Is 1600 calories too much when trying to lose weight for a woman?
liljakaren1997
Posts: 22 Member
So I'm a 20 year old woman and trying to lose weight. Right now I weigh around 84 kg(185 pounds) and I've already lost 10 kg(22 pounds) but now I feel like my weight is standing still. I go to the gym for an hour 2 days a week and I walk a lot and move during the day, I walk at least 10 thousand steps everyday. How many calories should I eat? Is 1600 too much?
0
Replies
-
My first question is how are you tracking your intake? Are you using a food scale?
2 -
fitoverfortymom wrote: »My first question is how are you tracking your intake? Are you using a food scale?
Yes I use a scale and I track almost everything that I eat. According to my Garmin smartwatch(I know they are not 100% accurate) I'm burning about 2000 calories a day.0 -
Depends...there's not some universal answer to that question. One's calorie requirements can vary substantially depending on their stats and activity levels.
My wife would lose anywhere between 1 and 1.5 Lbs per week eating 1600 calories per day. She's 5'2" - 5'3" and 42...avid runner and chaser arounder of a 7 and 5 year old.4 -
When you say you "feel" like your weight is standing still, what exactly does that mean? In what time period have you lost 22 pounds and how long has it been since you've lost?8
-
How long has your weight been stalled? If it's less than about 4 weeks, try to be patient. Have you lowered your intake since you lost the first 10kg?1
-
janejellyroll wrote: »When you say you "feel" like your weight is standing still, what exactly does that mean? In what time period have you lost 22 pounds and how long has it been since you've lost?
I've lost it since the begging of July. When I step on a scale I never really see the number go down, it's been like that for almost a month. Maybe it's because I'm gaining muscle, but I don't know0 -
How long has your weight been stalled? If it's less than about 4 weeks, try to be patient. Have you lowered your intake since you lost the first 10kg?
No I actually started with eating way less, only about 1100-1200 calories a day but people were telling me I wasn't eating enough so I increased it a little bit0 -
liljakaren1997 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »When you say you "feel" like your weight is standing still, what exactly does that mean? In what time period have you lost 22 pounds and how long has it been since you've lost?
I've lost it since the begging of July. When I step on a scale I never really see the number go down, it's been like that for almost a month. Maybe it's because I'm gaining muscle, but I don't know
Nah, it's actually really hard if not impossible for women to gain muscle that quickly. Two hours a week in the gym and 10k steps is awesome, but not remotely enough to gain that sort of muscle while eating in a deficit. But it's possible that you're eating more than you think and have hit maintenance. It's also possible you've just had some bad luck with water weight and actually have lost some fat and just need a woosh to come along.6 -
For which woman? For me 1800 to 2000 is enough to lose weight.
You've been stuck for a month? How's your food logging accuracy? Are you using a scale? has anything changed that might cause you to retain excess water?1 -
It will depend on the woman. Height, weight and activity level and age determine your calorie needs. I am 5'3.5" and 120 pounds and 49 years old. I would definitely lose weight on 1600 calories, but I am pretty active. Another woman my height and age who wasn't very active might maintain at 1600. Is your weight actually standing still, or do you just "feel" like it is?1
-
liljakaren1997 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »When you say you "feel" like your weight is standing still, what exactly does that mean? In what time period have you lost 22 pounds and how long has it been since you've lost?
I've lost it since the begging of July. When I step on a scale I never really see the number go down, it's been like that for almost a month. Maybe it's because I'm gaining muscle, but I don't know
By "never really see the number go down," does that mean you've been at the same weight for a month now?1 -
I ate 1650-1700 and lost 80 lbs, I was also 15 years older than you and about as active.
So no, not too much.
Your number of 2000 calories burned in a day at your age and weight seems extremely low though. I walked 11k steps yesterday and I burned as much... and I'm 39 and 145 lbs.4 -
Not too much at all. I'm over double your age, only 5' 2.75", and weigh just 4 pounds more than you, never come near 10k steps or visit a gym, average 1900/day, and lost 41 pounds in the last year.3
-
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »liljakaren1997 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »When you say you "feel" like your weight is standing still, what exactly does that mean? In what time period have you lost 22 pounds and how long has it been since you've lost?
I've lost it since the begging of July. When I step on a scale I never really see the number go down, it's been like that for almost a month. Maybe it's because I'm gaining muscle, but I don't know
Nah, it's actually really hard if not impossible for women to gain muscle that quickly. Two hours a week in the gym and 10k steps is awesome, but not remotely enough to gain that sort of muscle while eating in a deficit. But it's possible that you're eating more than you think and have hit maintenance. It's also possible you've just had some bad luck with water weight and actually have lost some fat and just need a woosh to come along.
Well I see a lot of difference in my appearance, and people have been telling me how much skinnier I look. I can see my arms getting more toned so idk. I used to go to the gym 4-5 times a week but now I only go twice, but I work out harder because I have a trainer now.0 -
I ate 1650-1700 and lost 80 lbs, I was also 15 years older than you and about as active.
So no, not too much.
Your number of 2000 calories burned in a day at your age and weight seems extremely low though. I walked 11k steps yesterday and I burned as much... and I'm 39 and 145 lbs.
Yeah well those watches are not accurate, I think mine only counts the calories I burn when resting and when I walk/run, not when doing other exercises.0 -
BusyRaeNOTBusty wrote: »For which woman? For me 1800 to 2000 is enough to lose weight.
You've been stuck for a month? How's your food logging accuracy? Are you using a scale? has anything changed that might cause you to retain excess water?
I would say it's pretty accurate, I use a scale to weigh it. Maybe I'm drinking more water now? Idk1 -
liljakaren1997 wrote: »I ate 1650-1700 and lost 80 lbs, I was also 15 years older than you and about as active.
So no, not too much.
Your number of 2000 calories burned in a day at your age and weight seems extremely low though. I walked 11k steps yesterday and I burned as much... and I'm 39 and 145 lbs.
Yeah well those watches are not accurate, I think mine only counts the calories I burn when resting and when I walk/run, not when doing other exercises.
I don't know which garmin she has but mine tracks everything. It tracks during resting, walking, and can track during workouts, swimming, bike riding, running.2 -
"I don't know which garmin she has but mine tracks everything. It tracks during resting, walking, and can track during workouts, swimming, bike riding, running. "
There really is no consumer device that can accurately track each person's daily calorie burn.3 -
If your hitting 10,000 steps a day. Try going to MyFitnessPal, "Goals" (on the Home Tab), and set the activity level to "Lightly Active". That number is where you should probably work on hitting. Mine says 1,400 but I'm working on any number from 1,200 - 1,600, just depends on the day's meal choices. Defiantly in-taking less then I was before. And working within a range is more motivating and less stressful in my opinion.
I also work to get 11,000 steps 6 days a week. That is defiantly more than the 2,000-5,000 I used to get when I just wore my tracker instead of paying attention to it.
Good luck on the rest of your journey!1 -
gamespriteicon wrote: »If your hitting 10,000 steps a day. Try going to MyFitnessPal, "Goals" (on the Home Tab), and set the activity level to "Lightly Active". That number is where you should probably work on hitting. Mine says 1,400 but I'm working on any number from 1,200 - 1,600, just depends on the day's meal choices. Defiantly in-taking less then I was before. And working within a range is more motivating and less stressful in my opinion.
I also work to get 11,000 steps 6 days a week. That is defiantly more than the 2,000-5,000 I used to get when I just wore my tracker instead of paying attention to it.
Good luck on the rest of your journey!
This is incorrect. 10,000+ steps is considered active, as in, between (which is above lightly active) somewhat active and highly active. I've also read it's approximately equivalent to walking 5 miles.
With the intake and progress I listed above for myself, and considering myself lightly active, the OP could eat more than I do, and could lose a similar amount.2 -
Athena98501 wrote: »gamespriteicon wrote: »If your hitting 10,000 steps a day. Try going to MyFitnessPal, "Goals" (on the Home Tab), and set the activity level to "Lightly Active". That number is where you should probably work on hitting. Mine says 1,400 but I'm working on any number from 1,200 - 1,600, just depends on the day's meal choices. Defiantly in-taking less then I was before. And working within a range is more motivating and less stressful in my opinion.
I also work to get 11,000 steps 6 days a week. That is defiantly more than the 2,000-5,000 I used to get when I just wore my tracker instead of paying attention to it.
Good luck on the rest of your journey!
This is incorrect. 10,000+ steps is considered active, as in, between (which is above lightly active) somewhat active and highly active. I've also read it's approximately equivalent to walking 5 miles.
With the intake and progress I listed above for myself, and considering myself lightly active, the OP could eat more than I do, and could lose a similar amount.
Well today(it's 9 in the evening where I live) I've taken 14 thousand steps, which is pretty good I guess? I've almost walked 10 kilometers2 -
My calorie goal for losing 1 pound a week is 1680 and that is right on the mark for me. I am 5 foot 9 and closing in on 2000. My maintenance at goal weight should be between 1800 and 2000 so I don’t think 1600 to lose is too crazy. Everyone is different though.0
-
liljakaren1997 wrote: »Athena98501 wrote: »gamespriteicon wrote: »If your hitting 10,000 steps a day. Try going to MyFitnessPal, "Goals" (on the Home Tab), and set the activity level to "Lightly Active". That number is where you should probably work on hitting. Mine says 1,400 but I'm working on any number from 1,200 - 1,600, just depends on the day's meal choices. Defiantly in-taking less then I was before. And working within a range is more motivating and less stressful in my opinion.
I also work to get 11,000 steps 6 days a week. That is defiantly more than the 2,000-5,000 I used to get when I just wore my tracker instead of paying attention to it.
Good luck on the rest of your journey!
This is incorrect. 10,000+ steps is considered active, as in, between (which is above lightly active) somewhat active and highly active. I've also read it's approximately equivalent to walking 5 miles.
With the intake and progress I listed above for myself, and considering myself lightly active, the OP could eat more than I do, and could lose a similar amount.
Well today(it's 9 in the evening where I live) I've taken 14 thousand steps, which is pretty good I guess? I've almost walked 10 kilometers
If that's typical for you, it's considered highly active. I believe that's 12,500+ for that category. If I might ask, how in the world do you hit that many steps (lol)? I don't think I could manage it even if someone paid me $10/step.0 -
Weight loss is just not linear. For a 20 year old weighing 185, 1600 calories does not sound like too many to me ... as long as you are reasonably confident that you are tracking accurately. If after 6 weeks the scale has not budged, then however you are tracking your food, you are eating more or less at maintenance.1
-
Athena98501 wrote: »liljakaren1997 wrote: »Athena98501 wrote: »gamespriteicon wrote: »If your hitting 10,000 steps a day. Try going to MyFitnessPal, "Goals" (on the Home Tab), and set the activity level to "Lightly Active". That number is where you should probably work on hitting. Mine says 1,400 but I'm working on any number from 1,200 - 1,600, just depends on the day's meal choices. Defiantly in-taking less then I was before. And working within a range is more motivating and less stressful in my opinion.
I also work to get 11,000 steps 6 days a week. That is defiantly more than the 2,000-5,000 I used to get when I just wore my tracker instead of paying attention to it.
Good luck on the rest of your journey!
This is incorrect. 10,000+ steps is considered active, as in, between (which is above lightly active) somewhat active and highly active. I've also read it's approximately equivalent to walking 5 miles.
With the intake and progress I listed above for myself, and considering myself lightly active, the OP could eat more than I do, and could lose a similar amount.
Well today(it's 9 in the evening where I live) I've taken 14 thousand steps, which is pretty good I guess? I've almost walked 10 kilometers
If that's typical for you, it's considered highly active. I believe that's 12,500+ for that category. If I might ask, how in the world do you hit that many steps (lol)? I don't think I could manage it even if someone paid me $10/step.
Hahah well it takes me about 2000 steps to walk to work and then 2000 more steps to walk back. I work at an elementary school and I have to walk between buildings with the kids and I go out to watch them during their free time. So yeah I play with kids, that's basically how I take that many steps, and I go to the gym twice a week and I take a few steps there haha. I don't have my driving license so I'm basically forced to walk everywhere, and I live in a small town so it's very easy to just walk.6 -
Athena98501 wrote: »gamespriteicon wrote: »If your hitting 10,000 steps a day. Try going to MyFitnessPal, "Goals" (on the Home Tab), and set the activity level to "Lightly Active". That number is where you should probably work on hitting. Mine says 1,400 but I'm working on any number from 1,200 - 1,600, just depends on the day's meal choices. Defiantly in-taking less then I was before. And working within a range is more motivating and less stressful in my opinion.
I also work to get 11,000 steps 6 days a week. That is defiantly more than the 2,000-5,000 I used to get when I just wore my tracker instead of paying attention to it.
Good luck on the rest of your journey!
This is incorrect. 10,000+ steps is considered active, as in, between (which is above lightly active) somewhat active and highly active. I've also read it's approximately equivalent to walking 5 miles.
With the intake and progress I listed above for myself, and considering myself lightly active, the OP could eat more than I do, and could lose a similar amount.
Yes, I understand. For me 10,000 is less then 5 miles. I'm 5 ft 1in. It depends on the person and the level of activity when doing the steps, I didn't want to over estimate. I have a desk job (Sedentary), so I just increased it one level to "Lightly Active" since I just go for a 10-15 min walk 1-2 times during working break and then get the rest in the afternoon while taking care of my family / watching tv / (video workout 2-3x a week).
If I get to 13,000 I will increase the level, but I'm not there. It is all trial and adjustment until you find your spot.0 -
Apparently if I ever get to my "ideal" weight I will maintain it on more than 1600 calories a day (more like 1800). So if I just ate 1800 a day for a long time I'd get there.
If you entered all your info into MFP and it says 1600, then in a perfect world it would work.
Why is the world not perfect? Because human beings aren't perfect. In particular, we stink at math, measuring, and being honest.
The vast majority of people don't log accurately, and unsurprisingly, the errors are almost always in the direction of eating more than they think they are. IS there anything at all that you eat or drink regularly that you don't bother to log?
(example: If I didn't log my coffee at work I'd be really inaccurate, because it turns out that coffee creamer plus a packet of sugar add up to quite a few calories if you drink as much coffee as I do)2 -
Apparently if I ever get to my "ideal" weight I will maintain it on more than 1600 calories a day (more like 1800). So if I just ate 1800 a day for a long time I'd get there.
If you entered all your info into MFP and it says 1600, then in a perfect world it would work.
Why is the world not perfect? Because human beings aren't perfect. In particular, we stink at math, measuring, and being honest.
The vast majority of people don't log accurately, and unsurprisingly, the errors are almost always in the direction of eating more than they think they are. IS there anything at all that you eat or drink regularly that you don't bother to log?
(example: If I didn't log my coffee at work I'd be really inaccurate, because it turns out that coffee creamer plus a packet of sugar add up to quite a few calories if you drink as much coffee as I do)
Well I usually don't track things with low calories like vegetables(cucumbers, lettuce etc.) and if I put a little butter on a cracker I usually don't log it.0 -
liljakaren1997 wrote: »Apparently if I ever get to my "ideal" weight I will maintain it on more than 1600 calories a day (more like 1800). So if I just ate 1800 a day for a long time I'd get there.
If you entered all your info into MFP and it says 1600, then in a perfect world it would work.
Why is the world not perfect? Because human beings aren't perfect. In particular, we stink at math, measuring, and being honest.
The vast majority of people don't log accurately, and unsurprisingly, the errors are almost always in the direction of eating more than they think they are. IS there anything at all that you eat or drink regularly that you don't bother to log?
(example: If I didn't log my coffee at work I'd be really inaccurate, because it turns out that coffee creamer plus a packet of sugar add up to quite a few calories if you drink as much coffee as I do)
Well I usually don't track things with low calories like vegetables(cucumbers, lettuce etc.) and if I put a little butter on a cracker I usually don't log it.
If you do feel like your weight loss is standing still, it might be worth tightening up your logging to see if that makes a difference. I'm not sure what "a little butter" is, but given that it's a calorie dense food, you might want to keep track of it.3 -
a serving of crackers is only 5 crackers and is usually at least 80-100 calories. A tablespoon of butter is 100 calories, and a "pat" of butter is about 40 calories. So one cracker with a smear of butter might be 40 calories. Not a LOT, but definitely not nothing.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions