Calorie Question!

Hi, I was just thinking about how calories work.

I understand that the point is to burn more calories that you take in, but say for example you eat 1,200 calories a day, and work off 1,200 calories (not including the ones we burn already).. Is it the same if we eat say 2,000 calories a day and then burn of 2,000? I'm not saying I'm doing that, but I was just wondering if you would get the same results, since you're just burning off what you ate anyway.

Basically my question is: Would you be more 'buff' if you ate more, even if you burned it all off like you would with less calories?

Thank you in advance!

well assuming that you were doing weight lifting to burn part of the calories eaten then yes you'd get more buff from eating more and working out more because you would have to exert the muscles for a longer period of time to make the calories balance out. for example, if you were to eat something for 100 cals, you could burn that off with a 15 minute weight lifting circuit. 15 minutes isn't very much, but if you were to workout for 45 minutes and you ate 300 calories, that 45 minutes could have done some serious damage to your muscles which would then require repair and more muscle building than if you hadn't exerted them so heavily. this is not based on research but on my own understanding of physiology and logic...i hope it makes some sense. in terms of weight loss though, the net result would be the same...muscle growth is a bit different though.

Original Post by chrissy1988:

well assuming that you were doing weight lifting to burn part of the calories eaten then yes you'd get more buff from eating more and working out more because you would have to exert the muscles for a longer period of time to make the calories balance out. for example, if you were to eat something for 100 cals, you could burn that off with a 15 minute weight lifting circuit. 15 minutes isn't very much, but if you were to workout for 45 minutes and you ate 300 calories, that 45 minutes could have done some serious damage to your muscles which would then require repair and more muscle building than if you hadn't exerted them so heavily. this is not based on research but on my own understanding of physiology and logic...i hope it makes some sense. in terms of weight loss though, the net result would be the same...muscle growth is a bit different though.

Oh okay, I understand what you're saying. Thank you for your help :)
You explained it really well

Wait a minute... I'm confused.

Are you actually trying to work off 1200 calories a day on top of what you burn? if you are, you're doing way too much and eating way too little. You don't need to work off every calorie you eat in order to lose weight.

Use your sedentary burn (eg, 1700) + calories burned working out and then minus 500-700 to create a daily deficit. That's all you need to do.

Original Post by merylwhite1:

Wait a minute... I'm confused.

Are you actually trying to work off 1200 calories a day on top of what you burn? if you are, you're doing way too much and eating way too little. You don't need to work off every calorie you eat in order to lose weight.

Use your sedentary burn (eg, 1700) + calories burned working out and then minus 500-700 to create a daily deficit. That's all you need to do.

ok...may I ask you a question, merylwhite1?

By "sedentary burn" do you mean the calories added to our total by CC as the day goes on?

When I look @ my total for a day, for example, it will post 3,500. But I only worked off 2,850, or w/e. Does that mean that my "sedentary burn" is the difference between the two?

I noticed that when I look @ my activities archives, it only shows what I logged, not what the actual total was. So as long as there is a deficit of at least 500-700 per day between what is shown, minus the calories I ate, I am going to continue to lose, right? Or, more specifically, every time the total deficit adds up to 3,500 I lose another pound?

Hi whitewave, 

if I may:

your sedentary burn is the amount of calories your body burns without doing anyting just by 'being'... your bowel movements and your beating heart and your brain are using calories every day! That's what's meant with 'sedentary burn'.

If you are using the CC calculator and type in all details about your body (height, weight, age) and you choose 'sedentary' you will get the amount of calories that your body is burning every day without being active. Let's say it's 2000 calories for you. 

If you are working out for 1 hour a day and you are burning say 500 calories by being active your total is 2500 which is shown on your daily log.

By eating 1500 calories a day and loging them you have a daily deficit of 1000 calories which is the maximum I understand you should aim for. 

If you add up 7 days at 1000 calories deficit you come up with 7,000 calories per week which equals 2 lb weight loss per week. 

Does this answer your question?

Hi Merylwhite,

no.. I'm not trying to do that, it was just a curiosity question. It's kind of hard to explain though, I just meant that does it matter how much you do eat, as long as you work the equivalent off. Like saying if you ate 1500 and you burned off 500, is it the same as eating 2000 and burning 1000.

I understand how to actually do all of that, I was just wondering if it would've been the same thing :)

Original Post by mermaid3011:

Hi whitewave, 

if I may:

your sedentary burn is the amount of calories your body burns without doing anyting just by 'being'... your bowel movements and your beating heart and your brain are using calories every day! That's what's meant with 'sedentary burn'.

If you are using the CC calculator and type in all details about your body (height, weight, age) and you choose 'sedentary' you will get the amount of calories that your body is burning every day without being active. Let's say it's 2000 calories for you. 

If you are working out for 1 hour a day and you are burning say 500 calories by being active your total is 2500 which is shown on your daily log.

By eating 1500 calories a day and loging them you have a daily deficit of 1000 calories which is the maximum I understand you should aim for. 

If you add up 7 days at 1000 calories deficit you come up with 7,000 calories per week which equals 2 lb weight loss per week. 

Does this answer your question?

hi mermaid3011 ~

Thanks for that...I do understand now; I am an Artist, so my math-boggled brain always has a hard time getting itself around numbers, no matter what they mean...but you explained it beautifully, as long as I took it slowly, lol, I was able to understand how it all works.

All I know is when I look @ the total lbs I've lost for the 3 months I've been here @ CC (22 so far), this makes sense. I just have to keep doing what I've been doing & I'll get there. I guess the only problem I'll have now is when I hit that dreaded plateau, which I hope never comes!

Now, Mermaid, THAT is the best explanation I've seen since I've been here.  It's actually how I thought it worked, but it was good to see it confirmed in print.  Thanks very much!

thamk you ladies :o) blush...