calorie help?

Kidvicious28

ok, this might sound like a question I should prob already know and I'm sure ppl have already asked...but I'm going to ask anyway...

ppl have been talking about net calories and it kind of confuses me....

Net calories are the calories you gain vs the calories you burn? I know what daily cals are...I'm confused more with cal deficit and net cals.

Can anyone explain this better to me??

vickyclare96

:huh: I think net calories is when you take the amount consumed away from the amount burnt off.. so for example say you eat 1500 cals then burn off 300 cals you do 1500 take away 300 = 1200 net cals :bigsmile: :bigsmile: :bigsmile: :bigsmile:
Vicky x

SHBoss1673

right, net means after everything you have done during the day.

I.E. if you eat 1800 calories today, and your maintenance calories are 2200 and you exercised for 400 calories your net calorie balance for the day would be negative 800 calories when everything is said and done.

In the end it's all about net calories, granted, how much we eat, and the kind of food we eat has a significant influence on things, but net calorie balance is very important. If you net positive calories (maintenance calories plus exercise calories minus calories consumed) then you'll eventually gain weight, if you net negative calories, then you'll eventually lose weight. This is assuming you are correct in what you think your maintenance calories are (many people are wrong about this, and then can't figure out why they aren't losing weight).

Kidvicious28

Ok let me see if i got it....Daily cals are the cals MFP gives you on your daily food log, correct? and exercise cals are the cals you burn... and your net cals are the amount of cals AFTER you add ur maintence cals and exercise cals together and then subtract the cals you've consumed....k.

i understand all that...but how do you know what your maintenance cals are? :blushing:

SHBoss1673

most of us use one of the calculators. It's generally pretty generic, but as long as you don't have any mitigating circumstance, it should be relatively accurate. I.E. on MFP you would put in your goal numbers with a goal of maintenance. Then at the end it tells you what you should be eating to remain the same weight. That is your maintenance calories. Every calculator is a tiny bit different, usually depending on what weight they give your daily activities. For instance, if you go to mayoclinic.com and type in calcorie calculator in the search area, they let you use a tool that tells you about what your maintenance calories are. If you want to be sure, go have a test done at a lab. For most areas in the US you can search for clinics or labs that will (for a fee) give you a test that calculates your daily calories based on your oxygen intake (which is very accurate), these same types of labs also will usually do body fat testing, and muscle to fat ratios, which are also very useful to know.

cardigirl

Are we supposed to not try and eat all of our exercise calories? I know this has been discussed endlessly, but I didn't think we were really supposed to be trying for a deficit of calories. At least not an 800 deficit.

Me confused.

SHBoss1673

800 was just an example pulled out of thin air.

Eating your exercise calories is a choice based on informed decisions. It depends on what you want to do. If you strictly follow MFP then yes, you are supposed to eat your exercise calories, but some people don't like to, and just set a smaller goal and leave some of their exercise calories on the table, it's the same difference.

800 calories is a lot for someone without much to lose, but if you're obese 800 isn't much at all, it might even be lower then you want. It all depends on you as a person.

cardigirl

Thanks for answering. It seems to me that 1200 calories is really not all that much, but seems to be the level given for a lot of the women on here, regardless of age.

Just with all the talk of starvation mode, etc, 1200 calories seems low...too low... for just about anyone. I don't see how anyone could get all of their nutritional daily needs from that.

So, when I exercise and earn 500 calories back, instead of eating the entire 1700 for the day, I should think about leaving some...darn it.

Like you said, it's a personal choice, just I thought that when someone was struggling to lose on the minimum cals allowed, the suggestion has been to feed the body more calories, so it's more willing to let the fat go. What works for one may not work for another.

And I know that I could never maintain for life a 1200 calorie a day diet. Would be like torture.

SHBoss1673

Thanks for answering. It seems to me that 1200 calories is really not all that much, but seems to be the level given for a lot of the women on here, regardless of age.

Just with all the talk of starvation mode, etc, 1200 calories seems low...too low... for just about anyone. I don't see how anyone could get all of their nutritional daily needs from that.

So, when I exercise and earn 500 calories back, instead of eating the entire 1700 for the day, I should think about leaving some...darn it.

Like you said, it's a personal choice, just I thought that when someone was struggling to lose on the minimum cals allowed, the suggestion has been to feed the body more calories, so it's more willing to let the fat go. What works for one may not work for another.

And I know that I could never maintain for life a 1200 calorie a day diet. Would be like torture.

1200 calories is only significant in that in the 80s the World Health Organization declared that the minimum an adult WOMAN can consume and maintain their basic functions over the long term. That doesn't mean stay healthy. It was also a VERY broad generalization based on thousands of subjects. Which is why mike caps the minimum calorie number at 1200, which is why you see so many people on here with 1200 as their daily calories.

In truth, you really need to take a long look at your situation, stop kidding yourself (not you personally, but people on here in general), and realize that if you aren't obese, you shouldn't be trying to lose 2 lbs a week. If you're obese, then fine, your body has the reserve fuel to support large calorie deficits, but if you're not, then your body doesn't and you're just creating different problems for yourself. MODERATION is the key, people are so impatient these days. If we give ourselves the time to lose the weight in a healthy manner, most people would be able to do it the first time, and stick to it. But everyone wants the weight gone NOW! Not realizing that besides that kind of weight loss being unsustainable, it also leads to health issues, weak muscles and bone, creates bad habits, stunts the metabolism, and doesn't really make you look very attractive ("hey baby them are some sweet circles under your eyes!")

cardigirl

Thanks for the great answer!!!! :flowerforyou:

I'm more interested in changing my BF% than anything, and am quite happy to lose weight slowly...I've done it fast before, and it always comes back on and brings 10 more new pounds with it. That's why I'm doing a lifestyle change rather than a "diet." Heh. Exercise and good food will always be a part of my life from now on.