two small kids and I work VERY strange hours, and so does my husband. A set schedule for an adult in our house is not going to happen. There are days when I can only get 3 hours of sleep, it all depends on our work schedules.

Thank you for clarifying that MFP is whacked compared to the website. With your explination, I finally get it! The light bulb went on! :drinker:

Thanks again,
Molly

schmoozie26

bump to read later. I must be an IDIOT because this stuff seriously confuses me. I'm a very visual learner and need a damn picture!!!! :sad:

heybales

I did this and the numbers I got at ExRx were only 3 off from the ones from here.

For what, BMR or maintenance calories?

If BMR was the same, and maintenance was about the same, then you entered in your current stats. And yes, it uses exactly the same calculation for BMR that MFP uses, so it should have been exactly the same.
And that formula is most accurate for those at a healthy weight already.

If maintenance was the same, then you told MFP one activity level, and ExRx a different activity level, or failed to enter in normal avg exercise if you do any.

Please reread OP carefully. Or share the basic stats for double-check by mail.

allynady

bump

heybales

I finally had the time to sit down and read this and I LOVE it. I am going to give a try and see what happens. I've been stuck at the same weight for the past 4 months, so it can't hurt, right??

Won't hurt, as it is meant to protect slowing your BMR down.

But you have done such an incredible job and are so close to goal weight already, it may take a few weeks to find out if it will work or not.

If your BMR is at healthy level already, and this method causes a few more pounds to drop but then leaves you about 5lbs away, either:
Re-examine if exercise levels are correct, may be overestimated.
or
Your healthy BMR really is lower than calculated, so drop another 100 cal off goal.
or
You have more lean mass from all that exercise, and your body doesn't want to go down in weight, because you would have to lose muscle weight.

As one post just commented, gal was fitting in high school jeans comfortable again, at 20 lbs more, because it is lean mass, not fat.

heybales

Would you calculate it for me?? Bc I don't get how to do this.. But I want to try

It would be a good example if you don't mind your stats public. If not, just send email.
Got your gender, age, and height already.

Just need goal weight -
Current weight for comparison -
And your normal activity levels including exercise type, intensity, and duration, and frequency.
(ie daily sleep 8, watching TV 3, work at desk 8 for 5 days, walking into office .25 for 5 days, walking 4mph for 1 hr, 3 times a week, 2 gym classes a week for 45 min, walking dog everyday at 3mph for 2 hrs, ect)

Kissybiz

bump

supermom4abcd

Definitely trying this as 1200 cal for almost a year is getting to the point where I feel ravenous. A bump up to 1800 will be a welcome change. I think healthier choices will fit in easier throughout the day and not have me worrying about saving calories to keep from being so hungry at night.

Myssi2

bump

futiledevices

I REALLY want to try this since my weight hasn't moved in a while. I put in resting for 12 hours and sleeping for 12 hours, just to get an underestimated number. It's still a lot! It's hard for me to do it without being worried. What I've done today is set my goal to around maintenance; I'll try that for a week and then go back down to 1300. Even now, with the higher number, I can't hit it. I have leftover calories. I guess I just can't eat as much as I used to.

heybales

I REALLY want to try this since my weight hasn't moved in a while. I put in resting for 12 hours and sleeping for 12 hours, just to get an underestimated number. It's still a lot! It's hard for me to do it without being worried. What I've done today is set my goal to around maintenance; I'll try that for a week and then go back down to 1300. Even now, with the higher number, I can't hit it. I have leftover calories. I guess I just can't eat as much as I used to.

Yep, and this method is to exactly protect someone from pre-maturely lowering their metabolism and BMR before they reach their goal weight.
Because otherwise, you get the effect you have. Stalled and no appetite.

Just in case the concept of BMR is not understood, my first post provided the link to read up on it, and snippet how it's the basic functions of human life.
More on that, taking care of all the cells in the body is part of that function, fat and muscle cells, and everything else.
You cannot get the BMR calories from fat, they must be taken in from outside. (well, the fat comes out to supply energy all the time, energy to take care of the fat cells, so just a tad lost in the inefficiency of that arrangement, but that must be made up from external sources).

If the needs of a healthy BMR are not met, the body has to lower the metabolism and basically set a new BMR to deal with lack of energy.

So lets say the healthy BMR calc was at 1600.
And as you set activity level, no exercise, sleeping all day basically.
And then you eat at just 1300 calories.

Your body needs 1600, you gave it 1300. it will lower the metabolism over a short time to 1300.

You just lost out on a free 300 calorie burn everyday of mostly fat energy. That is 2100 calories a week, or 2/3 of a pound.

If you are actually exercising and not being honest about sleeping all day, say 300 cal worth of exercise on avg daily.

You are now netting 1000 calories for your body to take care of those basic functions. It will slow down. You will not be hungry for more. And weight loss will stall.

And now you are missing out on a free 600 calories of burn each and every day. That is now 4200 calories a week, 1.2 lbs a week.

Are you sure you want to continue this journey with a hampered metabolism that has been slowed down by underfeeding it?

Now while this method I've presented does have you ending up with the lower BMR and metabolism you will eventually reach, eating at maintenance that includes honest evaluation of avg daily activities including exercise protects it from lowering the BMR early.

Only a very obese person would see that not be true, and I contemplated perhaps saying to estimate 1 yr out. But it is also estimated that obese can handle a slight dip below BMR without harm, because their BMR is already high for supporting the extra weight.

futiledevices

Well, my bmr (according to MFP) is 1359. My most recent daily goal was 1400 (before I switched to maintenance), so I wasn't going that far under it. I am kind of worried now - I really don't want to stall my weight loss more than I (potentially) have already.
Thanks for the tips - I hope my new plan works out.

Jessb1985

bump to do when I get home from work, thanks for the advice worth trying out

vegansara

I've emailed my nutritionist about this - I have been thinking a lot lately about how I've been eating at a deficit for almost 8 months now . . . doesn't seem smart. The timing of this post is perfect! Thank you universe (and OP!).

I've done the calculations and it gives me a daily intake of 2080. The exercise calories look low to me - based on what I usually give myself (don't have a HRM yet), so I feel like it's still a safe "loss" plan.

I have ten pounds to lose (maybe 20, we'll see) and I've been thinking more about building muscle mass, and I think that eating at a significant deficit is going to impede that progress.

I'll get back to you with my nutritionist's response

heybales

Well, my bmr (according to MFP) is 1359. My most recent daily goal was 1400 (before I switched to maintenance), so I wasn't going that far under it. I am kind of worried now - I really don't want to stall my weight loss more than I (potentially) have already.
Thanks for the tips - I hope my new plan works out.

That is much safer than, good for you for goal having been over the BMR.

Now, for every person that claims eating under their BMR is just fine (and it may be because that is an estimate), there are also people whose BMR is over the estimate. And it would suck just as bad to be missing out on those free calories burned.

If you exercise on current method, that would put you under your BMR too unless you ate back decently accurate exercise calories.

This method should include exercise if done in your maintenance calories. So if you do have a real schedule that you are good at keeping, get it in there. And if the calories really seem too high to eat, eat a snack before and after that workout.

If you used resting for 12 hrs (and you do sleep for 8 and watch TV for 4), then that is right.
By your reference to sleeping 12, I'm guess you mean Very Light. Which if you don't workout may indeed be right.
If you do, you would be best served to figure out your weekly workout totals and divide by 7.
I don't want this method putting you under your BMR either, or you won't see any results.

Example: let's say you are 25, 5 ft, 125 goal.
So the activity on 12 sleep/12 very light has you at say 1700 maintenance calories, with that BMR of 1358.
But you actually do an avg of 500 calories of exercise every day you don't want to include to eat back, then you just went under your BMR to 1200 net. So not much, but enough to potentially slow it down if consistent.
But if you entered in your time correctly, say avg 1hr day of Heavy, running at 150 HR.
Then maintenance would be at 2010 (up 310 cal) for Daily Goal, but in reality you are burning 500 day avg, so back to net 1510 - ah ahhh - slightly above your goal weight BMR, and above current weight BMR.

The benefit is you don't have a surprise day of bigger eating, you don't have to estimate your exercise exactly, there is safety, called your non-workout day, you don't have to record the calories and deal with credit calories.
And your BMR was protected.

Sorry I used your example to show the effects of what happens if honest daily activity is not input, hoping others find it useful.

Old saying goes, which really applies to dieting too - "Garbage in, garbage out".

Or one of my favorite quotes, nothing to do with your questions - "On two occasions I have been asked,—"Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" In one case a member of the Upper, and in the other a member of the Lower, House put this question. I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."

Tigster65

bump

heybales

ok so if I want to be 160....I should plug that into my weight as of current and see what it tells me to log for my calories. My current weight is 194

Yes, on the ExRx site, use goal weight, and honest daily activities including exercise. Easiest to just add up what normally happens in avg week, and divide by 7 for daily avg.

Then following the other steps, change MFP to manual.

Only changes needed on MFP are if activity level changes, then back to ExRx for re-calc. But your ever decreasing weight needs no changes to anything.

May also be a better inspiration for exercise if you estimate a certain level. Many comment they fill in the day's exercise early for support to do it.

keiraev

According to this calculator I maintain on 2700 calories a day. That is completely wrong- even with my activity levels factored in: 8 rest, 15 light, 1 moderate.

MFP gives me 1800 for "active" which is 900 less than that- how could there possible be such a huge difference. I would gain from eating 2700 a day without question.