I sold my soul to McDonalds. I am here to reclaim it.

Well, my name is Jackie. I am 22. I was always thin, but never ate. As soon as I went to college, I started eating regular meals, became less active and made bad choices...so here I am today, at 195 lbs, and I feel terrible. Moving in with my boyfriend seemed to make matters worse. Fast food quickly became a staple with so little time, and I guess now, it sounds like an excuse. After a while, I got sick of it, got sick of killing myself, so I started to try to take control.

Over 6 months ago I tried to change my lifestyle. I joined a gym, ate better meals, and ate mostly clean. I didn't lose a single lb. However, I didn't gain any weight either. I started out eating 1450 calories a day and working out 5x a week, and didn't lose. Then I bumped up my cals to 1863 and worked out 5x a week and didn't lose. I tried eating 1250 and didn't lose. I tried a few different calorie goals throughout the months and I still haven't lost a single lb. There was one point where I was advised to eat my calories back from exercise, and I didn't lose. It has been a long and frustrating time.

I do not have a thyroid problem. Maybe I wasn't as consistent as I thought I was. I just don't know. I feel like I am at a loss, and I feel stuck. I don't know what to do, and I came here to try to propel myself to a weight loss goal. Hopefully having support will help me carry one.

I need to real my goal. Most importantly I need to live healthier to live longer and to live happier. Junk food is no longer an option. It is not conducive to living a long, happy, healthy life. I am desperate for success.

how tall are you? what is your exercise regimen? how many calories are YOU CURRENTLY eating? what is your goal weight?

Hey Chrissy1988, I am 5'8'', I have started to work out 5 days a week with cardio, for about 40 minutes a day, and three times a week I spend an hour at the gym, 40 minutes on cardio and 20 on weights. Currently, I am eating 1863, which was recommended by doing a BMR Calculation, mine is 1719, and factoring in my activity level, which I put down as a lightly active, I multiply that by 1.375 and end up with 2363, which is a rough guideline of about how much I need to maintain weight. Subract by 500 for a 1 lb loss per week and I end up at 1863 per day. 

So, I have been eating 1863 per day. I was previously a member of another website where they advised to eat back your calories from exercise as not to increase your deficit. However, the biggest set back is that in order to be really accurate about your activity level (and therefore how many calories you need), you need to be following it to a T. So there are some days where I am not exactly sedentary, but days I am not exactly lightly active either. It gets a bit confusing.

My goal weight is 125. 

I would say that maybe attempting to be more consistent with your calories is the way to go for you, if you say lightly active is your activity level and some days you are virtually sedentary while others you workout more that "light active" then it all balances out, so it isn't necessary to really worry about eating back your calories unless you go above and beyond one day and are extremely famished. It is more easy to follow a consistent plan that one that is constantly changing. If you workout every other day or something like that and your activity is low active and moderately active, then it would be okay to vary from 1863 to maybe 2000 according to whether you worked out, so alternating higher and lower calorie days. does that make sense? basically, whatever is easiest for you to follow is what you should do. 

By the way, 5 days a week with cardio and 3 days with 20 minutes weight lifting is more like moderately active anyhow. 

So at 5'8 and 195 pounds, moderately active you burn about 2600 calories. closer to 2450 as low active. So if you want to eat between 1700 and 1850, you can expect to lose about 1.5 pounds a week which is safe for your current weight and height. I wouldn't eat less than that amount though. Does this help?? Any questions still need answering?

Original Post by chrissy1988:

I would say that maybe attempting to be more consistent with your calories is the way to go for you, if you say lightly active is your activity level and some days you are virtually sedentary while others you workout more that "light active" then it all balances out, so it isn't necessary to really worry about eating back your calories unless you go above and beyond one day and are extremely famished. It is more easy to follow a consistent plan that one that is constantly changing. If you workout every other day or something like that and your activity is low active and moderately active, then it would be okay to vary from 1863 to maybe 2000 according to whether you worked out, so alternating higher and lower calorie days. does that make sense? basically, whatever is easiest for you to follow is what you should do. 

By the way, 5 days a week with cardio and 3 days with 20 minutes weight lifting is more like moderately active anyhow. 

So at 5'8 and 195 pounds, moderately active you burn about 2600 calories. closer to 2450 as low active. So if you want to eat between 1700 and 1850, you can expect to lose about 1.5 pounds a week which is safe for your current weight and height. I wouldn't eat less than that amount though. Does this help?? Any questions still need answering?

As far as activity level goes, it doesn't just go by working out. So I may work out at the gym at a moderately active way, but I think that just sitting most of the day, maybe standing 3 hours, it balances out to lightly active. 

I understand what you are saying, though.

The activity level does throw me off, though. I was using this link:http://krupp.wcc.hawaii.edu/BIOL100L/nutritio n/energy.pdf as a guideline. Page 3, it goes into the activity levels. 

That is what I am the most curious about...because I think it matters.

If I were you, I'd eat 100 calories over your BMR as a general rule.   Cardio 5 days a week for 40 minutes is not that intense of an activity to take your activity level into account at all really. And unless you're lifting super heavy weight for 20 minutes, I'm sure you don't burn much there either (even if they are heavy, really).  When I lost 30 pounds a few years ago, I did it by going to hour-long step classes twice a week and eating my BMR.  I lost 1 pound a week for 30 weeks - from 138 to 108.  I figured out my BMR with the discovery calculator at http://health.discovery.com/tools/calculators /basal/basal.html

Most people grossly overestimate their daily calorie expenditure.

Alright, my BMR is 1711 from the website you gave. The one I used said 1719...so it's not a huge difference. So, 1711 is how many cals I'd burn if I would stay in bed all day...so then I use exercise to create a deficit? I mean, I thought you should take into account your activity level to create a deficit? Either way, 100 calories over my BRM is what I would be eating anyway...so I guess that is a good, no-nonsense plan. 

Is the deficit already calculated into say, eating 1800?

If you eat your BMR, you are already at a deficit (assuming you don't just lie in bed all day).  Just by getting up, going to work, working, walking around at home, exercising here and there, you're burning enough calories to be at a nice deficit.  Fiddling with my calorie intake by calculating how much I burned through exercise is something I've never been comfortable doing... I knew that somehow it would come back to bite me. First, everyone burns at different rates doing the same exercise.  Second, those calorie meters on the cardio equipment are bunk.

So as long as you're eating at BMR or a little over, you're getting enough calories without eating too many.  I would START like taht, be extremely consistent for 2 weeks, and track how much u lost in those two weeks.  If it's less than 1 lb. per week then step up the exercising, or evaluate how you're counting your cals.  However you choose to do it, a weight loss rate of 1-2 lbs a week is healthful.  I kinda played trial and error for a few weeks before I decided to just eat BMR.

PS - just to clarify - I know I initially suggested you eat at BMR + 100, but I think if i were you i'd first try eating at BMR.  Eat 1700 cals a day and keep working out as you have been.  I bet you'll watch the pounds melt off at at least a pound a week.

I have a HRM, so that is what I use to calculate my calorie burn. Does the BMR take into account exercising? I go to the gym for 40 minutes a day at least, and 3x a week, I go 1 hour a day (cardio and weights on those days). I am afraid of not giving my body enough fuel to actually accomplish those tasks. 

I thought a BMR was how much you BURN if you did nothing but lie in bed. I guess if you eat back those burned cals (which is what it seems like to me) and then you do housework and gym work...then I guess you create a deficit that way.

Thank you for all your help. I will definitely do what you said.

I have a HRM, so that is what I use to calculate my calorie burn. Does the BMR take into account exercising? I go to the gym for 40 minutes a day at least, and 3x a week, I go 1 hour a day (cardio and weights on those days). I am afraid of not giving my body enough fuel to actually accomplish those tasks. 

I thought a BMR was how much you BURN if you did nothing but lie in bed. I guess if you eat back those burned cals (which is what it seems like to me) and then you do housework and gym work...then I guess you create a deficit that way.

Thank you for all your help. I will definitely do what you said.

Exactly.  BMR is what your body burns per day WITHOUT taking into account any of the activity you do.  So say you burn 200 calories a day with your exercise and burn another 200 calories a day just moving around, going to work, etc... you will automatically be at a 400 calorie deficit per day just by eating at your BMR.  Give it a try - I sincerely think it's enough food for someone who does the exercise you're doing at the weight you are.  If you find you're losing weight too quickly or feel weak or too hungry, then adjust it.  

Also, I know this sounds unorthodox, but you might want to go to the gym a day or too less per week.  Working out stimulates the appetite, and while you should always work out to keep your body healthy, there have been studies that show that it's not as important as people think in losing weight; in fact can sometimes have the opposite effect as it makes people hungrier overall and makes them think they can "reward" themselves with more food.  Whether that applies to you or not (if not, then ignore me!) you should read this article:

 http://nymag.com/news/sports/38001/    

<--- It changed the way I looked at cardio.  Now I only do cardio for health reasons (and don't do it as much as I should for that purpose... I do it once a week MAYBE).  I lift weights to sculpt.  Other than that, I hold my diet entirely responsible for my weight.  And it WORKS.

Oddly enough, I was eating about 100 cals over my BMR before, and it was enough. However, I was instructed to "eat back" my calories, which I thought was kind of ridiculous, but I gave it a try, with no luck at all. I will definitely eat at my BMR and see what happens. I read the article...and from that, I think that hey, while going to the gym or any kind of exercise is good for health reasons, your diet is MUCH more of an important factor in weight loss.

Yay I totally agree. I'm excited for you; keep me posted on your progress!

I have decided that since my metabolism is seriously slow, I should get myself up to par. Maybe I'll eat around 2000 calories to start out with and see if I maintain. That way, if I am maintaining I know where I need to be in order to lose weight. The thing is, is that if I do maintain on 2000, then a 500 cal deficit will leave me at 1500, which is under my BMR.