numbers are confusing.

Options
pretzelman59
pretzelman59 Posts: 7
in Motivation and Support
The statistics given to me on this site says I need 1900 calories"to stay alive" But the diet limits me to 1400 calories. I am keeping it below 1000 calories and then told I need to consume more calories in order to lose weight. Sounds totally hypocritical to me. We are told we gain weight because we eat too much, then told to eat moree in order to lose weight!!!!!!

Replies

  • kristie874
    kristie874 Posts: 774 Member
    Options
    The link at the bottom of my post does a really good job explaining. Let me know if you have more questions and I (along with others, I'm sure) will do my best to help answer. Good luck!
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    Options
    LOL it is confusing at first. But it's really simple, when you understand the calculations used. Herre's a short explanation:

    MFP takes your height/weight, and age, to determine your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate). It then adds in whatever activity level you chose. From this number (the 1900) and subtracts the amount you chose for your weekly loss. So if you choose a 1 lb/week loss, it subtracts 500 (3500 = 1 lb), to leave you at a deficit for each day to allow for that weight loss.

    If you log exercise, it will then add calories (because you burned cals over and above your BMR + activity level), to keep you at that deficit.

    Here is a thread that helps explain the calculations in a little more detail.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/61706-guide-to-calorie-deficits

    Hope it helps!
  • Lindac67241
    Lindac67241 Posts: 314
    Options
    The statistics given to me on this site says I need 1900 calories"to stay alive" But the diet limits me to 1400 calories. I am keeping it below 1000 calories and then told I need to consume more calories in order to lose weight. Sounds totally hypocritical to me. We are told we gain weight because we eat too much, then told to eat moree in order to lose weight!!!!!!

    If the body thinks it is starving, it will hold onto the fat. That is when you stay at a plateau. So no eat the 1400 calories 6 days a week and on the 7th day, up it to 1500. You have to learn to trick the metabolism so that your body will let go of the fat.

    Lindac
  • pretzelman59
    pretzelman59 Posts: 7
    Options
    thanks for your replies. I think I will just continue along the route that I am taking. I use this site to just monitor my calorie intake. If I watch that...I will continue to lose. Again, thanks for the input
  • LarryPGH
    LarryPGH Posts: 349 Member
    Options
    The statistics given to me on this site says I need 1900 calories"to stay alive"

    I'm guessing you're talking about BMR -- that's not what you need to "stay alive", just how much you burn on average in a normal day, when you don't take into account your level of activity.
    But the diet limits me to 1400 calories.

    Makes sense -- in other words, instead of eating all the calories that your body burns in a day, you're being asked to eat a bit less than that, so that your body uses stored energy (hopefully, fat) to make up the difference.
    I am keeping it below 1000 calories

    Well, that means that you're asking your body to lose about 2 pounds / week. Not too horrible, depending on how overweight you are (i.e., what your BMI is).
    and then told I need to consume more calories in order to lose weight.

    Hmm... no -- you're being told that you need to consume more calories in order to lose weight at a safe, healthy rate of one pound each week.

    Think of it this way: you're sitting at a $10 blackjack table. Your BMR is like the table minimum -- each hand, you must ante up at least $10, so over the course of a day at the table, there's a certain minimum amount that you'll spend. Now, the activity level is like your betting strategy -- the more active you are, doubling down or splitting or raising your bet, the more money you'll spend. That multiplies the amount you spend, depending on how aggressive (i.e., active) you are.

    Now, if you win enough to cover what you're spending, you'll break even -- no loss, no gain -- your stack will stay the same size. If you spend more than your winnings, though, your stack will go down; by the same token, if you win more than you spend, your stack increases.

    The "game" of weight loss is trying to make sure that you manage your betting and your rate of return so that you change the size of your stack in a consistent, regular, "safe" way. No spikes, no plateaus, just long-term regular returns on your investment, rather than an attempt to win big in the short term (which, in weight loss as in gaming, usually ends in disaster...)!

    Good luck meeting your weight loss goals! (And, if you find that you just can't lose weight, even when you're eating less than 1000 cal / day, you might just try eating 1400 cal / day and see if that doesn't do the trick in getting you back on track!)
  • downtome
    downtome Posts: 529 Member
    Options
    The statistics given to me on this site says I need 1900 calories"to stay alive"

    I'm guessing you're talking about BMR -- that's not what you need to "stay alive", just how much you burn on average in a normal day, when you don't take into account your level of activity.
    But the diet limits me to 1400 calories.

    Makes sense -- in other words, instead of eating all the calories that your body burns in a day, you're being asked to eat a bit less than that, so that your body uses stored energy (hopefully, fat) to make up the difference.
    I am keeping it below 1000 calories

    Well, that means that you're asking your body to lose about 2 pounds / week. Not too horrible, depending on how overweight you are (i.e., what your BMI is).
    and then told I need to consume more calories in order to lose weight.

    Hmm... no -- you're being told that you need to consume more calories in order to lose weight at a safe, healthy rate of one pound each week.

    Think of it this way: you're sitting at a $10 blackjack table. Your BMR is like the table minimum -- each hand, you must ante up at least $10, so over the course of a day at the table, there's a certain minimum amount that you'll spend. Now, the activity level is like your betting strategy -- the more active you are, doubling down or splitting or raising your bet, the more money you'll spend. That multiplies the amount you spend, depending on how aggressive (i.e., active) you are.

    Now, if you win enough to cover what you're spending, you'll break even -- no loss, no gain -- your stack will stay the same size. If you spend more than your winnings, though, your stack will go down; by the same token, if you win more than you spend, your stack increases.

    The "game" of weight loss is trying to make sure that you manage your betting and your rate of return so that you change the size of your stack in a consistent, regular, "safe" way. No spikes, no plateaus, just long-term regular returns on your investment, rather than an attempt to win big in the short term (which, in weight loss as in gaming, usually ends in disaster...)!

    Good luck meeting your weight loss goals! (And, if you find that you just can't lose weight, even when you're eating less than 1000 cal / day, you might just try eating 1400 cal / day and see if that doesn't do the trick in getting you back on track!)

    Nicely put! Thank you, I sometimes have trouble understanding it all as well, but you helped me to see the light! LOL
  • pretzelman59
    pretzelman59 Posts: 7
    Options
    actually..."just to stay alive" is EXACTLY what it says about the BMR
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    Options
    actually..."just to stay alive" is EXACTLY what it says about the BMR

    That is correct - BMR is the number of cals your body expends just to exist - breathe, blink, etc - think of how much you'd use being in a coma.

    Your Daily Activity Level is ADDED to that - daily activities such as cooking dinner, walking to your car, watching tv, whatever you do for work, etc.

    The combination of the two gives your Maintenance calories - what you would eat to maintain the weight you are now.
  • LarryPGH
    LarryPGH Posts: 349 Member
    Options
    actually..."just to stay alive" is EXACTLY what it says about the BMR

    That is correct - BMR is the number of cals your body expends just to exist - breathe, blink, etc - think of how much you'd use being in a coma.

    Hang on a second, though -- I think we're getting hung up on exactly what "need 1900 calories 'to stay alive'" means. It *does* mean that your body burns (at least) 1900 calories every day, not including any activity or exercise you do -- in this sense, it's what you'd burn "if you were in a coma".

    However, it *doesn't* mean "you must *EAT* 1900 calories a day in order to survive". Instead, it means that whatever you eat, your body will expend at least 1900 calories. Eat more, and your body will store any excess as fat; eat less, and your body will burn fat (or muscle, depending on how intensely you're stressing your body). That's how dieting works -- if you eat less than you are burning, your body will find fuel within the body itself (rather than rely only on what you're eating).

    My original response was trying to answer your comparison of 1900 "just to stay alive" to the 1400-calorie-a-day diet that MFP was recommending. See, it's not that MFP is way off base here -- the recommendations are telling you about a "safe" number of calories that you can eat and still lose weight. It seemed to me that you were taking the 1900 figure to mean "you must EAT this much" instead of "your body will BURN this much".

    Does that help?
  • pretzelman59
    pretzelman59 Posts: 7
    Options
    bottom line is...I am still losing. I usually eat under 1000 calories a day. Mty body doesn't go into "starvation mode" . Instead, almost everyday that I get on the scale, I lose a couple of ounces. 10 lbs in three weeks. But thanks all, for your comments. I weigh in every week at my T.O.P.S. meeting just to prove that I am not "doctoring" my results
  • LarryPGH
    LarryPGH Posts: 349 Member
    Options
    To tell you the truth, sometimes I wonder whether the fears over "starvation mode" aren't a bit over the top around here. After all, our body isn't a digital computer -- it isn't as if we go one pound under an MFP recommendation one day, and all kinds of alarms go off in our body and it goes "that's it! he's trying to starve me! I gotta start hanging onto those calories!!!"

    instead, I would think, our bodies adjust -- gradually, and in an "analog", not "digital" way -- to the amount and kind of nutrition we give it. You're at 10 pounds in three weeks? Not bad. I've been using the "2 lbs a week" recommendations (at least now, while I'm well into the BMI "obese" range), and have gotten rid of 14 lbs in 5 weeks -- not quite the rate you've managed, but more than the 2/week I was shooting for.

    Here's what I'd say is the more relevant thing to think about: is the current regimen that you're on a "diet" or is it a "lifestyle change"? I think that these two are completely different things -- a "diet" is something that you do that is temporary or is goal-driven; when you hit your goal, you quit your diet. A lifestyle change, though, is something that you perceive as a way that you plan on using for the indefinite future. Mine, at the moment, takes in less calories than it will at this time next year -- but it still has the hallmarks that it will contain, hopefully, five years from now! (And yes, I *am* using these words in an everyday, not a strict scientific way.)

    So, if you see what you're doing -- a pretty intense calorie deficit -- as a "diet", then it's something that you'll bail from when there's greater stress, or the going gets rough, or you hit a plateau. If you're thinking "lifestyle change", though, you'll stick with it, and, I would guess, you will weather the storms more easily.

    Also, if you stay at the 3+ lbs/week rate, I'm wondering what the end result will be -- if you don't have an exercise plan in place, then you're going to look haggard rather than healthy-thin ...!

    In any event, congratulations on the progress to date, and good luck with your continued goals!!!

Categories