So according to this, a 218 pound 6'2" 27 year old man needs this for the following.

Bare in mind I work out an average of an hour a day now. This has me concerned on a few levels, not only that I apparently need to eat close to 4000 calories to remain healthy and lose weight according to this thing, in that it would be physically difficult to do so without eating some not so good foods for me, which believe me I'll do if I have to. As well as the monetary cost it would take to feed my body what this thing is telling me I need. How much truth is there to eating at your BMR to be healthy and lose weight?

I feel good, I'm losing weight as well as inches, I eat regularly and always when I am hungry, but I don't see me as eating even close to this amount currently. I don't feel like any of my normal function has changed. Do I really need 3390 calories a day to function correctly working out an hour a day? It just seems way to high.

Eliot is 6'0'", and when he started at 295, an (evidently different!) online calculator estimated that he needed about 2200 calories to maintain (sedentary)...

The numbers you have been given seem incredibly high, even with exercise.

FWIW, these stock caloric-need estimators always put me way, way above maintenance, too.

One common rule of thumb is to calculate maintenance by multiplying your body weight by 10-11 (sedentary), 11-12 (lightly active, i.e., low-intensity aerobic activity), 12-13 (moderately active, i.e., high-intensity aerobic activity or weight training), or 13-14 (very active, i.e., weight training 3/wk + aerobic activity). Men would use the upper number.

Then, multiply by 0.9 to get a 10% deficit for slow weight loss or by 0.85 (15%) for faster weight loss (recognizing that you may lose some muscle mass depending on how much protein you eat, among other things).

A 10% deficit would put your daily calories at around 2,550, assuming moderate activity. (218*13*.9)

These are just guidelines, and it may take a while to figure out how your body responds. But, it's a more reasonably starting point than 3400, which strikes me as a recipe for weight gain.

YMMV.

/b. strong

I got a similar result for you using freedieting.com.

The good news is, you may be able to keep losing, even while eating more.

The bad news is, the calculators aren't highly accurate, so your results may vary.

It's not necessary to eat foods that aren't healthy to increase your calorie intake. Just increase the amounts of healthy foods you are already eating.

It sounds like you're not formally tracking your calories--is that true? So you don't really know how much you're eating now. Try tracking what you eat for a couple of weeks and see what the average is per day.

Jay

So what's the problem? Sorry I know that's harsh, but I see this question and have asked it myself over and over. The wealth of information out there makes us question perfectly good plans all the time.

Those calculators are fairly accurate for "normal" sized people, but they are notoriously off for heavier folks.

I tend to look at them as a starting point. If you've never counted calories before, and have no idea where to begin, they give you a ballpark figure.

So log what you've been eating recently and find out where you are. You say you don't see yourself eating anywhere near that, but it can be amazing how much you're eating that you didn't realize was high-calorie (at least I remember how shocked I was when I first began calorie counting!).

Then if you're losing slowly but steadily, stay at whatever that level is. That's a good level for your exercise and food intake. When the weight loss slows, bump it down 200 calories for a couple of months and see what happens.

That's what I did. Most calculators told me that I would lose about 1.5 lbs/week on 1800-1900 calories a day when I was at my highest of 310 lbs. But it wasn't until I dropped that to 1600 and cut drastically back on sugar and starches that I began to see the scale move regularly.

We are all experiments of one. The calculators can give you "average" information about "normal" people, but as in so many other things, YMMV. Good luck in figuring out what works for you!

I sure wouldn't go adding back all those calories... however you could add back a feww hundred at a time and actually I would suggest it. I started at 1200 calories and now that I am plateauing I can't take calories away to jumpstart. You may want to add some back so when the inevitable plateau happens you will be able to cut calories a gain. Just a thought (but I am no expert) and I work out over an hour a day and have not felt deprived even with my calories so low (although I also drink a nutritional drink).

I started at 380 and went for the plunge to lose weight drastically by taking in 1200-1600 calories. I am now at 271 and am already seeing it slow down some. If you aren't worried about losing really quickly, I would say that going with a little over 2000 would be fine for you. Those calculators can be totally off sometimes so it is always best to just try it out and see how your body responds. It sounds like whatever you are doing now is working for you so I think you should just stick to that for now. Good luck!

For a man? You're almost my husband's size (he weighs a few pounds more) and I wouldn't recommend he start much higher or lower than 2400 calories a day. Do it for a few weeks and track your weight carefully. Losing too fast? Up the calories by 200-300 and wait another few weeks to see what that does on the scale. Not losing enough? Drop your calories by 200 and repeat said experiment.

It's easy. I promise. And more accurate that any calculator, to zero in on what YOU need to function at a given level, not what the calculator thinks you need!

Thanks, I actually do keep pretty good track of what I take in, even though I don't formally keep track of them to the ounce of food I ingest. I would say on a given average I eat around 2000 calories a day at this point, if for no other reason then being I eat when I get hungry. I appreciate the information, I just wanted to make sure that I was not completely harming my body by not eating enough even though I felt good.

Yeah, those numbers all look quite high. When I've tried eating at the calorie levels that those calorie counters suggested to me, I gained. They must assume you have an amazing metabolism or something (which I do not, LOL)