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

gyte

me too i dont feel comfortable eating 1900 cal.. just seems too high i put in very liitle activity at mine, but it still came up as high?! thought i exercise at least 3 times per week...

smithmom531

bump

jrbanta

bump

heybales

Please forgive me if this is a stupid question, and I don't want to come across as insensitive at all (because I have suffered with an eating disorder before) but how come people get anorexic? I am so confused because I've been trying to stick to 1300 or thereabouts (give or take lots of ups and downs) to try and lose a few pounds, yet people talk about starvation mode, plateaus and messing up the metabolism all of which stop weight loss.

People who become anorexic don't eat do they? Did they have to overcome weight gain and slow metabolism and no weight loss, prior to this?

I am going to try the OP's method, and try to up my intake to 1800, but I have been gaining on less so I can't really see how this is going to work, and my question is always in the back of my mind.

If your metabolism has been underfed for awhile, it will be lower than it's potential.
You will likely see a gain if you just jump into a healthy range.
Try adding a snack of 150-200 cal per day for about a week (Zone or Balance bar before exercise). Then do that again the next week (or increase the size of a couple of meals). Take exercise down to just decent walking for the first two weeks, many days as you like. The the third week add in the last bit of calories, and normal exercise routine again.

Anorexic is a self-image problem first usually, with desired weight loss the solution. Some may never have actually been overweight. But they desire weight loss or thin look, eventually get to the point they don't eat, but it usually starts out lack of required calories, BMR slows down, they still feel they look fat and weight loss stopped, eat less, BMR goes down, muscle is catabolized for energy, weight loss stops again, constant spiral down until it feels like since weight loss stopped and only eating very few calories, last solution must be to stop.

This exact situation can be obtained by eating below BMR, and exercising so much to burn up all calories you eat, not eating your exercise calories in essence. The BMR will slow down, and same possible effects if kept up.
When you hear comments of ones barely able to eat 1000 calories a day, and they exercise 6 days a week for an hour, they have most likely killed their metabolism, and it won't take long to see the sad consequences.
Your body needs fuel, just to be in a coma or sleeping (that is BMR), and if not provided, down it goes.

Plateau's are coming up to the same phenomena usually, at least by those honestly not over eating, but rather undereating, for their current weight and level of activity. You can easily go the same direction, starving yourself when you have 50 lbs to lose, and not losing anymore. Anything eaten over the limit is weight gain because system is so unhealthy.

The other plateau effect is when near the goal weight, and can't drop the last 5 lbs, and you've been eating at a healthy level based on the estimates. At that point, the estimates are probably off, and you decide if food or exercise was too much, and which way to go. Or you find out you've got more muscle than ever imagined, and decide 5 lbs of lean muscle is great!

SynicalEnvee

Hm this looks interesting. I'll give it a try!

ConkreteChic

Hey Bales! (haha)

I would like to try this, but have one question: i know part of the point of this is to not get sidetracked by entering calories burned everyday, etc., but sometimes the motivation for me to exercise is to know that if I get in a great workout, I am making room for a splurge if I need one (i.e. a birthday dinner, or wedding buffet)

Using this method of tracking, I would have more calories to eat each day, but maybe not enough on one specific day...

Is it still possible to "borrow" calories from the day before or after and still lose weight with this method? For example, if my daily calorie goal was set at 2000, but I knew I wanted to have 2500 available one Sunday (think Superbowl! ) could I eat 1500 the day before?

I'm sorry if you have already answered this. There are almost 9 pages of posts here!

ConkreteChic

By the way...

Has anyone thought about creating a group for this method? It would be interesting to be able to check in with others who are having success.

heybales

Age: 32
CW: 170
GW: 130

MFP calculates my BMR at 1447 and the other one you recommend calculates it at 1523. This makes me think even at 1500 net, I'm below my BMR and that's the problem.

I have a FitBit and looked at my activity graph for the past month, which averages as follows per day:
Lightly Active: 5hrs
Fairly Active: 2hrs
Very Active: 1hrs
Leaving 16hrs/day as Resting.

I would translate this into the other activity categories as follows:
Resting: 10hrs (8 sleeping and 1-2 sitting, watching tv, etc.)
Very Light: 7hrs
Light: 6hrs
Moderate: 1hrs
Heavy: 0hrs
It doesn't seem to make a huge difference when I change around the Very Light and Light distribution.

This leaves me with BMR (1523) + Activity (1047) = 2570cals/day for maintainance of future me at current activity level. That seems like a HUGE amount of calories but your methodology seems logical and the math is right there.

Should I really be eating more like 2500cals/day? Never netting under ~1550?

Well, see, you were basically doing this anyway, or at least just made the adjustment lately to do so.

BTW, your height must be 5'1" (I backed into it), and you used your current weight 170 in figures above, not goal weight, to get your BMR and maintenance.

But your way of doing it is interesting, tying in the FitBit levels. I would tend to think you might have some time of Heavy, that FitBit just can't tell is that extreme since it doesn't know HR. Then again, perhaps you don't.

So using your goal weight of 130 and level of activity, I get BMR of 1351 and maintenance of 2280 for current level of activity, if you plan on keeping that up.
Almost 300 cal under your current weight maintenance estimate.
Throw in the fact your exercise will likely be underestimated by those levels, and you may throw in an extra workout of 30 min you don't need account for, you'll be eating down close to current BMR levels, with about the biggest but safest deficit you could squeeze in there.

I would be careful of the 6hrs day tagged as Light level, constant walking. Perhaps your work is on your feet, in which case right on.

But that does sound realistic if you like the system.

For the future, only need to change activity levels if any major permanent changes to the daily routine. Broke leg, on back 22 hrs day for instance. Extreme example, and never may that happen!

heybales

Age: 32
CW: 170
GW: 130

MFP calculates my BMR at 1447 and the other one you recommend calculates it at 1523. This makes me think even at 1500 net, I'm below my BMR and that's the problem.

I have a FitBit and looked at my activity graph for the past month, which averages as follows per day:
Lightly Active: 5hrs
Fairly Active: 2hrs
Very Active: 1hrs
Leaving 16hrs/day as Resting.

I would translate this into the other activity categories as follows:
Resting: 10hrs (8 sleeping and 1-2 sitting, watching tv, etc.)
Very Light: 7hrs
Light: 6hrs
Moderate: 1hrs
Heavy: 0hrs
It doesn't seem to make a huge difference when I change around the Very Light and Light distribution.

This leaves me with BMR (1523) + Activity (1047) = 2570cals/day for maintainance of future me at current activity level. That seems like a HUGE amount of calories but your methodology seems logical and the math is right there.

Should I really be eating more like 2500cals/day? Never netting under ~1550?

Well, see, you were basically doing this anyway, or at least just made the adjustment lately to do so.

BTW, your height must be 5'1" (I backed into it), and you used your current weight 170 in figures above, not goal weight, to get your BMR and maintenance.

But your way of doing it is interesting, tying in the FitBit levels. I would tend to think you might have some time of Heavy, that FitBit just can't tell is that extreme since it doesn't know HR. Then again, perhaps you don't.

So using your goal weight of 130 and level of activity, I get BMR of 1351 and maintenance of 2280 for current level of activity, if you plan on keeping that up.
Almost 300 cal under your current weight maintenance estimate.
Throw in the fact your exercise will likely be underestimated by those levels, and you may throw in an extra workout of 30 min you don't need account for, you'll be eating down close to current BMR levels, with about the biggest but safest deficit you could squeeze in there.

I would be careful of the 6hrs day tagged as Light level, constant walking. Perhaps your work is on your feet, in which case right on.

But that does sound realistic if you like the system.

For the future, only need to change activity levels if any major permanent changes to the daily routine. Broke leg, on back 22 hrs day for instance. Extreme example, and never may that happen!

mamapuddin17

Can someone help me?
age 53
cw 170
goal weight 140
5'4"
9 resting
13 very light
2 light

heybales

I would like to try this, but have one question: i know part of the point of this is to not get sidetracked by entering calories burned everyday, etc., but sometimes the motivation for me to exercise is to know that if I get in a great workout, I am making room for a splurge if I need one (i.e. a birthday dinner, or wedding buffet)

Using this method of tracking, I would have more calories to eat each day, but maybe not enough on one specific day...

Is it still possible to "borrow" calories from the day before or after and still lose weight with this method? For example, if my daily calorie goal was set at 2000, but I knew I wanted to have 2500 available one Sunday (think Superbowl! ) could I eat 1500 the day before?

Good point, and since the whole idea is to spread out the calories (automatically providing a calorie cycling that many find useful because of exercise deficits on some days) so there is balance, the idea of eating back one day and going over the next, or even splurging and making it up the next, would be no problem. Just one day.
Or even the favorite, you do a longer workout on Sunday to make up for the Saturday night. Of course, that method wouldn't show up in the Diary, unless you recorded that extra special exercise and the calories along with it, giving a credit the next day to match the overage the previous day. That too would show up looking at the monthly results or such.

As to the group, I'll have to see how to do that, and would need a name. As the Topic title points out - I didn't think about length enough. it was supposed to be "... eating for who you will become"

sarahmaryfearnley

Thanks Heybales!

submissivelyserving

bump

crewellademel

bump

wish21

I am terrified of doing this!! I want to, but Im scared its goin to set me way way back:frown:

PanteraGirl

Bump

heybales

Here's my stats if anyone wants to help me:

Age: 23
CW: 285
GW: 200
Height: 5'4"
Activity: 8-9hrs resting, 12-14 very light, 1-2 light, 1-2 moderate, 0 heavy. ((depends on the day))

Well, the difficulty will be taking "depends on the day", to a normal daily avg.

Do you really work out 1 hr a day at Moderate - Walking 3.5 to 4 mph, weeding and hoeing, carrying a load, cycling, skiing, tennis, dancing, weight training including rest between sets?

This method does make it easier to follow on constant basis, but it does require a little homework up front.

Easiest to place the hrs for everyday things, like sleep.
But if you work 5 days a week, but sit watching TV a good 6hrs on Sat and Sun, that must be avg out. Big difference between Resting and Light Activity.

For your above estimate of activity, which really doesn't sound like avg, I show 2564, which does seem high, but 200 lbs is a high BMR of 1709 anyway. And I think that activity level sounds high.

And actually, at this weight, for the formula that calculates BMR, there is still some inaccuracy that far out from the healthy weights it is based on.
Now, if you plan on being a weight lifter at that weight, that would be understandable, you can go into that formula and change height to bodyfat %, and get a more accurate estimate.

But you need to take your normal weekly routine each day, add it all up for the whole week, and divide by 7.

You can only get out of this effort what you put in. Incorrect in, incorrect out.

jmelyan23

Bump

KriscoOil

bump! been fighting with 2lbs for the past month...haven't been exercising as much and currently frustrated.

lovelee79

Can someone confirm mine ?
LOL I just wrapped my mind around MFP, and now trying to figure this out...seems like a lot of calories to me.
MFP says I should eat 1200,(at sedentary), but I feel that is too low and I'm starving!! So I bumped it up to 1400 which is better, although I usually go over 1400 each day anyways.

Female,
33 years old, (CW 169)
GW 145
5'7" (67 in.)
8 resting, 14 very light, 2 light
1439 BMR 600 Activity = 2039 calories per day ??? This is what I should eat now as if I am at my future goal weight of 145 lbs?

Thanks !!

heybales

Hi, your system seems sensible to me, it's basically what my Mum and Dad always told me - the best way to lose weight is eat sensibly (i.e. a bit less but not too little) and move more. MFP tells me to reach my goal I can only consume 1200 calories a day, but I aways felt that was too low and usually eat at least 1400, occassionally more and very occassionally I eat at maintenance for my current weight. Would you say that was also a good way to keep the metabolism up by not constantly eating low?

Since reading your post I've rejigged my calorie limit. My stats are:
Age: 31
Current Weight: 161 lbs
Goal Weight: 136 lbs (maybe not that low but I'll see how I look/feel when I get closer)
Height: 172cm

The ExRx system tells me that my BMR at goal weight would be 1413 with calories at 2178. I have a desk job but I do walk to work most days which is about 4mph for 1.5hours. Then I often walk a bit after work which is another 35 minutes. I might play tennis or go for a jog weekends, but lately this has been sporadic so I haven't included it and I don't walk as much on the weekends. The rest of my day is made up of resting and very light activity.

I'm not really comfortable eating 2178 a day as to be honest this makes me feel I am overeating. So.... I changed my calorie goal to around 1700 a day which is still over my BMR even at current weight, and I use my exercise to create most of the calorie defecit. I actually had to hunt out extra things to eat today to reach 1700 which was novel!

Does that seem sensible or should I still be eating more than that?

Keep in mind that this method is exactly to prevent what MFP is willing to do, allow you to set a goal weight loss too aggressive for your BMR. They'll stop you at 1200 for safety reasons, but not your BMR for equal valid aggravation reasons (when weight loss stalls). And so your intentions were right on, and may need to go higher. You don't mention currently eating exercise calories back.

With your excellent level of daily activity, I would not be surprised if that 1700 with the actual exercise taken off ended up well below your BMR not only then, but especially now.

If you lower your BMR by underfeeding it now, you are just missing out on free calorie burn every day, which will stall or take longer to get to then.

So of course you are right on the BMR, but I have a feeling your estimate of activity could just use a tad more work.
Easiest perhaps to add up a typical week of activity and divide by 7.
Rest - 10 hr - Sleep probably consistent. Didn't mention it. But reading/watching TV counts.
Very Light - 5.75 hr - Work 5 days 8 hrs? This would be the balance of time too probably, computer, cooking, ect.
Light - 0.5 hr - few hours house cleaning a week perhaps?
Moderate - 1.15 hr - Walk to work at least 4 days always with extra 30 min? 5th day is spotty? Then don't include it.
Heavy - Jogging is spotting, so leave it out.

I'm hoping others see how this math on daily activity is done.

And I come up with 2092, pretty close to what you have. You may need to adjust what really happens on the weekends/7.

And for that level of activity, I'd bet in actual calorie burn right now, that would easily avg 700 a day on the active days, well below your current BMR, and just touching your future BMR. But your less active days take care of it. Plus the fact this is very nice fat-burning activities, shouldn't be too bad, near your BMR when exercise is included.

So do I think you should really eat at this level? Yes, I think the math bears out you probably are currently eating under your healthy BMR, and missing out on free calorie burn every day.

You can get up to there with just a few snacks a day. If you have been at a lower level for awhile, just add 150-200 cal a day for a week, and the week after add another 150-200, until you are up there at safer level.

Hope this helps.

heybales

me too i dont feel comfortable eating 1900 cal.. just seems too high i put in very liitle activity at mine, but it still came up as high?! thought i exercise at least 3 times per week...

Did you take that 3 times a week divided by 7.
If 3hrs a week, that is only 0.5 hrs a day.
Honest about sleep and watching TV time? Total 8 hrs on the weekend easily adds 1 hr to Rest daily.

That could be why it seems high. And you have perhaps the wrong idea of how little you should eat. Look through my posts on this topic regarding what lowered BMR is causing you to miss out on. If that happens.

deksgrl

My current calorie goal is 1,600 and I burn about 225 a day in exercise. I tend to not eat back the exercise calories. By your method, I should be eating a little over 1,800, which would be the same as I am doing now but also eating back my exercise calories. If the scale is still stuck next week, I will start eating my exercise cals and see if that makes the difference.

Erika_Ecka

Bump

heybales

Can someone help me?
age 53
cw 170
goal weight 140
5'4"
9 resting
13 very light
2 light

You already got it all figured out.
Just to confirm, you are like walking the dog or going out for a walk 2 hrs every single day?

I show 1829 maintenance at future you.

Now, I'm betting you did enter that, not only current, but also future body, and wondering how 180 cal difference will do much.
Remember, if you are accurate with activity levels and times, it already underestimates calories burned.

So to make you feel more comfortable with that 1829 daily eating, that 2hr light exercise, if indeed a dog walk at 3mph, would probably burn more than 500 for you at current weight. So in essence, that leaves your net at 1329, which is right around your current BMR also. And if you miss a day, or go longer a day, or slightly slower than 3mph - no problem.

But no exercise credits to deal with. If you have a slightly bigger workout day, no more food to eat, just looking at 1 daily value.

But that also means if you are not honest with your real exercise level and time, you will be pushing below your current BMR, and most likely lose that free calorie burn if done consistently.

luvmybaby333

Saving....

heybales

I am terrified of doing this!! I want to, but Im scared its goin to set me way way back:frown:

Read through all the posts on this topic, and the topic about "Another way to setup MFP" and you'll see comment after comment of folks toeing the line as correctly as they thought they shoudl be, that have stalled.
You'll also find a very decent sized group that purposely eat below their BMR and exercise and don't eat calories back that also stall eventually. Or they chase the declining BMR always trying to undercut it for a few more weeks of weight loss before needing to do it again.

Or you can follow the advice of many that have seen that happen and increased calories, and it works. Opposite of thinking.

This method is encouragement to NOT get in that boat in the first place. You cannot win overall. Oh, in theory and in some practice, you could lose all the weight if not much to lose, but you can never seem to ever eat more again, because your body is ready to just pack the weight on.

So question is, if you have underfed your BMR and it is now lower, do you want to chase that spiraling down BMR, and most likely have eventual weight gain down the road and blame your motivation for not sticking to a very restricted diet?
Or are you willing to MAYBE have an increase now, and then continue to tackle it correctly and soar to new heights of strong BMR and muscle building and eating properly and well?

How was that imagery - spiraling down, soaring? I should figure out a way to include eagles and vultures in the description!

heybales

My current calorie goal is 1,600 and I burn about 225 a day in exercise. I tend to not eat back the exercise calories. By your method, I should be eating a little over 1,800, which would be the same as I am doing now but also eating back my exercise calories. If the scale is still stuck next week, I will start eating my exercise cals and see if that makes the difference.

You probably aren't that far off your net being around your BMR perhaps then, so it's working for you, probably be on the safer side if you did eat back all accurately calculated exercise calories.

This method just makes it easier on daily basis for what to eat, no exercise credits, nor exact exercise calculations.

And your scale may not be stuck next week. You may indeed lose unless it's stopped already.

If your goal loss was too aggressive and MFP took away not only all the maintenance calories but just past the BMR a little bit, you likely won't have a problem unless your real BMR is much higher than estimated. Than you'll be lowering it.

But if regular exercise causes you to constantly net below by a decent 200-400 calories, it'll slow down to compensate.
Now, it'll take a few weeks, plus or minus depending on how quick your metabolism is at adjusting. So during that time you will indeed lose. It's what comes next is the problem. Keep cutting and exercising more?

You can check your suggested activity level calories that MFP thinks right now, and if the goal you selected (all on the same page) is 200 or more than those activity calories, that means you are dipping below your BMR very much, add in exercise, you are just compounding the problem.

heybales

Can someone confirm mine ?
LOL I just wrapped my mind around MFP, and now trying to figure this out...seems like a lot of calories to me.
MFP says I should eat 1200,(at sedentary), but I feel that is too low and I'm starving!! So I bumped it up to 1400 which is better, although I usually go over 1400 each day anyways.

Female,
33 years old, (CW 169)
GW 145
5'7" (67 in.)
8 resting, 14 very light, 2 light
1439 BMR 600 Activity = 2039 calories per day ??? This is what I should eat now as if I am at my future goal weight of 145 lbs?

So see what happened there, your current daily goal is under even your future BMR, let alone your BMR now. include exercise calories you may or may not be currently eating back, you should be hungry.

This also probably means your metabolism has not lowered. If your body was getting by with less energy needs, you wouldn't be hungry. And then you would shortly stall most likely.

So good for you, caught in time.

And you are dead on for the calculation - provided:

Really 2 hrs every day of Light exercise? Walking dog? OK.
Did you include TV/book reading time under Resting? Include those extra hours on the days off, avg throughout the week.

Do you actually having a few real exercise days in there, gym class, DVD, treadmill, elliptical, StairMaster, etc?
If you do it at intense level and make yourself sweat, that should be Heavy or Moderate if like walking speed is known.

If you are still surprised by perhaps the even higher maintenance calories, read the last few posts from me, and I comment on the fact the exercise calories is already slightly underestimated on there, and if you did a quick spot check with known exercise calories, you'd see you are most likely down near your current BMR, hopefully slightly above.

slimmerchick

If your metabolism has been underfed for awhile, it will be lower than it's potential.
You will likely see a gain if you just jump into a healthy range.
Try adding a snack of 150-200 cal per day for about a week (Zone or Balance bar before exercise). Then do that again the next week (or increase the size of a couple of meals). Take exercise down to just decent walking for the first two weeks, many days as you like. The the third week add in the last bit of calories, and normal exercise routine again.

Anorexic is a self-image problem first usually, with desired weight loss the solution. Some may never have actually been overweight. But they desire weight loss or thin look, eventually get to the point they don't eat, but it usually starts out lack of required calories, BMR slows down, they still feel they look fat and weight loss stopped, eat less, BMR goes down, muscle is catabolized for energy, weight loss stops again, constant spiral down until it feels like since weight loss stopped and only eating very few calories, last solution must be to stop.

This exact situation can be obtained by eating below BMR, and exercising so much to burn up all calories you eat, not eating your exercise calories in essence. The BMR will slow down, and same possible effects if kept up.
When you hear comments of ones barely able to eat 1000 calories a day, and they exercise 6 days a week for an hour, they have most likely killed their metabolism, and it won't take long to see the sad consequences.
Your body needs fuel, just to be in a coma or sleeping (that is BMR), and if not provided, down it goes.

Plateau's are coming up to the same phenomena usually, at least by those honestly not over eating, but rather undereating, for their current weight and level of activity. You can easily go the same direction, starving yourself when you have 50 lbs to lose, and not losing anymore. Anything eaten over the limit is weight gain because system is so unhealthy.

The other plateau effect is when near the goal weight, and can't drop the last 5 lbs, and you've been eating at a healthy level based on the estimates. At that point, the estimates are probably off, and you decide if food or exercise was too much, and which way to go. Or you find out you've got more muscle than ever imagined, and decide 5 lbs of lean muscle is great!

Thanks heybales, you're great :-)