HOW WILL WE EVER TRULY KNOW HOW MANY CALORIES TO EAT TO LOSE WEIGHT?

Options
2»

Replies

  • MegaMooseEsq
    MegaMooseEsq Posts: 3,118 Member
    Options
    I spent about six months last year eating about as usual, tracking calories here and weighing myself every couple of weeks. Around the new year I dumped all that data into a spreadsheet, looked at the trends, and figured out about how many calories it takes to gain weight. My first few months of calorie tracking were garbage, by the way - it takes practice (and a food scale) to get in the realm of accurate, and that still an estimate. This year I started tightening up my food intake, aiming to cut down an average 100 cal/day each month. Ive been losing about a half pound a week, which is just about what I predicted based on the past tracking and is just fine with me.
  • CattOfTheGarage
    CattOfTheGarage Posts: 2,750 Member
    Options
    If you're losing weight (overall trend over a few weeks) then you're eating the right amount of calories to lose weight. If not, you're eating too many.

    All calculators are only a starting point. Observe your results and adjust as needed.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    JerSchmare wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    From experience with people who had a lot of weight to lose, the usual thing I have to change is their INTENSITY of their exercise. Weight loss not only means a lower BMR, but also less calories burned to a lower weight. And if the exercise has been consistent and not been progressive, the body may have adapted to the load.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    9285851.png

    Hey @ninerbuff ,

    How does this explain steady state cardio? I'm actually truly curious not arguing.

    If I get up to running 5k 3 days a week over a period of time. Will I eventually adapt to the 5k runs? Do I need to then work on speed, or increase elevation, or maybe vary distances. What's the key thing there to keep my body feeling the intensity of the cardio? And, if I just do steady-state 5k's is there actual benefit other than weight loss? I am doing cardio for heart health, not weight loss or anything else.

    Thanks.

    If you started out running that at 13 min pace at say 210 lbs - you'd burn X amount of calories.

    If you kept running it at 13 min pace while you lost 40 lbs - you'd burn X-Y amount of calories.
    You'd need to pick up the pace to burn the same amount.
    And you likely would.

    (that's why walking stops becoming a decent workout for so many after some time and they lose weight)

    Now for your heart as a muscle and your aerobic system in general - it also is improving - and even if weight stayed the same and pace, it would go lower showing it's getting an easier workout.
    So for the heart to keep improving - you'd have to increase intensity there too.

    Combine losing weight with becoming more fit - now you really have to increase the pace to keep a load on the heart - perhaps beyond what the body can do actually for a while.

    Same as if you were doing squats or deadlift and did 250 lbs.
    Now you lost 40 lbs and can do 280 lb on the bar.

    You actually lost strength, should have been at 290.
    And if starting lifting - should be higher just from form improvements.
  • noirelb
    noirelb Posts: 216 Member
    Options
    How mamy calories did you eat per day by the end of WW when you didnt lose anymore? Can you check your data and add everything up and see hpw mamy calories it was in an average of 1 week. Once you have that number, remove 200-400 calories from that or work out more and you will be back in a deficit.
  • CattOfTheGarage
    CattOfTheGarage Posts: 2,750 Member
    edited July 2017
    Options
    I've noticed my heart/lungs seem to adapt to exercise quicker than the muscles. When I start new cardio exercise, I'm feeling breathless quickly and that's limits what I can do. Within a very short time of adapting, that has gone away and I'm fighting the burn in my muscles when my heart still seems to have plenty to give.

    ETA I don't know what relevance this has. It just passed through my mind, so I posted it. Sorry.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    CattOfTheGarage wrote: »
    I've noticed my heart/lungs seem to adapt to exercise quicker than the muscles. When I start new cardio exercise, I'm feeling breathless quickly and that's limits what I can do. Within a very short time of adapting, that has gone away and I'm fighting the burn in my muscles when my heart still seems to have plenty to give.

    ETA I don't know what relevance this has. It just passed through my mind, so I posted it. Sorry.

    Those newly used muscles if that's what they are - need more mitochondria for dealing with providing energy.

    Though depending on the workout style - many times it's just efficiency improvements means it's not as heavy a load of intensity.
  • estherdragonbat
    estherdragonbat Posts: 5,283 Member
    Options
    Same here. I've got MFP set to lose 1lb/month. I eat back half my exercise calories and I'm losing 1 to 1.5/week. (Hard to be sure because... say it with me now... "Weight loss isn't linear!" So, for two weeks, I've been down 0.2, 0.4. This week? 2.0. Like you, when I look at the averages, I'm generally slightly above target, but 1.5/week is okay for me right now.)
  • Crowned_Clown
    Crowned_Clown Posts: 9 Member
    Options
    Don't go by the typical 2000-a-day rule. Instead, try to calculate your TDEE, which takes into account your gender, your age, your height, and your typical activity level. When I calculated mine, I got a TDEE between 1,400 - 1,500 calories a day.

    Be honest about what you consume - liquid calories do count. If need be, measure out your food until you've gotten really good at guessimating if you're actually eating just a cup of cereal. (Most people are eating way more than that, since most use huge soup bowls for their morning meal.)

    CICO (calories in, calories out) is very simple, but it's not easy. You can't lie - you might decieve yourself into thinking you only ate 1000 calories, but the body knows that your little nibbles here and there added another couple hundred.
  • jdwils14
    jdwils14 Posts: 154 Member
    edited July 2017
    Options
    The closer you get to your goal weight, (and therefore the smaller the numbers get), the more erroneous the data becomes. I am 230ish, and I often account for any error, such as overestimating food and underestimating exercise (I deduct calories I would have burned in some alternate universe where I didn't choose to work out).

    Maybe that is the difference...if you are set to sedentary, are you deducting the calories you would have burned at BMR level? For me, I calculate I burn 120 calories or so just sitting. If I work out for an hour and burn 500 calories, I would deduct 120 and list exercise calories as 380, since the 120 is already accounted for in my daily energy expenditure.

    Since you are closer to your goal, that could be the difference for you, and could be where you are overestimating exercise.
  • perkymommy
    perkymommy Posts: 1,642 Member
    Options
    saraann321 wrote: »
    I think eating back exercise calories is a load of crap. And if you do, only eat a small amount back. I'd never lose anything if I ate all my excersize calories back.

    me either
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,419 Member
    Options
    perkymommy wrote: »
    saraann321 wrote: »
    I think eating back exercise calories is a load of crap. And if you do, only eat a small amount back. I'd never lose anything if I ate all my excersize calories back.

    me either

    That's awful. I hear you.

    https://examine.com/nutrition/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-people/

    Not true for everyone, though. I'm lucky: I vary in the other direction. I don't know why. Muscle matters. Energy flux might. Whole foods or macros (TEF) might (a little). Microbiome might. Other stuff? Dunno. I'm so sorry. That's hard.
  • estherdragonbat
    estherdragonbat Posts: 5,283 Member
    edited July 2017
    Options
    Yeah, when I don't eat back some of those calories, I get hungry. And, as I said a page back, I'm still losing...
  • LizbethHeller
    LizbethHeller Posts: 39 Member
    Options
    I wear a Garmin fitness tracker (like a fitbit, kind of) and just take its word on how many calories I've burned. It has my weight and a constant heart rate, so it's probably pretty accurate. I've noticed that when MFP takes the calories from GarminConnect (the sites sync) it cuts them by about half, and that's ok with me too. So far, I'm losing, so it must be working ok.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    saraann321 wrote: »
    I think eating back exercise calories is a load of crap. And if you do, only eat a small amount back. I'd never lose anything if I ate all my excersize calories back.

    Then you're either not logging accurately, your initial calorie goal isn't right, or you are overestimating your exercise calories.

    When someone is eating at a deficit, has chosen the correct activity level, and is eating back an accurate estimate of exercise calories, they're still at a deficit and they will lose weight.
  • MelanieCN77
    MelanieCN77 Posts: 4,047 Member
    Options
    JerSchmare wrote: »
    perkymommy wrote: »
    saraann321 wrote: »
    I think eating back exercise calories is a load of crap. And if you do, only eat a small amount back. I'd never lose anything if I ate all my excersize calories back.

    me either

    Way too many of you are ignorant of how this site works. It's sad because you are unnecessarily suffering more than you need to. If you follow it the way it's designed, it works.

    I imagine the OP all caps crying out for help and they can't hear MFP off to the side going "well actually..."

Categories