So confused!

2»

Replies

  • wswilliams67
    wswilliams67 Posts: 938 Member
    ws williams 67-

    That makes sense. I think now that I'm lifting heavy and that isn't reflected well in the "calories burned" department it makes more sense to do TDEE. What i do now is try to eat no more than 1800 on my lifting days (TDEE at my goal weight with my current exercise level is 1811),on other days I do 1300+ exercise cals. On non lifting days, I try to run at least 3 miles and walk 30 mins which burns approx 350 cals so on those days I eat about 1650 cals. My BMR is 1392. One day a week, I don't run or lift, but I usually go rock climbing or surfing or some other such awesomeness on my "day off" and burn calories which I add to my 1300.

    So I think I'm kinda doing what you say to do, only I do it in my own weird complicated fashion which makes perfect sense to me :)

    YEP! Same destination.. different road LOL.

    I used this to guestimate my lifting calories... http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calories_burned.htm

    It's not perfect, but it's a ballpark. I'm just not a Heart Rate Monitor & stopwatch kinda guy.
  • CorvusCorax77
    CorvusCorax77 Posts: 2,536 Member
    ws williams 67-

    That makes sense. I think now that I'm lifting heavy and that isn't reflected well in the "calories burned" department it makes more sense to do TDEE. What i do now is try to eat no more than 1800 on my lifting days (TDEE at my goal weight with my current exercise level is 1811),on other days I do 1300+ exercise cals. On non lifting days, I try to run at least 3 miles and walk 30 mins which burns approx 350 cals so on those days I eat about 1650 cals. My BMR is 1392. One day a week, I don't run or lift, but I usually go rock climbing or surfing or some other such awesomeness on my "day off" and burn calories which I add to my 1300.

    So I think I'm kinda doing what you say to do, only I do it in my own weird complicated fashion which makes perfect sense to me :)

    YEP! Same destination.. different road LOL.

    I used this to guestimate my lifting calories... http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calories_burned.htm

    It's not perfect, but it's a ballpark. I'm just not a Heart Rate Monitor & stopwatch kinda guy.

    Word.

    I think what I like about my method is that when I do something nutso like run 13 miles, I get to do something nutso like eat extra food :) {but not so much that i put on weight!}
  • wswilliams67
    wswilliams67 Posts: 938 Member
    ack. again. not to be complicated, but because now I am confused also....

    as i have said, i already lost my weight (my profile pic is my before pic) and now i'm focused on body composition...

    but like i said, when I started my BMR was 1562 and i ate 1200+. Now back then I'd run maybe 2 miles 2 or 3 x's a week so I was eating 1200-1400 cals a day. All under my BMR. I didn't die. My organs didn't fail. My thought is that my body got those extra cals from my fat which so obviously went away. I got my nutrients from the healthy food I ate.

    What's wrong with what I did??

    ETA: I do really want to understand this stuff, btw.

    Nothing wrong with it. You CAN eat under your BMR, but eventually your metabolism WILL shut down. It's just how the body works. For some people that happens quicker than others. You just got lucky and your metabolism didn't shut down. Now in your case, maybe as you were leaning out your BMR was dropping as well which kept your caloric intake just above your BMR so you never hit that wall. Maybe you were underestimating your caloric intake? Maybe you're an alien mutant to whom the laws of physiology don't apply LOL? No way to tell at this point. My guess wold be one of the first two reasons not the alien one.

    But again, every person is different except for one thing. We all have a metabolism. Knowing your current BMR & TDEE will give you a caloric range to stay within for your current weight and exercise level. Eat less than your TDEE but more than your BMR and you will lose weight. Do the same, but exercise (build lean muscle) and you will lose fat. The more you eat below your TDEE the more you will lose. Eat less than your BMR and eventually your metabolism will shut down. Eat your TDEE exactly and you will maintain your current weight.
  • wswilliams67
    wswilliams67 Posts: 938 Member
    Word.

    I think what I like about my method is that when I do something nutso like run 13 miles, I get to do something nutso like eat extra food :) {but not so much that i put on weight!}

    Some people love that strategy. Reward for exercise. I personally can't do that (friggin Diabetes) so I must go the regimented route.
  • marycmeadows
    marycmeadows Posts: 1,691 Member
    Hey the way i see it, the less i eat, the more weight i lose. On the other hand, if im hungry, i eat. Regarding my exercise, i have the extra cals there is i feel hungry later in the evening after dinner. I dont really pay too much attention to BMR or similar ...hope this helps! Wouldnt worry too much about what every one else says on the msg boards, just find what works for you :-)

    This is wrong - IT IS NOT TRUE THAT THE LESS YOU EAT THE MORE WEIGHT YOU LOSE. good way to develop an eating disorder. Starving yourself is not a good way to lose weight - if you do lose that way, you will gain your weight back as soon as you start eating again, and worse.
  • myownadvice
    myownadvice Posts: 95 Member


    Quote: "So just to make sure I have this right, I should be eating 1817 calories per day and disregard my weight loss calories completely in order to loose 1 pound a week? Couldn't I do 1317 a day in order to loose 2 pounds per week? I guess I don't understand why I can't do this since the minimum is 1200?"

    Because eating only 1317 a day puts you below your BMR (the amount of calories your body needs just to function properly). The 1200 is the absolute minimum that MFP allows, that doesn't mean it's a good number for you or anyone else in particular to shoot for.




    ack. again. not to be complicated, but because now I am confused also....

    as i have said, i already lost my weight (my profile pic is my before pic) and now i'm focused on body composition...

    but like i said, when I started my BMR was 1562 and i ate 1200+. Now back then I'd run maybe 2 miles 2 or 3 x's a week so I was eating 1200-1400 cals a day. All under my BMR. I didn't die. My organs didn't fail. My thought is that my body got those extra cals from my fat which so obviously went away. I got my nutrients from the healthy food I ate.

    What's wrong with what I did??

    ETA: I do really want to understand this stuff, btw.

    I'm with you on wanting to have a good understanding of all this stuff too. :smile: I think wswilliams put it well regarding metabolism. I'm very glad that you had success! I personally could not eat below my BMR and function. A lot of it has to do with how your body functions in regards to food/energy-not everyone is the same and not everything works for every body. I try and conform to what appears to work best for most. From my understanding, eating below your BMR "may" slow your metabolism and "may" cause "plateaus" and "may" cause your body to not only burn fat but muscle too as it tries to make up for the deficit. Without proper fuel, your body will use whatever it can get a hold of to function. I think more sustainable methods for weight loss will be longer lasting and easier to maintain in the long run. Just my opinion based on what I've seen, done, read, and so on...:wink:
  • CorvusCorax77
    CorvusCorax77 Posts: 2,536 Member
    ack. again. not to be complicated, but because now I am confused also....

    as i have said, i already lost my weight (my profile pic is my before pic) and now i'm focused on body composition...

    but like i said, when I started my BMR was 1562 and i ate 1200+. Now back then I'd run maybe 2 miles 2 or 3 x's a week so I was eating 1200-1400 cals a day. All under my BMR. I didn't die. My organs didn't fail. My thought is that my body got those extra cals from my fat which so obviously went away. I got my nutrients from the healthy food I ate.

    What's wrong with what I did??

    ETA: I do really want to understand this stuff, btw.

    Nothing wrong with it. You CAN eat under your BMR, but eventually your metabolism WILL shut down. It's just how the body works. For some people that happens quicker than others. You just got lucky and your metabolism didn't shut down. Now in your case, maybe as you were leaning out your BMR was dropping as well which kept your caloric intake just above your BMR so you never hit that wall. Maybe you were underestimating your caloric intake? Maybe you're an alien mutant to whom the laws of physiology don't apply LOL? No way to tell at this point. My guess wold be one of the first two reasons not the alien one.

    But again, every person is different except for one thing. We all have a metabolism. Knowing your current BMR & TDEE will give you a caloric range to stay within for your current weight and exercise level. Eat less than your TDEE but more than your BMR and you will lose weight. Do the same, but exercise (build lean muscle) and you will lose fat. The more you eat below your TDEE the more you will lose. Eat less than your BMR and eventually your metabolism will shut down. Eat your TDEE exactly and you will maintain your current weight.

    I may be an alien. I can't be too sure. LOL!

    I suspect that as i began to exercise more, I ate more than my BMR. I don't think I lost it too fast. I lost I think 30 lbs in five months. That's 1-2 lbs a week. At that point my BMR was 1435. I was still doing 1200+ but I think because i gave myself credit for walks, etc, I was probably eating about 1400 a day. I do remember hitting plateaus. I started doing HIIT and other things to get my weight down. I eventually got down to 123 (which I think is too low for me). My BMR then was 1300 (wow! My BMR is higher than I thought!). At that point, I freaked out that I was too skinny and slowly upped my cals to 1800 and started weight training. I put on 15 lbs. Freaked out again and lowerd my cals again! Now I'm at that weird thing I told you about and maintaining at 135 lbs and about 20% bf. Trying to get to 130 lbs and 16% bf. So confusing the closer you get to goal!
  • CorvusCorax77
    CorvusCorax77 Posts: 2,536 Member
    Word.

    I think what I like about my method is that when I do something nutso like run 13 miles, I get to do something nutso like eat extra food :) {but not so much that i put on weight!}

    Some people love that strategy. Reward for exercise. I personally can't do that (friggin Diabetes) so I must go the regimented route.

    I love this strategy becuase i have this problem called I LOVE FOOD. I keep my habits healthy, but every once in a while, I wanna pig out and I like combining that with a raging work out!
  • vbarrient
    vbarrient Posts: 52 Member
    We set your nutritional target in Net Calories which we define as:

    Calories Consumed (Food) - Calories Burned (Exercise) = Net Calories

    What that means is that if you exercise, you will be able to eat more for that day. For example, if your Net Calorie goal is 2000 calories, one way to meet that goal is to eat 2,500 calories of food, but then burn 500 calories through exercise.

    Think of your Net Calories like a daily budget of calories to spend. You spend them by eating, and you earn more calories to eat by exercising.
  • kdiamond
    kdiamond Posts: 3,329 Member
    You may or may not burn 500 calories. I'd err on the conservative side if you're trying to lose weight. I'd eat 1500+ on your workout days and stick to 1200 on nonworkout days.