Riddle me this...

Do you happen to know your body fat %? I'm not asking for BMI as it is completely useless for determining calorie needs. But with body fat percentage, I can subtract out the fat and use lean body mass to determine calorie needs. Also, if you can give me an estimate of your calorie burns from exercise. Just a basic guess is going to be 300-500 calories total for your exercise for a day? If you want, I'll be glad to do the math and figure your calorie needs based on the formulas I use for my clients.

Also, by PT are you talking about a physical therapist (who are actually the only ones who can use the abbreviation PT legally) or a personal trainer? Neither can legally give nutrition recommendations in most states, so before you follow it make sure the person giving you nutrition advice is actually certified in nutrition or is licensed as a registered dietitian.

Okay, I'm going to estimate with the older body fat percentage, but if you can get it redone it might be more accurate.

140 pounds x 24% = 33.6 pounds of fat
140 pounds - 33.6 = 106.4 pounds of lean body mass
106.4 / 2.2 (to convert to kilograms) = 48.364 kilograms of body weight.
48.364 x 1 kcal per hour x 24 hours per day = 1160.7 Basal Metabolic Rate
1160.7 x 1.5 (activity factor for Moderately Active) = 1741.1 Total Daily Energy Expenditure Not Counting Exercise
1741.1 + 575 (estimate of calories from exercise based on a MET level of 6 and your current weight for 1 1/2 hours) = 2316.1 Total Daily Energy Expenditure with Exercise

Calorie consumption should be no less then 80% of Total Daily Energy Expenditure. On Non-Exercise Days, 80% of 1741.1 = 1393 Calories. On Exercise Days, 80% of 2316.1 = 1853 Calories. So, in my opinion, on the days you don't exercise you should be consuming between 1393 and 1741 calories and on the days you do exercise you should be consuming between 1853 and 2316 calories. Going too low in calories can tell the body to store fat and breakdown muscle to make sure it has energy for those tough workouts later.

Okay, I'm going to estimate with the older body fat percentage, but if you can get it redone it might be more accurate.

140 pounds x 24% = 33.6 pounds of fat
140 pounds - 33.6 = 106.4 pounds of lean body mass
106.4 / 2.2 (to convert to kilograms) = 48.364 kilograms of body weight.
48.364 x 1 kcal per hour x 24 hours per day = 1160.7 Basal Metabolic Rate
1160.7 x 1.5 (activity factor for Moderately Active) = 1741.1 Total Daily Energy Expenditure Not Counting Exercise
1741.1 + 575 (estimate of calories from exercise based on a MET level of 6 and your current weight for 1 1/2 hours) = 2316.1 Total Daily Energy Expenditure with Exercise

Calorie consumption should be no less then 80% of Total Daily Energy Expenditure. On Non-Exercise Days, 80% of 1741.1 = 1393 Calories. On Exercise Days, 80% of 2316.1 = 1853 Calories. So, in my opinion, on the days you don't exercise you should be consuming between 1393 and 1741 calories and on the days you do exercise you should be consuming between 1853 and 2316 calories. Going too low in calories can tell the body to store fat and breakdown muscle to make sure it has energy for those tough workouts later.

This is all fine and well, but here's my concern...when i did eat 1700-1800 based on a 500cal deficit per the bodybugg, I still gained. How come I was able to lose at 1200cals those years ago.

And using the prev. bf %: how much more would Ilose on the inactivity via bedrest, and how much affect would that have regarding how many cals I should now eat...

Honestly, both of those would depend on your activity level and body composition. Years ago, you may have had less lean body mass and were therefore burning fewer calories at rest or were at a different activity level that was burning fewer calories. The change in lean body mass vs. fat mass will effect your calorie needs, but without a current estimate of body composition I can't get any closer on your estimates.

As for the BodyBugg and estimating calorie burns and deficits, you have to take into consideration anything that might have effected your heart rate to know if it was accurate in its estimations. Caffeine intake, medications for asthma, allergies, blood pressure, etc. can all effect heart rate and cause inaccuracies in heart rate monitors and on the BodyBugg. Plus if you were consuming 1700-1800 with a 500 calorie deficit, that means you needed 2200-2300 calories. Again, I go back to the 80% rule which is what I've been taught can be the dividing line for "starvation mode" (I hate that term!). You have to eat 80% MINIMUM of what you burn. At 2200 Calories for needs, that is a minimum of 1760 calories and at 2300 calories thats a minimum of 1840 calories. So, in that case a 500 calorie deficit would put you at only 77% if you were eating 1700 and needed 2200 and at 78% if you were eating 1800 and needed 2300. While 2-3% under the recommendation doesn't seem like a lot, it can be a big deal in the body. 2% dehydration has proven to cause decreases in performance, so I'm sure 2% too low in energy can do the same. It's a fine line to walk between ideal calorie intake and too much or too little. Because this is all estimation unless you go live in a human calorimeter, I tell my clients not to cut it too close and aim for 85% of TDEE so that they don't risk going too low. 85% of the 2316 I estimate for you on exercise days would actually be 1969 Calories. No, that's not a 500 calorie deficit, but the closer you get to goal the smaller your deficit will have to be to see results. It sucks when the body gets efficient at burning calories and you have to eat more and lose slower. Well, the losing slower part sucks anyway. :laugh:

Thanks for all your time here. I have more questions for you....I ask them as they come to me, hehe!

*If* I could possibly lose on what I feel is a high calorie level, why does MFP only estimate my needs to be 1600ish on workout days, especially since the site could be over estimating the burn. It seems to matter not where I set my goal loss (.5, 1, 1.5 etc lbs per week) or my exercise goals, MFP always gives me a net of 1200, therefore my exercise and calories needed per MFP are always the same. I can't reconcile that in my brain.

Your numbers are higher also that the calculators used to determine my caloric needs -- nearly every single one of them put me at around 1400-1500 for weight loss when considering activity modifiers. For maintenance, they generally give me an estiamte of 1900-2100. I've read that these calculators often overestimate caloric needs, so your calculations are understandably a bit scary for me.

Also, I have never eaten that many calories; during the pregnancy, I only ate about 1700-2000 and I was still working out (1hr day, 4-5 days), although with less intensity as we moved along. I gained about a pound a week throughout the pregnancy, give or take a pound or two some weeks.

Since I seem to gain on 1600-1800, I have cut back to calories to 1200 over the last 3 days and picked up an extra workout. If I try to eat the cals you recommend, should I jump full into or do it gradually. Considering this case, how much weight gain should I expect, as a rise in scale numbers and my inches not changing can be really frustrating, especially after several weeks.

Is it possible that a 1600-1700 is maintenance for a female who exercises regularly?

Fair warning, I may have more questions as I try to figure this out. The sooner I am confident in the mental grasp of it, the sooner I'll feel more comfortable applying it.

I don't mind questions at all. If I ever miss one on the boards, feel free to PM me. I may be slow to reply to PM's sometimes because I'm all over the place with work and school, but I do eventually respond to everyone.

As for MFP, I can't say why they would give a certain number of calories and not change when you change your goals. That has to do with their programming and I'm not privy to that info. I can say that if you are changing your activity level or exercise goal at the same time you are changing your weight loss goal, then that might have something to do with it as they can counteract each other. Maybe make one change at a time and see what it does then? Personally, I did the math for myself and set my net calorie goal as what I determined was my maintenance level (TDEE) not counting exercise and just do a quick calculation every once in a while to make sure I'm not too far under it.

My calculations are based on the formula I've been taught in both my exercise physiology program for calorie burns and in my nutrition program for calorie needs and in my sports nutrition certification for calorie needs specific to exercise and athletics. Because it is based on Lean Body Mass and not Total Body Mass like a lot of the calculators out there, it is considered more accurate--at least according to my professors. I know it sounds scary to think of increasing intake, but it really does work. Most of my clients tell me that they "can't eat that much" but when they do and start losing again after a plateau they start to believe. I will say to increase those calories slowly though, like an extra 100 calories a day for a week over what you were eating and just up it about 100 calories a week until you get to where you want to be. Going up too fast can cause some stomach discomfort.

A pound a week sounds about right for pregnancy weight gain, especially since it was twins. Ideally, most of it should have been in the last trimester so that it was mostly baby and not fat storage. If you were still exercising and only gained that much I'm betting your body fat didn't change as much as you think it might have.

Estimating how much you might gain can be tricky when dealing with too few calories. It honestly takes more then a few days for the body to think it is lacking in calories, so having been up for a while and then dropping down, you may actually see a loss at first. It would be after a month or two that the body would start to try to conserve energy by storing fat. Another thing to consider is that you may be breaking down muscle glycogen and not re-storing it, and then breaking down muscle to produce glycogen when glycogen isn't being stored, so you may see a loss from that. Unfortunately, too many people see those losses on the scale and think they are doing it right because the scale is moving when actually they aren't losing fat. So, don't stress so much on the scale, but have that body fat checked to see the results. Also, you'll know you're losing fat but not muscle if you are seeing inches decrease even if the scale creeps up.

Yes, it is definitely possible for a woman to have a maintenance of 1600-1700 calories per day. Mine is actually 2300 before exercise. The difference is in activity level and muscle mass. If you are doing resistance training to be stimulating muscle growth, then you will have a higher maintenance calorie need then someone who isn't doing anything to maintain or build muscle.

Ok, I'm going to consider giving your way a shot -- my way (1200cals) may work short-term and MFP didn't work, so let's try something new, right?

So, in my case, I should set my MFP cal goals to only the number I need to eat and not worry with logging exercise?
Also, on days that I exercise more, say grabbing an extra class or the like, do I need to eat more or remain failry consistent unless that extra workout time becomes a regualr habit?
Also, since I am trying to lose, what happens to my maintenance cals once I stop exercising so often...say going to a more "normal" 45-60mins/day 5-6 days a week and I'm ready to maintain.

I'll start tomorrow upping 100cals a day....that'll put me at 1300.Well, I think I'll grab 1400 since I'll be grabbing 2 hours cardio and 40min pilates. Then go up from there.

Do you have any estimate of "time" of when I should start seeing results in inches and changes, so that I'll know when to begin gauging that progress, AND so I'll know when I've hit my body's deficit needs. I'd hate to keep eating and eating (and not seeing changes thinking I'm not "there" yet) all the while packing on the pounds.....

My macs are set at 45/35/20...sound about right?

Because your exercise is variable, I'd set the amount on MFP to the max for non-exercise days and add the exercise calories. Then at the end of the day divide the number of Calories you consume by the Total Goal Calories (The number you put in + exercise) to get the percentage you are consuming. Make sure that percentage (once you get up to your normal range) is no less then 80%.

As for time frame, I don't weigh my clients for at least 6 weeks when they first start and then I weight them no more then once a month after that. The body doesn't make adaptations to body fat or lean body mass rapidly. The initial response to eating right and exercising right is glycogen storage (and the addition of water to store the glycogen in), so the scale may actually go up at first. Don't get discouraged by that. Give it time to work. If you aren't seeing changes in body fat or inches in 8 weeks, then you need to adjust the program, but not before.

As for the macro's, the ranges depend on what you are doing. With the amount of exercise you are doing, I'd up the carbs, especially if you are doing heavy weight training (because it causes more glycogen storage and you need the carbs to store the glycogen to properly fuel the activity). You're in the correct zones for everything (45-65% carbs, 10-35% protein, and 20-35% fat) so all you really need to do is tweak it to meet your energy needs. Of course, you also have to consider any medical things you have going on, like diabetes, IBS, etc. Any of those things that would mean a need to change your diet?

Quote: "...how in the world are people overeating so much that obesity is an epidemic? 1800cals is quite a substantial amount of food."

1800 calories could be a ton of food, but it depends on what you choose to eat.

It could also be 1 Chili's Smokehouse Bacon Triple-The-Cheese Big Mouth Burger w/ out side of Jalapeño-Ranch Dressing (1,840).

Or a Starbucks Extra Coffee Caramel Frappuccino® Blended Beverage (Grande, 490) plus a Starbucks Cranberry Orange Scone (490) for brunch, plus an Applebee's Grilled Shrimp and Spinach Salad (1050).

Or healthy meals but too much of 'em. Really, it's pretty easy to eat a lot of calories for most people. (That's why many people are here on MFP!)