3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community - Calories Needed Per Day?? Is This Right?

3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community (https://www.3fatchicks.com/forum/)

- Nutrition and Labeling (https://www.3fatchicks.com/forum/nutrition-labeling-175/)

- - Calories Needed Per Day?? Is This Right? (https://www.3fatchicks.com/forum/nutrition-labeling/63891-calories-needed-per-day-right.html)

Calories Needed Per Day?? Is This Right?

Ok Im thinking of starting to track my calories, I'm 19, 5'4, 213lbs, I used http://www.calorie-count.com and used a calculator there to figure out calorie needs to lose weight and calories burned per day, it said that in order for me to reach a goal of 150lbs I should consume 1512 calories/day, and that I burn 2144 calories/day with a sedentary lifestyle at my weight/height etc. That makes a difference of 632 calories, so if I consume 1512 calories/day and burn 2144, will I be burning off 632 calories/day? Then even more if I add exercise daily? Does around 1500 calories/day seem right? Is it enough?

There are a few variables but yes, essentially, you'd be only taking in 1500 and using 2144 just by being yourself. The 632 is often called a calorie deficit. In theory, 3500 calories make a pound so at those recommendations, you'd have a deficit of 4424 calories a week. Or a loss of about (4424/3500=1.264) 1.264 pounds.
If you exercise, you'll be using more than 2144 making a bigger calorie deficit and should lose faster.
1500 calories sounds very reasonable for your height.
Keep in mind that there are some variables here. The most important of which is your honesty with yourself. To accurately measure calorie intake you need to be true to yourself. I used to lick peanutbutter off a spoon and guess that it was about a teaspoonful. :lol: It was more like a 1/4 of a cupful! What I thought of as a serving of frosted flakes was actually three servings!
And honesty with your activities. I thought I was moderately active when I could sit at a computer for 8 or 9 hours a day. That's darned near bed-ridden!

Your question here shows me that you are intelligent and are carefully thinking out this fitness thing. You seem to be serious and to know what you want. I applaud you.
You keep reading and keep asking questions. I have a good and promising feeling about you.

Thanks so much Susan!! I know what you mean about being honest with how much your eating, I was trying weight watchers before and when I first started out I was putting down 2 points for a whole bag of popcorn b/c I only guessed at how many cups were in a bag, until one day I saw on the bag that there was 6 cups in one bag, so it ended up benig 6 points a bag!! I will have to start watching my portions alot closer! :) As for exercise I want to try and do 30 minutes minimum of cardio activity 3-5 times per week, and I would like to do full body strength 2 times per week, after a while I start to up either how long I do it or how many days, or both, I will start out slow and work my way up! :) I hope I can do it this time, Ive tried numerous times before only to fail!

Try the exercise accountability thread in the fitness section. I find I'm more likely to exercise if I think someone is watching. Also go hang out with the Ladies Who Lift. They're at all stages of learning strength training and are very welcoming and knowledgeable.
When you think you can't do another day, read here at 3fc. It gets me going every time.
Hey ... did you post a HELLO in the Canadians thread? I think it's in Buddy Up!

LOL, I should not have clicked on that sight because I've confused myself now. Maybe I will stick with what I orginally read. So, I've been on other sites and they say I need 1850 calories to be able to digest food, blink, have any moblity, that sort of thing and that this weight will help me lose weight quickly. The same sites say that I could eat 2750 calories to maintain my weight. This site said I need 1563 to even lose weight...hummmmmm

You'll have to experiment some to figure out what really works for you, but I can say that I am losing well on 1550 calories/day (5'6", started at 263.5, now at 250.5). I don't think any suggestion of over 1800 calories per day to lose weight can really be accurate for the average woman.

LOL, I'm not the average woman...quite the contrary. Actually, I've been losing weight eating well over 2,000 calories a day. I think it all depends on how many calories you were eating in the first place and how much you are reducing. At least that's my guess. I mean, think about it. If someone was eating 3,100 calories a day and then dropped to eating 2,700 a day, they are going to lose weight. Their weight loss would be slower than if they dropped down to 2,000 calories a day, but they will still lose.

That's true UniversityPrincess. If you have been maintaining on 3100 calories per day, you will lose on 2000. Eat less move more.
This is also why very obese people can lose several pounds in their first couple of weeks. You can understand how much of a deficit you can create if you suddenly drop to 1500 calories and up your exercise.
But Olivia is right too. Very few women are maintaining on 3100 calories per day. I for one would be heading upward at an alarming rate :)

Yeah I read that you just have to figure out what your body needs to maintain its current weight, or what you have been maintaining on and then drop it by 500 calories a day to lose a pound a week. I calculated my BMR and got 1793.03 then I multiplied that by 1.2 for a sedentary lifestyle and it is 2151.66, so my body needs that many calories a day to maintain my current weight, so if I drop it to 1500/day thats a deficit of 651.66, so almost a pound and half a week, I think I calculated around 1.3lbs, and that is just with calorie reduction!! :) It is amazing what you find out when you read and do some math! lol

I know that I have probably been consuming around 2000 calories a day or more, so even though I was trying to eat healthy I see now why I wasn't losing weight, every little thing adds up, I tried to do 1500 calories yesterday and ended up around 2127 for the day! Not much of a deficit, so it is no wonder why Im not losing weight, I just need to get my little butt in gear and realize that ice cream and popcorn isn't worth it! To grab a peice of fruit instead if I am really hungry and not just bored! The ice cream is what really shot me up yesterday! WHOA! lol I never realized how calorie and fat full it was! lol

Anyway thank you all so much for replying to my topic, your advice has really helped me, and now that I know alot more about these calories and the fact that I was eating alot more per day than I thought (I thought I could never lose weight on 1500/day b/c I didnt think I was eating more than that!! I know now!) I can finally get started on once and for all *hopefully* losing this extra weight!

We had an interesting thread on this topic (how many calories needed per day to lose weight) in the Support Forum (see link)

Unfortunately, those formulas are just loose estimates at best; my personal trainer's main 'nutrition tip' to me was to reduce my regular daily caloric intake by 200-300 calories a day to lose weight (I was shooting for a five pound weight loss). Keep in mind though, that he was well aware that I've been reading up on this topic for awhile :lol:

Especially interesting in the above-linked thread was one of Meg's responses:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meg

[A] 1200 calorie diet worked really well for me and got me to my goal weight. As a matter of fact, the way I personally lost my weight fits right into Venuto’s book (though it was published after I lost my weight), which is why I often recommend it to my clients.

When I weighed 257 pounds, quite unscientifically I picked 1600 calories per day as a good place to start. As I lost weight, my body naturally needed fewer calories to support my size and so, whenever my weight loss stalled, I dropped my calories. I finished my year of weight loss at around 1200 calories -- probabaly for the last four or five months before goal. I knew that this was about as low as I should go, but also realized that 1200 calories were necessary to get those last stubborn pounds off.

I was well aware of the importance of maintaining my muscle mass and had my body fat % checked every four weeks to be sure that I was losing fat and not muscle. Happily, I added eight pounds of muscle that year, so not only was able to preserve my muscle mass but to increase it. At the same time, my body fat % dropped from 57% to 16%. So despite my calorie levels being in that dread 1200-1500 range for almost the entire year that I was losing weight, I consider my weight loss story to be a success (and I think Venuto would also!)

Most important to me is the fact that I’m going into the fourth year of maintaining my weight loss, so not only did I lose the 122 pounds, I’ve kept them off.

At 3FC, we value and appreciate the insights and perspectives of all our members. We all have so much to learn from each other! :) But it’s important to recognize that what works for one doesn’t necessarily work for another and that there are significant differences between us. For example, at 280 pounds, you weigh twice as much as I do. Naturally, your caloric needs are far higher than mine and what may be a ‘starvation’ or ‘deprivation’ diet for YOU is simply maintenance calories for me. And yet it might be exactly the right number for weight LOSS for another one of our members. So when you make blanket statements like '1200 calorie diets don't work' and 'you’ll lose muscle mass' or 'your weight loss will stop', you’re going to have people like me scratching their heads. Because a 1200 calorie diet DID in fact work very well for me (as well as others here), my weight loss DIDN'T stop, and I DIDN'T lose muscle mass.

It's wonderful that you've discovered a plan that's working so well for you. :) But try to keep in mind that not every member here weighs as much as you do, can eat the menus that you post, and lose at the same calorie levels that you do. And though the metabolic calculators you cite do work for some people, they don’t even get into the ballpark for others (they’re off by a good 50% for me). One thing you’ll discover over time is that there isn’t a whole lot of RIGHT and WRONG to weight loss – it’s more a process of finding out what will work well for us as individuals.

Meg also wrote a terrific article in the Maintainers Forum regarding those often quoted (and oft-incorrect IMO) metabolic calculators that can be found all over the World Wide Web...check it out...this is QUITE interesting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meg

I’m sure you’re all aware of metabolic calculators – they’re all over the Internet. With these calculators, you input your height, weight, age, and gender and they purportedly tell you how many calories you can eat to maintain your weight. From there, you can theoretically figure – supposedly with great scientific precision – how many calories you need to cut to lose weight. One of the best known examples of a metabolic calculator is the Harris-Benedict formula. We even have a Daily Calorie Needs Calculator here at 3FC. :)

Some people swear by the accuracy of metabolic calculators and say that they get great results from them. But not me – the ones I’ve tried have been off by up to 50% of what my real life experiences (four years of tracking my calories in Fitday) teach me. And I’ve often wondered why? Am I some kind of freak -- completely out of the norm? :dizzy: Or could it have something to do with my large weight loss? :?:

Well, I came across some interesting info about metabolic calculators this morning while taking a continuing education course about metabolism and weight loss that’s worth passing along. Part of the course analyzed the Harris-Benedict formula (and others) and discussed its flaws and why it’s not reliable for many people.

Here’s the history behind the HB formula: it’s based on a 1919 study done on 239 individuals – 136 males (average weight=142 /average BMI=21.7) and 103 females (average weight=124/average BMI=21.5). It’s no surprise that 86 years later, average BMIs are far higher among the general population: in 2002, the average weight of a woman was 164 and her BMI was 28. So the study is old (86 year-old studies are prehistoric in science) and it’s based on a small group with characteristics quite different than today’s general population.

The course went on to say that, perhaps as a result of these changes in the characteristics of the general population since 1919, the results obtained from using the HB formula today aren’t accurate for a significant number of people. It said that the HB formula is accurate (with a margin of error of +/- 10%) for only 69% of the non-obese population and 64% of the obese population. ("Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index (BMI) 1960-2002: United States,” prepared by CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics) In other words, the HB formula isn’t even within 10% of predicting the calorie needs for approximately 1/3 of the population.

Well, heck! Maybe I’m not a freak after all ( … or maybe I still am! :lol: ) I feel better knowing that there are a substantial number of other people who aren’t getting correct, real world information from metabolic calculators either. Which is not to say that metabolic calculators aren’t a source of valuable information or a good place to start – it’s just that they’re not the final answer to the calorie puzzle. I think that only can come from personal experience – tracking portions and calories over time and seeing what works for each of us as individuals.

And that's how I'm spending my Sunday morning! :lol:

Just wanted to add an addendum - in 1990 I participated in a Stanford University weight loss maintenance study. During the first few weeks of the study (before the dieting phase began) all of the study participants were required to keep a FOOD JOURNAL - noting what we ate, how much, time of day, perceived hunger level, feelings while eating, satisfaction level after eating etc. That might be a good way to acertain how many calories you need to lose weight - because we are ALL DIFFERENT. Just keep track for a few days of what and how much you eat and what time, etc. (also keep track of your exercise, if any, during that time). You might try jotting it down on a pad and then entering the data into FitDay later, to see how many calories you are consuming on average. With that data, try reducing your caloric intake by 200-300 calories a day at first (that's really no big deal - 2 or 3 regular slices of bread, or a little bit of cheese...). I'm very much a proponent of slow, steady weight loss (see this article called "Get Thin Slowly" - basically, shoot for no more than a 10% weight loss, then MAINTAIN that loss for a period of time before trying to lose another 10%). That's basically how I lost (and kept off!!) my weight - slow and steady wins the race - I do believe (from personal experience) losing slowly gives your metabolism/body time to adjust its 'setpoint' while you are overcoming those 'mind games' aka 'head hunger'. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Universityprincess

LOL, I'm not the average woman...quite the contrary. Actually, I've been losing weight eating well over 2,000 calories a day.

Congrats on finding the level that works for you! (And for being not-an-average woman - a condition we all strive for in one way or another!)

I would pick the absolute maximum calories you can eat to lose weight, giving you more room to drop down as necessary. I personally would not drop down to 1500 yet at your current stats - try 2K of clean eating, if that doesn't work, drop it down. I lost weight at 5'4, 168 at 1500 cals a day with one free day/week, and now that I'm at 125, I maintain on 2K-2100 (and I'm 38, not a youngster with a teenage metabolism). I think keeping my calories as high as I could when 'dieting' allowed me to eat more when I was done 'dieting' to maintain. I'd hate to maintain on 1200 cals a day if I didn't have to! :)

Everyone is different, so YMMV. :)