I input my info, and it said I could maintain at 2,590, and my BMR was 1884.
It told me to eat 85 grams of protein.. I have 114 for today.
It told me to eat 226 grams of fat.. I have 151 for today.
I subtracted .5 a gram of fat for each gram of protein over 85 ( 29 ), which was I rounded off to 15. So 226 g of fat - 15 = 211 or less. I am 60 grams of fat low.
60 grams of fat would be 540 calories, but I eat 1,792, which is just 92 under my BMR, and to lose 1 lb a week I would have to lose 3,500 calories ( 500 a day ), from my maintenance calorie level. so 2,090. I eat 298 less a day, so while I have asked to lose 1 lb. a week, at a 798 calorie deficit, I should be averaging 1.596 lbs a week.
Instead I am losing almost 4 lbs a week. 9.8 lbs since the 21st of June.
Of course, since the extra calories come from fat, I don't think the numbers they give are bad. I just can't consume 226 g of fat. Also, losing an extra 2.8 lbs a week over what they are saying I will, and 2.2 over what conventional theory would suggest I should be losing.
This is factoring in a stay at the hospital where they did not feed me low carb, so instead of 4.2 lbs lost each of the last 2 weeks, I have only lost 1.4 these last 4 days, which drops me from 4.2 lost to 3.8 average.
They say I can lose 1 lb a week, eating 2,090 calories, yet I lose 3.8 - 4.2. Lets average it to 4 lbs a week, or 3 more than they say I should be losing. To do this according to the math, I would have to cut an extra 1500 calories a day from my menu. 3 X 3500 = 10,500/7 = 1500. This would require me to eat 590 calories a day, instead of 2,090. Far below the 1,792 I do eat. I have gone as low as 1500 on some days, but not anywhere near 590.
At best I eat 1000 calories average over what they suggest it would take to lose 4 lbs a week. I should be losing 1.6-2.0 lbs a week.
I thought the calculator's suggested protein was a bit low, and the fat a bit high, but it was nice to be able to put in 55 grams of carbs, and not have it tell me.. you need 250 + grams of carbs. I think if I followed the information given, I could still lose weight, but I don't want to eat that many calories, of fat. I am already at 66.7% fat.
*When I added up the calories of their suggested intake, it added up to the total to maintain, NOT 500 less required to lose 1 lb a week. So, they suggest 2034, out of 2,594 calories should come from fat, or 78.4%. At this rate though, I should maintain, not lose. so now I am even farther from the math matching since I lose 4 lbs a week.
The calculator is confusing, but if I dropped the 500 calories from fat ( 55 grams ), I could get down to 156. which is just 5 grams more than I do eat.
I think it would help you lose weight, but you would have to subtract the 500 calories yourself. It asked me what I wanted to lose ...1 lb a week, then gave me the macronutrients based on my maintenance calories.
I would suggest people check this out, and add up the calories of the suggested macronutrients. If it adds up to the maintenance levels, you have to cut 500 more calories, according to popular theory. Maybe they are saying maintenance is including the 1 lb a week drop??, but that makes no sense. That is not maintaining. I am pretty sure they have a line of code wrong, and the macors are based on maintenance levels. This makes it 500 more calories than it would take to lose 1 lb a week. So just subtract 500 calories, which if you are picking carb level, requires you to factor how much extra protein, and then cut fat from those levels. This requires you to cut the entire 500 calories from fat, unless you don't eat the suggested protein. Most low carbers are over on protein, so they would end up cutting some fat, and then 55 more grams of fat to get to a 500 calorie deficit.
If I do that, I get to very close to what I do eat according to the macros, but I lose 2-3 extra lbs a week. Of course that isn't a problem. Extra weight loss is always good.
"We can't solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them "
- Albert Einstein
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.”
For sure. In the long run, it seems that healthy lifestyle changes we can live with is the way to go. I'm hoping that the changes I'm making can be permanent, partly so that I can have long term positive health and body results for myself, but mostly so that my kids can have lifelong healthy habits.
Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear.
I agree with Birgit. It is so easy to think that what I gained or lost today is a direct result of what I ate or didn't eat yesterday, but it's not that easy. Today's fluctuations in both weight and inches are a result of what we did all this week, and probably the week (or weeks) before. Unlike what the calories in/calories out people would have us believe, our bodies are not simple machines that always process everything exactly the same way. There are all sorts of mechanisms built in to our bodies and our organs and our cells that react on their own to all sorts of stimuli that we don't even see. Like if we lose weight, our bodies may, all on their own and totally against our concious will, decide to start slowing down our metabolism in case we're going in to a period of famine or at least restriction. Not enough water and our bodies hold on to what they have. Certain foods (like carbs) cause hormonal reactions that go way beyond simply digesting them. Unusual exercise may cause our muscles to retain extra water to help keep them supple and to help them heal. As a personal example, while I do not have have hot flashes as a general rule, if I eat too much I'm likely to have night sweats. And so on and so forth.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that it's the trends that are important, and sometimes we have to look at pretty long trends. What the scale says on a single day is meaningless and shouldn't be used to change what we do. All too often we (and yes, I'm including myself here, even though I know better!) don't stick with something long enough to see how it works over time. Instead, we tweak it to death based on immediate or short-term results, and then get frusterated because we're not getting consistent results. Of course we're not getting consistent results! Not only do our bodies react inconsistently, but we're not giving them constant inputs on which to react! And that, I think, is one reason why so many people say that eating low carb (or low calories or low fat or high or low this that or the other thing) doesn't work in the long term. They don't give it a chance.
Ok, end of lecture. Bottom line, as Birgit said, this should be a life style not a diet, and that means not obsessing about the minutiae. Keep your eye gently on the big things and remembr that the idea is to live your life, not a diet.
JLKL, I understand the desire to be in control by keeping really good records. But I also found that this sense of control is an illusion. Who has not experienced situations of exercising hard and eating in moderation only to have gained instead of lost weight. My health and my weight is not determined by minute differences in calorie intake but by big patterns like eliminating most sugar and most starches from my diet on a daily basis, enjoying and experimenting with new vegetables, meat dishes etc. It is true that with enough over-eating (by thousands of calories) you can gain weight even on low-carb, but most people can learn to trust their instinct pretty quickly and start eating intuitively. It really helps to think like a thin person by not making it our second job to constantly monitor energy input and output and worrying more about what the scales say then whether we have treated our body well that day. Instead we can begin by simply paying less attention to our need for food.
I was beginning to think like you earlier in the day. If I start thinking about all the different formulas out there - I could really exhaust myself. I tend to be the kind of person who wants an exact formula and to know that I will lose a certain amount every week. But it just doesn't seem to happen that way.
I think I just need to relax about the whole thing and try to keep my carbs in the 30 to 40 gram range. And I'm not even sure about the calorie range anymore.
George S. Patton-You're never beaten until you admit it.
My comment is not quite the answer you asked for, but it seemed to me that this is a little more about dieting (temporary results at best) and a little less about longterm lifestyle change. For me it is very important to make any changes for life so I don't feel I have to reinvent the wheel every week. Of course there may be minor changes, but overall I like those to become more intuitive and less following any particular plan. Birgit
AKHEIDI - thanks for your input. The calculator told me I could have 1,159 calories and 30 carbs. I couldn't go below 60 grams protein or 55 grams of fats. I seem to do better when I go a lot higher on the protein.
I think being stalled after Atkins Induction for about a month frustrated me so much, that I considered trying a different approach to low carb. It was just a bit different than Atkins. Like if you were high on fat grams one day, you should adjust protein to be lower and vice versa.
George S. Patton-You're never beaten until you admit it.
Hi there- I played with it a little and am not sure how accurate it is. First off, it wouldn't let me lose 2 pounds a week, 1 pound was it. Next it said I'd have to eat 1100 calories to do that on 30 grams of carbs a day with 54 protein. I eat quite a bit more than that now and can still drop a pound or at least maintain. I'd stick with OWL imho.
1. Stop wasting time! Save Money!
2. Get organized- mise en place as the French say.
Every day this side of the sod is a good day- not sure who said it
My animals make me happy, some people not so much- a bumper sticker
On day 2, (following the data that I received from the calculator) I lost 2 pounds (possibly water weight or it possibly broke my stall I was in).
After that, the scales stayed the same for 7 days. Took my measurements and had gained back a bit of inch loss. I was bummed out about that, so I ate an extra 500 calories (in fat and meat), and I snacked on a few potato chips before retiring to bed.
Next morning, the scales dropped a pound. So in 8 days, I lost a total of 3 pounds. And it was pretty pleasant, plus I cheated a couple of days on my carbs. I was trying to keep carbs at about 30 to 40 total. But no inch loss.
So now, I am wondering if I should go back to Atkins OWL or stay with what I am doing. I don't want to go back to Atkins Induction at this point because it's Spring, and I like having a few berries each day.
I would like some input from my SparkTeam to help me decide what to do.
Should I do Atkins OWL or stick with what I am doing now? Or do you think I should try a couple days of a Fat Fast to prove to myself that it is better for inch loss? Is inch loss more important than scale loss?
Thanks everyone and hope you enjoyed your 4th of July holiday!
George S. Patton-You're never beaten until you admit it.
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.