This may seem like an obvious statement, but I think it's something I missed in the past when I tried to lose weight: You have to keep scaling back your calorie intake as you lose weight in order to continue losing at the same rate! In the past, I would start off losing weight pretty quickly, but then it would slow down. I would wonder why since I was still eating at the same calorie level! Well, duh! I was skinnier and didn't need as many calories! So I've put together a little table to remind myself to scale back calories. Here's my estimate of how I'm going to have to change my calorie intake as I lose weight to continue losing. I just wanted to post this in case someone else out there is overlooking this like I was! I've already started reducing calories from 1800 (when I started) down to 1700. It's going to be really hard when I get close to goal and have to eat 1500 calories to continue losing at the same rate! The good news is that once I'm at goal (125) I'll be able to bump my calorie intake back up to 1900 calories and maintain the loss.
Sometimes a little chart reminder like this helps a LOT. It might get a little hard for a while, but like you said, once you are at GW, you can maintain at a higher caloric intake. Keep up the good work!
Yes, that's absolutely true--and it also explains why those with less weight to lose have a harder time.
I tried that calculator, but it gave me a BMR value that's too high, compared to what I get on an impedence machine or with FitDay's calculation. I've found that the lower value gives me more consistent results in my estimates.
wow....at 154, i am eating around 1200 calories. I tend to lose 5 pounds a month. I wonder if that means, the closer i get to 130-120...if i am going to have to cut down even further???? I know i can get thru a day on only 900-1000 calories, but wow...i wonder.....
Yeah, I went to that site, but I know it's off for me, too. It says I burn 3,158 calories a day with a BMR of 1,616. FitDay says my BMR is 1,534 and I set my activity level to "sedentary/bed bound" because that seems to be the most accurate calculation (my job, in reality, is "seated work - some movement"). I WISH I was losing weight at a rate that high!
okay...after doing all of the multiplying, adding, subtracting...blah, blah, blah....it says that i could lose one pound a week on 1700 calories a week. I wonder how true that could be. I sometimes wonder if i am eating too little at 1200 a day, that if i did up my calories, i might lose more than 1 pound a week. But since i know i can lose up to 5 pounds a month on 1200 calories, i'm too afraid to try to up my calories any. If i go over 1200, i just eat less on another day.
Guys, don't spend too much time fretting about metabolic calculators. The data they're based on is studies of (usually) normal weight college students. And they're giving you the average number of daily calories, though there's usually an 800 calorie range that daily calories fall in for people of the same weight, height, and gender. That's a pretty big margin of error!
But that's why calculators are all over the place and give such different results. No one can tell what YOUR daily calorie needs are unless they take you and lock in you in a lab for a week. IMO, calculators will only leave you frustrated when your body doesn't follow "the rules".
The best way to figure out your own unique calorie needs is to track everything that goes in your mouth for several weeks and see what happens. If your weight stays the same for a week, you've discovered your maintenance calories. If you lose a pound, you know you've created approximately a 3500 calorie deficit that week. If you gain, well, you know you've eating more than your maintenance calories. Keep tracking over time and you'll know precisely how YOUR body reacts to different calorie levels.
Man, I don't look forward to going down on my calories. I don't want to have to eat a lot of steamed veggies and salads. Right now, I can find things to make that keep me within the 1700-2000 cal range. Thanks for the info...it's nice to see how someone does the lowering of the cals.
You also have to remember that if you're working out, you're also gaining muscle which will rev-up your metabolism. So it could be, that if you're not losing anymore and working out, that you may actually need to INCREASE your calories to keep on losing.
You know, I just don't believe the notion that there are situations where you increase your calories to lose more weight. I've heard a lot of people claim that - but I've also looked at a lot of scientific studies, and not a single one has supported that idea. Every one I've looked at has shown that fewer calories = weight loss and more calories = weight gain. I'm not saying you're wrong or that it's impossible - just that I've never seen it scientifically validated. So until I have evidence that it might be true, I'll stick with decreasing calories to lose weight.
I'm not saying you're wrong or that it's impossible - just that I've never seen it scientifically validated. So until I have evidence that it might be true, I'll stick with decreasing calories to lose weight.
Robin, I agree with you about that. But I do want everyone to keep in mind that as you become more fit and add some muscle mass, you may not always have to drop your calorie consumption in order to keep losing.
Is there an old saying about borrowing trouble from the future? I agree with Meg (who wouldn't? she's awesome!) You'll soon see if you need to drop cals or not.
That's a great point about exercise. I've been exercising the same amount for so long I sometimes forget I could add some to burn more calories. As I get close to goal, eating 1600 and jogging an extra mile a day sounds a lot more doable. Thanks for reminding me!
Here's the perfect place for an intensity plug
I was walking over an hour and toying with weights. There is just not time for that everyday! The fitness guru's here at 3FC talked to me about intensity. I glazed over ... how???
I got a heart rate monitor! It's fun and motivational. You can go for a walk or Baby you can walk!