Okay, I've been trying to get some things straight- but unfortunately, I am always confused by formulas and such. Then helpful people try to simplify things (like my hubby) and my head goes round and round. Hopefully nobody will think I'm a complete idiot. :p

I have read a lot of threads from this forum on the subject, but i just get more confused.
Anyway, here is the way my hubby explained to me in the most simplistic way, how to understand consuming and burning calories when trying to lose weight. I want to see if yall feel this is a true enough guideline for me to just generally get by with:

I must burn about 500 (don't know exactly where that number came from) more calories than I consume on any given day in order to lose weight. So, today I consumed 1610 calories (all mostly clean food). I figure i burned about 2949 calories including basal, excercise, and housework. So, subtracting the calores burned from the calories eaten, I get a figure of negative 1339, which is way more than 500 so therefore I kicked butt today?

I feel like i kicked butt, or rather everything I did today kicked mine. I got the figures for how many calories burned/eaten from my fitday thingie. The graphs show that I did indeed burn more than i took in... but just how many more does one have to burn than take in? Where did my hubby get the number "500"?

So, O wise and healthy people, am i barking up the proverbial wrong tree here?

Much Obliged,
Ferretnose

They recommend that a person lose 1-2 lbs per week maximum. The example I’m going to use is for my aim to be to lose 1 lb per week. I believe this is fast enough and I won’t be losing any muscle. 1 lb of fat is 3500 calories. Therefore to lose 1 lb a week you do the following: 3500 divided by 7 = 500 cals. I then minus 500 from 2895.4 = 2395.4. So to burn 1 lb of fat per week I must consume no more and no less than 2395.4 calories per day.

Quoted straight from HERE (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showthread.php?t=1222)

:gl:

I must burn about 500 (don't know exactly where that number came from) more calories than I consume on any given day in order to lose weight. So, today I consumed 1610 calories (all mostly clean food). I figure i burned about 2949 calories including basal, excercise, and housework. So, subtracting the calores burned from the calories eaten, I get a figure of negative 1339, which is way more than 500 so therefore I kicked butt today?

Much Obliged,
Ferretnose

As a 31 year old, 4' 11" female weighting 161lbs, you have a BMR of 1483, that is how many calories you burn doing nothing. Now I think you estimated how much work you do a day exteremly high! I will be generous and say your activity was 40% over BMR, I think that is kind. So Your burned calories are 2076, you can subtract 500 from that and you get 1576 calories as an estimate of how much you should eat. If you do that you would lose 1 lb a week.

You need to eat clean foods and increase activity. You need to begin weight training and some cardio. :gl:

As a 31 year old, 4' 11" female weighting 161lbs, you have a BMR of 1483, that is how many calories you burn doing nothing. Now I think you estimated how much work you do a day exteremly high! I will be generous and say your activity was 40% over BMR, I think that is kind. So Your burned calories are 2076, you can subtract 500 from that and you get 1576 calories as an estimate of how much you should eat. If you do that you would lose 1 lb a week.

You need to eat clean foods and increase activity. You need to begin weight training and some cardio. :gl:
BMR is not the calories you burn doing nothing, it's the calories you burn doing vital functions only. Sitting your butt on the couch all day earns you 1.2 x BMR. She said that she did both housework and excercise (though, we don't know what). Given that, I'd say that 1.4 x BMR is less than generous given her activity. I'd put you more at "moderately active" which is BMR x 1.55. 1483 x 1.55 = roughly 2300 calories you burned. 2300 - 500 = 1800 calories a day, very do-able. You will have a lot more energy too, which you said you felt was lacking. Can you tell us about the excercise you do besides the housework?

BTW, just an exceprt from Marcus' thread...
1 lb of fat is 3500 calories. Therefore to lose 1 lb a week you do the following: 3500 divided by 7 = 500 cals.

Yes, I not only do housework, shopping, etc, but I also do about 45 minutes of moderate pilates every other day, and I walk 2 miles (at a brisk pace) every other day, and also lift 2 lb weights, 3 sets of however many reps I can do (usually around 55) just about every day. I am eating pretty much all clean food, and drinking buttloads of water. I am keeping myself between 1500 and 1600 calories a day, depending on how I feel. I think I'm on the right track, but just thought i'd check with yall.
F.

BMR is not the calories you burn doing nothing, it's the calories you burn doing vital functions only. Sitting your butt on the couch all day earns you 1.2 x BMR. She said that she did both housework and excercise (though, we don't know what). Given that, I'd say that 1.4 x BMR is less than generous given her activity. I'd put you more at "moderately active" which is BMR x 1.55. 1483 x 1.55 = roughly 2300 calories you burned. 2300 - 500 = 1800 calories a day, very do-able. You will have a lot more energy too, which you said you felt was lacking. Can you tell us about the excercise you do besides the housework?

BTW, just an exceprt from Marcus' thread...
"Your basal metabolic rate, or BMR, is the minimum calorific requirement needed to sustain life in a resting individual."

Taken from www.weightlossforgood.co.uk (http://www.weightlossforgood.co.uk/basal_metabolic_rate.htm).

I have to side with rtestes on this one. Sitting on your couch all day is NOT having to multiply your BMR by 1.2. As Marcus writes:

"1. If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) – BMR X 1.2"

"Little or no exercise" is not the same as "not moving a muscle all day long". The difference is living an ordinary life. Going to work. Going shopping. Doing what an ordinary person does, while not exercising.



FerretNose, how did you come up with the figure of 2949 kcals burned? As rtestes says, it seems quite high. I think that 1600 kcals is quite good for you, regardless if you choose to say your in the 1.55 zone or 1.40. It makes a difference of about 200 kcals, which isn't anything lifealtering, since you're not trying to cut back too much on food.

I don't really get where you write that you were lacking energy, in another thread maybe? I saw that you were eating 1200 kcals at the beginning, and it's nice to hear you've upped it. Keep up the good work, and let us know how everything goes. :tu:

Yes, I not only do housework, shopping, etc, but I also do about 45 minutes of moderate pilates every other day, and I walk 2 miles (at a brisk pace) every other day, and also lift 2 lb weights, 3 sets of however many reps I can do (usually around 55) just about every day. I am eating pretty much all clean food, and drinking buttloads of water. I am keeping myself between 1500 and 1600 calories a day, depending on how I feel. I think I'm on the right track, but just thought i'd check with yall.
F.

You do seem to exercise some, hard to put a measure on it. I suppose 1.55 could be used. Just watch and see how much you lose. You are shooting for getting to 123 lbs, a 38 lb loss.

Don't know really what you are doing with the weights, but you need more than 2 lbs worth. Remember you are the stronger sex. :gl:

I got that figure of calories burned from the fitday.com site- in which it supposedly included moderate housework, from working out, and basal altogether. I also thought it seemed pretty off. i guess I maybe entered something wrong, or whatever. That's why I want to figure out a general everyday method for figuring calories burned versus calories consumed, wihout feeling like I'm having a math-induced heart attack. I thikn I am beginning to get the picture, taking everyone's responses.
Thanks yall.

Hey, Rtestes, I thought the stronger sex were men! I am a WOMAN, a very PETITE woman. :D
F.

. I thikn I am beginning to get the picture, taking everyone's responses.
Thanks yall.

Hey, Rtestes, I thought the stronger sex were men! I am a WOMAN, a very PETITE woman. :D
F.

I have always depended on the strength of women in my life.