This is my frist time posting in this section of the forum. I have not had the results I want with other weight loss methods so for the past week I have been calorie counting.
Now, by that I mean I have been counting every calorie that goes into my mouth, and writing it down along with the food that's responsible. I have not been aiming for a specific target, but obviously writing down my food does curb some bad eating. The average over seven days was 1800 calories per day. I imagine I was probably eating about 2500 (or even more!) up until I started writing things down.
My question is, should I cut my calories lower than that? Or should I aim for that moderately difficult 1800 for now?
I don't find calorie calculators that reliable. Some say my BMR is 2500, some say it's 1800. I guess I'm just not sure exactly what I should be aiming for. I know a lot of people say you shouldn't go to0 low because than you can't go lower 30 pounds from now. I also don't want to go so low that I hate it and give up.
I forgot to mention that I seem to have lost 5 pounds in the past eight days eating an average of 1800 calories (some days were as low as 1500, some as high as 2100). I'm sure a lot of that was water weight though, right?
A lot of women find that they maintain at somewhere around 13-15 cals per pound of body weight, and at the lower end (and possibly 12) if they're not particularly active. To lose weight, then, you'd have to cut calories below this. Start w/ one calorie per pound of body weight, and if the progress is too slow, decrease again by another cal / lb. of body weight.
The on-line BMR calculators usually suggest way too many calories, in my experience.
Less is not always better, though. Cutting calories too drastically will lead to metabolic slowdown, hunger pangs, cravings, stalled fat loss, and other Bad Things for a dieter. The human body evolved to protect against starvation, but has not (yet) evolved mechanisms that will protect against long-term food surplus.
Losing 5 pounds in 8 days sounds like pretty good results to me! And actually, since it sounds like you've switched to CC from another weight loss method, I'm not exactly sure how much of that would be water. I'm sure some of it, but it's definitely possible you didn't have that much water weight to lose. Someone more knowledgeable than me might chime in on that one.
I'd agree with others who say to stay at 1800 for a couple of more weeks. It's really hard to judge how things are going with just a week or so of data.
Keep counting the calories. You are doing O.K.
I started out last year eating 1800 calories and I lost 15 pounds within 14 weeks.
Then I dropped it down to 1500-1700 calories per day.
So I lost almost 30 pounds last year over a 6 month period.
I lose about 1 lb. per week.
I plan on eating the 1500-1700 calories until I stop losing weight.
Then I will drop it down to 1200 to 1500 per day.
That might happen this time next year. After I lose another 50 pounds in
2011.
I started a little heavier (and a lot shorter) than you are eating around 1800 calories a day. I lost on that amount for a long time. Things started to slow down, so now I am at 1650. I think it also depends on your activity level. I teach, so I walk around constantly at work. If you are mostly sedentary you might have to go a little lower. So anyway, I think you should stick with what's working for now. If it isn't getting you the results you want, then it's time to switch it up.
audri - I'm a teacher too, a kindergarten teacher, so I am absolutely moving all day. I just meant I haven't started going for runs, or slogging it out on the elliptical again, yet - traditional exercise. I'm curious if teaching kindergarten qualifies as at least "light exercise 3 times a week" for all those BMR calculators. I'm definitley not sedentary! haha
Thanks for all the advice, everyone. I appreciate it. I think for now i'm going to aim for 1800 and if I fall short that will be a bonus. Eventually I am going to have to cut back, but you guys are right - this is working for now, and I'm not feeling overly deprived or anything so...why mess with a good thing?
One good thing about cutting back calories eventually is that it will force me to evaluate my diet more. Right now I can get away with eating small portions of foods I probably shouldn't be eating.
One good thing about cutting back calories eventually is that it will force me to evaluate my diet more. Right now I can get away with eating small portions of foods I probably shouldn't be eating.
Teacher here, too, but big kids. Right now, I bet my seniors are more poorly behaved than your little ones! Once they get those college acceptance letters . . .
Anyway, don't borrow trouble. Small portions of "unhealthy" foods are perfectly fine as long as they don't lead to big portions. This can happen one of two ways: you start eating chocolate or whatever and can't stop OR you blow your calories on chocolate or other non-filling things, and then later you are so hungry you overeat other stuff (and tell yourself "I went over my calories, but it was with healthy foods"). The second, IMO, is actually more dangerous than the first, because you don't notice it: you think "I am just not satisfied on X calories", but it's the things that you are eating, not the amount, that leave you that way.
So as long as those two things aren't happening, eat stuff you like. If eating stuff you like leads you to eating stuff you didn't plan, that's when you change.
A lot of women find that they maintain at somewhere around 13-15 cals per pound of body weight, and at the lower end (and possibly 12) if they're not particularly active. To lose weight, then, you'd have to cut calories below this. Start w/ one calorie per pound of body weight, and if the progress is too slow, decrease again by another cal / lb. of body weight.
The on-line BMR calculators usually suggest way too many calories, in my experience.
Less is not always better, though. Cutting calories too drastically will lead to metabolic slowdown, hunger pangs, cravings, stalled fat loss, and other Bad Things for a dieter. The human body evolved to protect against starvation, but has not (yet) evolved mechanisms that will protect against long-term food surplus.
//b. strong
If I follow you right, for my weight of 209, I would eat 209 calories a day??? That don't sound right. I must be reading something wrong...At 8 calories per pound of body weight I get 1675.
I ask because like the OP I really don't know what I should be doing. The online calculators seem to go way too high.
If I follow you right, for my weight of 209, I would eat 209 calories a day??? That don't sound right. I must be reading something wrong...At 8 calories per pound of body weight I get 1675.
I ask because like the OP I really don't know what I should be doing. The online calculators seem to go way too high.
Thanks!
You definitely would not eat only 209 calories at your weight. To MAINTAIN, she was saying 12-15 calories per pound, so that would be 2508-3135 for you. Again, to maintain. To lose, you'd start with a certain amount, say 10 calories per pound, and then evaluate what you want to do based on that. If you maintain or gain, drop to 9/lb. If you find you're losing too quickly, up to 11/lb.
Try a few different online calculators and see how the numbers vary. Try the higher ones for a couple weeks and see how it goes -- you might be surprised to find that you lose, or at least maintain, even though the number looks high to you. It's hard to figure out how much you should be eating, but just stick it out through the trial and error process and you'll get the hang of it.
Last edited by KenzideRhae; 01-14-2011 at 04:56 PM.
For your weight and height 2200-1600 should be fine if you fluctuate your calories every other day. It also depends on your workout schedule, how much you do... but yea... You seem to be in a good spot. As long as you are comfortable and don't feel starved you will be fine.
I'm really happy with all this advice. I can't lie, this is exactly what I was hoping to hear.
1800 feels so comfortable and I know it's something I can stick to quite naturally. I have a really hard time sticking to a plans, usually. It almost started feeling too good to be true, so I was wondering if I was fooling myself!
You definitely would not eat only 209 calories at your weight. To MAINTAIN, she was saying 12-15 calories per pound, so that would be 2508-3135 for you. Again, to maintain. To lose, you'd start with a certain amount, say 10 calories per pound, and then evaluate what you want to do based on that. If you maintain or gain, drop to 9/lb. If you find you're losing too quickly, up to 11/lb.
Try a few different online calculators and see how the numbers vary. Try the higher ones for a couple weeks and see how it goes -- you might be surprised to find that you lose, or at least maintain, even though the number looks high to you. It's hard to figure out how much you should be eating, but just stick it out through the trial and error process and you'll get the hang of it.
Thank you so much for explaining that! I know intuitively that she didn't mean 209 calories, but I was confused! It is a trial and error process isn't it?
I apologize, I didn't mean to hijack the thread, or attempt to....
From Counting to Cutting
And actually, since it sounds like you've switched to CC from another weight loss method, I'm not exactly sure how much of that would be water. I'm sure some of it, but it's definitely possible you didn't have that much water weight to lose. Someone more knowledgeable than me might chime in on that one. 
It is a trial and error process isn't it?
