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

bettbett87

The alarm bells ringing for me are that in the UK the government tells us that for a healthy diet women should consume around 2000 calories per day. The calculator recommends I consume 2200 to maintain my goal weight and I really am not very active so this leaves me feeling nervous.

Having said that, I am a firm believer of "eat when you're hungry and don't when you're not"

prbyjennyd

bump

heybales

The alarm bells ringing for me are that in the UK the government tells us that for a healthy diet women should consume around 2000 calories per day. The calculator recommends I consume 2200 to maintain my goal weight and I really am not very active so this leaves me feeling nervous.

Having said that, I am a firm believer of "eat when you're hungry and don't when you're not"

The problem of the theory of eat when hungry is that if you have forced yourself to eat below your BMR for too long, you've lowered it and won't be hungry anymore a higher levels. So missing out on free calorie burn.

Are you sure that recommendation is not "a healthy woman should consume around 2000 calories a day"?

Because a healthy woman would weigh less, and therefore the body requires less to get buy.

But that recommendation hardly takes into account the fact that when you are taller, you have more surface area and therefore BMR is higher, that when you are heavier because of muscle the BMR is higher, ect.

This method at least keeps you from eating too little and slowing your BMR below what it could be burning.
If you are honest with the activity level, then it should still work, because future maintenance calories is below current maintenance calories, therefore weight loss.

JanaB2011

Bump to read later.

heybales

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.

Light level on ExRx is pretty active actually.

You walk around 15 hrs a day when not sleeping and doing that 1 Moderate level of exercise?

TV time just sitting there is resting, perhaps that is included in your rest hrs already, perhaps not.

That would for sure be the reason.

MelKut

hmmmm I may try this....

heybales

HELP! I am now confused! I have calculated that my BMR + activity at goal weight (140lbs) is 1985 calories!! I am currently set at 1270 net cals and only ever eat about half (of not less) of my exercise cals back and not getting anywhere. MFP says my maintenance at goal weight 140lbs would be 1600 + activity/exercise calories.

So should I be eating between 1600 and 1985 cals to lose the weight??

I really need all the help I can get so when I stumbled upon this thread I got excited but now confused.

Fat to Fit radio shows I should be eating 1893 cals per day (including exercise cals) for my goal weight.

Does this all sound right? I'm worried I could be setting myself up for a fall and gaining more weight!

Please click on the link under my name for Posts, and find the couple in this thread dealing with lowered BMR.
Yes, it sounds wrong, but read through all the posts, and your stall is not unique, and going lower is not the solution.

glassyo

Bumping so I can read through the whole thread when I have the time.

bettbett87

The alarm bells ringing for me are that in the UK the government tells us that for a healthy diet women should consume around 2000 calories per day. The calculator recommends I consume 2200 to maintain my goal weight and I really am not very active so this leaves me feeling nervous.

Having said that, I am a firm believer of "eat when you're hungry and don't when you're not"

The problem of the theory of eat when hungry is that if you have forced yourself to eat below your BMR for too long, you've lowered it and won't be hungry anymore a higher levels. So missing out on free calorie burn.

Are you sure that recommendation is not "a healthy woman should consume around 2000 calories a day"?

Because a healthy woman would weigh less, and therefore the body requires less to get buy.

But that recommendation hardly takes into account the fact that when you are taller, you have more surface area and therefore BMR is higher, that when you are heavier because of muscle the BMR is higher, ect.

This method at least keeps you from eating too little and slowing your BMR below what it could be burning.
If you are honest with the activity level, then it should still work, because future maintenance calories is below current maintenance calories, therefore weight loss.

Thanks for putting this into perspective for me. I am 5ft 10 which is definitely taller than the average woman, so I guess 2200 doesn't sound too horrendous. Like a lot of the people on here, MFP set my goal as 1260 cals a day and I have been keeping close to that, eating any calories I burn. I have been losing weight so far but am finding myself increasingly tired and run down so will definitely be switching to your method to see if I make any better progress!

I know weight loss should come down to eating healthily and exercising regularly, it's just difficult to find the right balance and fit it around work and family life!

wave143j

I'm intrigued.

heybales

My estimated cal intake to maintain at my goal weight is 3,000. This is more than double what I take in now. How can this be right?

Perhaps wrong hours in the activity levels. Those activity levels are more than what the 4 levels of MFP and other sites use.

For instance, Rest is non-existent for the broad 4 category method, but the next step up Very Light is 1.5 x BMR, whereas Sedentary is 1.2.
The reason is trying to be correct.

Most seem to be underestimating, you appear to have actually been attempting to be very honest.

The other kicker, taking the week's activity and dividing by 7. If you work out 1 hr for 5 days, that is not 1 hr of Heavy avg daily. That is 0.75 actually.

gogo0000

okay so i am 5ft 2in and currently 59 kg i want to go to 45 kg.
I am a student and don't get the time to exercise i burn around 100 calories twice a week.
At 45kg I calculated my bmr + activity to be 1699 (16 hrs light activity and 8 hrs rest).
i am currently consuming 1200 cal or less every day, are you saying i should increase my calorie intake to the 1699 and i'll still loose weight even if i do not exercise at all ??????

heybales

okay so i am 5ft 2in and currently 59 kg i want to go to 45 kg.
I am a student and don't get the time to exercise maybe 100 calories twice a week. At 45kg I calculated my bmr + activity to be 1699 (16 hrs light activity and 8 hrs rest).
i am currently consuming 1200 cal or less every day, are you saying i should increase my calorie intake to the 1699 and i'll still loose weight even if i do not exercise at all ??????

That is still under your current maintenance calories, so yes, you would lose.

And 1200 calories is below current BMR of 1406. Which means your body just slows down to meet what you feed it.

Feel like missing out on free 200 calories of burn every day by just sitting around?

You might adjust the resting level though, if that is just true sleeping, what about TV time, or reading homework time, or weekend time doing nothing but watching TV. 8 hrs of TV time on the weekend spread out over 7 days lowers your maintenance calories.

Plus at that level, if you do get in extra walking for an hour, or those couple 100 calories you mention, no need to record it or change anything. You have a full schedule not likely to change.

skruger22

okay, I'm trying this- I like the concept- eating for a lifestyle, not daily, and not constantly changing my BMR. Eating for the BMR I want to be, and want to maintain. I like it! Fit at 30, and beyond!

heybales

FYI..did BMR at 208 1900
at 190 1830
Moved MFP current weight to 190..got 1790

Didnt have time to read all details but having hard time seeing 110 cal diff?

Interesting, they both use the Harris-Benedict formula.

Since you are so close to goal weight of 190, it is known that you have a finer line to walk so as not to cause problems. Attempting too great a weight loss goal can backfire at this close range.

Now, this method with exercise included but underestimated (if you are accurate with times spent on avg daily) would in reality cause more than a 70 calorie deficit, but it should still protect your BMR because your rest days would be the bump for your system to not slow down metabolism because of always eating below your BMR.

And as you get close, you may indeed discover that as expected, the estimated BMR is not your true healthy BMR (I mean not suppressed because of underfeeding it the whole time).
If you stall 5 lbs away, your true BMR is lower, if you keep losing, your true BMR is higher.

But you have to get close to find out.
Then again, you may have more muscle mass and your body wants to keep it, in which case get a bodyfat% estimate, and change the ExRx calculator to BF% instead of height, and get a tad more accurate for where you want the future you.

gogo0000

And 1200 calories is below current BMR of 1406. Which means your body just slows down to meet what you feed it.

Feel like missing out on free 200 calories of burn every day by just sitting around?

You might adjust the resting level though, if that is just true sleeping, what about TV time, or reading homework time, or weekend time doing nothing but watching TV. 8 hrs of TV time on the weekend spread out over 7 days lowers your maintenance calories.

Plus at that level, if you do get in extra walking for an hour, or those couple 100 calories you mention, no need to record it or change anything. You have a full schedule not likely to change.

thank u so much for replying
Ok so what you're saying is that i increase my calorie intake to 1400 calories right???
and if i'm burning 100 calories i shouldn't record it.
do i get to eat the calories i burn if someday i exercise more than usual ???

heybales

Ok so what you're saying is that i increase my calorie intake to 1400 calories right???
and if i'm burning 100 calories i shouldn't record it.
do i get to eat the calories i burn if someday i exercise more than usual ???

No, yes, no.

I used 10 hrs resting (8hrs sleep, 2 hr sitting TV/reading per weekday, 8 hr TV per weekend), then other 14 Very Light).
Adjust that time if I guessed wrong, or more Resting time actually takes place weekly.

I come up with 1646. So if you follow this method, that is your Goal Net Calories.
And you don't need to record any exercise calories.
Your non-workout days will allow your system to recover enough.

If this is your school schedule until June, you are set.
Unless you find time to throw a 1hr gym class in couple times a week on regular basis, then change activity level, and maintenance calories.
And if activity level changes in June because of no school, wait until you have a good routine, and then reset.

Or, if you don't mind dealing with the credit calories from exercise, and some days being more than others, and trying to eat them back to keep your BMR safe, and getting decent estimate of the calories, then you could leave the settings where they are and record exercise seperately.
But if you don't mind doing all those things anyway, this is not the method for you probably.

You can record your current activity level choices in your Diary Notes for today for reference later.

deksgrl

Bumping for later.

ready2beme

So, as someone who is far off from goal, calculating it on the low side (activity wise) is OK as long as we are eating back enough to cover the BMR?

heybales

So, as someone who is far off from goal, calculating it on the low side (activity wise) is OK as long as we are eating back enough to cover the BMR?

Yep.
Like if you have some exercise classes you can hit sporadically, but not weekly basis. Or you can pop into the gym sometimes on a Monday night, but pretty iffy. Those can be left out.

But if you were always 3 times a week minimum, and at least 1 other day for 1 hr, just the day changed - that is still regular.

You just don't want to get into the issue of the exercise used calories causes you to underfeed your BMR by decent amount on continuing basis, otherwise in the same boat as just purposely eating below it.