Calcs a 40% calorie deficit... is this right?

Options
teamanderson1213
teamanderson1213 Posts: 2
in Health and Weight Loss
Hello All!!

Thanks in advance for any tips & advice. Here are the stats:

*28 year old female
*5'7" 216lbs 46% Body Fat
*Works out 3-4 times per week (approx 1hr each time; ~75% lifting/25% cardio). Also a high school basketball ref about 2-3 days/week (I do not work out on those days)

BMR = 1738
TDEE = 2390 (used Lightly active due to having a desk job but being active w workouts)
Weight Goal = 180 lbs... losing 2lbs/week in MFP

MFP says I should do:
1440 cals (baseline, not include workout calories) at 48g fat, 180g carbs, 72g protein.

1440 cals is a 40% deficit, right. I understand trying to get to the weight loss goal, but is 40% okay? I want to ensure I don't go into that 'starvation mode' that many talk about.. and that I'm losing fat safely. I assume it may be okay because I workout often and I'm able to eat those cals back, but wanted to make sure that a 40% deficit baseline sounded right.

FYI - I also used a Keto calculator (in case I try that route) and just backed in with the MFP suggested cals - it produced 1440 cals, 88g fat, 50g carbs, 112g protein. Just thought I'd drop it here since I did that calc as well.

Thanks in advance!!

Replies

  • tibby531
    tibby531 Posts: 717 Member
    Options
    when you log your workouts, you'll get more calories to eat. and you can aim for your own macros, if you think you want more of one type than mfp says. I go way over on my protein, according to my mfp, but that's what I want for my macros.
  • tibby531
    tibby531 Posts: 717 Member
    Options
    oh, wait! just noticed that you have it set to lose 2 pounds a week. for only 30 pounds to lose, try .5-1 pound a week.
  • editorgrrl
    editorgrrl Posts: 7,060 Member
    edited December 2014
    Options
    2 lbs. per week to lose 36 lbs. is way to aggressive a goal. Set your goal no higher than 1lb. per week. Your calorie goal has your deficit built in, so you must eat back most (if not all) of your exercise calories.

    Use the default MFP macros, but treat protein & fiber as minimums and ignore fat & carbs.
  • teamanderson1213
    teamanderson1213 Posts: 2
    edited December 2014
    Options
    Thanks @tibby531 and @editorgrrl ! I thought 2lbs/week is realistic considering I work out so often. No? I understand that making it 1lb/week versus 2lb/week will give me more calories, but if I'm okay with the calorie intake should I still shoot for 2/week? Because the cal intake isn't necessarily bothering me (for now) since I get so many workout cals - I was just wondering if the 40% deficit even sounded correct from the start...

    Thanks again for your advise!
  • catic32
    catic32 Posts: 105 Member
    edited December 2014
    Options
    1lbs a week is realistic and safe. If you lose more GREAT.
    I change my mfp macro percentages for protein/carbs/fat. 40/30/30
    don't ignore fat. You need good fat.
  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,565 Member
    Options
    With TDEE, all your exercise is already included in that number. MFP does not include it in the goal, therefore it's going to be lower. However, you are expected to eat back your exercise calories (50-75% of them to account for overestimation of burns) when you follow MFP's goal, which will take you closer to what your TDEE calculation should be.

    At your size, you may even be able to get away with 1.5 pounds a week, but it's best to lower the deficit the closer to your goal you are.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    Options
    I think 1% of your weight per week as a goal is safe and at 200+ lbs. I'd be more concerned with lessening my months in obesity than with starvation mode (which you really don't need to worry about at levels MFP recommends).

    But if the deficit feels unsustainable for the time it'll take you to lose some of that weight, by all means-- raise it and lose slower. But there is no guarantee slow losses = more maintainability or more odds of success. Most studies find you're more likely to hit goal if you lose it at a faster pace. And the odds of maintenance from there are about the same for all-- fast or slow losers.

Categories