Calorie Debate

[TheSocialAnimal]

I realize that I have posted several topics about calorie intake. Why am I doing this? Because it is one of my main concerns. I am trying to figure out what is best for my body and my weight loss goal. I've read that some suggest less then 1000 calories, as well as some saying as much 1200 and even all the way up to 1400.

When I met with my doctor at the local weight loss clinic I received a monthly meal plan. I was told I didn't have to follow it exactly, but to follow the calorie intake. As I've browsed the book the daily calorie intake is between 720 to 1144.

Quoted from the book:

"It takes your body 1500 calories a day to function, so if you stay around 1100 and have some kind of caloric burn off, you should maintain your weight very easily."

I am slightly worried that the clinic I am attending isn't exactly the best of places I could of gone (somewhat like a pill pushing place verses helping you change your lifestyle), so that is why I am always seeking advice. Thank you for any replies. I apologize for any annoyance.

[LindsayBo]

Quoted from the book:

"It takes your body 1500 calories a day to function, so if you stay around 1100 and have some kind of caloric burn off, you should maintain your weight very easily."

The way that book makes it seem, you should be eating like way under 1100 to lose. We dont want to maintain right? Hmm, who knows. Anybody?

[TheSocialAnimal]

The way that book makes it seem, you should be eating like way under 1100 to lose. We dont want to maintain right? Hmm, who knows. Anybody?

That is why I am so confused. I keep getting contradicting information. Right now I am just attempting 1000 calories or less with plenty of water. This book talks about putting the body in mild ketosis one week, then feeding the muscle tissue another week to stimulate the metabolism. While my Sparkpeople.com account tells me I should be eating way more calories.

I am a fretter, so I fret about a lot of things.

[missmyhotbod]

I don't know who wrote that book, and where they got their info, but everyone is different. Everyone has a different metabolism, weight, height, etc. It isn't a one size fits all sort of thing when it comes to calories. A very general rule of thumb is, take your weight, and multiply by 10. that is the number of calories your body needs to maintain its current weight. As you lose weight, that number goes down. So, the number of calories you burn during exercise would be your deficit. Of course, if you are eating less than that in the first place, then you subtract your exercise from the real number of calories you are eating, and then subtract that final number from the original number to get your deficit. A deficit of 500 cals a day leads to a 1lb per week weight loss... 1000 cals a day leads to 2lbs a week.... For example... if you weigh 220 lbs, then it takes your body approx 2200 cals to maintain your weight. Of course that is assuming you are lightly active every day. I you are a couch potato, then that number is probably more like 2000 or so. That being said, if I was making the decision for myself, and I weighed 220 lbs, I wouldn't eat any less than 1400 cals a day. (I'm using 2000 instead of 2200, and that includes a workout every day that is burning 400 cals) It is said that in the long term, a deficit over 1000 cals a day will lead to your body going into starvation mode, and you will sooner or later stop losing weight. Then it will be much harder to even maintain your weight, because if you do start eating more than that severe restriction, you will begin to gain because you have reset your metabolism to be crazy efficient on a very small amount of energy. Doctors that put their morbidly obese patients on a very restricted calorie diet do so to jump start their patient's weightloss and give them inspiration and motivation to continue. Plus, of course as you lose weight, your energy increases, so they are insuring that the patient does in fact lose some weight and maybe develop the confidence to continue before they have a chance to just give up. It's never meant to be a long term situation. It can't be. Nobody could ever maintain that kind of calorie deficit for the rest of their life. Not without shrinking the stomach through surgery, and truth be told... a lot of people that have that surgery begin to stretch out their newly formed stomach by gradually eating more and more, and some of them eventually gain much of their weight back. I couldn't say exactly what a safe time frame for that type of diet would be. I can only speculate, but my guess would be no more than 3 months or so before it has an effect on your metabolism. I could be wrong. Maybe it's less than that, maybe a little more.

Sorry if you already knew this stuff... I just thought I'd contribute my 2 cents worth : D

[Band Mamma]

Let me reach back into my brain to see how much I remember.
Every body is different. What I need and burn is not what you need and burn.
Try going online to find a free BMI/BMR calculator. This will give you a rough estimate of what your body in general needs calorically just to exist. That means just to breathe and be awake basically. To lose one pound you must reduce or burn 3500 calories. From those numbers and with your decision concerning how much you would like to lose per week, you decide how many calories to take in and what activity you will do to lose weight.

Now, concerning the range of calories. Your body doesn't specifically recognize a cut off time for caloric intake and activity. I.E. it won't stop storing or burning calories at let's say 7 p.m. Your body runs around the clock. Yes, you burn less as you move less, but that doesn't mean your body automatically starts storing fat at a certain time of the day or night or necessarily at a certain caloric level. Are the potato chips more likely to be stored as fat if you eat them at night rather than with lunch? Maybe. It depends on the overall picture.

I try not to stress about hitting a specific calorie or activity mark like 1200 calories on the dot. What matters more is the overall picture. For me, I use a week. Any longer than that and I find too many excuses to eat what I shouldn't or sit instead of moving around. If your caloric intake is 700 one day and 1100 the next, your body won't automatically store fat at 1100 and burn fat at 700.
Is any of this making sense?

You do have to play around a bit to see what works best for your own body. At 700 calories, I feel physically ill most of the time so I know that is too low for me. 1800 calories makes me feel okay but I don't lose weight so that's probably around where my maintenance level will be. With 1200 calories, some times I lose and some times I don't. Don't worry about hitting a specific number. Pay attention to how you feel, if you are losing pounds and/or inches, and the quality of calories you eat.

Yes, that's yet another thing to figure out: are the calories coming from nutritious food or junk? Are you eating too much sodium/fat/sugar/carbs/etc...? However, my own experience has been that because I like to eat and I feel physically ill if I don't get enough food (as in amount, not calories) that I will eat broccoli over chips because I can eat a lot more broccoli for the same amount of calories, it fills my stomach, my body needs the fiber, etc.... Therefore, for me, as long I as I try to get the most nutritionally for the calories I allow myself, all the other numbers like sodium and such fall into place automatically.

In the end, you have to decide for yourself using your own experiences along with research about nutrition and such. It would be a heckuva lot easier if the medical community all agreed with each other, if the information was all in one convenient place, and if our bodies all reacted exactly the same. Alas, that is not the way things are right now. I hope this was helpful and makes sense.