help!!- how to work out my daily calorie goal

celia34
celia34 Posts: 26 Member
in Food and Nutrition
help anyone out there.. i dont know how i use MFP to work out my daily calorie goal. Its often mentioned on here with a series of acronyms that i have no idea what they stand for :) can someone point me in the right direction as to how i work out how much i should be consuming? at the moment i think i am eating too little

p.s. i only have one stone to lose.

thanks folks!

Replies

  • Chrisparadise579
    Chrisparadise579 Posts: 411 Member
    What I do and what I recommend to people is to eat at a calorie level that allows you to drop 1-2 lbs/week. This assumes an average calorie burn from you getting in all of your workouts. This will be different for everyone, so you'll have to do some trial and error to figure it out. I'd start ~1600 cal/day. Hit this goal, along with your macros and getting in your workouts, for a week. If you lose 1-2 lbs, you're good to go. If you lose too much, increase your intake and repeat. If you don't lose enough, reduce your intake a bit and repeat. After a few weeks, you'll figure out what works for you in your situation.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    help anyone out there.. i dont know how i use MFP to work out my daily calorie goal. Its often mentioned on here with a series of acronyms that i have no idea what they stand for :) can someone point me in the right direction as to how i work out how much i should be consuming? at the moment i think i am eating too little

    p.s. i only have one stone to lose.

    thanks folks!

    I really like this thread for walking you through the two most popular ways to set your calorie goals: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets
  • nick1109
    nick1109 Posts: 174 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio
  • Snip8241
    Snip8241 Posts: 767 Member
    Go to community>>>> getting started. See the topics at the top? These contain links with lots of info.

    Also. Google IIFYM, BMR, and TDEE.

    These definitions will help you calculate your daily needs.

    Good luck.
  • kshadows
    kshadows Posts: 1,315 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)
  • haildodger
    haildodger Posts: 181 Member
    Read the stickies at the top of the various forum sections. They have all the information you'll need.
  • nick1109
    nick1109 Posts: 174 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?
  • kshadows
    kshadows Posts: 1,315 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".
  • nick1109
    nick1109 Posts: 174 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".

    Actually I do know her and happen to know she is very petit
  • nick1109
    nick1109 Posts: 174 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".

    Its individual I know, Which is also why starting at a modest number for her age, height and weight and monitoring and adjusting over time is the way to go.
  • kshadows
    kshadows Posts: 1,315 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".

    Its individual I know, Which is also why starting at a modest number for her age, height and weight and monitoring and adjusting over time is the way to go.

    Petite or not, like I said, you can't just throw out a random number. It will depend on activity level, exercise and GOALS. I'm on the shorter side at 5'5 and my BMR is 1480. It's much more important to emphasize accurate goals and tracking. With only 1 st to lose, dropping down until you get to 1200 is NOT the way to go about it. Unless you have no interest in WHAT weight you lose. I prefer to hang onto my lean muscle mass.
  • nick1109
    nick1109 Posts: 174 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".

    Its individual I know, Which is also why starting at a modest number for her age, height and weight and monitoring and adjusting over time is the way to go.

    Petite or not, like I said, you can't just throw out a random number. It will depend on activity level, exercise and GOALS. I'm on the shorter side at 5'5 and my BMR is 1480. It's much more important to emphasize accurate goals and tracking. With only 1 st to lose, dropping down until you get to 1200 is NOT the way to go about it. Unless you have no interest in WHAT weight you lose. I prefer to hang onto my lean muscle mass.

    Ok this is stupid, maybe I should explian how 1700 is derived then you can see its not so insane. My advice to anyone cutting (and I've used this myself to get to sub 10% at 185lbs) would be to start calories at somewhere between 10-14 calories per pound of body weight. The number would depend on how aggressively one wishes to cut (ie- somebody may have a lot of work to do and be 4 weeks out from a show).

    So say a small women weighs 130lbs, this is a starting calories count of 1300 to 1820. In my experience its best to cut on as many calories as you can get away with then at least you can reduce it without impeding on bolidly functions or going off the rails, monitor and adjust over time. My advice would also be to set protein at 1g per pound of body weight and make the rest of the calories up how you wish.

    So please tell me why starting at 1700kcals is poor advice?

    Its a ball park estimate which must be ADJUSTED over time with monitoring of results. How you hit those numbers is also up to the individual. Burn 300 kcals of cardio and restrict diet to suit or do it purely from diet...horses for courses
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".

    Its individual I know, Which is also why starting at a modest number for her age, height and weight and monitoring and adjusting over time is the way to go.

    Petite or not, like I said, you can't just throw out a random number. It will depend on activity level, exercise and GOALS. I'm on the shorter side at 5'5 and my BMR is 1480. It's much more important to emphasize accurate goals and tracking. With only 1 st to lose, dropping down until you get to 1200 is NOT the way to go about it. Unless you have no interest in WHAT weight you lose. I prefer to hang onto my lean muscle mass.

    Ok this is stupid, maybe I should explian how 1700 is derived then you can see its not so insane. My advice to anyone cutting (and I've used this myself to get to sub 10% at 185lbs) would be to start calories at somewhere between 10-14 calories per pound of body weight. The number would depend on how aggressively one wishes to cut (ie- somebody may have a lot of work to do and be 4 weeks out from a show).

    So say a small women weighs 130lbs, this is a starting calories count of 1300 to 1820. In my experience its best to cut on as many calories as you can get away with then at least you can reduce it without impeding on bolidly functions or going off the rails, monitor and adjust over time. My advice would also be to set protein at 1g per pound of body weight and make the rest of the calories up how you wish.

    So please tell me why starting at 1700kcals is poor advice?

    Its a ball park estimate which must be ADJUSTED over time with monitoring of results. How you hit those numbers is also up to the individual. Burn 300 kcals of cardio and restrict diet to suit or do it purely from diet...horses for courses

    The fact you don't see your advice is basically to start at a random number then cut incrementally until something works as opposed to using MFP or scooby (or any other site) to calculate a caloric requirement based upon what are simple formulae is a bit frightening.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    OP to make is simple eat what MFP tells you to eat, just set an appropriate weight loss goal for weekly weight loss. Once you get use to that then start looking at macros and such:

    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.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1069278-acronyms-and-terms-for-new-mfp-members-v-6

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1399829-step-by-step-guide-to-losing-weight-with-myfitnesspal

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants


    Celia ... read the links and go from there. With the approximately six pounds your ticker shows left to lose, you'll be at/near the half pound per week loss goal. Those who are further from goal and with more excess weight can afford do lose more weight in a rapid manner than those who are close to goal.

    If you use MFP's calculations, it expects you to eat your exercise calories back to maintain a net caloric deficit. It's math simply does not include exercise when figuring your daily needs. If you use a site like scooby's, it uses TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) and exercise is included in the numbers provided so you do not eat exercise calories back with them.

    The basics of both are the same ... basal metabolic rate (BMR) is your body's caloric requirement to survive ... often referred to as what you would burn if in a coma. BMR x 1.2 = your sedentary caloric requirement. For those with desk jobs, this is the number MFP uses as the basis for calculating a deficit since MFP does not include exercise.
  • kshadows
    kshadows Posts: 1,315 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".

    Its individual I know, Which is also why starting at a modest number for her age, height and weight and monitoring and adjusting over time is the way to go.

    Petite or not, like I said, you can't just throw out a random number. It will depend on activity level, exercise and GOALS. I'm on the shorter side at 5'5 and my BMR is 1480. It's much more important to emphasize accurate goals and tracking. With only 1 st to lose, dropping down until you get to 1200 is NOT the way to go about it. Unless you have no interest in WHAT weight you lose. I prefer to hang onto my lean muscle mass.

    Ok this is stupid, maybe I should explian how 1700 is derived then you can see its not so insane. My advice to anyone cutting (and I've used this myself to get to sub 10% at 185lbs) would be to start calories at somewhere between 10-14 calories per pound of body weight. The number would depend on how aggressively one wishes to cut (ie- somebody may have a lot of work to do and be 4 weeks out from a show).

    So say a small women weighs 130lbs, this is a starting calories count of 1300 to 1820. In my experience its best to cut on as many calories as you can get away with then at least you can reduce it without impeding on bolidly functions or going off the rails, monitor and adjust over time. My advice would also be to set protein at 1g per pound of body weight and make the rest of the calories up how you wish.

    So please tell me why starting at 1700kcals is poor advice?

    Its a ball park estimate which must be ADJUSTED over time with monitoring of results. How you hit those numbers is also up to the individual. Burn 300 kcals of cardio and restrict diet to suit or do it purely from diet...horses for courses

    The fact you don't see your advice is basically to start at a random number then cut incrementally until something works as opposed to using MFP or scooby (or any other site) to calculate a caloric requirement based upon what are simple formulae is a bit frightening.

    Glad I'm not the only one who thought so.
  • nick1109
    nick1109 Posts: 174 Member
    Would personally start at around 1700, monitor and adjust down until you're loosing 1lb a week, when you stall reduce by 100kcals and so forth until you hit 1200.

    Once at 1200 you can start thinking about carb munipulation and adding a little cardio

    Are you kidding me right now?? OP, please ignore this post.
    Check out the link mentioned (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets)

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why is so far out with your extensive knowledge?

    You know nothing about this person (age, height, weight, goals, exercise), you can't just pick a random number out of a hat and say "eat this". And lowering down to 1200 isn't healthy for most people, as it's below BMR for the majority of people. Calorie goals are individual and unique to the people who are using them, there is no "one number fits all".

    Its individual I know, Which is also why starting at a modest number for her age, height and weight and monitoring and adjusting over time is the way to go.

    Petite or not, like I said, you can't just throw out a random number. It will depend on activity level, exercise and GOALS. I'm on the shorter side at 5'5 and my BMR is 1480. It's much more important to emphasize accurate goals and tracking. With only 1 st to lose, dropping down until you get to 1200 is NOT the way to go about it. Unless you have no interest in WHAT weight you lose. I prefer to hang onto my lean muscle mass.

    Ok this is stupid, maybe I should explian how 1700 is derived then you can see its not so insane. My advice to anyone cutting (and I've used this myself to get to sub 10% at 185lbs) would be to start calories at somewhere between 10-14 calories per pound of body weight. The number would depend on how aggressively one wishes to cut (ie- somebody may have a lot of work to do and be 4 weeks out from a show).

    So say a small women weighs 130lbs, this is a starting calories count of 1300 to 1820. In my experience its best to cut on as many calories as you can get away with then at least you can reduce it without impeding on bolidly functions or going off the rails, monitor and adjust over time. My advice would also be to set protein at 1g per pound of body weight and make the rest of the calories up how you wish.

    So please tell me why starting at 1700kcals is poor advice?

    Its a ball park estimate which must be ADJUSTED over time with monitoring of results. How you hit those numbers is also up to the individual. Burn 300 kcals of cardio and restrict diet to suit or do it purely from diet...horses for courses

    The fact you don't see your advice is basically to start at a random number then cut incrementally until something works as opposed to using MFP or scooby (or any other site) to calculate a caloric requirement based upon what are simple formulae is a bit frightening.

    Glad I'm not the only one who thought so.

    And how do you suppose MFP or Scooby calculates numbers? do you think they consider every facet of the individual and their health to calculate the numbers they provide, no I doubt it, its likely generic formulea which is as good as making a sensible guess and making adjustments over time as everyone will be different

    Have a look at Layne Norton's appraoch and also the condition his athletes get in and you'll see its mostly intuition and monitoring and adjustment over time starting with a sensible base figure. (think he advises 10-12 kcals per lb of body weight)

    Basically what your saying is she should ditch my 'random' number (which is pretty much derived the same way many top coaches derive it) and use another arbitrary system which is based again on somebodies intuition....makes perfect sense.

    How many of you discrediting what I'm saying have actually obtained very low body fat through flexible dieting and kept decent size?

Categories