In place of a road map!

BUMP!!

Bump to read later.

I am not sure exactly how this program puts it but I was reading around on the forum and found a group called eat more to lose weight and I raised my calories based on those cals (I think the information was from the New Rules of Lifting for Women) and I have seen results just with bumping my cals up. I went from 1200 to 1600. This Fat 2 Fit states I should eat about 1705.

I also had a Bod Pod body fat testing done. I entered my measurements into the calculator using the Military Body Fat Calculator and my results were pretty similar to the output I received. However the Bailey Body Fat test was different by 5%.

Not telling anyone what to do or believe just sharing my experience.

thanks for this topic! it has been super informative.
I did the calculators on Fat2Fit and got 1414 as my BMR.
Add in moderate activity, I get 2083. What?!
I doubt I will eat that much but I will up my calorie intake. MFP has me at 1200 and I am constantly famished.
I'm starting c25k next week and started weight training so more calories are needed

bump

Bump to save in My Topics.

I think I got it. Its really simple if you don't read too much into it!
BF%: 45.5% (GROSS!)
K-M's BMR: 1430
Lightly active calorie goal: 1966
Moderately active: 2217

Me: 198lbs, 5'4", 24 years old, goal weight of 135lbs.
So those numbers all seem correct, and the logic behind it does make sense. I'm barely losing anything with what I was doing, so increasing calories was my next idea.

However, I have a question that I didn't see answered anywhere.

I am exclusively breastfeeding a baby. Right now I have it set on my food diary to subtract 500 calories per day (that's about how many calories you burn to produce milk), so I eat an extra 500 calories per day to keep my milk supply going. I was netting 1200 per day, so eating 1700 per day. None of these calculators make an allowance for breastfeeding... Do I continue to add an extra 500 calories per day to make an allowance for the breastfeeding? So right now I consider myself lightly active... instead of eating 1966 cals per day, should I be aiming for 2466? (Man that seems like a lot! I've been eating in the 1500-1800 range for so long that I'm going to struggle to intake that many at first lol)

That looks correct to me! But you don't have to start off with that many calories. You can do it gradually.

bump

I've read and re-read this post many times and I'm finally going to stop lurking and say thank-you! I've been gradually increasing my calories and as long as I've measured my waist in the right place these are my numbers -

Female, 42, current weight 139lbs, goal 126lbs

Body fat percentage 36% ( I don't like that number and prefer the one that my scales tell me - 27% - but there you go!)

Katch-McArdle BMR 1244

Activity Level Daily Calories
Sedentary (little or no exercise, desk job) 1568
Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 1797
Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 2026

I tend to do 5 to 6 days of cardio burning an average of 300 cals per day with 3 dumbell sessions thrown in (not very heavy, but heavy enough for me)

Since this thread started I've been keeping a record of my calories eaten and have gradually increased from an average intake of 1300 a day to an average of 1700 a day by using the MFP method and eating back calories. As luck would have it last week at just over 1700 I lost 3/4lb after 2 weeks of 1/2lb losses at 1650 cals! I'm finally ready to go with just setting my daily goal as one number and not eating back calories. You've convinced me )

As of yesterday I've set my goal at 1800. I've a feeling that it should be around the 2000 mark and may well use the extra 200 as a buffer on the odd day. When it says you can drop your intake by 200-300 cals as you get nearer to your goal - how near do 'they' mean? Or do you just wait until the loss stalls? I'm happy with a 1/2 lb loss a week so I'm not in a rush to decrease tbh.

Am I correct in thinking that I shouldn't net below 1444 (BMR + 200) but otherwise just stick to 1800? I'll still be logging my exercise just for my info but only looking at my goal cals for the day and net if they fall below the 1444.

Ok I think I got everything down that I wanted to say/ask I guess I just want someone to tell me I have it right and to just grow up, put the blumming calculator/spreadsheet away, trust myself and go with it

Female, 42, current weight 139lbs, goal 126lbs

Body fat percentage 36% ( I don't like that number and prefer the one that my scales tell me - 27% - but there you go!)

Katch-McArdle BMR 1244

Activity Level Daily Calories
Sedentary (little or no exercise, desk job) 1568
Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 1797
Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 2026

I tend to do 5 to 6 days of cardio burning an average of 300 cals per day with 3 dumbell sessions thrown in (not very heavy, but heavy enough for me)

Since this thread started I've been keeping a record of my calories eaten and have gradually increased from an average intake of 1300 a day to an average of 1700 a day by using the MFP method and eating back calories. As luck would have it last week at just over 1700 I lost 3/4lb after 2 weeks of 1/2lb losses at 1650 cals! I'm finally ready to go with just setting my daily goal as one number and not eating back calories. You've convinced me )

As of yesterday I've set my goal at 1800. I've a feeling that it should be around the 2000 mark and may well use the extra 200 as a buffer on the odd day. When it says you can drop your intake by 200-300 cals as you get nearer to your goal - how near do 'they' mean? Or do you just wait until the loss stalls? I'm happy with a 1/2 lb loss a week so I'm not in a rush to decrease tbh.

Am I correct in thinking that I shouldn't net below 1444 (BMR + 200) but otherwise just stick to 1800? I'll still be logging my exercise just for my info but only looking at my goal cals for the day and net if they fall below the 1444.

So you increase calories a little, lose a tad more than normal, the math (which is still underestimated) show you should really eat more, to lose even more.

Why not go for it? You've proved it can work. And working out that often you really are at higher level. Perhaps 1900.

If you have a few rest days, and of course still eat the same level, it's not bad if a day or two you get close to net BMR, those other days balance it out.

Near goal weight means final 5.

Also, since you are basing this on LBM BMR calc, re-measure every 5lbs loss and recalc, and adjust the goal if needed, because you hope your LBM goes up and BF% goes down, now that you are feeding the workouts.

Thanks for posting this. You started a very interesting and informative thread!

bump because I keep losing this thread :P

I have been eating using this method for 2 weeks now. Like everyone else my weigh and body fat t has been up and down a small amount a lot over those 2 weeks. I know I have to stick with it and see how I get on.

I really feel like reducing my calories by 100 per day in the next few weeks if I don't see some movement.

All over the Forum, Heybales is sharing his exceptional knowledge !!!

We should all be very grateful for his kindness, and let him know how much we value his recommendations ...

Thank you both. I'm a problem solver. Now where's that wrench at....