Question about daily calorie goal

CM9178
CM9178 Posts: 1,251 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I posted this question in the middle of another thread, so I figure it would probably be overlooked there, but I'm really looking for an answer:

In order to lose weight, you need to create a deficit for the week, right? So for example, if you are allowed let's say 1400 calories per day x 7 days = 9800 calories for the week. If you go over one day and eat, let's say 1700 calories, couldn't you just reduce your daily calories to make up those extra 300? That is what I have always done - and I've heard it mentioned many times - if you have a "cheat day" or a 'bad day' where you go over, you can make up for it throughout the week by eating better the remaining days.

So my question is this - if you are on a 1200 calorie/day plan, and you go over by let's say 300 calories on 1 day, can you eat below the 1200 a few times to make up for that extra 300?

So for example:
Based on a 1200/calories per day plan:
Saturday - 1500 calories (went over 300)
Sunday - 1100 calories
Monday - 1200 calories
tuesday - 1100 calories
Wednesday - 1200 calories
thursday - 1100 calories
Friday - 1200 calories

OR
are you just 'screwed' that you went over, and you can't do this because it is 'unhealthy'?
I personally know if I go out to eat and go over by a few hundred, there is no way I can eat my usual calories the next day because I am usually feeling stuffed - so I have no problem keeping it under my calorie goal that day to make up for the previous day.

I've made my diary public in case anybody is interested in actually seeing what I'm doing on a weekly basis. While it may look like I'm eating around 1200 every day, I have some higher days (usually Fridays) and then "make up" for them throughout the week, but my average is usually around 1350/day in the end.

Replies

  • islandgirl76_
    islandgirl76_ Posts: 86 Member
    I wonder about this too! I have never done weight watchers, but I think they give you some flex points that you can use at any point throughout the week.

    I just asked a similar question about spreading exercise calories out over two or more days. I've been logging for a couple weeks and 5 out of 7 days I am just under my goal calories. I lost a pound and then gained it back. So I'm wondering the same as you if we should look at weekly totals. At least a little bit!
  • now_or_never13
    now_or_never13 Posts: 1,575 Member
    I think it's better to look at the weekly goal instead of daily. I try to stay at my daily goal but sometimes I go over, sometimes I am under.. it all evens out in the end.

    However, if you are only consuming 1200 a day I wouldn't worry about going over a day or two a week. It is far too low of a goal for the majority of people anyways.
  • CM9178
    CM9178 Posts: 1,251 Member
    I think it's better to look at the weekly goal instead of daily. I try to stay at my daily goal but sometimes I go over, sometimes I am under.. it all evens out in the end.

    However, if you are only consuming 1200 a day I wouldn't worry about going over a day or two a week. It is far too low of a goal for the majority of people anyways.

    I'm averaging about 1350 calories per day in 1 week, but there are definitely some days that I eat about 1100 calories, and there are other days that I eat around 1500 calories. I'm just wondering if this is still considered bad to do - since they say you shouldn't eat under 1200 calories. But does that mean you shouldn't consisently eat under 1200, or ever??
  • prokomds
    prokomds Posts: 318 Member
    The only people who should really be eating 1200/day are short, fairly small women who are on the inactive side. If you're in that population (which I think is much smaller than the number of people who THINK they should be eating that little)... then yeah, I think it's fine to bounce over/under by 200ish calories day to day.

    The concern would be getting into a cycle of binging one day and then starving the next to make up for it. There are people who are into intermittent fasting, which is intentional cycling of heavier/lighter periods of eating, but I think that's way different that going way over one day and "making up" for it by starving the next, you know? In my opinion what you described is probably fine, but eating 2000 one day and 800 the next two days to compensate is going off the deep end
  • CM9178
    CM9178 Posts: 1,251 Member
    I wonder about this too! I have never done weight watchers, but I think they give you some flex points that you can use at any point throughout the week.

    I just asked a similar question about spreading exercise calories out over two or more days. I've been logging for a couple weeks and 5 out of 7 days I am just under my goal calories. I lost a pound and then gained it back. So I'm wondering the same as you if we should look at weekly totals. At least a little bit!
    I do weight watchers and I've ALWAYS looked at my points for the week as a whole, rather than per day. It is too hard to eat exactly the same number of points (or calories) every single day - it is going to fluctuate, so I'm guessing that as long as the weekly average, or total number of calories (or points) should be all that matters.
  • CM9178
    CM9178 Posts: 1,251 Member
    The only people who should really be eating 1200/day are short, fairly small women who are on the inactive side. If you're in that population (which I think is much smaller than the number of people who THINK they should be eating that little)... then yeah, I think it's fine to bounce over/under by 200ish calories day to day.

    The concern would be getting into a cycle of binging one day and then starving the next to make up for it. There are people who are into intermittent fasting, which is intentional cycling of heavier/lighter periods of eating, but I think that's way different that going way over one day and "making up" for it by starving the next, you know? In my opinion what you described is probably fine, but eating 2000 one day and 800 the next two days to compensate is going off the deep end
    Yup, I totally fall into that group. I am 5'2", small and very inactive. I have a 9-5 desk job and don't exercise. The most movement I get is going to the bathroom and cooking dinner, in a typical week. I'm averaging around 1350 calories though and still losing weight.
    I also don't binge, but we do go out to eat every Friday night, so I'll allow myself an extra 300 to 400 calories that night, and then slowly adjust my calories the rest of the week to make up for the difference.
  • Angelina3894
    Angelina3894 Posts: 9 Member
    I do not really think it matters much. I try to remain healthy, eat my protein-carb-fat ratios correctly and for the most part stay around my caloric goal as well. i think there is too much stock put into "counting calories" or eating low fat. I use MFP as way to make a journal of what i am eating, see what works for me and what makes me feel good and that is what i follow. i eat healthy 90% of the time and i exercise regularly. some days i have 6 slices of pizza! it doesn't happen often, i don't beat myself up about it and i don't adjust my calories to make up for it. i just start the next day brand new. plain and simple. i have lost 26 pounds doing this. i wouldn't let it going over/under weigh you down!
  • prokomds
    prokomds Posts: 318 Member
    The only people who should really be eating 1200/day are short, fairly small women who are on the inactive side. If you're in that population (which I think is much smaller than the number of people who THINK they should be eating that little)... then yeah, I think it's fine to bounce over/under by 200ish calories day to day.

    The concern would be getting into a cycle of binging one day and then starving the next to make up for it. There are people who are into intermittent fasting, which is intentional cycling of heavier/lighter periods of eating, but I think that's way different that going way over one day and "making up" for it by starving the next, you know? In my opinion what you described is probably fine, but eating 2000 one day and 800 the next two days to compensate is going off the deep end
    Yup, I totally fall into that group. I am 5'2", small and very inactive. I have a 9-5 desk job and don't exercise. The most movement I get is going to the bathroom and cooking dinner, in a typical week. I'm averaging around 1350 calories though and still losing weight.
    I also don't binge, but we do go out to eat every Friday night, so I'll allow myself an extra 300 to 400 calories that night, and then slowly adjust my calories the rest of the week to make up for the difference.

    Congrats on your successes :)

    It's hard to not sound judge-y, when you see so many (much taller, larger) women eating way below where they should be. Some people want to jump down your throat as soon as they hear "1200" -- but there's such a huge range of calories that people need depending on their body and their lifestyle. Sounds like you've got a good handle on your needs (and eating at around 1350 gives you a little buffer over the dreaded 1200, anyway)

    I'm a fan of any routine that isn't taking things to extremes. Just like how it's dumb to way undereat just because you think you'll lose faster... I think it's also dumb to give up on eating out with your friends, even if it puts you "over" for the day. The routine that sticks is the one that's flexible with all the activities in your life. Take care :)

Categories