Poll: Ideal Calorie Intake

2»

Replies

  • 0somuchbetter0
    0somuchbetter0 Posts: 1,335 Member
    usmcmp wrote: »
    0somuchbetter0 wrote: »
    WTH is cho?

    Carbohydrates. Carbs are made up of Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen. CHO.

    ooooh.....I've been on this site for almost 3 years and never saw that before. I was thinking of a nice Pho...with extra sriracha.... :)
  • Paul_Collyer
    Paul_Collyer Posts: 160 Member
    Go for a modest loss per week - 0.5 to 1lb - and keep your carbs as far below 50% of calorie intake as you can manage. Track and get most of your sugars from fresh fruits.

    All IMHO and based on personal experience. Good luck!
  • ana3067
    ana3067 Posts: 5,623 Member
    i agree that 1300 is too low. My ideal range is as much food as humanly possible to still get results. I would change goal to 1lb/week because if you feel full now it's most likely a) psychological, b) due to eating too much anyways so might as well start with a higher goal so you can lower it more easily in response to your results.
  • SergeantSausage
    SergeantSausage Posts: 1,673 Member
    edited January 2015
    Just enough so you consistently lose weight, yet still feel comfortable at the dinner table (can walk away not feeling "starved" or "deprived" or denying your favorite foods all the time). Some can lose 5 or more pounds a week. A few can't handle more than half a pound a week. Most are pretty comfortable with a pound or two every week or so.

    Regardless of what anyone tells you, the only way to reliably and accurately find this point is experimentation. It may take weeks, or even months of trial and error to find, but you're in it for the long-haul, right?

    1360 is as good a place as any to start taking data and making adjustments.

    NOTE: It's also a Moving Target. What works now, may not work for you in ... say .. 4 months.
  • sofaking6
    sofaking6 Posts: 4,589 Member
    I'm 5'4 and at 1360 but I do eat back exercise - or at least, I allow them in my daily count so if I'm hungry I can eat up to the 1360 + exercise, but I don't make any special effort to eat the extra. Hopefully that makes sense.
  • mymodernbabylon
    mymodernbabylon Posts: 1,038 Member
    1600 calories w/o exercise would put you at a 25% deficit which is the most I would suggest for anyone (and honestly, I think it's too big for pretty much most people). And then you should eat back 1/2 of your exercise calories on top of that. You will lose between 1-2 lb a week eating that. (Figured out using your info and Scooby Workshop set at desk job/no working out).
  • mymodernbabylon
    mymodernbabylon Posts: 1,038 Member
    You don't want to start so low because as you lose weight, you might have to go even lower to achieve any further weight loss - that's why a 15-20% deficit and eating 1/2 of your calories is a better idea. Personally, I'd rather eat more and do it more slowly and keep as much lean muscle mass as possible.
  • 3laine75
    3laine75 Posts: 3,069 Member
    lauraldrum wrote: »
    Oops - you're right.

    1360 Calories
    Fat - 38g
    Carbs - 136g
    Protein - 119

    I have my fitbit synced to MFT but I don't eat my exercise.

    1360 sounds fine to me for your height but I WOULD eat back your exercise calories - you earned them! (And you already have your deficit) :)

  • Holla4mom
    Holla4mom Posts: 587 Member
    mymodernbabylon wrote: »
    You don't want to start so low because as you lose weight, you might have to go even lower to achieve any further weight loss - that's why a 15-20% deficit and eating 1/2 of your calories is a better idea. Personally, I'd rather eat more and do it more slowly and keep as much lean muscle mass as possible.

    And I think mymmodernbaby is saying eating 1/2 of your exercise calories back (if using the MFP guided route to calculating your calories).

    If you use TDEE (and include how much you are actually working out in those calculations) you don't eat back your exercise calories.
  • vismal
    vismal Posts: 2,463 Member
    No one has asked the million dollar question yet. How closely do you count your calories? Do you weigh 100% of your food on a scale, or do you use measuring cups/tablespoons (those are meant for liquids only) or are you just estimating portion size? Any cheat/free days? Do you eat out often and have to guess at the calories?

    What I'm getting at is that if your calorie count isn't fairly tight, your 13-1400 calories might actually be much more then that. I know at one point I was logging 1600 calories a day which was way to low for me at the time (6'1 about 260ish). But in reality I was not weighing anything, and had a weekly cheat day. So my average was probably closer to 22-2500 which is perfectly appropriate.

    If you are keeping your count tight, weighing everything, etc, and indeed eating that much, I would agree, it's too low. While it might not be affecting you right now, it more then likely will. Most people who eat very low calories for too long find they are low on energy, tempted to cheat or binge, and can suffer from poor recovery from workouts.
  • SergeantSausage
    SergeantSausage Posts: 1,673 Member
    mymodernbabylon wrote: »
    You don't want to start so low because as you lose weight, you might have to go even lower to achieve any further weight loss ...


    <boggle>

  • lauraldrum
    lauraldrum Posts: 55 Member
    You have all been so helpful. I really appreciate the time you've taken to respond to my question.

    I do weigh about 60% of my food, the other 1/2 I measure with cups and spoons. I'm sure there's quite a bit of variance.

    I'm finding it very hard to keep my fat low -- that's been the most difficult challenge. I'm always a gram or five above my allotment but if I don't, I'm hungry. My carbs are typically little under my allotment but they don't fill me up like fat does :)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories