I think my figures were/are wrong!

[Eoghan]

I've been doing this a 5 weeks now and I honestly don't feel different or see a difference (I know it takes a while to notice but not even the SLIGHTEST)

I never knew my exact starting weight, but I did remember being 260 last time I weighed, so I just said 260, I never weighed myself

So I used a BMR calculator and it said mine would be around 2400. So I cut it down to 1800 and just eat around that much everyday and exercised

Uh oh, apparently I was wrong, the figure I needed was my daily calorie needs, which is apparently 3100 for my age and size, so I've been cutting by like, 1300+?

Have I been cutting too much? I've only realised this today. Am I eating too little in 1800? If I want to lose 2lbs a week, cutting 1000 a day to 2100 from 3100, is this ok?

Does it work like, my body will burn X amount every day regardless of what I eat or exercise, so I exercise and eat Y amount to create a deficit (Y being less than X) Because I honestly don't think I could burn 3000 plus calories a day lol

I'm confused, 255lbs at the moment, age 20, 5 foot 11, really need help. Wont eating more not make me bigger (even though it is significantly less than my calorie needs)

All these terms and stuff are confusing me, I just eat healthier, count calories and exercise now, I don't see a difference, I think I've been doing this wrong number wise

Please help!

 

[amy1985]

I don't think you'll have done damage or anything, but you're right, you need to base it on your maintenance calories, not your BMR.

The reason why eating more is better because eventually your body fights back from weight loss in the form of slowing of metabolism, and so you want to lose weight while keeping your metabolism as fast as possible (you're still eating a sensible amount, just a little too little for you). 2100 probably seems like a more sensible goal in the circumstances though.

If your BMR is 2400, then your body burns approximately 2400 calories a day just to keep you alive. Plus whatever exercise you do (even being sedentary adds something to this- you multiply your BMR by 1.2 to estimate sedentary needs). So your body would be burning (approx.) 2880 calories even if you didn't do any exercise at all, so 3000 doesn't seem like a big jump to me. What this means is (presuming the numbers are exactly right- they won't be, but they're the best we've got without specialist equipment) theoretically if you were sedentary and ate 2879 calories a day, you'd lose weight (albeit incredibly slowly- 7 calories a week, and you need to have a deficit of 3500 to lose a pound).

There is some suggestion that you should eat no lower than your BMR, but I'm not sure what the basis is behind that.

If you're not losing weight or don't feel different, then maybe you need to look at your stats/ calorie intake again- you might be miscalculating (not a criticism, just something that appears to be very common). And if you're sure you've calculated right (and have double checked), you should talk to a doctor to see if you have an underlying medical condition which would make it difficult to lose weight.

 

[Jeanette401]

One thing you can do if you don't have a scale is to take measurements as well. Especially at your waist & hips (Because the waist hip ratio is a good predictor of overall health issues).

How are you determining how many calories you're eating, btw? That can also have an impact.

Also, normally the heavier you are the 'safer' it is to cut more without having a harmful impact. I.e if your maintenance calories are 3500 it's less likely to cause your body to rebel to cut out 1500 calories than if your maintenance is at say, 2000 calories. 1800 calories seems fairly reasonable at your weight, although you should still lose weight at 2600 calories or so. However, I think the first thing you should do is take some measurements and then make sure you're not miscounting your calories somehow. After 5 weeks you definitely should be seeing some change!

My 2 cents anyway

 

[Eoghan]

Thanks for the reply

I just alternate between jogging and weight training different days, and just eat healthy. Afaik my calorie calculating is pretty good it's just I have not been eating enough me thinks since I think my figures were wrong

So it could be that 1800 was too low? I wanna lose 2 lbs a week so I think it's 3100 so is 2000/2100 ok? What difference will 300-400 calories make if I got my figures wrong, could it really have messed me up that bad?

I do exercise 5 days a week so what is my activity level, I used this site and it said for 5 days a week exercise I should take in 3100 calories and 2100 or so to lose 2 lbs a week. But my BMR is like 2400 so I can't go below 2400? I'm confused

 

[Jeanette401]

It's hard to say - especially since you're not sure you didn't lose anything!

One thing that can happen is that your body can lose fat, but hold on to water weight for a while after the fat is gone. Apparently it the body can have fat abandonment issues

300 calories can make a difference, although over 5 weeks not so much that you don't see a result.

If you're confident of your counting, you might try going up to 2100 for a week and see what happens and kind of adjust based on that. Also, sometimes having one higher calorie a day can help flush extra water out of the system... It's all kind of weird, really!

I wouldn't have thought that 1800 was way too low, except you're not seeing a change. So either there was a change and you didn't see it, or you're eating more than you thought, or you need to change your calories. I wish I could be more specific than that, but it's hard to be since it seems like everything is so situational.

So... the best I can offer is to pick something to change, change it and measure how well it works and go from there!