Actual calories differ from maintenance recommendations

RabbitLost
RabbitLost Posts: 333 Member
in Goal: Maintaining Weight
About 6 weeks ago I hit my goal weight of 190 pounds. Yay me. I never really thought about maintenance as a goal before, so I really wasn't prepared. I used MFP to calculate my maintenance target. The number I got was a little more than 2,500 calories. I am 6'2", 190-192 pounds and lightly active - desk job with light cardio 3-5 times a week. I also used several other sites - Scooby, IIFYM, etc. They all came up with about the same target.

I started this whole thing over 240 pounds and used a goal of basically 1,700 and a lot of lifting and cardio exercise (I cannot lift weights right now) and lost the 50 or so pounds in just about 2 years.

So here is the thing. For the past six weeks, my 20-day moving average intake has been very close to 1,980 average calories per day, and I have stayed in a weight range of 190-192 I literally have not weighed below or above that range the entire 6 weeks.

To me, this seems to be my actual maintenance goal since I am in a consistent weight range that centers on my maintenance goal. So here is my question - Could my metabolism be that much slower than the averages provided by the various websites?

Replies

  • csuhar
    csuhar Posts: 779 Member
    It could be.

    None of the calculators online really measure our actual metabolic activity. They're just good guesses. If this is the caloric intake that works for you and supports your current goal while letting you take in the necessary nutrients, then there you go.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Do you weigh all your food? My guess is that your maintenance is closer to 2500 and you're underestimating your food... it seems very hard to believe that you would maintain at 2000 with your stats.
  • RabbitLost
    RabbitLost Posts: 333 Member
    It could be.

    None of the calculators online really measure our actual metabolic activity. They're just good guesses. If this is the caloric intake that works for you and supports your current goal while letting you take in the necessary nutrients, then there you go.

    Yep. As I read my post, I realize the answer is basically in the question, isn't it? Just surprised me that I would be 20% lower than the averages. Le sigh.
  • RabbitLost
    RabbitLost Posts: 333 Member
    Do you weigh all your food? My guess is that your maintenance is closer to 2500 and you're underestimating your food... it seems very hard to believe that you would maintain at 2000 with your stats.

    I am diligently weigh with the scale. I stopped using tablespoon and volume measurements about a year ago when I realized now much such measurements can understate the calories on the label. Grams for non-liquids. And due to my circumstances, I have been home for more than 80% of my meals these last 6 weeks, so I am not getting whipsawed by restaurant foods, either.
  • SaintGiff
    SaintGiff Posts: 3,679 Member
    I think, my friend, that maybe you're overlooking a few pieces here. You are 8 to 12 weeks out from major surgery. Your diet has changed fairly dramatically from before. Your sleep patterns are very different. You are not at full strength yet. I don't think you can look at your metabolism right now and say that this is your metabolism six months from now. Your body is very much still adjusting to a new playing field. You're gonna have to give it at least six months of monitoring and fine tuning before you even have a ballpark of where you need to be.
  • 3laine75
    3laine75 Posts: 3,069 Member
    We actually have a maintenance range not a fixed number (I can maintain on anything from 1750 - 2150). If you up,gradually, you'll probably find that you stay the same weight.

    Also, remember these calculators are based on averages - your numbers could always be slightly different.
  • RabbitLost
    RabbitLost Posts: 333 Member
    I think, my friend, that maybe you're overlooking a few pieces here. You are 8 to 12 weeks out from major surgery. Your diet has changed fairly dramatically from before. Your sleep patterns are very different. You are not at full strength yet. I don't think you can look at your metabolism right now and say that this is your metabolism six months from now. Your body is very much still adjusting to a new playing field. You're gonna have to give it at least six months of monitoring and fine tuning before you even have a ballpark of where you need to be.

    Good point. Thanks.
  • al142
    al142 Posts: 35 Member
    When I first started maintenance, I maintained at about 1400 kcal per day. I am a 5'10" woman, but I have some health problems (and urgh, middle aged) so it didn't surprise me that my metabolism was slower than average. But after I kept it there for awhile, I started to lose a little again. I slowly raised my calories until I wasn't losing any more. I'm usually around 1700ish now. So there was an adjustment period, apparently.
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    Yes, your metabolism could be lower than the estimates those sites give you. If it is, you can allegedly bring it back up by something called reverse dieting, where the theory is after you hit your goal, bump up your daily calories by something like 5/ 10%, then each week bump them up a little further to the tune of 2- 5%.

    Basically this is supposed to allow you metabolism time to slowly rise, and with the additional calorie increases you shouldn't be seeing too much weight gain, as if you were maintaining on 1980, you would initially bump it to something like 2100- 2200, then bump it again each week by 50- 100 calories.

    Such increases should not be enough to see any real weight increase, and your metabolism coming back up by allowing it to gradually, should probably neutralise any gain. So goes the theory..
  • 3laine75
    3laine75 Posts: 3,069 Member
    Yes, your metabolism could be lower than the estimates those sites give you. If it is, you can allegedly bring it back up by something called reverse dieting, where the theory is after you hit your goal, bump up your daily calories by something like 5/ 10%, then each week bump them up a little further to the tune of 2- 5%.

    Basically this is supposed to allow you metabolism time to slowly rise, and with the additional calorie increases you shouldn't be seeing too much weight gain, as if you were maintaining on 1700, you would initially bump it to something like 1800- 1850, then bump it again each week by 50- 100 calories.

    Such increases should not be enough to see any real weight increase, and your metabolism coming back up by allowing it to gradually, should probably neutralise any gain. So goes the theory..


    Theory works :)
    (And works quickly btw)
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    Theory works :)
    (And works quickly btw)

    Thats good to know, and quite interesting - can you elaborate on your own experiences ? :)

    (by the way, just amended the numbers in my original post, as saw the OP maintained on 1980, not 1700 :) )
  • LiftAllThePizzas
    LiftAllThePizzas Posts: 17,857 Member
    I find I have to go several hundred calories in either direction to either gain or lose, so "maintenance" is more like a range. I also agree with suggestions to keep increasing and see where the top end of your range is.
  • parys1
    parys1 Posts: 2,072 Member
    I think, my friend, that maybe you're overlooking a few pieces here. You are 8 to 12 weeks out from major surgery. Your diet has changed fairly dramatically from before. Your sleep patterns are very different. You are not at full strength yet. I don't think you can look at your metabolism right now and say that this is your metabolism six months from now. Your body is very much still adjusting to a new playing field. You're gonna have to give it at least six months of monitoring and fine tuning before you even have a ballpark of where you need to be.
    *LIKE*
    Giff is right.
  • 3laine75
    3laine75 Posts: 3,069 Member
    Theory works :)
    (And works quickly btw)

    Thats good to know, and quite interesting - can you elaborate on your own experiences ? :)

    (by the way, just amended the numbers in my original post, as saw the OP maintained on 1980, not 1700 :) )

    Yes, I bulked from February to May. The numbers needed to keep gaining 0.5 a week had to be increased twice in that time. Started at 1950 then upped to 2050 then 2150 to keep up with the gains. I maintained at 2150 for about 3 weeks before cutting.

    Unfortunately for me, I seem to have quite a wide range as I could not lose weight at 1950 or 1750. Losing now at 1470 (MFP is set at 'lose 1 lb a week' but I lose half a pound a week, give or take).

    It works out well for me if I want to bulk or maintain, not so good if I want to lose.
  • ILiftHeavyAcrylics
    ILiftHeavyAcrylics Posts: 27,732 Member
    We actually have a maintenance range not a fixed number (I can maintain on anything from 1750 - 2150). If you up,gradually, you'll probably find that you stay the same weight.

    Also, remember these calculators are based on averages - your numbers could always be slightly different.

    This is what I came to say

    I have maintained on everything from 1700 to 2300 calories.
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    Yes, I bulked from February to May. The numbers needed to keep gaining 0.5 a week had to be increased twice in that time. Started at 1950 then upped to 2050 then 2150 to keep up with the gains. I maintained at 2150 for about 3 weeks before cutting.

    Unfortunately for me, I seem to have quite a wide range as I could not lose weight at 1950 or 1750. Losing now at 1470 (MFP is set at 'lose 1 lb a week' but I lose half a pound a week, give or take).

    It works out well for me if I want to bulk or maintain, not so good if I want to lose.

    Thanks, its interesting to hear some actual experiences, aside from what I've read elsewhere on the web. Its funny though, maybe there is some truth in the thought of a maintenance range, but I do wonder if what people are seeing might not be fluctuations ? Just playing devils advocate, as know it can be difficult sometimes to get a true picture of actual bodyweight, due to variances in the amount of water retained.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    yes, reality trumps online calculators.

    and you'll find that you'll have a range that works more than a steadfast number. what tends to happen is that you'll compensate for additional calories by being more active in ways that you don't realize, and will subconsciously adjust your activity level downward when you have a few less calories.

Categories