Low Carb Friends

Low Carb Friends (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/)
-   JUDDD (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/juddd/)
-   -   Question About Calorie Deficit (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/juddd/812623-question-about-calorie-deficit.html)

Slimming-up 09-20-2013 09:10 AM

Question About Calorie Deficit
 
Out of curiosity, I spent a bit of time looking at my calorie intake over a period of time, and compared it to the weight loss for the same period.
This is what I found over a 44 day period. I used this time period because I was so consistent on JUDDD and very diligent in entering my food diary:
Total calorie intake: 52,913
Total weight loss: 11.4 lb

My daily calorie requirement is calculated at 1800, so my deficit for that period was 26,287.
Which should have resulted in a weight loss of 7.5 lb...

Since my loss was 11.4lb during those 44 days, the deficit must have actually been 39,900...

Does that mean my requirement is probably more like 2100?

Hope someone can follow what my train of thought here!

jacquelinejolie 09-20-2013 09:29 AM

What was your loss in your first week or two? Mine was 4 and 6.4 pounds respectively so I figured that at least 2-3 of that was water so you might want to back those out of your equation?

I think Johnson uses the Harris Benedict equation which isn't always accurate (but fairly close, about 10% too low on me) depending on your lean body mass levels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris%...edict_equation

Slimming-up 09-20-2013 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacquelinejolie (Post 16612468)
What was your loss in your first week or two? Mine was 4 and 6.4 pounds respectively so I figured that at least 2-3 of that was water so you might want to back those out of your equation?

This was 2 weeks after I started.
I figured those first pounds included water, even though my loss wasn't too dramatic initially - but that's why I chose this 44 day period. It was an uneventful and consistent time.

Slimming-up 09-20-2013 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacquelinejolie (Post 16612468)
I think Johnson uses the Harris Benedict equation which isn't always accurate (but fairly close, about 10% too low on me) depending on your lean body mass levels.
Harris

That's interesting.
I think I'll keep things as they are right now, since I feel like I'm not limited on my UDs.
But when I get to goal, I might be happy to find out I can maintain on more - :D

jacquelinejolie 09-20-2013 10:14 AM

It's also so highly dependent on your activity levels. Since I've been monitoring that this last 3 weeks or so, I've had burn rates anywhere from about 1850 - 3200 calories a day, average about 2400. Whereas the calculator only gives a really rough estimate of that. ie. At my weight, the extremely active exercise max is only 2544 calories and moderate is 2286. I think most more active people underestimate this kind of thing with the "choose sedentary" recommendation.

FWIW, proponents of the Mifflin RMR equation found that the HB BMR equation is 5% overstated - so good for you if you lose faster than the UD maintenance limit!

PS - You probably don't want to be as anal as I was in figuring this out. I just couldn't figure out why I didn't sleep well on DD's and it appears to be when I'd go into negative calorie territory. :)

Slimming-up 09-20-2013 11:23 AM

Thanks - I think I'm understating activity level. I think of myself as fairly sedentary, but that's probably not accurate.
I'm just glad that if I'm wrong on calorie intake, that I'm understating and not overstating!

ravenrose 09-20-2013 11:32 AM

those charts and calculators are just generalizations. no one's metabolism works exactly like that. you lose what you lose, because your body doesn't look at the numbers LOL

your metabolism can also change abruptly one way or the other, and suddenly what was working doesn't anymore. all you can do is pay attention and work with your body as best you can.

E.W. 09-21-2013 02:32 AM

I have seen two articles that relate to this. In one study about people doing JUDDD they found that the weight loss was more than could be accounted for by the calorie deficet.
Then in a scientific paper looking at metobolic rate on a total fast they found that for about the first 48 hours of a fast instead of your basic metabolism slowing down it was actualy higher, about 10% higher. So we probably burn more calories on a DD than we do
on an UD.

Librarygirl 09-21-2013 07:27 AM

That's interesting, E.W. :) I have resisted doing the math for my weight loss, and have been doing a rough estimate of everything since the beginning of starting Juddd...basically eod, with breaks thrown in, hoping to lose regardless of what I'm actually doing lol. It has worked, somewhat, in that I am losing but not very quickly. I am eating way more than my maintenance levels most days, so not getting enough of a deficit to lose more than a lb or 2 a month. I'm grateful for that little bit, but decided to step it up a bit. I am going to stick to my numbers, with set UDs and a high MD on the weekends. I hope to start consistently losing 3-4 lbs a month, and don't really care to lose any faster because so far I have not experienced the dreaded hanging skin, and hope to minimize it by slow losses.

My set plan could be derailed as the holidays approach and we are bombarded with lunches out at work, and goodies being brought in. I won't mess up a DD if it's not a planned luncheon, but I will most likely accomodate a set holiday get-together.

Good news is that we are off nearly the entire month of December for a HVAC replacement. That will curtail some of the partying. ;)

Slimming-up 09-21-2013 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E.W. (Post 16613281)
I have seen two articles that relate to this. In one study about people doing JUDDD they found that the weight loss was more than could be accounted for by the calorie deficet.
Then in a scientific paper looking at metobolic rate on a total fast they found that for about the first 48 hours of a fast instead of your basic metabolism slowing down it was actualy higher, about 10% higher. So we probably burn more calories on a DD than we do
on an UD.

So interesting! I know some studies have indicated that women do not respond as well as men to IE, so it has made me pay very close attention to the numbers, because if there is any sign of a negative effect, I want to know.
But so far, it's going better than expected, which leads me to believe that although it may be true that women in general are less successful with IE, I do not seem to be one of them.
The SIRT effect seems to be working for me.
I may regret speaking too soon though!

Anonymousity 09-21-2013 08:15 PM

Calories in doesn't always equate with calories out in those calculations. Protein takes more energy to digest, so that could play a part. And so on....


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:03 AM.