Falling under calories

BootyShakingBadAss

I am a little confused! Most of my friends on MFP tend to be under their calories each day, including myself, however aren't we supposed to be striving to HIT the calorie intake level? Obviously we shouldn't be going over but constantly being under can't be good either, right?

Echosapa

Just an observation I made. This last week I hadn't lost a single pound. I had been under my intake by 500 to 600 because I've been working out quite a bit. Then on Sunday I decided to take a rest day and so I was only about 90 under my 1200 goal. When I weighed the next day I had lost about 3 pounds overnight. My body was probably in that starvation mode. So now I'm trying to be as close to my goal as possible each day and see how that goes for me.

cole_ashleyy

What I think it is is that if you hit your calorie goal- it's to maintain... if you're under- it's to lose... obviously you don't want to be TOO much under though because that's unhealthy. You need a calorie deficit to lose weight. I think the deficit depends on weight and how much you're trying to lose. I think a 500 calorie deficit (on average) may help you to lose 1-2 pounds a week. It's hard to say though because working out may increase muscle weight so you can't always go by the scale. I can't remember how many pounds per week is really safe to lose... I feel like it would only be 1-2 because above that you may be losing too much weight too quickly which really isn't healthy either.

BootyShakingBadAss

Just an observation I made. This last week I hadn't lost a single pound. I had been under my intake by 500 to 600 because I've been working out quite a bit. Then on Sunday I decided to take a rest day and so I was only about 90 under my 1200 goal. When I weighed the next day I had lost about 3 pounds overnight. My body was probably in that starvation mode. So now I'm trying to be as close to my goal as possible each day and see how that goes for me.

I just a lot of positive feedback for people staying under goal but should we be encouraging people to get closer to their goal?

BootyShakingBadAss

What I think it is is that if you hit your calorie goal- it's to maintain... if you're under- it's to lose... obviously you don't want to be TOO much under though because that's unhealthy. You need a calorie deficit to lose weight. I think the deficit depends on weight and how much you're trying to lose. I think a 500 calorie deficit (on average) may help you to lose 1-2 pounds a week. It's hard to say though because working out may increase muscle weight so you can't always go by the scale. I can't remember how many pounds per week is really safe to lose... I feel like it would only be 1-2 because above that you may be losing too much weight too quickly which really isn't healthy either.

I understand your point but when calculating your goal you can set it to lose a certain amount per week so I thought that goal already was under a maintaining goal

cole_ashleyy

Just an observation I made. This last week I hadn't lost a single pound. I had been under my intake by 500 to 600 because I've been working out quite a bit. Then on Sunday I decided to take a rest day and so I was only about 90 under my 1200 goal. When I weighed the next day I had lost about 3 pounds overnight. My body was probably in that starvation mode. So now I'm trying to be as close to my goal as possible each day and see how that goes for me.

Weighing on a daily basis won't always give you the most accurate results. There are so many things that can factor in to it. Water retention, missing a bowel movement, ect... ect...

cole_ashleyy

What I think it is is that if you hit your calorie goal- it's to maintain... if you're under- it's to lose... obviously you don't want to be TOO much under though because that's unhealthy. You need a calorie deficit to lose weight. I think the deficit depends on weight and how much you're trying to lose. I think a 500 calorie deficit (on average) may help you to lose 1-2 pounds a week. It's hard to say though because working out may increase muscle weight so you can't always go by the scale. I can't remember how many pounds per week is really safe to lose... I feel like it would only be 1-2 because above that you may be losing too much weight too quickly which really isn't healthy either.

I understand your point but when calculating your goal you can set it to lose a certain amount per week so I thought that goal already was under a maintaining goal

It's possible... that's not really how I saw it though... maybe... I wonder if there's something on here in FAQ that might help explain. But I know when you exercise it adds to the amount you're "allowed" for the day.

KarenJanine

What I think it is is that if you hit your calorie goal- it's to maintain... if you're under- it's to lose... obviously you don't want to be TOO much under though because that's unhealthy. You need a calorie deficit to lose weight. I think the deficit depends on weight and how much you're trying to lose. I think a 500 calorie deficit (on average) may help you to lose 1-2 pounds a week. It's hard to say though because working out may increase muscle weight so you can't always go by the scale. I can't remember how many pounds per week is really safe to lose... I feel like it would only be 1-2 because above that you may be losing too much weight too quickly which really isn't healthy either.

I understand your point but when calculating your goal you can set it to lose a certain amount per week so I thought that goal already was under a maintaining goal

Yes, the deficit was already factored in when you set up MFP. Eat right up to your goal. It is set up so you will lose weight without exercise. If you're working out, eat you exercise cals too.

cole_ashleyy

What I think it is is that if you hit your calorie goal- it's to maintain... if you're under- it's to lose... obviously you don't want to be TOO much under though because that's unhealthy. You need a calorie deficit to lose weight. I think the deficit depends on weight and how much you're trying to lose. I think a 500 calorie deficit (on average) may help you to lose 1-2 pounds a week. It's hard to say though because working out may increase muscle weight so you can't always go by the scale. I can't remember how many pounds per week is really safe to lose... I feel like it would only be 1-2 because above that you may be losing too much weight too quickly which really isn't healthy either.

I understand your point but when calculating your goal you can set it to lose a certain amount per week so I thought that goal already was under a maintaining goal

Yes, the deficit was already factored in when you set up MFP. Eat right up to your goal. It is set up so you will lose weight without exercise. If you're working out, eat you exercise cals too.

Good to know!! Thanks!

Firefox7275

I am a little confused! Most of my friends on MFP tend to be under their calories each day, including myself, however aren't we supposed to be striving to HIT the calorie intake level? Obviously we shouldn't be going over but constantly being under can't be good either, right?

Depends what goal people set and the quality of their diet. If they want to lose two pounds a week they are undereating by 1000 cals a day, it's not wise to go even further under because you simply won't get all the nutrients your body needs. If someone is using a very conservative goal and consuming a balanced nutrient dense diet being under is less of a concern.

sweetiepiesara147

Yes, very good to know. I've been under my calories as well and I haven't been eating the calories that I'm burning with exercise and I only lost 0.2 lbs. Let me know if you see any improvement by eating all the cals/day.

212ackley

It really would depend on how you set up your profile....if you chose your calories to loose 2 # per week, the calculation is for how many calories to eat to lose those 2 # per week....

Erienneb

I am a little confused! Most of my friends on MFP tend to be under their calories each day, including myself, however aren't we supposed to be striving to HIT the calorie intake level? Obviously we shouldn't be going over but constantly being under can't be good either, right?

Depends what goal people set and the quality of their diet. If they want to lose two pounds a week they are undereating by 1000 cals a day, it's not wise to go even further under because you simply won't get all the nutrients your body needs. If someone is using a very conservative goal and consuming a balanced nutrient dense diet being under is less of a concern.

Exactly this. I have a deficit of 1000 a day so I aim as close to goal as possible. However, I'm usually under because I would rather be 10 under than 10 over and it's hard as hell to hit the exact number. I also don't eat back all my calories from work outs for accuracy reasons, I try to leave about half of those just in case.

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

What I think it is is that if you hit your calorie goal- it's to maintain... if you're under- it's to lose... obviously you don't want to be TOO much under though because that's unhealthy. You need a calorie deficit to lose weight. I think the deficit depends on weight and how much you're trying to lose. I think a 500 calorie deficit (on average) may help you to lose 1-2 pounds a week. It's hard to say though because working out may increase muscle weight so you can't always go by the scale. I can't remember how many pounds per week is really safe to lose... I feel like it would only be 1-2 because above that you may be losing too much weight too quickly which really isn't healthy either.

Your calorie goal has your deficit built in. You want to hit within 100 calories or so of the goal MFP gives you.

BarackMeLikeAHurricane

I aim to be under by a single or double digit number of calories. Sometimes I'll be 200-300 calories under my goal, but that's usually if I fall asleep early. Normally I'm like ~50 calories under my goal which isn't very much.

3foldchord

I am a little confused! Most of my friends on MFP tend to be under their calories each day, including myself, however aren't we supposed to be striving to HIT the calorie intake level? Obviously we shouldn't be going over but constantly being under can't be good either, right?

Yes, true. My goal is to be on target, but I often get side-tracked obsessing over macros and end up under. I an doing better and being within 100 or even closer somedays.

3foldchord

I aim to be under by a single or double digit number of calories. Sometimes I'll be 200-300 calories under my goal, but that's usually if I fall asleep early. Normally I'm like ~50 calories under my goal which isn't very much.

I think 50 is a good goal, ESP for me, as I make my own foods and often am probably off a little bit on logging calories.

SanteMulberry

From what I understand, if you are obese, you have a bit more "wiggle room" than those who are closer to their goal weight. I saw a recommendation on another thread that suggested that obese people should eat TDEE-20% and then work DOWN from there as you lose body fat. In other words, if you have 100 lbs of body fat to lose, you should be eating fewer of your exercise calories back (TDEE-20%) than if you only have 20 lbs. (maybe something like TDEE-5%) to lose. By the time you get close to your goal weight (five to ten lbs.), you should be eating ALL of your exercise calories back. It makes sense if you think about it. It requires patience, consistency and perseverance. But then, all things--from creating productive relationships to learning a new skill set-- do.

bagge72

Just an observation I made. This last week I hadn't lost a single pound. I had been under my intake by 500 to 600 because I've been working out quite a bit. Then on Sunday I decided to take a rest day and so I was only about 90 under my 1200 goal. When I weighed the next day I had lost about 3 pounds overnight. My body was probably in that starvation mode. So now I'm trying to be as close to my goal as possible each day and see how that goes for me.

Just please don't listen to this. Your body doesn't go into this thing called starvation mode, because you ate under your calorie goals for a week, and bam, you rest one day, and your body comes out of this so called starvation mode, and it says oh great you are eating again, so I will go ahead and drop those 3lbs of fat now. Most likely what happened in this situation is that the person was under eating, and not getting enough liquids, and also working out extra, so the body was holding on to all of the water it could to repair its self, and when it was done, it dropped all of the extra water weight.

Now for your question OP. If you are a bigger person, and you have a pretty high calorie goal, for a while you can be under your calorie goal, and still lose weight safely, but if you don't have a ton of weight to lose, and you are eating between 1400- 1200 calories, I would try to reach your goal every day, because your body doesn't have as much stored fat to munch on, so it isn't as healthy. I personally am usually way under my calorie goal on the weekdays, but make up for it on the weekends.

SOOZIE429

You should all be eating over your BMR. If you are not, you are depriving your body of necessary nutrients and probably burning mostly muscle not fat.

Please read this: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/804485-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12