Help with calorie needs confusion!
MelanieAG05
Posts: 359 Member
I have been reading the forums a lot recently and have gotten myself confused with my calorific goals as there are so many different calculations so i wondered if anyone could shed some light...........this may also helps others as well!
My BMR is 1342 (Katch McCardle) and I weigh 163lbs (I am 5'3, female, 39 years old).
I work out 5-6 days per week which depends on my husbands rota and childcare etc. I run 5km 3 x per week (will soon be increasing the distance gradually up to 10km for a race in Sept). I do strength training (kettlebells mostly) 2 x per week and go cycling a couple of times. Some days I am doing more than one of these activities. My average calorie burn in a week through exercise is about 2500 cals. I consider myself moderately active for the purposes of some calculations (except MFP of course).
Here are some of the calculations I have done:
MFP - says I should NET 1480 cals to lose half a pound per week or 1230 to lose one pound per week. This is based on sedentary as have a desk job and this is what I currently use (1480 cals and try to NET 1300 which is close to BMR)
Fat2fit radio - says I should eat 2134 for moderately active (and obviously not eat exercise cals)
TDEE - moderately active using calculation of BMR x 1.55 is 2080 which is maintenance, take 500 off for deficit would be 1580 (and not eat exercise cals??)
Another calculation I recently read is that we should eat no less than BMR * 10 which for me would be 1630 (not sure if this is NET or not)
Any suggestions/advice in relation to my figures would be really helpful as I have hit a plateau. I am losing inches (8.5 since Oct 2011) but not a great deal of weight (only 5lbs in 3 months).
I eat healthily most of the time (80%) and log everything I eat and drink.
Sorry if this is a bit of a ramble but it probably shows my confusion!
Thanks in advance!
Mel x
My BMR is 1342 (Katch McCardle) and I weigh 163lbs (I am 5'3, female, 39 years old).
I work out 5-6 days per week which depends on my husbands rota and childcare etc. I run 5km 3 x per week (will soon be increasing the distance gradually up to 10km for a race in Sept). I do strength training (kettlebells mostly) 2 x per week and go cycling a couple of times. Some days I am doing more than one of these activities. My average calorie burn in a week through exercise is about 2500 cals. I consider myself moderately active for the purposes of some calculations (except MFP of course).
Here are some of the calculations I have done:
MFP - says I should NET 1480 cals to lose half a pound per week or 1230 to lose one pound per week. This is based on sedentary as have a desk job and this is what I currently use (1480 cals and try to NET 1300 which is close to BMR)
Fat2fit radio - says I should eat 2134 for moderately active (and obviously not eat exercise cals)
TDEE - moderately active using calculation of BMR x 1.55 is 2080 which is maintenance, take 500 off for deficit would be 1580 (and not eat exercise cals??)
Another calculation I recently read is that we should eat no less than BMR * 10 which for me would be 1630 (not sure if this is NET or not)
Any suggestions/advice in relation to my figures would be really helpful as I have hit a plateau. I am losing inches (8.5 since Oct 2011) but not a great deal of weight (only 5lbs in 3 months).
I eat healthily most of the time (80%) and log everything I eat and drink.
Sorry if this is a bit of a ramble but it probably shows my confusion!
Thanks in advance!
Mel x
0
Replies
-
Will be interested to read any informative replies you get as I am also confused.0
-
anyone???0
-
Oops missed the answer already in your post
0 -
Can you open up your diary for public viewing?0
-
I think I read you should eat no less than BMR + 200. But I might be making that up - if you search the forums for "in place of a roadmap" that's a very helpful post Sorry I can't be more help myself - I'm still working through the calculations, but I've been eating my TDEE - 500 and I naturally seem to cycle my calories (higher at some points of the week and lower at others) and then just looking at the weekly sums. Seems to be working here, but for how long, who knows! 0
-
Try this group...read the stickies.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/3817-eat-more-to-weigh-less0 -
Is it possible you are overestimating calorie burns during your exercise? Some people try to eat back no more than 50% of what the database estimates most days.0
-
I have been reading the forums a lot recently and have gotten myself confused with my calorific goals as there are so many different calculations so i wondered if anyone could shed some light...........this may also helps others as well!
My BMR is 1342 (Katch McCardle) and I weigh 163lbs (I am 5'3, female, 39 years old).
I work out 5-6 days per week which depends on my husbands rota and childcare etc. I run 5km 3 x per week (will soon be increasing the distance gradually up to 10km for a race in Sept). I do strength training (kettlebells mostly) 2 x per week and go cycling a couple of times. Some days I am doing more than one of these activities. My average calorie burn in a week through exercise is about 2500 cals. I consider myself moderately active for the purposes of some calculations (except MFP of course).
Here are some of the calculations I have done:
MFP - says I should NET 1480 cals to lose half a pound per week or 1230 to lose one pound per week. This is based on sedentary as have a desk job and this is what I currently use (1480 cals and try to NET 1300 which is close to BMR)
Fat2fit radio - says I should eat 2134 for moderately active (and obviously not eat exercise cals)
TDEE - moderately active using calculation of BMR x 1.55 is 2080 which is maintenance, take 500 off for deficit would be 1580 (and not eat exercise cals??)
Another calculation I recently read is that we should eat no less than BMR * 10 which for me would be 1630 (not sure if this is NET or not)
Any suggestions/advice in relation to my figures would be really helpful as I have hit a plateau. I am losing inches (8.5 since Oct 2011) but not a great deal of weight (only 5lbs in 3 months).
I eat healthily most of the time (80%) and log everything I eat and drink.
Sorry if this is a bit of a ramble but it probably shows my confusion!
Thanks in advance!
Mel x
Take your TDEE 2134 and deduct 20% which leaves you with 1707, this is what you should aim to eat every day, if your exercise burns more than 365 cals then you should try and eat back to NET at or above your BMR.
Jen x0 -
I did the samething over the weekend and I think you are on track. I went to fat2fit.com.
My BMR is 1365 and my TDEE is 1365X1.55= 2115 ( -500 cal. deficit) making my net cal intake 1615 cal per day. I sometimes eat back exerice cal, but not all. I try no to net less them my BMR.
I manually set my MFP cal goal at 1550 which is somewhere between based on execise activity. ( 1365 X 1.375 =1876 minus 500 cal deficit = 1376) or
(1365 X 1.55= 2115 minus 500 cal deficit =1615)
Now the question is how many cal to eat 1376 or 1615. So I went in between and stay active. I exercise 4 days a week for about 45 min each. I do most interval training getting both cardio and strength.0 -
Hi, so ultimately what you want is to do tdee minus 500. Given the information above I think that mfp is overestimating your burns and you are actually eating at maintenance. Try lowering net calories by 200. I know I can't lose 0.5 lb per week, I lose nothing if I don't have at least a 500 cal deficit (or perhaps what I lose is masked by water weight).
Conventional wisdom is that you shouldn't eat below your bmr. So in your case, you could just set mfp to your bmr and let your deficit be made from daily activity. If that low leaves you hungry, listen to your body and up it 100-2000 -
Is it possible you are overestimating calorie burns during your exercise? Some people try to eat back no more than 50% of what the database estimates most days.
I use an HRM so as accurate as can be!0 -
Bump for later.0
-
Conventional wisdom is that you shouldn't eat below your bmr. So in your case, you could just set mfp to your bmr and let your deficit be made from daily activity. If that low leaves you hungry, listen to your body and up it 100-200
You shouldn't eat below your BMR! Your BMR is what your body needs just to function without adding in any exercise etc... You need to FUEL your body to make it function properly, it is better and healthier to eat just below your maintainance and lose weight slow and steady than to lose quickly from going hungry x0 -
Hi, so ultimately what you want is to do tdee minus 500. Given the information above I think that mfp is overestimating your burns and you are actually eating at maintenance. Try lowering net calories by 200. I know I can't lose 0.5 lb per week, I lose nothing if I don't have at least a 500 cal deficit (or perhaps what I lose is masked by water weight).
Conventional wisdom is that you shouldn't eat below your bmr. So in your case, you could just set mfp to your bmr and let your deficit be made from daily activity. If that low leaves you hungry, listen to your body and up it 100-200
I use an HRM so no chance of overestimating calorie burn.........0 -
Is it possible you are overestimating calorie burns during your exercise? Some people try to eat back no more than 50% of what the database estimates most days.
This is so true!
I was logging the calorie burned on the elliptical(average about 400-500 per workout.
Then I started using the new balance HRM, average burn 300n- 400. I didn't like it, so i exchanged it for the Polar FT4 HRM, which shows my average burn as 175-250. That's 1/2 of what my elliptical is showing!!! ((Today HRM 229 cal, elliptical readout was over 500 cal.)) This is exactly why I was not losing for 3 months.
What kind? My New Balance was over estimating calorie burn.
I use an HRM so no chance of overestimating calorie burn.........0 -
I'm definitely not an expert but your numbers are similar to mine. From what I've read, the MFP suggestion is definitely too low and if I were recommending this site to anyone else, the first thing I would tell them is to use numbers from somewhere else.
I was examining the F2F numbers pretty closely last week and found that F2F does NOT use the Katch McArdle BMR in their calorie calculations, no matter what current/goal weight or BF % you enter. They use Harris Benedict which is likely higher and thus resulting in the larger number than your own BMR * 1.55 calculation. Which one is better -- I don't know.... Also, I realized that their daily calorie calculation for my goal weight was SO close to my current weight daily maintenance (I'm 10-15 pounds away) that if I eat at F2F numbers, it will take seven forevers to reach my goal -- if I'm even accurate enough each day to maintain the small deficit there is to get there. So, that's when I realized that their recommendation to take an extra 200-300 calories off to speed up weight loss may be needed the closer you get.0 -
Is it possible you are overestimating calorie burns during your exercise? Some people try to eat back no more than 50% of what the database estimates most days.
This is so true!
I was logging the calorie burned on the elliptical(average about 400-500 per workout.
Then I started using the new balance HRM, average burn 300n- 400. I didn't like it, so i exchanged it for the Polar FT4 HRM, which shows my average burn as 175-250. That's 1/2 of what my elliptical is showing!!! ((Today HRM 229 cal, elliptical readout was over 500 cal.)) This is exactly why I was not losing for 3 months.
What kind? My New Balance was over estimating calorie burn.
I use an HRM so no chance of overestimating calorie burn.........
Polar FT7! MFP estimated my swimming burn as 307 for 30 mins of breastroke when it is actually only about 160! Crazy eh!0 -
Thanks very much for all the responses so far!!
My TDEE I have worked out is as follows:
Sedentary = 1665
Lightly Active = 1908
Moderately active = 2151
Less 20% is anywhere between 1332 and 1720 so somewhere in the middle seems a sensible place to set my goal - say 1500 cals - and then only eat back exercise cals on workout days if NET is below my BMR 1388.......0 -
If it helps....
I'm 5' 2.5" 156.... 41years old
MFP set me at 1200 net calories to lose 0.9* of a pound per week.
*I actually chose the lose 1 pound option, but it won't set me to lose an entire pound because that would put me under 1200 net.0 -
Thanks very much for all the responses so far!!
My TDEE I have worked out is as follows:
Sedentary = 1665
Lightly Active = 1908
Moderately active = 2151
Less 20% is anywhere between 1332 and 1720 so somewhere in the middle seems a sensible place to set my goal - say 1500 cals - and then only eat back exercise cals on workout days if NET is below my BMR 1388.......
How often do you workout?! If it is 3-5 times a day then you are moderately active, to be sedentary you would work an office desk job and not workout at all, not even a walk, it is just every day stuff you would do! I would go for moderately active minus 20% 1720 then aim to eat that every day. the only reason you will need to eat back any calories is if your NET goes below your BMR x0 -
If it helps....
I'm 5' 2.5" 156.... 41years old
MFP set me at 1200 net calories to lose 0.9* of a pound per week.
*I actually chose the lose 1 pound option, but it won't set me to lose an entire pound because that would put me under 1200 net.
I personally think 1,200 cals is far too low! I am just over 5ft 2 and started at 157lbs (not 147.7lb) eating that low made me irritable, lethargic, hungry just not nice at all. I was also at a standstill with my wieghtloss for over 3 months until I upped my cals! I have now lost 2.6lbs AND lost nearly 15inches in total since upping my cals x 0 -
bump0
-
How often do you workout?! If it is 3-5 times a day then you are moderately active, to be sedentary you would work an office desk job and not workout at all, not even a walk, it is just every day stuff you would do! I would go for moderately active minus 20% 1720 then aim to eat that every day. the only reason you will need to eat back any calories is if your NET goes below your BMR x
Thanks! You are starting to convince me this is the right thing to do.....what is your rate of weight loss using this method? I ideally want to lose another 10lbs before my summer hols which is 21st July!
Sorry - meant to say that I work out 5-6 times a week - running/kettlebell classes/weights at the gym etc0 -
How often do you workout?! If it is 3-5 times a day then you are moderately active, to be sedentary you would work an office desk job and not workout at all, not even a walk, it is just every day stuff you would do! I would go for moderately active minus 20% 1720 then aim to eat that every day. the only reason you will need to eat back any calories is if your NET goes below your BMR x
Thanks! You are starting to convince me this is the right thing to do.....what is your rate of weight loss using this method? I ideally want to lose another 10lbs before my summer hols which is 21st July!
Sorry - meant to say that I work out 5-6 times a week - running/kettlebell classes/weights at the gym etc
Your def moderately active then (I am too and I workout 5/6 times aweek) I have lost 2.6lbs in about 4 weeks BUT before anybody goes "that's not a lot" I have also lost nearly 15 inches!!! (my ticker is my side loss during those 4 weeks) And only we see the scale number, everybody else sees the body! Every 10lbs you do lose you readjust your daily allowance if you stop losing! I think 10lbs in just under 2 months is pretty doable! I woud like to lose 8-14lbs between now and August 7th BUT if I don't as long as my muscle defintion is even better and inches are decreasing I don't care if I stay this weight lol x
Give upping your cals to what I said a go for a month, take measurements at the start and end. And just see how you get on x0 -
Conventional wisdom is that you shouldn't eat below your bmr. So in your case, you could just set mfp to your bmr and let your deficit be made from daily activity. If that low leaves you hungry, listen to your body and up it 100-200
You shouldn't eat below your BMR! Your BMR is what your body needs just to function without adding in any exercise etc... You need to FUEL your body to make it function properly, it is better and healthier to eat just below your maintainance and lose weight slow and steady than to lose quickly from going hungry x
That is a fine example of bro science. Just because people say it a lot, doesn't mean that it is true. Peer reviewed literature that I've read says that pretty much if you cut calories really low, you lose more muscle than a less drastic cut and your metabolism temporarily slows. The whole point of a calorie deficit is that you are giving your body too few calories from food and forcing it to metabolize fatty acids for energy. If anyone can find research that says bmr is a magic number you can't eat below, I'd love to read it.
That said, I told the op to eat at bmr, not below it. So please read my post before you freak out.0 -
Conventional wisdom is that you shouldn't eat below your bmr. So in your case, you could just set mfp to your bmr and let your deficit be made from daily activity. If that low leaves you hungry, listen to your body and up it 100-200
You shouldn't eat below your BMR! Your BMR is what your body needs just to function without adding in any exercise etc... You need to FUEL your body to make it function properly, it is better and healthier to eat just below your maintainance and lose weight slow and steady than to lose quickly from going hungry x
That is a fine example of bro science. Just because people say it a lot, doesn't mean that it is true. Peer reviewed literature that I've read says that pretty much if you cut calories really low, you lose more muscle than a less drastic cut and your metabolism temporarily slows. The whole point of a calorie deficit is that you are giving your body too few calories from food and forcing it to metabolize fatty acids for energy. If anyone can find research that says bmr is a magic number you can't eat below, I'd love to read it.
That said, I told the op to eat at bmr, not below it. So please read my post before you freak out.
There's a thread called in place of a road map plus a group called women who eat more or something like that! That can explain it better! May of read your post wrong, my opinion is to NET at or above your BMR not just eat it, if that makes sense?!0 -
Thanks very much for all the responses so far!!
My TDEE I have worked out is as follows:
Sedentary = 1665
Lightly Active = 1908
Moderately active = 2151
Less 20% is anywhere between 1332 and 1720 so somewhere in the middle seems a sensible place to set my goal - say 1500 cals - and then only eat back exercise cals on workout days if NET is below my BMR 1388.......
THATS WHAT I DID!!!! I took the number somewhere in between at 1495 cals and will only eat back enough exercise cals to net my BMR of 1365. Good luck0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions