Are my goals OK?

infitspo
infitspo Posts: 29 Member
edited November 22 in Food and Nutrition
Okay, so I'm a very cliche beginner at this. I'm going to put my overall information here and to those who have the knowledge and experience PLEASE tell me any input you have!

5"5', 182lbs. Goal weight is 125 (doctor said, and I was 125 before).
My calorie intake goal right now is 1200. (I've heard that's too low, so I'm planning on increasing it. That's what MFP gave me though- I have no idea how to calculate what I should be intaking now though, so help please)

I try to workout every day, still trying to figure out how I'm going to figure out calories burned (any tips on that let me know!).

I NEED to be a maximum of 130 by May 2016.

Thank you all so much!


Replies

  • barbecuesauce
    barbecuesauce Posts: 1,771 Member
    http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/ to calculate, or do 1200+at least half of exercise calories.

    Sounds quite reasonable to lose 52 pounds in that length of time. (I'm 5'6", I think I weighed 180 in December and I'm 132 this morning). Just don't stress out over the deadline--focus on weighing your foods and creating your own recipes and results will follow.
  • infitspo
    infitspo Posts: 29 Member
    Thanks!
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,603 Member
    I'm not going to disagree with the doctor! At least yourselves you a number. Mine is all, "Well..." So we are still Wait And Seeing.

    Follow the MFP. Eat back you exercise calories for 2-3 weeks. It's designed for you to eat them back, so might as well try it as it's designed for a few weeks, IMO. If you don't lose, start eating half of those extra calories. A lot of people eat half and it's great to do, but if you can eat them all and lose, do that! :)

    A lot of people get Fitbits or Up things. I do too many different things and would have to wear two or three of them, so I don't wear any. I'm losing weight without anything on my body! Egads! ;) But I'm a rebel like that. So many people really like those things a lot. You might think about getting one. If you don't, just enter your exercise in the section for it. :)
  • infitspo
    infitspo Posts: 29 Member
    I do know that the number of calories burned really depends on the person and the workout, so I dont know if I should eat the workout calories back at all
  • barbecuesauce
    barbecuesauce Posts: 1,771 Member
    infitspo wrote: »
    I do know that the number of calories burned really depends on the person and the workout, so I dont know if I should eat the workout calories back at all

    At least half, maybe more. If you sustain too large a deficit, you could lose more lean body mass and have brittle nails/thinning hair.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,603 Member
    infitspo wrote: »
    I do know that the number of calories burned really depends on the person and the workout, so I dont know if I should eat the workout calories back at all

    Eat them! You're going to want to cut back later, so eat as much as you can while still losing now, so you'll have something to cut.

    I like your Model My Diet picture. I go on that site all the time. :)
  • MillyFleurs
    MillyFleurs Posts: 57 Member
    OP, don't eat back the exercise calories MFP gives you. Most of the time those are wild overestimates. The same with any cardio machines you might use. If you can, I hear investing in a FitBit or something similar works well for a lot of people.
    I can't justify the cost of one myself right now, so I change my activity level to accommodate exercise and use that number as my target on the days I work out and 1200 on the days that I don't. It's been working pretty well for me so far.
  • infitspo
    infitspo Posts: 29 Member
    What are exercises you recommend??
  • mccindy72
    mccindy72 Posts: 7,001 Member
    MillyFleurs wrote: »
    OP, don't eat back the exercise calories MFP gives you. Most of the time those are wild overestimates. The same with any cardio machines you might use. If you can, I hear investing in a FitBit or something similar works well for a lot of people.
    I can't justify the cost of one myself right now, so I change my activity level to accommodate exercise and use that number as my target on the days I work out and 1200 on the days that I don't. It's been working pretty well for me so far.

    This is not good advice. You should eat back at least half of the calories you have for exercise. MFP does overestimate calorie burns, which is why you eat back less than the full amount. To be more accurate, get a heart rate monitor with a chest strap, or a Fitbit.
    Not eating back exercise calories will result in burning lean muscle mass as well as fat. Also losing weight too fast can result in loose skin that can't be repaired.
    If you are losing more than 1-2 pounds per week, 1200 calories is too low for you and you should adjust your calories upward.
  • MillyFleurs
    MillyFleurs Posts: 57 Member
    edited July 2015
    FitnessBlender, I love FitnessBlender! I dropped a lot of weight and had a very nice shape not very long ago with the help of FitnessBlender. Then I started school last year and caved to the Freshman Fifteen. I'm back on track now though and working out at home is just so convenient and still fairly challenging at the beginning of this journey.
    https://www.fitnessblender.com/

    They have been fit for a long time, so I recommend doing one of their Low Impact programs a couple of times to get in the swing of things because sometimes they're like "oh, this is so easy" and I'm all "no, jumping burpees are NOT easy."
  • MillyFleurs
    MillyFleurs Posts: 57 Member
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    MillyFleurs wrote: »
    OP, don't eat back the exercise calories MFP gives you. Most of the time those are wild overestimates. The same with any cardio machines you might use. If you can, I hear investing in a FitBit or something similar works well for a lot of people.
    I can't justify the cost of one myself right now, so I change my activity level to accommodate exercise and use that number as my target on the days I work out and 1200 on the days that I don't. It's been working pretty well for me so far.

    This is not good advice. You should eat back at least half of the calories you have for exercise. MFP does overestimate calorie burns, which is why you eat back less than the full amount. To be more accurate, get a heart rate monitor with a chest strap, or a Fitbit.
    Not eating back exercise calories will result in burning lean muscle mass as well as fat. Also losing weight too fast can result in loose skin that can't be repaired.
    If you are losing more than 1-2 pounds per week, 1200 calories is too low for you and you should adjust your calories upward.

    Right, which is why I have adjusted my activity level to accommodate exercise. Not every one can afford gadgets and I don't feel like googling or estimating every work out I do.
  • infitspo
    infitspo Posts: 29 Member
    Will going from 180 to 120 in about 11 months make me have loose skin!? :( how do you deal with loose skin!?

    I think I'm going to reset my goal to 1.5 pounds a week, and increase my calorie intake a little. I'll start by eating a third of the exercise calories and take it from there? it doesnt seem to make sense to me that you'd work out and burn only to eat it back...!?
  • 2snakeswoman
    2snakeswoman Posts: 655 Member
    I find it a lot easier to stay on target if it's not always moving, so I pay attention to my calorie budget but do not log exercise. My calories are set at about 1600.
  • AliceDark
    AliceDark Posts: 3,886 Member
    edited July 2015
    infitspo wrote: »
    I think I'm going to reset my goal to 1.5 pounds a week, and increase my calorie intake a little. I'll start by eating a third of the exercise calories and take it from there? it doesnt seem to make sense to me that you'd work out and burn only to eat it back...!?
    I was going to recommend that you do the bolded part. 52 pounds in 36 weeks is about 1.5 pounds a week.

    Regarding eat-backs: the formula MFP uses assumes you do no additional exercise. It calculates your target so that, if you didn't work out at all, you'd still lose your 1.5 pounds per week. Eating back your calories (or a portion thereof, just to be safe) keeps you at a consistent deficit. For a lot of reasons, it's not the best idea to try to create the biggest deficit possible -- it's a much better idea to find a deficit that allows you to lose at a consistent, controllable rate that doesn't leave you feeling deprived or trigger over-eating.

  • infitspo
    infitspo Posts: 29 Member
    Ohhhh makes sense!
    Thank you so much :)
  • ahoy_m8
    ahoy_m8 Posts: 3,053 Member
    infitspo wrote: »
    Will going from 180 to 120 in about 11 months make me have loose skin!? :( how do you deal with loose skin!?

    I think I'm going to reset my goal to 1.5 pounds a week, and increase my calorie intake a little. I'll start by eating a third of the exercise calories and take it from there? it doesnt seem to make sense to me that you'd work out and burn only to eat it back...!?

    One pound per week loss is a good, sustainable goal. Many people have lost 50lb, 100lb and even more at that rate with no skin problems. It depends on age, genetics, and rate of loss. Unfortunately, you only control one of those. Gotta echo Kalikel about finding the MAXIMUM calories you can consume while losing 1 lb/week. Your caloric need gradually declines as you slim down, and if weight loss stalls, you may have to cut calories to get back on a losing trend. If you start too low, yes you might see the scale move faster at first, but also your metabolism can adapt to a slower rate. Mentally, smaller deficits are easier to sustain for a year without burning out and giving up. If you start as high as you can while still losing at the desired rate, you have more room for adjustments later. And it's easier to sustain.

    The thing about eating back exercise calories is a little confusing at first, I'll admit. The idea is your caloric need may vary widely based on your activity, and if you are experimenting with different work outs, it makes sense to count exercise separately. At least until you have a regular routine. It's all an estimate. Estimate your intake and your exercise absolutely as accurately as you possibly can, with brutal honesty, and in a couple months you will have data that will help you fine tune. As Kalikel said, eat back exercise calories (your best estimate), and if you aren't losing on average 1lb/week, then eat back fewer or revise your exercise estimates downward--same diff.

    Good luck!
  • infitspo
    infitspo Posts: 29 Member
    ahoy_m8 wrote: »

    One pound per week loss is a good, sustainable goal. Many people have lost 50lb, 100lb and even more at that rate with no skin problems. It depends on age, genetics, and rate of loss. Unfortunately, you only control one of those. Gotta echo Kalikel about finding the MAXIMUM calories you can consume while losing 1 lb/week. Your caloric need gradually declines as you slim down, and if weight loss stalls, you may have to cut calories to get back on a losing trend. If you start too low, yes you might see the scale move faster at first, but also your metabolism can adapt to a slower rate. Mentally, smaller deficits are easier to sustain for a year without burning out and giving up. If you start as high as you can while still losing at the desired rate, you have more room for adjustments later. And it's easier to sustain.

    The thing about eating back exercise calories is a little confusing at first, I'll admit. The idea is your caloric need may vary widely based on your activity, and if you are experimenting with different work outs, it makes sense to count exercise separately. At least until you have a regular routine. It's all an estimate. Estimate your intake and your exercise absolutely as accurately as you possibly can, with brutal honesty, and in a couple months you will have data that will help you fine tune. As Kalikel said, eat back exercise calories (your best estimate), and if you aren't losing on average 1lb/week, then eat back fewer or revise your exercise estimates downward--same diff.

    Good luck!

    I'm going to set up a routine and post up again in two weeks for an update. Thank u!!
  • mccindy72
    mccindy72 Posts: 7,001 Member
    MillyFleurs wrote: »
    mccindy72 wrote: »
    MillyFleurs wrote: »
    OP, don't eat back the exercise calories MFP gives you. Most of the time those are wild overestimates. The same with any cardio machines you might use. If you can, I hear investing in a FitBit or something similar works well for a lot of people.
    I can't justify the cost of one myself right now, so I change my activity level to accommodate exercise and use that number as my target on the days I work out and 1200 on the days that I don't. It's been working pretty well for me so far.

    This is not good advice. You should eat back at least half of the calories you have for exercise. MFP does overestimate calorie burns, which is why you eat back less than the full amount. To be more accurate, get a heart rate monitor with a chest strap, or a Fitbit.
    Not eating back exercise calories will result in burning lean muscle mass as well as fat. Also losing weight too fast can result in loose skin that can't be repaired.
    If you are losing more than 1-2 pounds per week, 1200 calories is too low for you and you should adjust your calories upward.

    Right, which is why I have adjusted my activity level to accommodate exercise. Not every one can afford gadgets and I don't feel like googling or estimating every work out I do.

    I bought my husband a heart rate monitor with a chest strap for $35. Pretty worth it for the accuracy of making sure calorie burns are correct so your weight loss is right for your body and you don't lose your lean muscle mass.
  • Tom_Head
    Tom_Head Posts: 2 Member
    edited July 2015
    I'm gonna be blunt: You asked me if I think your goals are OK. I think a target weight of 125 pounds is realistic. I think you can probably lose 57 pounds by next May without great difficulty. But I agree with the other posters' reservations re: the low calorie limit, and I'm especially concerned by this one sentence:
    infitspo wrote: »
    I NEED to be a maximum of 130 by May 2016.
    That's the part of your post where I might actually say the goal is not OK, because while it is very likely that you will in fact weigh less than 130 pounds by May 2016, rate of weight loss is hard to predict and taking drastic steps to force it can lead to unplanned side effects (loose skin actually being one of the milder ones, in the grand scheme of things).

    So my one piece of advice is that I'd urge you to be gentle with yourself and accept yourself wherever you are in May 2016, whether you end up weighing less than 130 pounds or not. And it pays to celebrate all the smaller victories on the way—there are going to be a bunch of little milestones on the way to 130 (positions you will be able to comfortably sit in that you can't now, clothes that'll fit you differently, and so on), and it's better for both your weight loss plan and life in general if you let yourself enjoy them without worrying about how much you've got left to go before you reach your target.

    Good luck!
  • infitspo
    infitspo Posts: 29 Member
    ^^ Thank you for being "blunt", exactly what I needed :)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories