1300 or 1600 calories?
Options
Replies
-
I have a similar issue to you.. you're not going to be able to lose 2lbs per week and eat above your BMR.What is your BMR? Create as large a deficit as you like, but do not eat under your BMR as it will eventually cause metabolic damage. My BRM is 1303 and TDEE around 1950. I eat 1800 or so because I am close to goal but in the past the same number of calories was a 1 pound a week deficit.
My BMR is 1743.. and to lose 2lbs a week I'm meant to eat 1300 but that's well below my BMR. But even if I calculate my sedentary TDEE minus 20%.. that's below my BMR too.
How much do you want to lose?
2lb a week may not be right for you.
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.
I'm 80lbs overweight & wanna lose 80.. So I guess I'm okay at 1300 cause I've got so much body fat?
I had to adjust to .8 lbs per week - that is the MOST I can do without eating below BMR.
And for the record, this was calculated using the Roadmap Spreadsheet, so I know it is correct.0 -
Please don't listen to the ignorant and do a little research. I have known many people who jump on the high deficit bandwagon to regret it later for many different it-did-not-benefit-them-but-hurt-them reasons. Just know it's easy to get past stalls on a smaller deficit, you'll be able to get more nutrients from food on a calorie deficit, you'll be able to keep your energy expenditure higher then on a smaller deficit (which you can look up on google scholar if you don't believe me) so in turn your metabolism well be higher. It's absolutely true that your metabolism will get slower faster on a higher deficit...I just don't see the point why you should be eating less rabit food compared to someone who is half your size...when you could be eating the exact same thing and be headed to the exact same place...weight loss. The low calorie diets are known to drop initial water weight fast and then come to a halt, mainly because of depleting glycogen stores...the stuff that flows around your body repairing organs and muscles. It's just not worth it if you ask me.
With that said there are those who have reasons to go on extremely high calorie deficits under the supervision of a doctor...I would imagine you do not fall into this category even if you are overweight. I've seen many larger then you get oodles smaller without eating less then my dog.0 -
Please don't listen to the ignorant and do a little research. I have known many people who jump on the high deficit bandwagon to regret it later for many different it-did-not-benefit-them-but-hurt-them reasons. Just know it's easy to get past stalls on a smaller deficit, you'll be able to get more nutrients from food on a calorie deficit, you'll be able to keep your energy expenditure higher then on a smaller deficit (which you can look up on google scholar if you don't believe me) so in turn your metabolism well be higher. It's absolutely true that your metabolism will get slower faster on a higher deficit...I just don't see the point why you should be eating less rabit food compared to someone who is half your size...when you could be eating the exact same thing and be headed to the exact same place...weight loss. The low calorie diets are known to drop initial water weight fast and then come to a halt, mainly because of depleting glycogen stores...the stuff that flows around your body repairing organs and muscles. It's just not worth it if you ask me.
With that said there are those who have reasons to go on extremely high calorie deficits under the supervision of a doctor...I would imagine you do not fall into this category even if you are overweight. I've seen many larger then you get oodles smaller without eating less then my dog.
My sedentary TDEE minus 20% is 1600, and that's what I've been advised to eat by Helloitsdan, the original poster of the road map.. But when world famous personal trainers such as Jillian Michaels advise to create a 1000 cal deficit and say that 1200-1400 calories is okay, it just gets really confusing.
Ultimately all I want is to lose body fat & inches. I've gone from having a 27inch waist only 14 months ago to now having a 40inch waist. I want to fit back into my size 8 clothes again and have very low body fat to being 80lbs overweight.. and I know it's not a face but I'd really like to be back in my size 8's by summer!0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.
This makes more sense numberwise I think. Did the nutitionist say to eat exercise calories back?0 -
I'm currently eating 1300 calories a day, but it's only been a few days so I'm not sure how my body is responding to this number.
What I'm wondering is.. If losing weight is all about creating a calorie deficit, and for me I have a BMR of 2300 so to lose 2lbs a week I'd require a 1000 cal deficit which takes me down to 1300 a day.
But then I see TDEE minus 20% all over this forum, and people saying they have better weight loss results and better inch and body fat loss results eating more..
So I'm not sure which path to take?
What number did MFP put you at?0 -
bump0
-
I'm currently eating 1300 calories a day, but it's only been a few days so I'm not sure how my body is responding to this number.
What I'm wondering is.. If losing weight is all about creating a calorie deficit, and for me I have a BMR of 2300 so to lose 2lbs a week I'd require a 1000 cal deficit which takes me down to 1300 a day.
But then I see TDEE minus 20% all over this forum, and people saying they have better weight loss results and better inch and body fat loss results eating more..
So I'm not sure which path to take?
What number did MFP put you at?
1260, which I rounded up to 1300.0 -
I eat 1,330 calories. I have lost 25 pounds so far. you take your weight and times by 10 if you are sedentary, very obese, or elderly
if you are slightly active times by 13 and if you are active times by 15. that is the calories you are maintaining to lose weight healthy take that answer and subtract 300-500 calories depending on your weight to get your answer. hope this helps.
give your body at least 3-4 weeks to adjust first before changing calories. when you lose 10 pounds that is when you re access your calories.0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.
This makes more sense numberwise I think. Did the nutitionist say to eat exercise calories back?
Eating them back is not necessary. The 25-30 range for multiplying is so you can figure out what works for your body, and i think the same probably applies to the exercise cals. For me, I use the 25 multiplier because I have issues keeping weight down bc of hormonal b.c. I think once I get to my maintenance level I will eat back at least some exercise calories.0 -
I've read that you shouldn't eat less than 500 calories that what you burn each day. If you do, your body "learns" how to store fat better making it harder to lose weight in the future. So if I generally burn 2,200 a day then subtract 500 and I get 1,700. Oprah says if you want to weight 150 eat 1500 calories. If you want to weight 120, each 1200 calories. You just add a zero to your goal weight. Not saying it's right. It all comes down to your individual body shape, age, activity, and so on. I just thought it was interesting.0
-
Wow, I'm still confused but this thread is awesome! I'm a 230 lb man (was 248 6 weeks ago) and I had my RMR calculated at 1550. My doctor told me to take 20% off that number and stick to it. He said that my RMR would go down as I lost weight so for every 10lbs I lose, my RMR would go down by 7-8%.roughly, lowering the calories I should be eating as I lose weight. I'm exercising daily with a minimum of a 4-5 mile walk and a max of circuit training/weight lifting and cardio (3 days week) I'm still eating between 1250 and 1300 calories daily, but the folks at my gym tell me I should be eating at least 1400. I'm losing weight but I've screwed my metabolism so many times I don't want to do it again. From what I'm reading here, I might just be doing that by eating too little. I've lowered my RMR number to 1450 but still eating 1300 calories a day. Exercising at least 300 and sometimes 900 calories + per day.
Any thoughts. How high do you think I can go and still lose 1 to 1.5 lbs a week?0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.
This makes more sense numberwise I think. Did the nutitionist say to eat exercise calories back?
Eating them back is not necessary. The 25-30 range for multiplying is so you can figure out what works for your body, and i think the same probably applies to the exercise cals. For me, I use the 25 multiplier because I have issues keeping weight down bc of hormonal b.c. I think once I get to my maintenance level I will eat back at least some exercise calories.
(120/2.2)*25=1365 and holy mother is this ever wrong. Even at the highest number it's wrong, I was eating much more then that, weighing my food, and losing weight. And I'm not just saying that because it worked for me, I'm saying that because to me those numbers make no mathematical sense. Also, the other equations have some scientific standing....Nutritionalists, I hold little value to what they say, same goes for personal trainers. I've met only dense ones. If you want to talk to someone with qualifications, talk to a dietitian:
"In most US states, parts of Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, the term nutritionist is not legally protected, whereas the title of dietitian can be used only by those who have met specified professional requirements" - wikipedia0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.
This makes more sense numberwise I think. Did the nutitionist say to eat exercise calories back?
Eating them back is not necessary. The 25-30 range for multiplying is so you can figure out what works for your body, and i think the same probably applies to the exercise cals. For me, I use the 25 multiplier because I have issues keeping weight down bc of hormonal b.c. I think once I get to my maintenance level I will eat back at least some exercise calories.
(120/2.2)*25=1365 and holy mother is this ever wrong. Even at the highest number it's wrong, I was eating much more then that, weighing my food, and losing weight. Also, the other equations have some scientific standing....Nutritionalists, I hold little value to what they say, same goes for personal trainers. I've met only dense ones. If you want to talk to someone with qualifications, talk to a dietitian:
"In most US states, parts of Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, the term nutritionist is not legally protected, whereas the title of dietitian can be used only by those who have met specified professional requirements" - wikipedia
She is a licensed dietitian as well. its just easier to type one rather than both. Also...quoting wikipedia to doubt the validity of another source?? Pot, meet Kettle :P0 -
If dan took the time to run your numbers, the least you can do is give it a shot for a month or two. I follow IPOARM and it works for me.Your BMR is 2300 or 1743? You have both in 2 different posts. Eat above your BMR, under your TDEE. How did you find out your BMR/TDEE, did you use helloitsdan's post (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12)
My BMR is 1743 and my TDEE is 2300. Yes I used the road map post & dan advised me to eat 1600.
I kinda don't understand how the road map is suggesting eating under your BMR though... does not compute.
If your TDEE is 2300, then the -20% of that would still be 1840. If your BMR is 1743 and you're eating the 1840, you're still gonna be at a deficit.0 -
If your BMR is 2300 like you said...your TDEE is AT LEAST 2300*1.2=2760 if you are sedentary and you exercise never...and 20% of 2760 is much much much much much higher then 1600. If those numbers are correct, take it from the girl with the 25 inch waist, you can eat much more then 1600.Please don't listen to the ignorant and do a little research. I have known many people who jump on the high deficit bandwagon to regret it later for many different it-did-not-benefit-them-but-hurt-them reasons. Just know it's easy to get past stalls on a smaller deficit, you'll be able to get more nutrients from food on a calorie deficit, you'll be able to keep your energy expenditure higher then on a smaller deficit (which you can look up on google scholar if you don't believe me) so in turn your metabolism well be higher. It's absolutely true that your metabolism will get slower faster on a higher deficit...I just don't see the point why you should be eating less rabit food compared to someone who is half your size...when you could be eating the exact same thing and be headed to the exact same place...weight loss. The low calorie diets are known to drop initial water weight fast and then come to a halt, mainly because of depleting glycogen stores...the stuff that flows around your body repairing organs and muscles. It's just not worth it if you ask me.
With that said there are those who have reasons to go on extremely high calorie deficits under the supervision of a doctor...I would imagine you do not fall into this category even if you are overweight. I've seen many larger then you get oodles smaller without eating less then my dog.
My sedentary TDEE minus 20% is 1600, and that's what I've been advised to eat by Helloitsdan, the original poster of the road map.. But when world famous personal trainers such as Jillian Michaels advise to create a 1000 cal deficit and say that 1200-1400 calories is okay, it just gets really confusing.
Ultimately all I want is to lose body fat & inches. I've gone from having a 27inch waist only 14 months ago to now having a 40inch waist. I want to fit back into my size 8 clothes again and have very low body fat to being 80lbs overweight.. and I know it's not a face but I'd really like to be back in my size 8's by summer!0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.
This makes more sense numberwise I think. Did the nutitionist say to eat exercise calories back?
Eating them back is not necessary. The 25-30 range for multiplying is so you can figure out what works for your body, and i think the same probably applies to the exercise cals. For me, I use the 25 multiplier because I have issues keeping weight down bc of hormonal b.c. I think once I get to my maintenance level I will eat back at least some exercise calories.
(120/2.2)*25=1365 and holy mother is this ever wrong. Even at the highest number it's wrong, I was eating much more then that, weighing my food, and losing weight. Also, the other equations have some scientific standing....Nutritionalists, I hold little value to what they say, same goes for personal trainers. I've met only dense ones. If you want to talk to someone with qualifications, talk to a dietitian:
"In most US states, parts of Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, the term nutritionist is not legally protected, whereas the title of dietitian can be used only by those who have met specified professional requirements" - wikipedia
She is a licensed dietitian as well. its just easier to type one rather than both. Also...quoting wikipedia to doubt the validity of another source?? Pot, meet Kettle :P
I know right? But I'm not doing all kinds of research to please you, anyone with a google search engine even if they lacked a brain could look it up. And usually one would type the best qualification, not the worse.0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.
This makes more sense numberwise I think. Did the nutitionist say to eat exercise calories back?
Eating them back is not necessary. The 25-30 range for multiplying is so you can figure out what works for your body, and i think the same probably applies to the exercise cals. For me, I use the 25 multiplier because I have issues keeping weight down bc of hormonal b.c. I think once I get to my maintenance level I will eat back at least some exercise calories.
(120/2.2)*25=1365 and holy mother is this ever wrong. Even at the highest number it's wrong, I was eating much more then that, weighing my food, and losing weight. Also, the other equations have some scientific standing....Nutritionalists, I hold little value to what they say, same goes for personal trainers. I've met only dense ones. If you want to talk to someone with qualifications, talk to a dietitian:
"In most US states, parts of Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, the term nutritionist is not legally protected, whereas the title of dietitian can be used only by those who have met specified professional requirements" - wikipedia
She is a licensed dietitian as well. its just easier to type one rather than both. Also...quoting wikipedia to doubt the validity of another source?? Pot, meet Kettle :P
I know right? But I'm not doing all kinds of research to please you, anyone with a google search engine even if they lacked a brain could look it up. And usually one would type the best qualification, not the worse.
Honestly I didnt KNOW one was worse than the other. But she rolled her eyes when i showed this to her and she pulled out the license, so from now on to please people like YOU i will type dietitian instead of nutritionist0 -
This thread is full of awful awful advice. For anyone reading this looking for advice I advise looking at any of these instead:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
I'm sure there are many others.0 -
I talked to a nutritionist today. Rather than use the TDEE/BMR and have to recalculate all the time...use this formula. it will be slower going but easier to maintain in the long run.
Take your GOAL weight and convert to kg (divide by 2.2). Multply that number by 25-30...thats the amount of calories needed to maintain your GOAL weight. That way, once you get there, you have already developed the eating and exercise habits necessariy to maintain that weight.
This makes more sense numberwise I think. Did the nutitionist say to eat exercise calories back?
Eating them back is not necessary. The 25-30 range for multiplying is so you can figure out what works for your body, and i think the same probably applies to the exercise cals. For me, I use the 25 multiplier because I have issues keeping weight down bc of hormonal b.c. I think once I get to my maintenance level I will eat back at least some exercise calories.
(120/2.2)*25=1365 and holy mother is this ever wrong. Even at the highest number it's wrong, I was eating much more then that, weighing my food, and losing weight. Also, the other equations have some scientific standing....Nutritionalists, I hold little value to what they say, same goes for personal trainers. I've met only dense ones. If you want to talk to someone with qualifications, talk to a dietitian:
"In most US states, parts of Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, the term nutritionist is not legally protected, whereas the title of dietitian can be used only by those who have met specified professional requirements" - wikipedia
She is a licensed dietitian as well. its just easier to type one rather than both. Also...quoting wikipedia to doubt the validity of another source?? Pot, meet Kettle :P
I know right? But I'm not doing all kinds of research to please you, anyone with a google search engine even if they lacked a brain could look it up. And usually one would type the best qualification, not the worse.
Honestly I didnt KNOW one was worse than the other. But she rolled her eyes when i showed this to her and she pulled out the license, so from now on to please people like YOU i will type dietitian instead of nutritionist
I apologize if I sounded rude, but when someone pulls math that is different from the math from every other scientific resource I've ever seen used, I doubt them. Since you and a nutritionalist+dietition are sitting around on a computer on mfp, could you point me in the right direction of where I can see that math that proves those are the maintenance calories, and for who (people/dogs/etc)? Because I can maintain on almost double the numbers you listed that I would maintain on, which doesn't make much sense now does it.
And I don't want you to please me, I just question when things are different from everything else.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions