[dek6]

I have been interested in trying to Count Calories. But Im not exactly sure what is involved. I mean is it as easy as setting a certain amount of calories and eating that amount. If anyone can give me some tips I would really appreciate it. Thank

[sockmonkey70]

At first, for me, it was that easy. I just set a certain amount of calories, and stuck to it. Then, I started noticing my fat and protein intake. I tried to incorporate more protein, and 30% fat or less. Just try to eat as healthy as you can

You can eat twice at a fast food joint one day, or you can eat 5-6 small, healthy meals in the same amount of calories. I now try to get the most food out of my calories.

[Robin41]

Sockmonkey is right. You can start out with the basics, a simple caloric goal for the day, and then start incorporating more variables like fat or protein percentages. Lots of us use Fitday to help us with this.

It really does become like spending money. Personally, I like to get the most food I can out of my daily total. This usually means eating more vegis and lean protein and less fat and crap. Treats just become so expensive calorie-wise that I'm not willing to pay that big a price for them. I really feel like it encourages making good choices.

[bargoo]

Daphne basically it is as easy as you say , but you will get more bang for your buck if your calorie count is used for healthy foods just as Mary said.

[Idealmuse]

Dek -

That's pretty much it.

Although, it can be as complex as you want to make it. In my case I figure out what a 1000 calorie deficit is which is supposed to aim for a 2lb loss a week. (or -7000 calories a week) Right now I work at home and besides my exercise I don't move around a lot so my baseline is like 1300 minimum. That being said thats not a lot of calories so I "eat back" my exercise calories so I end up eatting about 1500-1800 or so a day depending on how many calories I burned via exercise.

It sounds complex, but I use an online website that does all the math for me it's called myfooddiary.com which I think is similar to fitday etc but I think it's more user friendly (and also 9 bucks a month! Eep!)

But really all you have to do Is pick a calorie level that works for you where your losing but not too quickly.

[rockinrobin]

I love calorie counting. It's my way of portion control. Just saying I was going to eat healthier and cut back didn't do it for me. I needed the accountability of calorie counting.

I like getting the most bang for my buck so to speak. I eat low fat proteins and lots of veggies. This is how I get to eat often, every 2 hours or so. That is KEY for me.

When eating only X amount of calories, you CAN really eat whatever you want to create that deficit. But I like to use those calories wisely. The protein and the fiber helps keep me full longer, helping me to stay on plan. All the vitamins and minerals found in natural foods fuels my body with the best stuff as opposed to say fast food. I figure why feed my body junk when I can be feeding it the cream of the crop? Yes, I want to lose weight, but I also want to be healthy. I want low cholesterol, I want to lower my risks of certain cancers, I want to keep my colon in good shape, I want thick hair, strong nails, strong bones and muscles, healthy eyes, good sugar levels - I want it all.

It does take a little getting used to. But so what. It's worth the effort. I have made this all a "hobby" of mine so to speak. I love everything about it. It's the best possible hobby I can think of. It's got some great bonuses attached to it.

Once you get the hang of it, it requires very little effort. I already know the calorie counts for just about everything I am eating. I tally it all up right in my head. I didn't start out that way, but that's the point where I'm at now. I can definitely do this for the rest of my life.

I also exercise. But I most certainly do not add those burned calories back into my day. This is what works for ME. Those to me are a total bonus and helps to create more of a deficit. I keep my calories and my exercise totally separate. I eat what I eat, I burn what I burn. I don't agonize that if I overate for the day, say an extra bowl of cereal and it was 200 calories, that I should therefore walk for an extra hour or so. I try to keep the slip ups to a minimum and don't fret over it.

I have also never set myself any weekly goals. I track what I eat, I do my exercise and whatever I lose, I lose. A lot of it is trial and error. If I don't like the results I am getting I cut back a little more the following week or add in some more exercise.

Why not check out Fitday.com or thedailyplate.com? The only thing is, I find that all of those places really overestimate the amount of calories one should be eating and the calories burned through exercise and everyday life. I never, ever use the activity portion of any of those sights. They are really inaccurate. I use them strictly for counting calories.

I'm excited for you. Calorie counting is IMO the best way to lose and then maintain weight. Good luck to you.

[NickiB68]

Daphne ~ I have had more success counting calories than anything else I've tried. Browse around online, there are many sites that provide this service. If you can, go see a nutritionist. They can help you with calorie goals and a good combination of your daily protein/carbs/fat intake.

[Idealmuse]

I'm not knockng what R. Said because everybody does things a little differently and not everyone eats back exercise calories... It definately worked for her!

But the one thing you might want to pay attention to if your not eatting exercise calories back is your NET calories. For example if you only eat 1200 and you exercise 500 then your net calories is 700. If you exercise a lot you need more fuel like a car needs more if it goes farther.

Pay attention to your body. If you feel lightheaded or NEED more... then make sure you be nice to your body. It took me a few months to convince myself eatting them all back was okay, but since your technically not really supposed to aim for more then 2lbs loss a week (or 3lbs if your very heavy I hear) then you don't need a giant deficit.

Shes right activity is often over estimated so keep that in mind too. HRM (Heart Rate Monitors) help you estimate this better.

[rockinrobin]

Originally Posted by Idealmuse

But the one thing you might want to pay attention to if your not eatting exercise calories back is your NET calories. For example if you only eat 1200 and you exercise 500 then your net calories is 700. If you exercise a lot you need more fuel like a car needs more if it goes farther.

I really am not meaning to be argumentative with you - at all. But once you've eaten 1200 calories, you can't erase that. You still have reaped all the nutrients from those 1200 calories. And all the energy provided by it. Yes you can burn more calories through exercise, but again, that doesn't negate the FOOD that you've eaten and all it provides for you.

There is no way on this earth to accurately know for sure, for sure just how many calories you are burning - that's why I keep them separate. We burn plenty more then 500 calories a day. We burn calories brushing our teeth, washing the dishes, sleeping, etc. If we were to tally in all those factors and then ADD them into our day, well I don't even want to go there.

I think basically we really ARE doing the same thing. We're just calling it different things. We are both exercising to create MORE of a deficit then our every day things.

[Idealmuse]

Robin - I wasn't trying to argue I was trying to include a different perspective I respect your success and what you've done to get there.

But she's not going to want to eat 1200 calories and then train for a marathon. If you exercise a lot you just need more energy... maybe you can do it for a day or two but eventually your bodys going to get really tired from lack of proper fuel.

I'll leave it at that because I don't claim to be a nutritionist or metabolic scientist.

I understand the idea of eatting back what your exercise sounds counter intuitive. I don't always eat back it all normally about half... sometimes all. The theory is that you eat the most you can eat because you'll need to eat less as you lose weight and you want to leave some wiggle room.

[Jasmine31]

I don't want to argue with anyone here either. I understand what you are both saying and it both makes sense, HOWEVER, I USED to think about...what about plateauing? What if I try 1400 cals a day(and walk 25 miles a week) and what if I do lose pretty good but as I get lower, then do i HAVE to lower to see more results? That always kind of plagues me. I CAN and have lost on a 1700 cal a day average, when I stick to it(with the walking I mentioned) I can lose 2 a week.

But you know what? Look at Robin's success!!! Do the math. She has lost 155 total but 143 of that was in 40 weeks!!!! That is 3.575 pounds a week! And not just 1 week, not for 2 weeks, not even for two months! Consistently for 9 months!!!!! Where is this dreaded "plateau" at??

I tell you where it is, its NOT there.

[Jasmine31]

I have since changed my mind from my earlier thinking patterns and am going to give 1400 a day for 7 days a shot. And if for some reason I feel I absolutely HAVE to have a few extra 100 cals in a certain day, what is the worse that can happen? I hit 1700 and lose JUST the 2 pounds a week? Well that is fine too.

[Idealmuse]

I totally understand what you're both saying. It's just for me sticking to this long term it's a lot easier when my limit isn't 1200 you know? On the days I don't exercise I eat 1300 and that's hard for me to stick to! For those of you who do... mad props!!

I guess I'm just not in it for the quickest way possible. I want to give my body time to adjust, and I want to be able to substain this forever and for me this is the easiest way and I just wanted to share that with the original poster.

Anyway Onward!

[Jen415]

I hadn't thought of that (lowering calories once you reach a certain weight). I think that might be part of some folks' plateaus. I know when I reach 299 very soon, I will have to make some adjustments!

[rockinrobin]

Ideal, don't worry, I know no one's looking to argue here.

I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that anyone SHOULD eat only 1200 calories to start out with. I picked that number in particular because I believe that was the number that you used as an example. I would DEFINITELY start out a higher number. DEFINITELY.

Lowering calorie intake as we go along the journey is something that is going to have to happen - usually. I think it's best to stay at a certain number until you are no longer losing and then lower it by a hundred calories or so. The smaller and lighter we are, the less calories we require - hence we need to lower them.