Fat2Fit radio calculations

Erica0718

Bump, to check out later

Amanda993

I'm following Fat2Fit also. When I eat what they tell me too, I don't feel as deprived as I do when I only eat 1200, so I can stick with it. I believe that the slower the weight comes off, the more likely it is to stay off. I'd recommend that calculator to everyone.

LisaManySongs

It's funny that you should post this. I just downloaded the info. this morning so not sure how it works for me yet!

juliep1974

I just started this week. I set my calories to my goal weight at sedentary. I am probably moderately active as I do NROL4W twice a week, spin twice a week and run twice a week (but some days I'm super lazy and really do very little and needing to exercise so I have more calories is a good motivator for me), so I am adding exercise calories and eating back most of them. On days I work out, it means I'm eating about 2000 calories a day. I only have 5 lbs to my goal so I'm expecting a slow loss so we'll see how it goes.

psuLemon

I was searching the forums to find an answer to this exact question so I am bumping it for answers:flowerforyou: .

I am 30 years old and only 5'1. I workout 6 days a week for about 30 minutes each time. So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.
I am scared to eat that and have been eating around 1937 because it says on there "As you get closer to your goal weight, your weight loss will start to slow down. It is OK to eat a few hundred calories less per day (200-300) to speed up your weight loss at this point." So since I am still hoping to lose an additional 5 lbs I subtracted 300 from 2237 and got 1937 calories. I haven't seen many women on MFP eating MORE than 1600-1700 calories. It just seems like 1937 calories to lose weight is a lot.
Also according to that website and the Harris Benedict Formula my BMR is 1318.

These last few lbs are taking f-o-r-e-v-e-r to leave....
Anybody?

The majority of women on this board i work with are eating 1800-2500 calories. Higher if you do a lot of cardio. Since you do jm and light active with children i wouod start you at moderately active. After a month if you dont lose or gain the up it to very active.

Sugar_Junkie

BUMP

jworb

I've been thinking of trying this as well but am nervous about changing my calories to over 1700. there is a group on here somewhere about this though.

AmyLRed

bump

getting ready to increase my cals again

ahubacek

I do. I work out 3-5 days a week minimum doing both cardio and strength and I'm 6 feet tall so their calculations have me eating 2362 calories a day. Initially I had a slight gain (no more than a normal water weight fluctuation but that hung around for several days) but I think that had a lot to do with what I was eating as well as eating more since I was working long shifts and eating more processed foods. Since then, I've been steadily losing and I eat whenever I'm hungry.

athensguy

I have a net goal (2600) slightly under the moderately active level (2702) given by fat2fit. Including exercise calories, I usually end up eating more than the "Extremely Active" level.

thekarens

I've been reading about this a lot on the forums, but would you say eating more calories per Fat2Fit would apply to someone who is morbidly obese as opposed to someone who only needed to lose 20lbs or was maintaining? Seems like the same rules wouldn't apply to everyone, but I really don't know. I'm curious about opinions.

psuLemon

I've been reading about this a lot on the forums, but would you say eating more calories per Fat2Fit would apply to someone who is morbidly obese as opposed to someone who only needed to lose 20lbs or was maintaining? Seems like the same rules wouldn't apply to everyone, but I really don't know. I'm curious about opinions.

Actually you generally have to eat more as morbidly obese people can get more nutritom from their fat stores. This is why 1200 for them isnt as bad as someone with 20 lbs. As you get closer to your weight goal, you have to eat closer to your tdee.

go2grrl

Long before there was an MFP or a Fat2Fit, this was how I was eating. For over ten years I've logged and have averaged around 2300 calories in every day and successfully lost and kept off over 100 pounds. I'm not a fan of dieting and I'd never heard of eating exercise calories until I arrived here about a year ago. But I do know that you have to be consistent with exercise. Very consistent. If I do not get at least five hours in a week (which I feel is still only "moderately active), I will stall and even worse, tiny gains will creep up on me.

I'm ten years older now, menopausal and lost my thyroid gland last summer so I'm just now having to relearn that magic number, but I think it's going to end up being around 2100.

-Cynthia

JayByrd107

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

I'm skeptical about programs that set caloric intake based on the number of times a week you exercise and the guage for activity level. I've come across a few of these and I question their accuracy. Based on the number of workouts per week and not taking into account duration or exertion, this could be way off for a lot of people. One person could do 30 minutes a day 6x a week and another could do 120 minutes a day 6x a week and they could both consider themselves very active and they would get the same calculations. Am I misunderstanding something here?

I took the time once to plug one of these "activity level/#of workouts a week" type calculators into a spreadsheet to get the margin for each step. Based on the multiplier, I calculated the number of calories required above BMR at sedentary and each step above that. I also calculated the number of calories required to meet each activity level > than sedentary (which I use as my baseline). What I found is that at the 1.375 multiplier (lightly active) I have to burn 450 calories 5 times a week to meet the lowest level. Extremely active requires 1,200 calories 6 times a week above sedentary. Anyway, putting it into numbers helped me get a more accurate idea of where I'm at. I would consider myself at the very least Moderately active, if not Very active, but apparently I'm only Lightly active. Knowing this has prevented me from going too high and eating too much. Something to think about.

Birder150

I'm eating 2100 average daily calories. I don't eat exercise calories back at this level.
My loss is 17.2 lbs so far and it has been relatively effortless.

SOOZIE429

How many calories are you burning with this workout?

Between 175-250 calories for a 30ish minute workout. However, I don't eat my exercise calories back because with fat2fit you aren't supposed to eat back exercise calories. So I net between 1600-1700 usually.

What is your BMR? As long as your eating (netting) AT LEAST that number, you should be fine.

Sharonks

Because my exercise level varies and other than that I spend a heck of a lot of time at a desk, I use my BMR on MFP then record my exercise and eat those cals back. My BMR is 1260 and MFP had me at 1200 to lose .4 lb per week. I'm small so I don't burn much (I just use the database) when I exercise but generally end up with a couple hundred or more cals per day of exercise.

According to Fat2Fit I only need to lose about 5.5 lbs (we shall see) so weight loss is very very slow.

MrsRawwwr

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

I'm skeptical about programs that set caloric intake based on the number of times a week you exercise and the guage for activity level. I've come across a few of these and I question their accuracy. Based on the number of workouts per week and not taking into account duration or exertion, this could be way off for a lot of people. One person could do 30 minutes a day 6x a week and another could do 120 minutes a day 6x a week and they could both consider themselves very active and they would get the same calculations. Am I misunderstanding something here?

I took the time once to plug one of these "activity level/#of workouts a week" type calculators into a spreadsheet to get the margin for each step. Based on the multiplier, I calculated the number of calories required above BMR at sedentary and each step above that. I also calculated the number of calories required to meet each activity level > than sedentary (which I use as my baseline). What I found is that at the 1.375 multiplier (lightly active) I have to burn 450 calories 5 times a week to meet the lowest level. Extremely active requires 1,200 calories 6 times a week above sedentary. Anyway, putting it into numbers helped me get a more accurate idea of where I'm at. I would consider myself at the very least Moderately active, if not Very active, but apparently I'm only Lightly active. Knowing this has prevented me from going too high and eating too much. Something to think about.

Very helpful...thanks for the info!

lilsassymom

How many calories are you burning with this workout?

Between 175-250 calories for a 30ish minute workout. However, I don't eat my exercise calories back because with fat2fit you aren't supposed to eat back exercise calories. So I net between 1600-1700 usually.

What is your BMR? As long as your eating (netting) AT LEAST that number, you should be fine.

According to Fat2fit and the Harris Benedict formula it is 1318. However, I notice when I eat that few calories (anything under 1700) I get soooo irritable and cranky. I also have no energy. I think it is my bodys way of telling me I need more food. I don't think anything under 1700 is enough for me. Heck, I think 1800 is still pushing it:noway: .

ImperfektAngel

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

I'm skeptical about programs that set caloric intake based on the number of times a week you exercise and the guage for activity level. I've come across a few of these and I question their accuracy. Based on the number of workouts per week and not taking into account duration or exertion, this could be way off for a lot of people. One person could do 30 minutes a day 6x a week and another could do 120 minutes a day 6x a week and they could both consider themselves very active and they would get the same calculations. Am I misunderstanding something here?

I took the time once to plug one of these "activity level/#of workouts a week" type calculators into a spreadsheet to get the margin for each step. Based on the multiplier, I calculated the number of calories required above BMR at sedentary and each step above that. I also calculated the number of calories required to meet each activity level > than sedentary (which I use as my baseline). What I found is that at the 1.375 multiplier (lightly active) I have to burn 450 calories 5 times a week to meet the lowest level. Extremely active requires 1,200 calories 6 times a week above sedentary. Anyway, putting it into numbers helped me get a more accurate idea of where I'm at. I would consider myself at the very least Moderately active, if not Very active, but apparently I'm only Lightly active. Knowing this has prevented me from going too high and eating too much. Something to think about.

Fat2Fit gives you 5 different levels of calories to eat. You can still do the Sedentary calories given and add in your workout calories after.