Thanks so much Joanie and Best!
At this time, I am not really exercising deliberately, and it's so difficult without that (and I suppose, with it) to measure calories out. xD I try all kinds of online calculators and so forth, and I find it really hard to believe I could possibly, just by walking, driving, typing, and sleeping, be burning 3000 calories a day or thereabouts. But that is what they keep telling me.
Since I was struggling to make an (estimated) 1200-1400 calories a day intake previously (on LC protocols) I don't even understand how all the numbers could be adding up. It would be incredibly difficult for me to achieve even 2000 calories intake on an average day, let alone 3000.
So that is where I start to get confused, and that is why I am trying so hard to pin this all down. I am becoming fairly convinced that I am calculating my intake really incorrectly, or maybe am somehow totally incorrect about how many calories the things I am eating are worth.
0 cal. tons of spices
400 cal. 4 TBSP Kerrygold butter
676 cal. 1 pound pastured ground turkey, browned
350? cal. 1/2 pound grass fed stew beef, chopped small and browned prior to adding
30? cal. 1 large yellow onion
30? cal. 1 can beef broth, no sugar added
60 cal. 1 can fire roasted tomatoes
90 cal. 1 can tomato paste
0 cal. 1 cup water
1,636 cal. / 4 = 409 cal per serving, assuming these values are correct.
0 cal. tons of spices
140 cal. 1/2 large boneless skinless chicken breast
34 cal. 7 ounces romaine lettuce
150 cal. 2 tbsp salad dressing
100 cal. 1 TBSP Kerrygold
225 cal. 3 pastured eggs
250? cal. 2 breakfast sausage links from butcher
[B]1308 calories for the day. [/B] Every day this week will be identical.
So not far off from my estimate, I suppose. Now, what to do with this knowledge? I do not know!
I assume that, because you are attempting this, that you know how to calculate your 'resting metabolic rate', convert that into calories, and subtract that from your total caloric input. If you don't, I don't either. Maybe someone else can help.
From the caloric burn rate given from various exercises it's obvious that it's impossible to loose weight by exercising it off.
[QUOTE=Cryptocode;1123938]I assume that, because you are attempting this, that you know how to calculate your 'resting metabolic rate', convert that into calories, and subtract that from your total caloric input. If you don't, I don't either. Maybe someone else can help.
From the caloric burn rate given from various exercises it's obvious that it's impossible to loose weight by exercising it off.[/QUOTE]
I don't really, that's the part where stuff tends to lose me. :3
I googled and got a BMR of 2191.5 which I was then told to multiply by 1.2 for a sedentary life to find the number of calories I need to maintain weight which is apparently 2629.2.
I feel like I am flailing. :P Math hard.
I really like the [URL="http://tracker.dailyburn.com/"]Dailyburn tracker[/URL] for meals and recipes. You can create a recipe and put in the value of the ingredients like you listed above, and split it into servings. I also second buying a scale and weighing everything. This is something I also need to do soon!
It also tracks activity and calorie expenditure from these things. Once you put in your stats, it roughly calculates your BMR and also what you should be eating based on activity and blah blah. Anyway, i'm a fan and it's been my main one for a few years.
This is also a really good calculator to figure out BMR and macros separately, without having to do calculations yourself.
I didn't catch your height/weight, but yeah the BMR you wrote is a bit high :p usually it's somewhere between 1500-1900 (assuming you're a woman!), and then you add in the activity multiplier.
Thank you Nivanthe! I am a woman, and I am very overweight, I think that is why it always calculates so high? I will try out Dailyburn and see what it tells me.
We estimate that you'll burn about 2,620 Cals a day from normal daily activity and exercise.
To lose weight, we recommend that you eat 2,096 Cals a day.
Your estimated weight change is -1.05 lbs per week.
You should meet your goal in about 123 weeks!
That's a damn long time! I lost 50 lbs in 6 months last year, a similar rate would be preferable. :P
[QUOTE=qqemokitty;1124610]Thank you Nivanthe! I am a woman, and I am very overweight, I think that is why it always calculates so high? I will try out Dailyburn and see what it tells me.
That's a damn long time! I lost 50 lbs in 6 months last year, a similar rate would be preferable. :P[/QUOTE]
That sounds about right, it takes more energy based on how much mass you have, so it would be high.
The rate is based on the -600cals it's giving you if you follow eating 2000. But of course, being an estimate, it could go faster for you especially as you have a lot to lose, but as you get closer it slows down.
Slower can be better for preventing an excess of loose skin though.
Well my menu this week is a whole 600~ calories below what seems to be recommended for me by most sites. That is where I start to struggle, because I don't really want to eat more. What the heck else am I supposed to be eating? :x
This is why I always get so frustrated. Maybe I am eating too little? But I don't really want to eat more!
You can't really track calories that precisely. Problems: are you really going to weigh the food that precisely? Do you know how much fat is in your particular pork chop, as opposed to the averages? How efficient is your digestion of protein? Some think that protein has as much as a 25% "cost" associated with digestion, conversion to glucose, and then metabolism, for the portion of the protein that is burned rather than put into muscle and tissue.
Then there's the other side, the calorie consumption side. People vary all over the place on the "basal metabolism" part of the equation: we burn a lot of energy just to keep warm. The number of calories burned exercising is likewise a SWAG (scientific wild-ass guess) since it depends on how efficient your are, which bike you are riding, all kinds of things.
Not to say that the exercise of tracking calories is a total waste of time; I've done it too. Just don't think it is going to be better than plus or minus 10-20%.
Software: there is a pretty good free on-line site that lets you calculate a lot of what you want. cronometer.com. Free with a premium upgrade; allows a lot of plots, trends, etc. You can put the precise weight or volume of food in and it will calculate a zillion things for you: amounts of trace minerals, vitamins, amino acids, more than even a science geek like me needs.
[QUOTE=qqemokitty;1124694]Well my menu this week is a whole 600~ calories below what seems to be recommended for me by most sites. That is where I start to struggle, because I don't really want to eat more.[/QUOTE]
Are you IFing? If you add breakfast back in, or lengthen your window, you'll probably be hungrier and fit more in.
I'm not trying to make you overeat, because it's great that you're not hungry, but i'm afraid of you undereating. Maybe an easy modification for now would be to switch the ground turkey for ground beef?