Quote:
Originally Posted by mdawson2 I had based it on the harris benedict equation because thats what a trainer at my rec center told me to do.
If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725 |
Fair enough.
But keep in mind that these maintenance calorie tools are all just ways of determining ' estimates '.
Take the guideline of 1.55 and exercise of 3-5 days/week for example. Let's say 2 people had the same BMR or 2,000. One of them trains 3 days a week for 30 minutes of moderate cardio at 60% MHR%. The other trains 5 days a week for 1 hour of moderate cardio at 80% MHR. Exercising 3 days a week and exercising 5 days a week are seen as being similar. According to the harris benedict equation, the 1.55 factor would yield the same calorie estimate for each of them when clearly, they each have expended significantly different levels of calories.
In other words, you have to accept these estimates as simply being the guidelines that they are, and not expect them to reflect some high level of accuracy as it pertains to your particular circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdawson2 had taken my bmr(1950) andmultiplied that by 1.55 just cuz I didnt know if my routine was hard excercise for 6/7days aweek, came out to being 3100, someone had mentioned that cuz I do some sort of cardio everyday plus lifting 4 days a week, I should use 1.725= about 3400 |
Well, if you think 1.725 adequately reflects your exercise frequency and if harris benedict gives you 3,400 and the equation I gave you gives you 3,700 - why not just split the difference and go with something around 3,550 or so ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdawson2 I had a deficit at 2500 but if the lader was true it would be 2700 not that big of a deal but with the other equation that was listed as a certain amt of min per excercise gave me about 3800 not close to the other 2 numbers, then i got worried cuz a deficit from that would mean I should be eating around 3000cal and at 2500 that would be 33%deficit a key way to set starvation mode in progress. |
That is the point, if you decide to go with 3,700, then a 20% cut is 3,000 - not 2,500. So a level of 2,500 ( 33%deficit ) is a moot point as you'd be aiming for 3,000 a day , not 2,500.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdawson2 ive been doing a zig zag diet for a little over a week now and Ive seen good resultsbut that worries me even more that im seeing these results that quick if i was at abig deficit of coarse i'd see results fast but it would hurt me in the long run and slow my bmr down, see my dillema? |
One simple solution might be to simply try the 3,000 calories a day for a month or so , continue to train hard and see how it turns out - fat loss wise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdawson2 I guess im just frusturated cuz ive tried so many times to get past this plateau but have always failed, but the diet im on seems to work and if i could just calculate a proper maintenance i think i could finally get passed it, sorry this was so long. also still tryin to work more protein in, are protein bars bad? |
Well, as I said before ( above ) ' a proper maintenance ' isn't synonymous with a ' 100% accurate ' maintenance. Again, the example I gave above underscores the fact that you could vary 300 calories a day person to person or vary 2,000 calories for the week using the exact same factor of 1.55. The point being , don't get to hung up on looking for a 100% accurate maintenance level for yourself - it doesn't exist.