Calories In..Calories Out

phatnotfat81

Can someone please explain to me what does this exactly mean???? Because sometimes I notice that if I burn too many calories the scale doesnt move for quite some time. I've been stalled for a while, just trying to get a clue. thanx

Sidesteal

Can someone please explain to me what does this exactly mean???? Because sometimes I notice that if I burn too many calories the scale doesnt move for quite some time. I've been stalled for a while, just trying to get a clue. thanx

It means that your change in weight will be largely determined by the difference between calories consumed and calories expended.

phatnotfat81

so what should the difference be? what amount of calories should i not burn off?

TheVimFuego

Creating an energy deficit does not mean that your body is compelled to burn weight (fat, muscle, whatever).

The whole "3500 calorie deficit in a week will burn 1lb of fat" is a lie.

It's repeated so often (and used by MFP) to be taken as fact but it does not work consistently.

Sidesteal

Creating an energy deficit does not mean that your body is compelled to burn weight (fat, muscle, whatever).

The whole "3500 calorie deficit in a week will burn 1lb of fat" is a lie.

It's repeated so often (and used by MFP) to be taken as fact but it does not work consistently.

EDIT: NVM, that was a cranky reply on my part.

Sidesteal

Creating an energy deficit does not mean that your body is compelled to burn weight (fat, muscle, whatever).

This part I disagree with. This is the ONLY way you can compel your body to oxidize fuel.

The whole "3500 calorie deficit in a week will burn 1lb of fat" is a lie.

It's repeated so often (and used by MFP) to be taken as fact but it does not work consistently.

^ I wouldn't say it's a lie, but I would agree that it doesn't work consistently but that's largely due to estimation errors. We CANNOT perfectly create a precise deficit. We're basically taking an educated guess and it's a moving target.

EDIT: You also can't magically determine that ALL weight lost will come from fat. So even if you COULD magically create a perfect deficit of 3500 calories per week, you can't claim that it will all come from fat. So in that sense I agree with your assessment. I don't think it changes the fact that an energy deficit is still the primary requirement for weight loss.

wewon

Creating an energy deficit does not mean that your body is compelled to burn weight (fat, muscle, whatever).

The whole "3500 calorie deficit in a week will burn 1lb of fat" is a lie.

It's repeated so often (and used by MFP) to be taken as fact but it does not work consistently.

I agree.

In theory it sounds correct, but if it were that simple of an equation people would not have plateaus and all weight loss would be linear..

Obviously there are other variables in the equation that are not being accounted for.

melaniecheeks

Because human bodies are not machines - there are lots of other factors that come into play. But by and large, burn more calories than you expend, and you SHOULD lose weight.

vjrose

Only problem I have with that is the idea it gives that eating 1200 and burning 1200 is a valid weight loss approach. If it was as simple as that all these starvation dieters would be at their goal weight in a matter of weeks. There is an energy equation, and it does require some energy be taken in to fuel the system adequately.

phatnotfat81

Because human bodies are not machines - there are lots of other factors that come into play. But by and large, burn more calories than you expend, and you SHOULD lose weight.

Will I lose muscle?

phatnotfat81

Only problem I have with that is the idea it gives that eating 1200 and burning 1200 is a valid weight loss approach. If it was as simple as that all these starvation dieters would be at their goal weight in a matter of weeks. There is an energy equation, and it does require some energy be taken in to fuel the system adequately.

There have been maybe a couple days where i worked out and burned more cal than i consumed, and it seemed like i stalled or gained a couple pounds. There has to be some number that we should keep for fuel..i would think.

yarwell

There have been maybe a couple days where i worked out and burned more cal than i consumed

So your workout calories exceeded your food intake ??

jshinoff

Actually it isn't a "lie" it is the 2nd law of thermodynamics.Your body doesn't run on magic beans, if are actually burning more than you intake the only possible mechanism is to source calories from the body. People that make claims of not losing weight (long term) aren't actually burning more than they intake. The most likely reasons are errors in measuring intake and errors (or mis-estimation) of calorie burn. It is very easy to mis-calculate/estimate both ends of the equation as the sources of data being used are themselves just estimates (especially calorie burn as the BMR used here is just a rough estimate and the exercise calculators can be wildly off). If you aren't losing weight make sure your numbers are dead on by only intaking food for which you know the absolute caloric value and using a full time activity monitor plus an HRM tool to measure caloric burn. If you do this for 2 weeks and it makes no difference then drop your calorie intake 5-10% and repeat as your BMR is likely significantly lower than estimated.

phatnotfat81

There have been maybe a couple days where i worked out and burned more cal than i consumed

So your workout calories exceeded your food intake ??

Yes, most days..for the past few weeks

ZugTheMegasaurus

There have been maybe a couple days where i worked out and burned more cal than i consumed

So your workout calories exceeded your food intake ??

Yes, most days..for the past few weeks

You're failing to take into account the energy your body uses on a daily basis just to function. Exercise is only a tiny part of the "calories out." The vast majority of calorie burn is from running your various body systems and functions. You must eat enough to sustain those.

phatnotfat81

Actually it isn't a "lie" it is the 2nd law of thermodynamics.Your body doesn't run on magic beans, if are actually burning more than you intake the only possible mechanism is to source calories from the body. People that make claims of not losing weight (long term) aren't actually burning more than they intake. The most likely reasons are errors in measuring intake and errors (or mis-estimation) of calorie burn. It is very easy to mis-calculate/estimate both ends of the equation as the sources of data being used are themselves just estimates (especially calorie burn as the BMR used here is just a rough estimate and the exercise calculators can be wildly off). If you aren't losing weight make sure your numbers are dead on by only intaking food for which you know the absolute caloric value and using a full time activity monitor plus an HRM tool to measure caloric burn. If you do this for 2 weeks and it makes no difference then drop your calorie intake 5-10% and repeat as your BMR is likely significantly lower than estimated.

I was thinking that too...maybe i'm missing some calories consumed....i only add the calories burned from the elliptical, treadmill, or stationary bike....rarely add walking....i do know these numbers are estimates so i eat less (in case missed some uncounted calories) and i work out a little more....i'm going to go buy one of those monitors and HRM tools. Thanx

Halleeon

Phat, FWIW, this MFP'ers blog post really helped me to further understand the math/theory used for weight loss following the BMR/TDEE method. Since weight loss is not an exact science, the best we can do is calculate/guesstimate and go from there. There are plenty of other methods out there...but this one helped me to grasp the concepts a bit easier. I also did some of my own internet research as well.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/ShannonMpls/view/tdee-exercise-calories-an-alternate-way-to-customize-mfp-goals-238045

phatnotfat81

Phat, FWIW, this MFP'ers blog post really helped me to further understand the math/theory used for weight loss following the BMR/TDEE method. Since weight loss is not an exact science, the best we can do is calculate/guesstimate and go from there. There are plenty of other methods out there...but this one helped me to grasp the concepts a bit easier. I also did some of my own internet research as well.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/ShannonMpls/view/tdee-exercise-calories-an-alternate-way-to-customize-mfp-goals-238045

: ) thanx!

yarwell

if your workout calories exceed your food intake you have a large calorie deficit...

Deficit = exercise calories + energy used in daily life - food intake

Let's say 900 + 1800 - 800 = 1900 which is a BIG deficit. You would need at least 60 lbs of fat reserves to supply you with that, in practice the 1800 will reduce to a smaller number as your body reacts so the deficit will be smaller than this suggests.

If you did achieve a 1900 deficit you would expect to lose about half a pound a day, which is getting on for the amount people lose while fasting completely.

mlegosz

Actually it isn't a "lie" it is the 2nd law of thermodynamics.Your body doesn't run on magic beans, if are actually burning more than you intake the only possible mechanism is to source calories from the body. People that make claims of not losing weight (long term) aren't actually burning more than they intake. The most likely reasons are errors in measuring intake and errors (or mis-estimation) of calorie burn. It is very easy to mis-calculate/estimate both ends of the equation as the sources of data being used are themselves just estimates (especially calorie burn as the BMR used here is just a rough estimate and the exercise calculators can be wildly off). If you aren't losing weight make sure your numbers are dead on by only intaking food for which you know the absolute caloric value and using a full time activity monitor plus an HRM tool to measure caloric burn. If you do this for 2 weeks and it makes no difference then drop your calorie intake 5-10% and repeat as your BMR is likely significantly lower than estimated.

I agree with this guy.

msstuard

Actually it isn't a "lie" it is the 2nd law of thermodynamics.Your body doesn't run on magic beans, if are actually burning more than you intake the only possible mechanism is to source calories from the body. People that make claims of not losing weight (long term) aren't actually burning more than they intake. The most likely reasons are errors in measuring intake and errors (or mis-estimation) of calorie burn. It is very easy to mis-calculate/estimate both ends of the equation as the sources of data being used are themselves just estimates (especially calorie burn as the BMR used here is just a rough estimate and the exercise calculators can be wildly off). If you aren't losing weight make sure your numbers are dead on by only intaking food for which you know the absolute caloric value and using a full time activity monitor plus an HRM tool to measure caloric burn. If you do this for 2 weeks and it makes no difference then drop your calorie intake 5-10% and repeat as your BMR is likely significantly lower than estimated.

I agree with this guy.

I agree,

Also calories in a given food are an estimate, and your portion size is an estimate. Your activity level is an estimate. if you can't comfortably lower your calorie intake you have to increase your activity. I find it easier to lower calories and increase activity so neither one is too much to handle.