Caloric Intake

tmaths
tmaths Posts: 58 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Just a quick question for everyone.

It's more of a poll really.

So let's say your caloric intake is 1700.

Do you personally find that it's better to eat 1600 ( if you can't make the 1700 ) or is it better to eat 1800 ( so 100 over ) so you reached the intake?

I'm on the fence with this one. I personally thing if my intake is 1700. I should get as close to 1700 as possible; without going under too much.

So something in the realm of 1650, for me would be as good as 1700.

Just interested to hear what people think.

Cheers

Replies

  • L1zardQueen
    L1zardQueen Posts: 8,753 Member
    Maintaining or losing?
  • sschauer513
    sschauer513 Posts: 313 Member
    As long as there is exercise involved since that part is a guestement I go with I feel fine I stop eating, if I'm hungry I eat some more. 1 day doesn't wreck anything and 100 calories up or down is not a big deal weekly it should average out to 0.
  • MichelleSilverleaf
    MichelleSilverleaf Posts: 2,027 Member
    Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »
    Trying to lose weight right now so I'd go low. Plus exercise as much as you can and resist temptation to eat the extra calories you get from this.

    Why?
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »
    Trying to lose weight right now so I'd go low. Plus exercise as much as you can and resist temptation to eat the extra calories you get from this.

    If you are using the calorie goal MFP gave you, you're supposed to eat back at least some of your exercise calories. Otherwise you will be undereating and lose faster than recommended. Unless you are obese and racing against weight-related health issues, that's not a great idea.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    tmaths wrote: »
    Just a quick question for everyone.

    It's more of a poll really.

    So let's say your caloric intake is 1700.

    Do you personally find that it's better to eat 1600 ( if you can't make the 1700 ) or is it better to eat 1800 ( so 100 over ) so you reached the intake?

    I'm on the fence with this one. I personally thing if my intake is 1700. I should get as close to 1700 as possible; without going under too much.

    So something in the realm of 1650, for me would be as good as 1700.

    Just interested to hear what people think.

    Cheers

    Ideally, some days you go one way, some days you go the other, and they all even out. I find generally, I can play with my serving sizes to get pretty darn close to the number I want, and pre-logging as much as I can helps too.
  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,562 Member
    Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »
    Trying to lose weight right now so I'd go low. Plus exercise as much as you can and resist temptation to eat the extra calories you get from this.

    That's not how this works. The winner is the one who eats the most and still loses.

    OP, I would try to be as close to a 1700 average over the week.
  • tmaths
    tmaths Posts: 58 Member
    A lot of varied responses, which is what I was expecting.

    And I didn't think of that, ti does depend on if you're losing/maintaining, trying to reach goal quicker etc.
  • Kst76
    Kst76 Posts: 935 Member
    tmaths wrote: »
    Just a quick question for everyone.

    It's more of a poll really.

    So let's say your caloric intake is 1700.

    Do you personally find that it's better to eat 1600 ( if you can't make the 1700 ) or is it better to eat 1800 ( so 100 over ) so you reached the intake?

    I'm on the fence with this one. I personally thing if my intake is 1700. I should get as close to 1700 as possible; without going under too much.

    So something in the realm of 1650, for me would be as good as 1700.

    Just interested to hear what people think.

    Cheers

    If I am full at lower calories I am done eating. I never make myself eating.
  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    Aim to hit your target. Average your intake through the week. Try not to obsess :)

Categories