Eat, Train, Progress.

Join

Trying to understand target calories

Options
djdube525
djdube525 Posts: 69 Member
in Social Groups
As I've read a bit more through MFP.... I believe I'm eating too few calories...

This may be poor form (cross posting), but I had started a thread in the general food and nutrition group...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/860448-help-i-don-t-think-i-m-eating-enough?page=1#posts-12942531

I was directed here... Looks like I have a bit more reading to do.... I was wondering if anyone had either general thoughts on the thread above, or posts in he stickies above that I should pay particular attention to.

Thanks!

-DD

Replies

  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    Options
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    When you used fat2fit, they would have already included a deficit. Pick the activity level as near as possible to yours and eat to that number - no eating back of exercise calories as they are included already. The link SideSteel provided will tell you how to over-ride MFP settings as well as how to calculate your macros.

    If you need to up your calories, which it sounds like you do, up them by 150 - 200 a week until you get where you need to be.
  • djdube525
    djdube525 Posts: 69 Member
    Options
    Consoldating some threads as I work this out as I read threads from Sara and SideStep... Please correct me if I'm incorrect anywhere...

    Heigh: 6'1"
    Age: 40
    CW: 201
    BF: 25% (calculated from fat to fit Military Calculator)
    GW: 175

    MFP BMR is: 1,878 (Mifflin - St. Jeor equations)
    Fat 2 Fit BMR is: 1,973 (Harris - Bennedict)
    Fat 2 Fit BMR is: 1,853 (Katch - McArdle)

    So... targeting a BMR of roughly 1865

    When setting Fat2Fit BMR calculator with goal weight = current weight (This what I would want to stay under)

    Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 2713
    Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 3058
    Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 3403
    Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 3749

    When setting Fat2Fit BMR calculator with goal weight = 175 (This is what someone at 175 would consume to maintain):

    Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 2490
    Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 2807
    Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 3124
    Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 3441

    So my understanding... if moderately active, if I consume 2800 calories, I'll eventually get down to my goal weight.

    According to Fat2Fit, LBM is 151lbs... rounding to 150... so using the following

    1g Protein per LBM
    .35g Fat per LBM
    Remaining as Carbs

    I would get (assuming 1540 calories net <= 2lbs per week loss):

    150g of Protein (600 calories) => 39%
    52.5g of Fat (472 calories) => 30.5%
    124g of Carbs (468 calories) => 30.5% (remainder)

    Since MFP works in 5% increments for macros... I'll target 40% Protein, 30% Fat, 30% Carbs

    If I were to lose 1.5lbs per week, MFP says my net should be 1790 calories net... so looking at:

    150g Protein (600 calories) => 33.5%
    52.5g Fat (472 calories) => 26.3%
    179g Carbs (718 calories) => 40.1%

    So... Ideally, I would be at 40% Carbs, 34% Protein, 26% Fat

    Week of Jan 14: 1,235 net calories day
    Week of Jan 7: 1,192 net calories per day
    Week of Dec 31: 1,156 net calories per day

    Note: I was taking calories burned off the elliptical... those could be too high, so my nets may actually be better (higher) than I thought. So... at this moment I'm thinking this week I should have a goal to have no defecit for the week or two... (hit 1540 net on average, focus on the macros, and calibrate calories burned on the elliptical with a HRM.
  • djdube525
    djdube525 Posts: 69 Member
    Options
    Now just need to find a place for that occasional IPA or glass of wine... ;)

    I probably shouldn't sweat it given where my calories are at...
  • djdube525
    djdube525 Posts: 69 Member
    Options
    Finally brought a HRM to the gym for my elliptical workout... Interesting differences in calories burned...

    Details:
    Precor Elliptical
    45 min
    Crossramp set to 9, Resistance to 10
    4.67mi, 7909 steps
    Age: 40, Weight: 199

    Precor machine estimate:726 calories
    MFP Estimate: 610 calories
    Garmin 500 HRM: 564 calories

    On the plus side, I've probably a good 100+ calories closer to my target... So, I wasn't as bad off as I thought...
    On the downside, less room than I thought to play with splurges tonight. :/

    Now I know...

    -DD
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    So... targeting a BMR of roughly 1865

    When setting Fat2Fit BMR calculator with goal weight = current weight (This what I would want to stay under)

    Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 2713
    Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 3058
    Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 3403
    Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 3749

    So my understanding... if moderately active, if I consume 2800 calories, I'll eventually get down to my goal weight.

    I would get (assuming 1540 calories net <= 2lbs per week loss):

    If I were to lose 1.5lbs per week, MFP says my net should be 1790 calories net... so looking at:

    Too big of a goal loss amount for what you have left to lose, 25 lbs.
    15% deficit should be it, off the full TDEE estimate of 3000 - so 2550 daily no matter what you do, unless you do more than the 5 hrs of exercise in a week Moderately Active is based on, or less if you do less than 3 hrs.

    Don't even try to set up MFP activity level and weight loss goal to mimic that - their levels are not the same, but based on non-exercise. You'd never get it high enough.

    You want that weight loss to be all fat, no muscle mass right. Don't chance it by taking a deficit too big.

    Reasonable deficit 15% soon 10% when down to last 10 lbs, recommended protein which you got figured out, and strength training - all will help retain muscle mass.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Consoldating some threads as I work this out as I read threads from Sara and SideStep... Please correct me if I'm incorrect anywhere...

    Heigh: 6'1"
    Age: 40
    CW: 201
    BF: 25% (calculated from fat to fit Military Calculator)
    GW: 175

    MFP BMR is: 1,878 (Mifflin - St. Jeor equations)
    Fat 2 Fit BMR is: 1,973 (Harris - Bennedict)
    Fat 2 Fit BMR is: 1,853 (Katch - McArdle)

    So... targeting a BMR of roughly 1865

    When setting Fat2Fit BMR calculator with goal weight = current weight (This what I would want to stay under)

    Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 2713
    Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 3058
    Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 3403
    Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 3749

    When setting Fat2Fit BMR calculator with goal weight = 175 (This is what someone at 175 would consume to maintain):

    Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 2490
    Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 2807
    Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 3124
    Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 3441

    So my understanding... if moderately active, if I consume 2800 calories, I'll eventually get down to my goal weight.

    According to Fat2Fit, LBM is 151lbs... rounding to 150... so using the following

    1g Protein per LBM
    .35g Fat per LBM
    Remaining as Carbs

    I would get (assuming 1540 calories net <= 2lbs per week loss):

    150g of Protein (600 calories) => 39%
    52.5g of Fat (472 calories) => 30.5%
    124g of Carbs (468 calories) => 30.5% (remainder)

    Since MFP works in 5% increments for macros... I'll target 40% Protein, 30% Fat, 30% Carbs

    If I were to lose 1.5lbs per week, MFP says my net should be 1790 calories net... so looking at:

    150g Protein (600 calories) => 33.5%
    52.5g Fat (472 calories) => 26.3%
    179g Carbs (718 calories) => 40.1%

    So... Ideally, I would be at 40% Carbs, 34% Protein, 26% Fat

    Week of Jan 14: 1,235 net calories day
    Week of Jan 7: 1,192 net calories per day
    Week of Dec 31: 1,156 net calories per day

    Note: I was taking calories burned off the elliptical... those could be too high, so my nets may actually be better (higher) than I thought. So... at this moment I'm thinking this week I should have a goal to have no defecit for the week or two... (hit 1540 net on average, focus on the macros, and calibrate calories burned on the elliptical with a HRM.

    At a 2,800 intake level you would have to be burning 1,300 calories every day from working out. You say your HRM gives you about 600 cals. Where is the discrepancy coming from?
  • djdube525
    djdube525 Posts: 69 Member
    Options

    At a 2,800 intake level you would have to be burning 1,300 calories every day from working out. You say your HRM gives you about 600 cals. Where is the discrepancy coming from?

    Well, I can't see what I could have done to bork up the earlier calculations (from websites).

    Not sure it has much to do with it.... The HRM is a cycling computer, which is used to leveraging distance, altitude and HR as a means to calculate a total. In this case, the GPS is turned off. <- Possibility #1?

    Also, when I upload data to Garmin Connect, the tool is expecting the exercise to be a cycling workout. When I change from cycling to some other form of exercise (walk, run, elliptical, etc) the total calories does not change. <- Possibility #2

    Even though HRMs get us pretty close... A lot closer than the "swags" from various machines... There's still a lot of variability... A lot of which can be weaned out of the GPS unit. Here's a good article re: Garmin calorie calculations.

    http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html

    I was investigating after I came back from a casual 30 mile bike ride (~15 mph) and MFP was estimating 1900 while the Garmin said
    820... That's a rather large discrepancy.

    I need to investigate how to import VO2 data into the device, and how expensive a lab test may run (decide if its worth the expense).

    But back to your original question... The difference between the here methods is less than 200 calories... Not enough to make up the diff you are talking about.
  • djdube525
    djdube525 Posts: 69 Member
    Options
    Ok... I should try to not reply before A) I've had my coffee and B) before 5:00AM


    So I think it actually makes sense... If looking at it from a weekly perspective:

    19,600 calories per week (2,800 per day)
    - 7,000 calories (attempt to lose 2lbs per week)
    - 2,000 calories (4 days of cardio at 500 calories per... a swag)
    10,600 calories for the week or
    1,515 calories per day... which is roughly the number MFP has set as my target (1540).

    So the delta is just the amount of weight I'm targeting what I should lose.

    Does that sound right?

    -DD
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Ok... I should try to not reply before A) I've had my coffee and B) before 5:00AM


    So I think it actually makes sense... If looking at it from a weekly perspective:

    19,600 calories per week (2,800 per day)
    - 7,000 calories (attempt to lose 2lbs per week)
    - 2,000 calories (4 days of cardio at 500 calories per... a swag)
    10,600 calories for the week or
    1,515 calories per day... which is roughly the number MFP has set as my target (1540).

    So the delta is just the amount of weight I'm targeting what I should lose.

    Does that sound right?

    -DD

    The math makes sense now. However, you should not really be setting your target weight loss to 2lb a week. If you check out the thread here, we would recommend 1lb a week. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets
  • djdube525
    djdube525 Posts: 69 Member
    Options

    The math makes sense now. However, you should not really be setting your target weight loss to 2lb a week. If you check out the thread here, we would recommend 1lb a week. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets

    Thanks! I think I was being a bit overzealous... or possibly impatient. I was planning on upping calorie intake slowly... targeting a 100-150 calories or so per week until I get to the 1lb a week range.

    Sound like a reasonable approach?

    Regards,
    Dave
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options

    The math makes sense now. However, you should not really be setting your target weight loss to 2lb a week. If you check out the thread here, we would recommend 1lb a week. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets

    Thanks! I think I was being a bit overzealous... or possibly impatient. I was planning on upping calorie intake slowly... targeting a 100-150 calories or so per week until I get to the 1lb a week range.

    Sound like a reasonable approach?

    Regards,
    Dave

    Not a big deal as it will only take you three weeks to get to that level.

Categories