My calorie goal hard to reach, any suggestions?
Options
Replies
-
here's an update real quick, forgot to mention, when I walk 2 miles of the morning I burn an average of at least 345 calories walking carrying my 15 lb weight, and of the evenings after lunch or dinner, I walk for 3 miles, and burn about 460 calories, by doing this my calories remaining are going to be about 1200, and my goal is 1750. I eat good sized meals throughout the day as you can see, and use muscle milk and fiber one bars, but with my walking, seems like I'm not getting enough calories, yet I'm full throughout the day. I'm a little confused... Should I just not walk as much?
Why is it that MFP only gives me 198 calories for walking 3 kms ( 2 miles ) with a 7 kilo ( 15.5 pounds ) load ? It takes me about 40-45 minutes to do this.
Presumably you weigh a lot less.0 -
This thread is confusing in many ways.Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?0 -
There are definite negatives to having a large calorie deficit. The greater the calorie deficit, the greater the muscle loss during weight loss. Also, the greater your metabolism wants to bridge the energy gap between calorie intake and calorie burn and will slow down if you sustain a large calorie deficit for a long period of time. Studies also show that with a large calorie deficit and faster weight loss, you're much much more likely to regain the weight and actually overshoot your original weight on the way up, mainly due to hormones that make you hungry when the body senses rapid weight loss and keep making you hungry even when you gain weight again...
I'm not here to debate. Your metabolism doesn't change significantly when you eat a large deficit. Everyone eating at a deficit will have a small decrease in metabolism, but it isn't exponential and it's temporary... so it's a non-factor. It absolutely does not matter. He's not starving himself so muscle loss won't be significantly if any different than if he was eating a few hundred more calories.
An individual is not a statistic. You can't point at someone and tell them that eating 1200 calories will definitely cause them to gain weight after they finish dieting. Something being statistically significant doesn't mean that it applies to everyone. Some people will have more success losing 2 lbs/week than 1/2 lb/week and vice versa. And don't use words like "much more likely" if you don't have the source. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2001.134/full here you will see that there is evidence against the idea of a VLCD hindering long term success of weight loss. While it is a popular idea and is often repeated, there isn't much research to back up the claim that VLCD is more likely to cause weight gain...while there is evidence against the claim.
Sidenote: OP isn't on a vlcd and I'm not advocating them...but I am disputing the notion that lower calorie diets are more harmful or won't work as well as eating a few hundred more calories.0 -
Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?
This...^^^^^^^^0 -
here's an update real quick, forgot to mention, when I walk 2 miles of the morning I burn an average of at least 345 calories walking carrying my 15 lb weight, and of the evenings after lunch or dinner, I walk for 3 miles, and burn about 460 calories, by doing this my calories remaining are going to be about 1200, and my goal is 1750. I eat good sized meals throughout the day as you can see, and use muscle milk and fiber one bars, but with my walking, seems like I'm not getting enough calories, yet I'm full throughout the day. I'm a little confused... Should I just not walk as much?
This calorie burn seems high to me for walking (even with a 15 lb weight). Assuming you're walking quickly, you're probably completing 2 miles in 35-40 minutes. My gym has a guide that says that at MAXIMUM exertion (like, you can't breathe/talk etc), you're burning 8-10 calories per minute. I don't think it's POSSIBLE to keep up that intensity for a full 35-40 minutes. You're likely burning somewhere around 120 calories per mile...
If you're going by what a HRM is telling you, don't forget to subtract out the calories that you'd be burning anyway, even if you were sleeping (probably about 70 per hour) because those are already accounted for in your base calorie intake of 1750.
I know that your post is about getting more calories (which I agree with calorie-rich nutrient-rich food suggestions that others have put out there, like avocado, olive oil, nuts, etc), but part of that is not overestimating your calorie burn, too.
you may be right, I have a pedometer that counts steps, miles, calories, and minutes, and I put my weight in at 215, and when I get back from my 2 mile walk, it was actually like 2.3, and it says.....wait, just went and got it, your right, I was looking at the wrong thing, 2.3 miles I burnt like 260 calories it said, so the 3.3 miles is probably like 365 then.. either way, you got my point lol.0 -
here's an update real quick, forgot to mention, when I walk 2 miles of the morning I burn an average of at least 345 calories walking carrying my 15 lb weight, and of the evenings after lunch or dinner, I walk for 3 miles, and burn about 460 calories, by doing this my calories remaining are going to be about 1200, and my goal is 1750. I eat good sized meals throughout the day as you can see, and use muscle milk and fiber one bars, but with my walking, seems like I'm not getting enough calories, yet I'm full throughout the day. I'm a little confused... Should I just not walk as much?
Why is it that MFP only gives me 198 calories for walking 3 kms ( 2 miles ) with a 7 kilo ( 15.5 pounds ) load ? It takes me about 40-45 minutes to do this.
dunno, I've been manually putting in what my pedometer says. and the one lady was right, I burn about 245 calories on that walk, and yes, it takes me about 40-45 minutes as well. Dunno what's more accurate, a pedometer counting steps and miles, with my current weight, height and age, or what MFP gives. Either way, one is misleading. I'm going to start doing an average, so if my pedometer says 245, and here says 198, I'll say an even 220.0 -
In...
...to catch up on how *hard* it is to eat 2000 calories...
(...and this is from a guy who thought it was only a *little bit* difficult to consistently hit his 3500+exercise calories target for a couple of months.)0 -
Haha do not eat ice cream. It will just lead to increased blood sugar levels and insulin in bloodstream and halt progress a lot. Try eating stir fry with bunch of meat and vegetables easy way to get your greens and protein .
*sigh*
In what way will eating at or below his calorie target "halt progress a lot"? That makes zero sense at all.
(Hopefully this has already been addressed in the pages I haven't read yet...)0 -
here's an update real quick, forgot to mention, when I walk 2 miles of the morning I burn an average of at least 345 calories walking carrying my 15 lb weight, and of the evenings after lunch or dinner, I walk for 3 miles, and burn about 460 calories, by doing this my calories remaining are going to be about 1200, and my goal is 1750. I eat good sized meals throughout the day as you can see, and use muscle milk and fiber one bars, but with my walking, seems like I'm not getting enough calories, yet I'm full throughout the day. I'm a little confused... Should I just not walk as much?
Why is it that MFP only gives me 198 calories for walking 3 kms ( 2 miles ) with a 7 kilo ( 15.5 pounds ) load ? It takes me about 40-45 minutes to do this.
dunno, I've been manually putting in what my pedometer says. and the one lady was right, I burn about 245 calories on that walk, and yes, it takes me about 40-45 minutes as well. Dunno what's more accurate, a pedometer counting steps and miles, with my current weight, height and age, or what MFP gives. Either way, one is misleading. I'm going to start doing an average, so if my pedometer says 245, and here says 198, I'll say an even 220.
Not necessary. That persons burn is going to be different from yours because they weigh less than you.0 -
Because there is a lot more factors than just calories.Haha do not eat ice cream. It will just lead to increased blood sugar levels and insulin in bloodstream and halt progress a lot. Try eating stir fry with bunch of meat and vegetables easy way to get your greens and protein .
*sigh*
In what way will eating at or below his calorie target "halt progress a lot"? That makes zero sense at all.
(Hopefully this has already been addressed in the pages I haven't read yet...)0 -
Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?
I weight 215, 5'10", 25, listed my activity as lightly active, since I don't get to get to a gym regularly, and I take long walks (that's what it said under lightly active), clicked wanted to lose 2 lbs a week, and it said my goal was 1750 (I could be wrong, maybe I need 2800 to maintain weight, not sure exactly, but I just assumed MFP subtracted like 500-650 calories from what I need to eat to maintain, so that's where I got 2300 for my total to maintain, could be off by a hundred or 2, but dif websites have gave me different goals for maintaining weight, so not sure which to believe)0 -
I just completed the 30 day ice cream/ gelato cleanse.
lost 5.8lbs
1" off my waist
new PR on my half-marathon
and I'm finishing off a half-pint of Cadbury Creme Egg Ice Cream as I type this.
Wait... you mean to tell me that somewhere in this world there exists Cadbury Creme Egg Ice Cream, yet I have never heard about it? How did I not know this?! And where might I ask did you buy such a tasty sounding treat?
It was a one-off from a local ice cream shoppe. I prefered it to their Peeps ice cream.
But, there is hope... MFP had several listings for Cadbury Cream Egg Ice Cream, so that means it must exist SOMEWHERE. I seem to recall a bunch of the entries looked like they were from the UK.0 -
Because there is a lot more factors than just calories.Haha do not eat ice cream. It will just lead to increased blood sugar levels and insulin in bloodstream and halt progress a lot. Try eating stir fry with bunch of meat and vegetables easy way to get your greens and protein .
*sigh*
In what way will eating at or below his calorie target "halt progress a lot"? That makes zero sense at all.
(Hopefully this has already been addressed in the pages I haven't read yet...)
Well, as far as the protein shakes go with the muscle milk, it gives me loads of daily micronutrients based on the nutrition label, loads of vitamins, calcium, etc. So by drinking 2 of those a day at least, a long with my veggies to get VC and the other vitamins I need, I believe I am doing alright on that part of things.
Honestly, I didn't expect this topic to go past page 1, was just expecting some short, personalized opinions. but trust me, I'm copy and pasting all of the awesome advice into microsoft word now to go back on for later so I don't have to scroll from page to page.0 -
Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?
I weight 215, 5'10", 25, listed my activity as lightly active, since I don't get to get to a gym regularly, and I take long walks (that's what it said under lightly active), clicked wanted to lose 2 lbs a week, and it said my goal was 1750 (I could be wrong, maybe I need 2800 to maintain weight, not sure exactly, but I just assumed MFP subtracted like 500-650 calories from what I need to eat to maintain, so that's where I got 2300 for my total to maintain, could be off by a hundred or 2, but dif websites have gave me different goals for maintaining weight, so not sure which to believe)
I'm going to guess it's a little off but you'll be able to better tell in time. For perspective, I'm 5'3.5 " 116 lbs and a girl and I lose weight around 2150ish, just weightlifting 3x a week, walking and taking care of my kids.0 -
I'm going to guess it's a little off but you'll be able to better tell in time. For perspective, I'm 5'3.5 " 116 lbs and a girl and I lose weight around 2150ish, just weightlifting 3x a week, walking and taking care of my kids.
You're SUPPOSED to take care of your kids. What do you want? A cookie?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(sorry, couldn't resist a little Chris Rock)0 -
Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?
I weight 215, 5'10", 25, listed my activity as lightly active, since I don't get to get to a gym regularly, and I take long walks (that's what it said under lightly active), clicked wanted to lose 2 lbs a week, and it said my goal was 1750 (I could be wrong, maybe I need 2800 to maintain weight, not sure exactly, but I just assumed MFP subtracted like 500-650 calories from what I need to eat to maintain, so that's where I got 2300 for my total to maintain, could be off by a hundred or 2, but dif websites have gave me different goals for maintaining weight, so not sure which to believe)
MFP is not a TDEE calculator, it calculates what you need NOT INCLUDING EXERCISE. So your activity level it asks for is for your daily life, job, school, running after kids, shopping, laundry, what have you. When you exercise, it gives you more calories to eat.
A properly set MFP + exercise calories goal should be somewhere in the same ballpark as a properly set TDEE - % goal.
MFP takes a flat rate from its calculation depending on how much you say you want to lose. If you choose 2 pounds per week, it subtracts 1,000 from what you need not including exercise. The 1750 it tells you to eat is already a steep deficit, now the fact that you are only eating 1,000-1,200, this makes it a Very Low Calorie Diet, and not safe. Please eat.0 -
Nonsense, don't overthink it.....eat healthy and count calories to a certain extent but don't worry if your not hitting 1750 because there are too many variables that go into this to know exactly what your intake actually is.....if you are losing weight, keep it up and get it over with so you can move into heavy lifting and eating more of what you want.0
-
Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?
I weight 215, 5'10", 25, listed my activity as lightly active, since I don't get to get to a gym regularly, and I take long walks (that's what it said under lightly active), clicked wanted to lose 2 lbs a week, and it said my goal was 1750 (I could be wrong, maybe I need 2800 to maintain weight, not sure exactly, but I just assumed MFP subtracted like 500-650 calories from what I need to eat to maintain, so that's where I got 2300 for my total to maintain, could be off by a hundred or 2, but dif websites have gave me different goals for maintaining weight, so not sure which to believe)
I'm going to guess it's a little off but you'll be able to better tell in time. For perspective, I'm 5'3.5 " 116 lbs and a girl and I lose weight around 2150ish, just weightlifting 3x a week, walking and taking care of my kids.
That's actually a very nice weight for you at your height. But since you lose weight around 2150ish, I'm wondering why MFP told me my goal is 1750 =/ and I am 215 pounds and 5'10"... Starting to wonder if the calorie thingy is truly correct, unless it's telling me that because I'm shooting for 2 lb's a week instead of 1/2 or 10 -
Because there is a lot more factors than just calories.Haha do not eat ice cream. It will just lead to increased blood sugar levels and insulin in bloodstream and halt progress a lot. Try eating stir fry with bunch of meat and vegetables easy way to get your greens and protein .
*sigh*
In what way will eating at or below his calorie target "halt progress a lot"? That makes zero sense at all.
(Hopefully this has already been addressed in the pages I haven't read yet...)
Don't you find it even a little bit thought-provoking that you're in such a strong minority with this belief that you can actually increase mass while in a calorie deficit (or decrease mass while in a calorie surplus)? Just a little bit? No?
I wish the NASM had a Board to which I could report your posts to have your CPT license revoked for malpractice.0 -
There are definite negatives to having a large calorie deficit. The greater the calorie deficit, the greater the muscle loss during weight loss. Also, the greater your metabolism wants to bridge the energy gap between calorie intake and calorie burn and will slow down if you sustain a large calorie deficit for a long period of time. Studies also show that with a large calorie deficit and faster weight loss, you're much much more likely to regain the weight and actually overshoot your original weight on the way up, mainly due to hormones that make you hungry when the body senses rapid weight loss and keep making you hungry even when you gain weight again...
I'm not here to debate. Your metabolism doesn't change significantly when you eat a large deficit. Everyone eating at a deficit will have a small decrease in metabolism, but it isn't exponential and it's temporary... so it's a non-factor. It absolutely does not matter. He's not starving himself so muscle loss won't be significantly if any different than if he was eating a few hundred more calories.
An individual is not a statistic. You can't point at someone and tell them that eating 1200 calories will definitely cause them to gain weight after they finish dieting. Something being statistically significant doesn't mean that it applies to everyone. Some people will have more success losing 2 lbs/week than 1/2 lb/week and vice versa. And don't use words like "much more likely" if you don't have the source. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2001.134/full here you will see that there is evidence against the idea of a VLCD hindering long term success of weight loss. While it is a popular idea and is often repeated, there isn't much research to back up the claim that VLCD is more likely to cause weight gain...while there is evidence against the claim.
Sidenote: OP isn't on a vlcd and I'm not advocating them...but I am disputing the notion that lower calorie diets are more harmful or won't work as well as eating a few hundred more calories.
Here's a quote from the conclusion section of the paper you linked to:VLCDs and LCDs with an average intake between 400 and 800 kcal/d do not result in differences in body weight loss, as shown in some RCTs. Therefore, the pessimistic 1958 view of Stunkard and McLaren-Hume (1), that most patients will not lose weight, is no longer true. However, their statement that most patients regain their lost weight is still true. Although their are difficulties in comparing studies because of large variations in the design and control of study variables, the overall picture is still very negative. VLCD in combination with active follow-up treatment seems to be one of the better treatment modalities for long-term weight maintenance success. Carefully controlled studies, however, are needed to determine more precisely the role of VLCD or other dietary treatments such as LCD in the treatment of obesity. Questions such as the rate and level of initial weight loss, as well as gender differences on weight-maintenance success, need further attention.
The body is always working towards equilibrium. Everything we have seen in science shows the the universe prefers equilibrium and takes steps to get to it. You can't argue that a higher calorie deficit is superior to a lower calorie deficit because you've completely left out adaptive thermogenesis. Sorry for not providing links earlier, I will do that now:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3673773/
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/65/3/717.full.pdf+html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/228467760
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 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
- 988 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions