Another calorie question

[kelownagirl]

I have a question for anyone who might be a nutritionist or have a medical background.

For my weight, I need to eat between 1200-1500 calories a day to lose 1 lb a week. I am comfortable eating that amount and generally stick to it so when I exercise, theoretically, I will lose more.

HOWEVER, in the past 5 weeks, I have been riding and running a LOT. On an average week, I can easily burn in the 5000 calorie range. This past week, I burned 9500 calories. As you can see, that is more than what I'm supposed to be eating (7 X 1200= 8400). To compensate, I have been eating more, probably in the 1800-2000 calorie range.

I know that if you eat less than 1200 calories a day, your body can be tricked into thinking you ae starving and start to hoard calories so you don't lose weight. Is that 1200 calories a day gross, or 1200 calories net? In other words, should I being eat 1200 calories a day PLUS an additional 5000-9000 calories a week to make up for all the ones I burn off?

Merci. :)

[KnottedYet]

If your bod is getting less than the minimum it needs to stay happy, it'll drop your metabolism.

That 1200-1500 is based on average activity. If you are doing above average activity, your bod doesn't have enough calories to work with, and might start thinking it's teetering on the edge of needing to drop your metabolism.

I'd eat more.

[eclectic]

I am neither a nutritionist nor do I have a medical background but I found this interesting.

In Eric Harr's tiathlon training book - in the section on nutrition - he said to find your basic caloric needs at the weight your wish to be then add the caloric needs of your exercise on top of that to find out how much you should be eating in a day.

[equus123]

For your size and weight, the "1,200 cal per day" rule generally refers to the number of calories the average, mostly sedentary individual must consume in a day for basic bodily functions to operate. If too few calories are consumed then yes, the body goes into survival mode. As stated above, metabolism slows and because fat is important for the body - the majority of food consumed will be stored as fat.

So to answer your question, for you, the 1,200 cal per day rule should apply as the following:

Total calories consumed ( - ) Calories burned while exercising ( = ) should equal the 1,200.

So in this example, you should be consuming a lot of calories each day if you're burning up to 9,000 calories per week. Btw, are you sure that this figure is correct? It seems extremely high but it could very well be true. Just wanted to make sure you know that your numbers are accurate. So in terms of eating, I have a small stomach and tend to each small portions but of food that is high in calories so I can achieve my weight goals. It's tricky to find food that is high in calories and carbohydrates but also healthy and not full of fat or sugars.

That's all I got for now. Hope this helps clarify. :)

[snapdragen]

In Weight Watchers we earn activity points for exercise - approximately 50 calories for each 100 calories burned. We are encouraged to eat all of our activity points. So, if I burn 100 calories, I can eat an extra 50.

Correct me if this sounds wrong WW ladies!

[GLC1968]

Like others have said, 1200 is a guideline. Everyone is different and it's based on things like activity level, body composition, gender, age, etc...

If you know your BMR (basal metabolic rate - what your body needs to just perform the basic functions), you can add activty to that to figure out your needs. But even then, it's only an estimate and it can change with the different types of activity, different types of food, different days in your cycle, etc. There are a ton of factors, so in may ways it's best to experiment, track and learn. If you try to figure it out down to the last calorie eaten or burned, you'll drive yourself nuts. Not only are the calculations a pain, but when the body doesn't react like it's 'supposed' to...it's frustrating (and it rarely does what we expect it to do when it comes to weight loss!!).


Another factor to consider is that most HR monitors over report calorie burn for women. I don't know if that's how you figured the 9500 calories burned, but that's something else to consider. In my case, 120 miles a week and my weight training puts me at a calorie burn of about 5000 calories a week according to my HRM, but I know that's not 100% accurate. I consider it a guideline and do my best not to try and eat all those extra calories (or at least, that's my story! ;) ). I try to use that number, my BMR, my energy levels, my experience with my own body and my hunger as a guide for what I am eating. When I keep all these things in balance (and I avoid the call of my inner 'Fat Girl'), I do all right. :)

[kelownagirl]

Yeah I realize the calories burned numbers can be wrong. I use two methods - one is my garmin HRM and the other is an online chart - I figure as long as they're reasonably close, I'll go with it. Most weeks I burned 4500-5000 calories. That week I burned 9000 was the week I did a century ride plus I rode another 225 km the rest of the week. I did about 14 hours of riding that week, plus an hour of running. (Not a usual week. :)

:D

[nicole309]

Where can I find these charts you are talking about?

[kelownagirl]

There are lots of "calories burned" for certain exercises available online. Just do a google search. I use the calorie charts on Sparkpeople.com where I have my diet/fitness page. As others have mentioned, you will find some variety in the calculations everywhere you go, including your HRM data.