Understanding the Deficit

K

KeeseeD

New member
Understanding the Deficit - Need Advice

I understand that creating a consistent calorie deficit is a key factor to many weight loss programs and I'm currently working on a 7000c per week deficit with a goal of losing two pounds a week. My fiancé and I are both working on our weight, but she has a tendency to binge.... her target is about 1200 calories a day (low, I know!) and mine is 2000... I'm a bit larger then her, but my question is that when a person is creating a deficit based on a target of say 1500/ day and on the last day Sunday eats 3500 calories how would that effect things... It seems like I'm really dumbing down the human body with all my calculations, so is the calorie deficit STRICTLY a mathematical difference between maintenance and intake or am I totally missing something? Either way, how does binging affect your deficit?
 
Last edited:
Drastically under eating and then drastically binging is not a good thing for fat loss. It can really mess with insulin and hormone levels. There is a difference between a re-feed and a binge.

Re-feed are where you eat in a deficit and re-feed to your maintenance level or a little higher. If carb cycling you would also interject higher carb re-feeds.

Basically you are saying if I starve myself and then binge on the weekend will I still lose weight. Depends, can't say for sure. Can say it isn't healthy, can say it isn't optimal, can say you could cancel your whole week of work out.

So make a better decision, stay in a HEALTHY deficit all week.
 
KeeseeD said:
1500/ day and on the last day Sunday eats 3500
Click to expand...

I agree with Leigh.

Taking from your example, one would consume 12,500 calories (whitch isn't horribly bad, a normal 2000 calorie a day diet would be 14,000 calories. Instead of binging, why doesn't she just divide that 12,500 calories over a 7 day period, which would be roughly 1785 calories a day. She would (most likely) be creating a calorie defecit, and would be much healthier for her (but hey, I am not a Dr., but I'm sure many would agree that this is a much healthier approach).

I myself, try to aim for 1500-1800 calories a day, so this is roughy what I'm currently eating at, and I have yet had any temptation to binge.

Aso, if she eats 5-6 meals (including snacks!) a day, she would probably be less hungry and unlikely feel the need to binge.
 
Great insight and tips! Why do some diets promote six good days of eating right (on track with a deficit) and then to have a "free day" on one day out of the week? Obviously no diet is perfect, but these are popular with people I know... how can it work out consistently though?

Thanks again!
 
The free day; I use it to have a supper I wouldn't normally have, or go out for a drink or two, etc. I don't use it to have a free for all. 3500 calories in one day is a LOT if you're used to 1200. I don't binge. I usually eat around my maintenance level. Which still gives me 6 days of having a deficit, and one day of staying the same.
 
It seems very counter-productive to me too :D My maintenance has been calculated at about 3000.... I'm 250 lbs, 6'2 and 20 years old so staying under that seems really easy but she likes to eat the way I do and she is only 5'1 and 145 so it's tough!

One side note, do people tend to lose more weight when they start a diet for some reason? I've heard yes, no. and only if their liquid intake changes, I never drank soda before so I was wondering if I would drop any water weight, but to be honest I'm not sure what defines water weight! :)
 
Look, there are multiple variables that go into weight loss. It seems that many around here take it as straight math. If I eat in a deficit of 7000 calories per week, I will lose 2 lbs since there are 3500 calories in one pound of fat.

No.

Well.

Maybe.

LOL.

It is not straight math. For some, this may workout to be true. For others though, and this depends drastically on where you are currently in terms of weight loss, how close you are to your ideal weight, how long you have been dieting, how you've been dieting, etc, it doesn't work like this.

Dieting screws with certain physiological aspects of your body. Some of these aspects play a role in your metabolic rate. Obviously, if you slow down your metabolic rate, your 7000 calorie deficit is no longer a 7000 calorie deficit. Follow me?

As for these diets that give you a free day to eat whatever you want:

There is sound reason for them. Psychological adaptation is just as important as physical adaptation. You can't expect to throw a nutrition plan at someone that is 100% different than how they've been eating for the last 10-20 years and expect them to adhere for any appreciable length of time.

So control variables are worked in, such as cheat meals or some even have cheat days. The line of thinking is, heck, get them to eat good 5 or 6 days out of 7, good things are bound to happen. Law of averages.

This doesn't mean it will work for everyone. Obviously one big variable is the person and how they behave. It is hard to negate a week's worth of good eating in one day. However, it is very possible too. If you have someone with little self-control and discipline, they can really screw up their diets by binging on junk every Saturday. Couple that with momentary slip ups spread out here and there throughout the year and you are looking at a 20% chunk of poor eating habits throughout the year. For some, this won't cut it in terms of physique enhancement or goal attainment.

The more controlled you are, the more you can assure yourself that you are doing all that you can in order to succeed.

My take, I don't really like the idea of binging ever. Nor do I like the idea of cheat DAYS. Cheat meals are certainly fine within reason. Just be smart and logical in your cheats.

I think some people on here cringe at the thought of counting calories. I think some people don't listen to what I have to say b/c I advocate counting calories. Until you can prove to me with sound scientific evidence that calorie/energy balance is not the driving force behind weight/fat loss, you will never be able to prove to me that matching calorie intake to expenditure is not the most important variable in the equation.

You choose your path to success. Meaning, it is commonsense what one has to do in order to lose weight. Can you lose weight with episodes of binging? Certainly. Will it be optimal? Probably not.

I find that for many, taking steps backwards such as those taken when you fall of the nutrition wagon is enough to throw them off the tracks completely after a while.
 
Very good points Steve! It all breaks down to discipline and being smart with your intake... For what it's worth I agree that counting calories is the way to go... its logical and logic is what I work with :) One other thing... How can you measure your metabolic rates and what are actual ways to increase that rate? I know eating 5-6 meals keeps you full, but from what I gather it's insignificant when it comes to the metabolic rate. I've heard eating real spices and being hot/cold will do it, but that’s not really "practical application" in a normal person’s life (except cooking with hot spices.)

Tips?

Ever hear the saying "People do EXACTLY what people want to do in all situations and under all circumstances." I agree with it, especially with dieting... people will change if it they want it bad enough!
 
KeeseeD said:
Very good points Steve! It all breaks down to discipline and being smart with your intake... For what it's worth I agree that counting calories is the way to go... its logical and logic is what I work with :) One other thing.

How can you measure your metabolic rates ???


What are actual ways to increase that rate? ???
Click to expand...

This is a very simplfied explanation, but in a nutshell, when people talk about " metabolism ', what they most often are referring to is calorie burning - how many are burned and how they are burned. So, someone who has a high metabolic rate burns a lot, someone who has a low one, doesn't, they will burn less. The metabolic rate is usually assocated with how many calories you need per day just to maintain your current weight - it is also sometimes called your maintenance calorie level. For example, a person's maintenance calorie level or metabolic rate might be 2,000 calories a day.

To answer you question on how to change your metabolism ( metabolic rate / maintenance calorie level ) - for example, 2,000 calories a day - you have first understand that your metabolism is the sum total of various things I call ' drivers ' of metabolism. This is as example ( btw - the numbers below are not meant to reflect proper proportions, they're just there to illustrate a point ) of how someone's metabolism / maintenance calorie level of 2,000 calories a day might be represented..

1. BMR ( Basal Metabolic Rate )
Calories you need just to exist to keep you breathing, your heart pumping etc. - think coma. Not easy to measure but BMR is key because it can make up about 2/3 of the total calories you need. It not only varies as a function of your size, sex, and age ( and a bunch of others ) but it's also affected by the amount of muscle mass you have - the more muscle, the more calories burned.

2. RMR ( Resting Metabolic Rate )
Calories you need just to exist to keep you in a state of rest / relaxation - think laying a bed reading a book. It's easier to measure and is usually represented by your BMR with just a few more calories added to get to your RMR.

3. Digestion
The process of digesting your food requires your body to use energy ( calories ) - the more you eat, the more energy required.

4. Daily Activities
Stuff like showering in the morning, making breakfast, doing househould chores, getting to and from work, doing stuff at work and running errands etc. etc.

5. Exercise
Self explanatory - your use calories to do an exercise - i.e you burn calories going for a brisk fitness walk, or riding a bike, jogging, working out with weights etc. It's the energy used / calories burned doing the exercise itself...i.e during exercise

6. After Exercise ' Burn '
After any exercise in which you use up energy, your muscles need to re-fuel with energy. So, it's the process itself of re-fueling your muscles that actually uses up energy. The process of re-fueling actually ' burns ' calories after your exercise and this ' burning ' can continue to do so for hours after you exercise.​

So, an example of someone who doesn't exercise and has a 2,000 maintenance calorie level might look like this...

1. BMR...................................1,300
2. RMR ( bump ) ........................200
3. Digestion ( 3 meals a day ) ......200
4. Daily Activities.......................300
5.a Cardio Exercise....................... 0
5.b.Resistance Exercise..................0
6. After Exercise ' Burn '.................0

Total :...................................2,000​

So, your metabolism is 2,000 calories. Getting back to the simple math you talked about, if you eat 2,000 calories of food, since you only need 2,000 calories as your maintenance calorie level, you're weight won't go up or go down.

The basic formula is; 2,000 calories required ( maintenance calorie level ) less 2,000 calories consumed = no change in weight.

How can you measure your metabolic rates ?

Here is a link explaining how to approximate your maintenance calorie level..


​


Actual ways to increase that rate ?

You want to change as many of the variables - 1 thru 6 above - as you can. Here are a couple of the " opitmal " ways to go about it .......

1. Do some cardio exercise:
- good for your heart
- it burns calories to do it
- it burns calories after you do it ( after ' burn ' )​

2. Do some resistance exercise:
- it burns calories to do it
- it curns calories after you do it ( after ' burn ' )
- it can boost your BMR ( adding muscle mass )
​

3. Eat more:
- assuming you do 1 & 2 above, you can now eat more - bumping digestion metabolism​

4. More more active overall:
- take stairs instead of elevators, walk instead of driving, little stuff like that​

Let's say you do this for a few months or a year, now look at what happens to the table above ( see the changes ) ..

1. BMR...................................1,400
2. RMR ( bump ) ........................200
3. Digestion ( 3 meals a day ) ......300
4. Daily Activities.......................400
5.a Cardio Exercise.....................300
5.b.Resistance Exercise...............200
6. After Exercise ' Burn '..............200

Total :...................................3,000​

Now, the basic formula is; 3,000 calories required ( maintenance calorie level ) less 2,000 calories consumed ( forget about the extra food for now ) = drop in weight. The beauty of this is, you can actually now eat more food. For example, you could now actually eat more as in something like 2,500 calories vs 2,000 calories a day and still be in a more modest calorie deficit that will still cause you to safely ( safe = fat , not muscle ) lose weight without lowering your BMR. Requiring 3,000 calories and consuming 2,500 calories ( about a 17% drop ) is much better approach than sticking with the 2,000 calories ( about a 33% drop ) because then you run the risk of making up for needed 1,000 calorie deficit by using nutrients your bodyneeds to maintian muscle. If this happens, you start to lose muscle mass which in turn lowers your BMR. And in doing so ( given BMR accounts for so many of your overall calorie needs ) you end up lowering your overall metabolism.


KeeseeD said:
I know eating 5-6 meals keeps you full, but from what I gather it's insignificant when it comes to the metabolic rate.
Click to expand...

There are tons of good reasons to eat 5-6 meals a day vs 3 - I am a big supporter of that myself. The theory is, if you eat 2,000 calories over 6 meals you burn more calories than if you only eat 2,000 calories over 3 meals. It makes intuitive sense to me but there is still some considerable debate among the so-called ' experts ' if meal frequency ( holding calories constant ) such as going from 3 meals to 6/8 meals a day bumps the amount of calories burned in any significant way. You're right, even if the theory is right, it's not a huge contributor to creating a calorie deficit in the overall scheme of thingsanyway - but then again, every little bit helps. :)
 
Last edited:
Can you please be more specific?!


















/joke

Awesome info man, very insightful! Many thanks!

I need to work on the exercise thing soon, but for now im just parking farther away from places and taking the stairs!

Thanks again!
 
Steve said:
Look, there are multiple variables that go into weight loss. It seems that many around here take it as straight math.
Click to expand...

I'm probably one of the people you're referring to. At least, I tend to come off that way.

About 15 years ago, when I was getting my MBA, I had a statistics class that was really terrific. One of the points the professor kept making was that the way we present numbers often confers a degree of accuracy that is simply unwarranted. For example, we ask a bunch of people in an informal poll what they thought of something on a scale of 1 to 5. Then we report the answer: "The average score was 3.55". We look into the stats, and find the stardard deviation was 1.5, so carrying out the answer to two decimal places is simply ridiculous.

My calorie counting is similarly ridiculous -- I KNOW that. Every day, I count my calories for food, my normal activity rate of metabolism, and exercise. I do all that to the calorie, e.g. "My food was 2,412 calories, my NARM was 2,357 (computed by multiplying my body weight x 9.9 calories), and my exercise was 959 calories, giving me a deficit of 904 calories."

Of course, this is a bit absurd. All of it is a rough estimate. I might as well round everything off to the nearest hundred, and it would be just as accurate.

So why do I do it?

It's all for psychological reasons. For decades, food has controlled me. Now I feel like I am controlling food. Yes, my "accuracy" is an illusion, but it's an important psychological illusion that WORKS FOR ME. One of the biggest battles we food addicts have is letting food take us over. So we fight back, any way we know how.

Deficit/Surplus computations, for me at least, are an important part of the battle. Yesterday, I went really overboard and consumed 3500 calories. Fortunately, I expended 1,050 calories in my workout, so I ended up even for the day. But by knowing that exact figure, I'm motivated today to hit my goal of 2,450 calories.

It's a day to day struggle. For me, the battle is won one step at a time.
 
I feel the same way... I'm naturally analytical so I do it for that reason. Food has never really controlled me, I've just never cared until now. I just want to live a long and healthy life so I figured I'd get an early start before it's too late! I have a lot to learn and need to find a work out program that I can do with the time I have available. (Not much!)

So... If I lose weight just by creating a deficit and not exercising will the weight loss be proportional? Obviously, not as much as if I were working out, I just don’t want to be one of those saggy people. :)
 
And I don't have a problem with it at all Tom. Honestly, you were not who I was referring to. I was referring to the less educated people who expect to go in a deficit of 3500 calories weekly to lose 1 lb per week. Surprisingly to them, the weight doesn't come off in this manner, since as we know, weight loss does not happen linearly due to a host of variables, namely the physiological adaptations that accompany dieting. I have this problem b/c when the "straight math" approach doesn't work.... a vast majority throw their hands up in frustration and many give up and switch course.... when all along, they were on the right course to begin with.

Dumbing down the body is usually a good idea. There is no point for everyone to have a full understanding of how it works. In this case though, I don't think it is the wisest choice. This is why you will find many posts by me in this forum dealing with the physiological adaptations that accompany dieting.
 
KeeseeD said:
I feel the same way... I'm naturally analytical so I do it for that reason. Food has never really controlled me, I've just never cared until now. I just want to live a long and healthy life so I figured I'd get an early start before it's too late! I have a lot to learn and need to find a work out program that I can do with the time I have available. (Not much!)

So... If I lose weight just by creating a deficit and not exercising will the weight loss be proportional? Obviously, not as much as if I were working out, I just don’t want to be one of those saggy people. :)
Click to expand...

Well, you've got kind of a contradictory goal in your last sentence. You want to lose weight, but you don't want to be "saggy". The answer is, yes -- you CAN lose weight without exercising, as long as you have a calorie deficit. But you will also be "saggy" that way, because without exercise, a good portion of the weight loss will come from your lean muscle mass and not from your fat.
 
Steve said:
And I don't have a problem with it at all Tom. Honestly, you were not who I was referring to. I was referring to the less educated people who expect to go in a deficit of 3500 calories weekly to lose 1 lb per week. Surprisingly to them, the weight doesn't come off in this manner, since as we know, weight loss does not happen linearly due to a host of variables, namely the physiological adaptations that accompany dieting. I have this problem b/c when the "straight math" approach doesn't work.... a vast majority throw their hands up in frustration and many give up and switch course.... when all along, they were on the right course to begin with.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I see what you mean. It IS tough when you're doing everything "right" and your body doesn't respond the way you think it should. I keep having to repeat to myself this rule: the ease with which the weight will come off is inversely proportional to the ease with which it came on.
 
Steve said:
I was referring to the less educated people who expect to go in a deficit of 3500 calories weekly to lose 1 lb per week. Surprisingly to them, the weight doesn't come off in this manner, since as we know, weight loss does not happen linearly due to a host of variables, namely the physiological adaptations that accompany dieting. I have this problem b/c when the "straight math" approach doesn't work.... a vast majority throw their hands up in frustration and many give up and switch course.... when all along, they were on the right course to begin with.
Click to expand...

I'm just gonna' volunteer to be that guy, but I'm sincerely interested in losing weight in a healthy way and keeping it off. I thought math would be a pretty straight forward way to go about it. Roughly of course, but some sort of accuracy has to be there right? I think strictly cutting calories from god knows what to 2000 when my maintenance is 3000 would trigger some sort of loss, but I'm probably the furthest thing from a dietician that exists so throw me some tips if you can.
 
Last edited:
My Free Day experience

I wont get into it as technically as Steve did (nor could I even get close, thats dude is pretty damn knowledgeable), but I will tell you for me personally I am using and loving the free day philosophy. However, I can see some problems I have gotten over which others might have trouble with.

For starters, I really do control my food intake 100% during the week, to the extent I pre-prepare a weeks worth of food every Sunday. I can tell you as exactly as possible how many calories I am eating each day. On my free day, typically Saturday, I still eat a healthy breakfast, (since I like those anyways), but I will have a few veggie buns instead of oatmeal, for lunch I will have some rice and home made food with the family, then diner might be in a restaurant. Of course afterwards maybe a few beers. But, the key for me is "free day" doesn't mean "stuff yourself to the gills" day either! Although I eat foods without counting the calories, I don't gorge and eat more than I normally would anyways. I would never drink more than 3 beers on Saturday (free) night because I wouldnt normally do that any other night anyways. No need to suck down a 6 pack just because I can. Thats a hard point for many people. I don't go grab chocolate bars, donuts and chips (though sometimes an ice cream), I just don't count the calories and stress the "kinds" of foods I am eating.

Another all too present danger is that a Free day, can turn into 2 very easily, then 3, then a week, then "Oh my god! Where did those 20 pounds come from?!?!?!" I know, been there, done it. Too damn many times to be sure.

Even free days need control as a big part of them.

The next "down-side I experience is the inevitable weight gain on Monday morning. Happens every week and drives my wife crazy! The sodium, the beer, the different foods play havoc with my system and cause me to retain water from that one day. Some Mondays I shoot up 5-7 pounds and my wife SNAPS!!!! However, for me I know full well, (and for 2 months now it has happened without fail) that within 2 days the 5 extra pounds will be pee'd or flushed away and I am due for another 2 or so by Friday. I know the "shocking" difference is coming every Monday, so I don't let it bother me. I do always get so amused by my wife freaking out though. (I do *bad husband bad!* call her over every Monday to see..) I now use those temporary pounds as fuel to push forward. Many a time during last months 2 pounds a week challenge I thought to myself "damn, am I gunna make it this week? Better push a little harder..."

However, this is working for me, I would not tell anyone it will work for them. I am exerting a lot more control than I have ever been able to in the past in order to make this work. Some people like Tom are very regimented in their attention to detail (his attention to detail makes me envious actually), others watch primarily their diets and use exercise as an occasional bonus, others pound out the miles on the running shoes and "somewhat" keep tabs on what they are dining upon, some cut carbs, some use regular blood work and specific diets. All are valid systems and all have success stories you can read about here and other places.

But probably the hardest thing about this whole damn weight loss game is not the specifics of any one program and a die hard "all or nothing" attitude. If I am learning anything from this it is that I was too quick to jump on a bandwagon in the past, to eager to find "the One!" secret. Sadly to find the one best for you you will need to do the same that most of us did. Trial and error. I have been using my meal plan and free day system for 2 months and not only did it break a (terrible) plateau, but has given me 30 pounds off in the process. Others here are having just as amazing results doing other things.

I sincerely hope you find the one that works best for you, that you truly enjoy and that you will be able to ride to the finish line and beyond. We can all do it here, every single solitary one of us. We just have to find what works...

sirant
 
I definitely appreciate your optimistic point of view; I think anyone can do it as well. The problem for me is that I'm not utilizing exercise yet. I literally have no time. Infact, as I type I'm literally at a desk working... Sunday, 9:30AM, where else could a person want to be?

As for the loss of weight, I haven’t really implemented a full plan yet, but it most likely won’t include a free day of my choosing. We’ll see though!
 
KeeseeD said:
I definitely appreciate your optimistic point of view; I think anyone can do it as well. The problem for me is that I'm not utilizing exercise yet.

I literally have no time.

Infact, as I type I'm literally at a desk working... Sunday, 9:30AM, where else could a person want to be?

As for the loss of weight, I haven’t really implemented a full plan yet, but it most likely won’t include a free day of my choosing. We’ll see though!
Click to expand...

I have 4 kids - 5 years apart - I once thought I " literally have no time " to exercise as well. I was wrong.

I simply made a point of getting up at 4:30 a.m. to get to the gym to workout before I went to work and I'd workout at lunch at times as well. A trainer I once had joked with me, is that if he offered his clients $5,000 to exercise only 30 minutes a day 99.9% of them would magically find the time.:)

It's been my experience that it isn't an issue of time that prompts people to say they can't exercise, the more relevant issue IMO is that they simply choose not to exercise.

Everyone makes - and life is all about - choices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top