Eating enough to lose weight??...sent by a bootcamp instruct

abookreader2

bump

fisherlassie

Bump!

RonSwanson66

So much misinformation.

AKosky585

I got 2243....I gain weight eating 1500...so this cannot be right..at least not for me.

MelBee29

keeping this to read later

Airbear3

bump

SafireBleu

I got 2243....I gain weight eating 1500...so this cannot be right..at least not for me.

I think what people have said is that there is an initial gain and then you lose. But I'm not 100 % sure if that is right. I do know I lose at 1500 so it is possible.

amylynna1

This is totally confusing to me, can you help me?

Yes email me the info provided and I can try to calculate for you

CorinthiaB

I got 2243....I gain weight eating 1500...so this cannot be right..at least not for me.

Is 2243 the number of calories you need to maintain your current weight? If so, you don't want to maintain you want to lose. So, you would need to subtract how much you want to lose per week from the 2243.

amylynna1

I know a lot of people are VERY skeptical of the "eat more to lose" mentality, but I can tell you that it's working for me.

When I started here at MFP at 239 I was eating around 1,500 gross calories per day and burning between 700-1,300 calories a day through exercise (100% cardio). So I was netting between 200-800 calories per day and I dropped 32lbs really quickly (within 4 months).

Last October, my weight loss came to a HALT. I re-evaluated, changed my workouts to more strength training and less cardio, but kept eating the same.

It wasn't until the end of January when I started P90X and started eating ALOT more that the scale started to move. I eat at my TDEE sedentary, add my exercise calories, then subtract 500 to get a 1 pound per week deficit. So:

TDEE sedentary for a 5'6 female weighing 203: 2159
Add an average of 600 for my workout: 2759
Subtract 500 to get a deficit: 2259

So, I aim for 2,259 each day. Days that I work out extra, I eat extra.

I can tell you that I feel 100% better, stronger, healthier, and fitter, and I don't have any trouble at all getting in my calories when they are healthy ones. And I'm still losing weight - not super fast, but fast enough to be healthy and sustainable.

When I did the formula in this post, it's nearly the same as the TDEE process I described above - I did it for sedentary (so multiplied by 1.2) and got 2,229 calories, to which I would need to add my exercise and then subtract a deficit. I use sedentary since my exercise varies each day with P90X - some days it is intense and some days it's yoga.

For those who are stalling - give it a try. What's the worst that happens??? And when I say give it a try, I mean for at least a month. You may not see results immediately, but a few weeks later I can definitely see a change.

There are a bunch of really smart women in the women eating 2,000+ calories per day group...if you have specific questions, they might be able to help!

SOOO wonderful to hear persons making the changes they desire and giving their bodies the nutrition they need. THANK YOU SO MUCH for posting and YOU LOOK GREAT!! I hope I can look as fit as you soon!

maryrr88

Bump

amylynna1

I really think everyone is different. Makes sense, but what worked for me when I was in my 40s is not working now in my 50s. And trust me I am trying hard. I've been around the block a few times and know that people have different metabolisms and some definitely WOULD gain on that program and some would shed pounds easily enough.

It gets very discouraging when someone says THIS is the magic ticket and then it doesn't work for someone else. I am happy when something works for someone else though.

Find out what works for you...but in general I agree. We are hurting our bodies, stressing them out and making them susceptible to illness and disease when we over diet and over exercise.

I agree this may not work for everyone. What does? But those who arr working out hard and metabolisms are rising it is working! BUT maybe not everyone. I feel it depends on you activity level, age and maybe other factors. But for those it is working its commitment and trusting you body that making it happen!

I agree dont over diet or exercise I did that and my body retained everything. It made me gain weight and feel like crap

amylynna1

Yeah, I used the number 66 instead of 665. Got 1105. Makes a LOT more sense!

then number should be 665. Remember this is about losing fat and gaining muscle. Anything under 1200 is really bad. I was at 1200 and didnt loose uped to 1400 and lost 2 pds!!!

I was also at 1200 and upped only to 1300 but started losing more - I am now upping my calories again

YAY!!!!!! ITS WORKING remember stay committed and please continue to work out. You need to run to eat to loose!

Skinny_Kitty

This # is to MAINTAIN. My calculate calories if 2125 which would kepp me exactly where I am now if I continued to eat this way. I am currently eating 1460 a day. Now.. this is true if you are working out hard core and burning more than 1000 calories a day. My friend did the boot camp and she was eating around 2500 calories a day and she was still losing FAST, however she was doing the boot camp workout for 1 hour in the morning and running 10 miles a night, 5 days a week. She was buring so many calories, that she needed to eat a lot more to keep her body nourised and going.

QueenMother14

equation

Brook70

Bump

jcstanton

Is there usually a gain before the loss begins if you haven't been eating this way previously? I just want to be prepared.

According to the formula, my number was 2318. On MFP, my daily caloric intake is 1310 before exercise. I burn around 600-700 calories 5 days per week, Around 400-500 on the weekends. I weigh 156 and want to weigh 128, so I used the numbers for my goal, rather than my current weight.

I'm a bit worried about eating more, but I'm pretty stalled on my weight loss at the moment and am willing to try it.

This is where people are not understanding the point of eating back exercise cals. You're not burning calories ONLY during your workouts. You're burning calories ALL day long, 24/7...even while sleeping. The average amount of calories you burn while completely sedentary is called your Base Metabolic Rate. Your BMR is how many calories you'd burn if you did nothing but lay around 24/7. That's the MINIMUM amount of calories you should be taking in without exercising. On an average day, even without a workout, you're burning more than your BMR just by your regular daily activity. When you add to that your workout calories, and the fact that workouts boost metabolism so you're burning at a higher rate for the next several hours, your calorie deficit is enormous if you don't eat back your workout calories. You need calories for energy. If you don't have enough, your body won't function efficiently and your metabolism will slow way down, thus, decreasing the amount of calories you are burning. That being said, however, the standard BMR calculations do not take into account medical conditions like insulin resistance and hypothyroidism. People with such conditions burn calories at a much slower rate, so they need fewer calories to begin with. I don't know of any way to accurately account for these conditions. Personally, I have both IR and HT, so I set my base calories about 200 under what MFP says it should be, then I only eat back about 2/3's of my exercise calories rather than the full amount. I've been doing this for about six months now, and it seems to be working pretty well so far. I'm not an expert by any means, I'm just going by personal experience and what the health/fitness professional at my gym have taught me.

carolann_22

I actually joined a group about this (eating for who you want to be) where you set your calories for maintenance at GOAL weight, and then don't eat your exercise cals. For me, that's 2400 cals a day. And guess what - I've lost more in three weeks of doing this than I did in 5 weeks of eating 1200 plus exercise.

ladyraven68

I actually joined a group about this (eating for who you want to be) where you set your calories for maintenance at GOAL weight, and then don't eat your exercise cals. For me, that's 2400 cals a day. And guess what - I've lost more in three weeks of doing this than I did in 5 weeks of eating 1200 plus exercise.

That's pretty much what the Fat to Fit radio site does too, and their numbers for me with a goal of 125 came up similar to the numbers I am using now.

According to that site, my TDEE at 125lbs and lightly active comes out at 1752, and the numbers I'm using as set by Dan is 1750, so very very close.

http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/

livingaloha

bump to read later

lilsassymom

I actually joined a group about this (eating for who you want to be) where you set your calories for maintenance at GOAL weight, and then don't eat your exercise cals. For me, that's 2400 cals a day. And guess what - I've lost more in three weeks of doing this than I did in 5 weeks of eating 1200 plus exercise.

If I stall I think I might try that...sounds good!

icclepodge

Bump

kmh_97

I had my a-ha moment yesterday. I started on Jan 2, lost 7 pounds in a month eating 1200 calories and riding a stationary bike for 30-60 minutes 4 times a week. Then after that initial loss, I got nothing and even gained a couple pounds. Yesterday after doing some reading I realized that I probably was not eating enough. If I was only eating 1200 calories and then burning between 2-300, I was trying to function on 900 calories. I don't know why this didn't dawn on me before. After doing this formula, I came up with 2232. I upped my calories yesterday to 1500 on MFP. Is that a good starting point or do I need to up my calories even more.

Thanks-I am not so good with numbers!

pinkita

I always get stuck on figuring out my activity level. The post says 4+ days/week of boot camp would be "moderately active." Well, I don't do boot camp, but I walk most days at least 60mins (on weekends 90-120), and I do 30mins 3x/week of a workout with dumbells.... nothing extreme in my exercise so I get stuck on which category of "active" to consider myself.

Using the calculation posted, I got 2145-2418 daily (to maintain?), so subtracting 500 cals daily from that is what I should do to lose 1lb/week?

deniserenee_02

1978.9 calories a day WOW.

FitMama2013

I always get stuck on figuring out my activity level. The post says 4+ days/week of boot camp would be "moderately active." Well, I don't do boot camp, but I walk most days at least 60mins (on weekends 90-120), and I do 30mins 3x/week of a workout with dumbells.... nothing extreme in my exercise so I get stuck on which category of "active" to consider myself.

Using the calculation posted, I got 2145-2418 daily (to maintain?), so subtracting 500 cals daily from that is what I should do to lose 1lb/week?

I'm the same way...so I use the sedentary setting and then add my exercise myself. So, I still eat back ALL of my exercise calories!

junyr

the 665 is probably the boot camp exercise calories. Check your calculations, subtract the 665 and see if thats closer.

I know with p90x they say add about 600 calories on workout days.

ladyraven68

the 665 is probably the boot camp exercise calories. Check your calculations, subtract the 665 and see if thats closer.

I know with p90x they say add about 600 calories on workout days.

The 665 is part of the BMR calculation, and does not take into account exercise. Google it, the formula listed above is the same as stated on many websites.

http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/bmr-formula.php

http://www.fitness.com/tools/bmr/

Yori1

bump

AntWrig

Here are the problems with calculators and formulas:

1. People over estimate their activity level.
2. People UNDERESTIMATE their bodyfat%.


The formula used in this thread is old and inaccurate. You are better of going by estimates.

I suggest you check this out.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121703981

Remember you have to use trial and error, it's going to take time. And please don't uses %'s when calculating macros. Your body is not some slider, it doesn't recognize %'s. Stick to LBM when choosing macros.