Calorie Calculation- Thoughts?

x_cinder_x
x_cinder_x Posts: 118 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
While surfing the great wide web the other day I came across an article (link attached below) that had the below calorie formula in it:

Calculate your calorie goal
YOUR CURRENT WEIGHT X 12 = calories needed to maintain your weight
To lose 1 pound/week: Cut 500 calories/day
To lose 2 pounds/week: Cut 1,000 calories/day

The article said this calculation was used in weight loss studies, but not sure how legit that claim is. I was just thinking in my head if someone is 350 lbs that would put them at 4200 calories just to maintain. I don't know, that number just sounds high to me and that it would result in gaining.

I am not planning on using it, but am wondering if it is valid. Can someone generically figure out their maintenance/loss calories with this?

Article link:
http://www.eatingwell.com/nutrition_health/weight_loss_diet_plans/what_does_a_1500_calorie_day_look_like

Replies

  • wkwebby
    wkwebby Posts: 807 Member
    I believe that those maintenance calories are too high. Dependent upon activity levels and lean muscle mass, this number can swing widely. To lose, those calorie figures are correct.
  • wkwebby
    wkwebby Posts: 807 Member
    I believe that those maintenance calories are too high. Dependent upon activity levels and lean muscle mass, this number can swing widely. To lose, those calorie figures are correct.
  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,562 Member
    At that calculation I'd be eating about 2475 calories, which is roughly my TDEE. However, I have a fairly active job. Another person my size may burn 300 calories less than I do. So no, it isn't valid.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    That isn't accounting for activity, so nope, I wouldn't use it.
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    No, it's not accurate.

    There are people that will have less and more depending on their fat percentage, activity level, current physical fitness, and so on.

    If you know your body fat percentage i suggest using the Katch-McArdle formula for BMR and then multiplying it by your activity level. This has been the most accurate for me (within 50 calories). Alternatively if you don't know your body fat you can use the Harris-Benedict formula which MyFitnessPal uses.


    either way, considering MFP has all of these tools and calculates this information for you you shouldn't need to use anything else.
  • Jruzer
    Jruzer Posts: 3,501 Member
    I can't get the article to come up. Is that supposed to be for women only? At my weight the "maintenance calories" it suggests are actually close to where I cut a 1 lb/week.

    I've hears these kinds of numbers bandied about before as ways to get a quick handle on your caloric needs, but now in the days of readily available TDEE calculators they are superfluous.
  • ForecasterJason
    ForecasterJason Posts: 2,577 Member
    Jruzer wrote: »
    I can't get the article to come up. Is that supposed to be for women only? At my weight the "maintenance calories" it suggests are actually close to where I cut a 1 lb/week.

    I've hears these kinds of numbers bandied about before as ways to get a quick handle on your caloric needs, but now in the days of readily available TDEE calculators they are superfluous.
    Yeah. For me, that calculation works out to be close to my BMR, so not even close.

  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,089 Member
    For me, I would be losing almost a half pound a week if I followed that, just with normal activity (not counting "exercise" activity or non-normal activity, like snow shoveling).

    Any one-size fits all calculation that doesn't account for variations in activity (much less variations in muscle mass, reproductive status, etc.) is not going to be accurate.
  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    That formula does not take into consideration activity level. So it means that for me to maintain my weight I'd need to eat around ~1560 whether I'm sedentary at a desk all day, or run a 5-10k each day. That's just not logical. A TDEE estimate has to take the lifestyle into consideration.

    For what its worth, if I'm a slug my maintenance would be around 1450-1500. On a regular lightly active day with 30-60 minutes of intentional walking, about 1800.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,603 Member
    There are different equations for figuring out how much someone should eat, but none are that easy. Age, bone structure, amount of muscle, sex, activity - all kinds of things have to factored in - everyone is different. Even the best equations are still just a guess.

    You have to figure out the way that works for you and then stick with that. The odds of it being your weight times ten or twelve...odds are against that.
  • brynnsmom
    brynnsmom Posts: 945 Member
    That can't be right - it would put my maintenance calories at less than 1300 when in reality it's about 2000.
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    It gives me a number a little bit too low as maintenance, not too far off though. But the danger would be if I did what it said, I'd be thinking sure! 2lbs per week loss would be great! This formula says I should eat 900 calories per day, ok, I'll do that!

    It needs a caveat about minimums.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    LOL...that would give me about 2100 calories. I maintain on closer to 3,000.

    the 500 and 1000 calorie deficit parts are correct, but one's maintenance calories are going to be dependent on a number of factors, not just weight x some number.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Yeah, as many people have pointed out . . . this thing ignores many factors, including activity. If I followed this, I would be attempting to maintain on around 1,300 calories. I eat about 2,000 a day and maintain.
  • juliebowman4
    juliebowman4 Posts: 784 Member
    x_cinder_x wrote: »
    While surfing the great wide web the other day I came across an article (link attached below) that had the below calorie formula in it:

    Calculate your calorie goal
    YOUR CURRENT WEIGHT X 12 = calories needed to maintain your weight
    To lose 1 pound/week: Cut 500 calories/day
    To lose 2 pounds/week: Cut 1,000 calories/day

    The article said this calculation was used in weight loss studies, but not sure how legit that claim is. I was just thinking in my head if someone is 350 lbs that would put them at 4200 calories just to maintain. I don't know, that number just sounds high to me and that it would result in gaining.

    I am not planning on using it, but am wondering if it is valid. Can someone generically figure out their maintenance/loss calories with this?

    Article link:
    http://www.eatingwell.com/nutrition_health/weight_loss_diet_plans/what_does_a_1500_calorie_day_look_like

    That can't be healthy......if I wanted to lose 2lbs a week, I'd be eating just over 800ca a day.
  • jacklifts
    jacklifts Posts: 396 Member
    according to Lyle McDonald, a 12 multiple is a moderate deficit. I think it's fine to use it as a starting point when first losing weight, and seeing if you can lose weight on that before cutting further.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited November 2015
    It gives a very rough estimate that's often going to be too high or too low.

    For me it gives 1500 for maintenance, which is too low even if I'm sedentary and since I'm not it's way too low--my actual maintenance is more like 2000.

    Also, it tells me to eat 1000 to lose a lb, which isn't good advice at all.

    A far better way that's based on more information is to use MFP and log exercise or to find a good TDEE calculator.
  • strong_curves
    strong_curves Posts: 2,229 Member
    @Stroutman81 mentions something similar in this thread:

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/113609/relatively-light-people-trying-to-get-leaner/p1

    (it's in the first post and he goes more into detail)
  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,486 Member
    At 100 lb 1200 cal works out at sedentary (reading all day or sick) maintenance for me. However I am 5'1 and 62yo, and generally eat closer to 1400. Been maintaining 6 yr.
    Probably anyone younger with the same stats would need at least an extra 100 cals for each decade.

    Cheers,
  • x_cinder_x
    x_cinder_x Posts: 118 Member
    edited November 2015
    Thanks for all the answers everyone! It seems to echo what I was thinking-there are much better calculations out there. :)

    @Jruzer -Sorry the article would not pull up, not sure what is up with that. No it was directed at everyone, not just for women. There was little info in it though.
  • x_cinder_x
    x_cinder_x Posts: 118 Member
    edited November 2015
    strong_curves wrote: »
    @Stroutman81 mentions something similar in this thread:

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/113609/relatively-light-people-trying-to-get-leaner/p1

    (it's in the first post and he goes more into detail)

    Oh! That explains it much better. Pretty much what everyone is saying: it depends on other factors. Thanks @strong_curves
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    x_cinder_x wrote: »
    While surfing the great wide web the other day I came across an article (link attached below) that had the below calorie formula in it:

    Calculate your calorie goal
    YOUR CURRENT WEIGHT X 12 = calories needed to maintain your weight
    To lose 1 pound/week: Cut 500 calories/day
    To lose 2 pounds/week: Cut 1,000 calories/day

    The article said this calculation was used in weight loss studies, but not sure how legit that claim is. I was just thinking in my head if someone is 350 lbs that would put them at 4200 calories just to maintain. I don't know, that number just sounds high to me and that it would result in gaining.

    I am not planning on using it, but am wondering if it is valid. Can someone generically figure out their maintenance/loss calories with this?

    Article link:
    http://www.eatingwell.com/nutrition_health/weight_loss_diet_plans/what_does_a_1500_calorie_day_look_like

    Doesn't work for me

    My goal is 160 (currently weigh 158 so in range) - that calculation gives me maintenance at 1850... That is 450 calories below my actual maintenance
  • MommyL2015
    MommyL2015 Posts: 1,411 Member
    Multiplying 12 times my weight would give me exactly what MFP gives me for maintenance at a sedentary level.
  • dhimaan
    dhimaan Posts: 774 Member
    As others have noted it doesn't take into account how active you are and exercise intensity.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    MommyL2015 wrote: »
    Multiplying 12 times my weight would give me exactly what MFP gives me for maintenance at a sedentary level.

    It gives me 100 more

    It's still wrong by 100s
  • shewillgetthere
    shewillgetthere Posts: 3 Member
    I wouldn't use it. According to the calculation, I should maintain on 1500 calories a day. It actually makes me lose, albeit slowly.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Bit low for me if I was sedentary, which I'm not.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    It's within 10 calories of my MFP sedentary maintenance #. But yeah like everyone said, it doesn't take activity into consideration. Could always do like MFP and consider activity after the fact...

Categories