Ask Monica: How many calories should I eat to lose weight?
Q. I'm 31 years old and 66 inches tall and weigh about 250 lbs. How many calories should I be consuming if I want to lose weight. Should I only eat 1500 calories a day?
A. Many experts like to reduce this question into a simple mathematic equation, namely, that 3500 calories equals one pound. Therefore, cutting 500 Calories (kcal) per day will equal one pound of weight loss per week (500 Calories x 7 days = 3500 Calories, or 1 pound). Using Nutrition Data's Daily Needs Calculator, I figure that you would need 2500 Calories per day to maintain your current weight. So, using the simple math, eating 1500 Calories a day would cut 1000 Calories, translating into 2 pounds a week.
But in the real world, it's a little more complex than that. First of all, a 1500-Calorie diet can feel pretty restrictive and might be hard to stick to for the long term. Secondly, suddenly cutting your caloric intake by 40% is likely to shift your body into starvation mode, in which your metabolism slows to accomodate the drop in calories. That's not what you want!
A better way to create a calorie deficit is to moderately reduce your calorie intake and at the same time increase the number of calories you burn with exercise.
Let's say you reduce your caloric intake to 1800 Calories a day (a deficit of 700 per day). Then, you burn an extra 300 Calories every day through exercise. (You can use the Daily Needs Calculator to see how many calories various exercises burn. Walking briskly 30 minutes a day and doing 20-30 minutes of strength training per week would burn an average of 300 extra Calories per day.)
You're still creating a 7000/per week Calorie deficit, which would average out to a weight loss of 2 pounds per week, but you won't be as hungry and there's less danger of an unintended down-shift in metabolism. In fact, exercise not only burns calories but as you add lean muscle mass (particularly through strength training) you actually increase your metabolic rate. That means you burn more calories even when you're not exercising, which can incrementally increase the pace of weight loss. It will also speed the loss of inches, which can be just as important as the loss of pounds.
It might not sound like much, but two pounds a week is a pretty good pace for steady weight loss. (And at first you'll probably lose more than that as your body sheds water). At 250 pounds, you have around a hundred pounds to lose in order to reach a healthy weight, so you should be realistic: It's going to take a little while to reach your goal. But it's so worth it. And it is possible! Just last year, an ND user lost over a 100 pounds by monitoring his diet on Nutrition Data.
One last piece of advice from me (and then I'll let other NutritionData users chime in): Choosing foods with a high Fullness Factor will help keep you feeling satisfied on fewer calories, which may make it easier to stick to your diet for the long term. Read more about the Fullness Factor on Nutrition Data.
So, any Nutrition Data users with words of wisdom or encouragement?
 older posts |
home | newer posts  |
| What do 200 calories look like? | | Nutrition Data Blog | | Fill that sport bottle with milk |
Posted by: Sam | Aug 16, 2007 3:50:45 PM
Exercise, indeed! Everyone could use a little bit more of it. I'm glad to see someone wanting to lose weight and hopefully following through with it. Good luck to you!
Posted by: Deb | Aug 17, 2007 12:57:42 PM
I have had chronic pain and fatigue for awhile now. I have interstitial cystitis, IBS,and just diagnosed with RA and referred to a rheumatologist. He put me on a med for inflammation. Said my inflammation test was higher than my RA test. So I looked up inflammation on google and got you!
I am about 50 pounds overweight(200 at 5'5") Up untill a year ago and this pain, I was in good shape and exercised. Now I am in so much painI can't walk far at all.
I am getting your book even though my doc didn't mention diet at all. (He is overweight too)
Posted by: deb | Aug 17, 2007 12:59:11 PM
I forgot to mention I also have Type2 diabetes also and I thought I was eating well till I read your blog. Bananas are bad huh?
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Aug 17, 2007 3:54:15 PM
Bananas are not the enemy! I think the reason that bananas (and other tropical fruits like mango and guava) get a bad rap for diabetics is that they have a higher glycemic index than other fruits such as berries. (You can read more about the glycemic index on our Topic pages.)
But virtually all types of fruit have a lower glycemic index than refined sweets like cookies and cake. Plus they are an important source of fiber, vitamins and minerals.
Fruit is a healthy food for diabetics but should be eaten in moderation. A serving of fruit at every meal is not too much. On the other hand, four boxes of raisins as a mid-day snack might be.
(Watch portion sizes of dried fruit. Because they have all the water removed, it's easy to eat the equivalent of several servings of fresh fruit at a single sitting.)
Posted by: Julio Vasquez | Aug 27, 2007 8:31:50 PM
This evaluation is great. I feel very satified with all your information about health and fisical condition.
Best wishes Monica.
Julio Vásquez
(from Caracas Venezuela)
Posted by: Kym | Aug 30, 2007 10:29:45 PM
I really enjoyed reading all this info..thanx..I lost about 20 lbs this summer by walking everyday 5 miles..and just really cutting out JUNK!!! But now I am at a stand still & need to lose about 25 more lbs. Any advice? Kym
Posted by: Skeptic | Oct 7, 2007 1:11:15 PM
This article is an oversimplification of fuel metabolism. And unfortunately it is not physiologically sound and gives a lot of inaccurate information on the regulation of fat mass.
First, resting or basal metabolism rate (BMR) is closely associated to fat free mass (mostly muscle mass, since Fat/adipose is made mostly of metabolically inactive triglycerides)... BMR is virtually independent of energy intake. So, if you reduce your dietary input, your metabolism will NOT decrease. Think of your BMR as the smallest amount of energy needed to maintain tissue/cellular function and viability... so BMR cannot reduce any lower without leading to cell dysfunction or cell death. In summary, dieting will NOT "slow" your metablism down.
[Although, it should be noticed that in weight loss, muscle is also lost and this decreases you free fat mass --> leading to a decrease in BMR]
Second, the biggest problem faced by people attempting to lose weight is the set point we adopt (usually early in life - although it is modified throughout life). As it turns out our fat cells have a minimum mass that they want to maintain (our set point), which makes sense out of the fact that weight proportions are associated with genetic inheritance (more so than environment... studies with adopted children and identical twins bear this out). So, when we we fall beneath our fat mass set point, fat cells release hormones, such as ghrelin --> which is then released to the hypothalamus --> which communicates with the cerebral cortex --> and initiates feeding. So any reduction in the fat mass acts by increasing the signal to eat. So people dieting will notice that they feel more hungry. In summary, if you're on a diet, anticipate greater hunger, which intuitively makes sense.
BTW, insulin and leptin (leptin is also released from fat cells) send signal to the brain as well, but these signals are "anorexic" in nature, or rather they result in the reduction of hunger.
In addition to the hunger drive, the other problem for people trying to lose weight is that of energy expenditure. Again, when our fat mass decreases below our set point (such as when one loses weight) energy expenditure is blunted. So, often dieters will say that since they went on a diet they "feel" tired, sleep more, etc.; this is a decrease in energy use. In fact, when fat free mass decreases as a result of dieting, energy expenditure decreases more than what would be expected --> so dieting makes you more tired than would be predicted... I'd say that is just plain EVIL. Seriously, it is very difficult to lose weight and keep it off. In summary, if your dieting, anticipate that you will have less desire to be physically active.
Fact: about 90% of people that lose weight will gain in back within 5 years.
Losing weight is a dunting challenge, but nevertheless, one should endeavor to lose at least a modest amount of weight. Interestingly, weight loss due to modification of lifestyle rarely exceeds 10%, which is not too bad since this 10% correlates favorably with improved health, i.e., cardiovascular and cerebralvascular disease, cancer, as well as reduced diabetes manifestation.
Other Points:
Okay, this so called "starvation mode" this actually is sort of a reality, but not as explained above. All you can say about this "mode" is that once your immediate use of readily available glucose and glycogen are largely deplete, you begin utilizing in great proportion fat stores as a primary source of energy. Fatty acid --> oxidation --> ketone bodie generation. (Note: the brain uses glucose as it's primary fuel, but after 3-4 days of starvation it will shift to using ketones for energy)... but once again, there is NO such thing as a "starvation mode" that results in a slower metabolism.
One last thing on metabolism. There is misinformation that's been hanging around out there for years and that is that overweight and obese people have "slower" metabolisms. NOT TRUE AT ALL! In fact obese people have a higher BMR (this has been demonstrated extensively in laboratory settings), which makes sense. If you're obese you have to have larger muscles to move your body...and fat free mass increase (muscle) results in --> higher BMR. In other words, it requires more strength, larger muscles, more enegery to move a 300 lb person than a 120 pound person. In summary, larger people have more muscle (fat free mass) so they have a higher BMR.
Good luck with your weight loss.
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Oct 8, 2007 12:52:39 PM
Thanks for the interesting post. See my response here: http://blog.nutritiondata.com/ndblog/2007/10/is-dieting-ho-1.html#more
Posted by: Pmax | Nov 29, 2007 7:15:59 PM
I have to laugh at people who say 'it's better to gradually decrease calories', or 'it's better to eat a more balanced diet', citing optimum percentages of Fat, Carbs and Protein.
They decry the people that talk about being successful on a 'fad diet', and claim they are no good.
Why is it funny?
Simple. If people could eat these balanced percentage diets and 'just stop eating so much', then everyone would be thin.
There are definitely 'tricks' to dieting successfully, but each person has to find their own diet that works and discover their own 'tricks'.
There are really three main diet choices. Low fat, low calorie and low carb (or a combination of the above). Low calorie dieters who haven't discovered the appropriate 'trick' are miserable and look unhealthy; same with low fat dieters. Low carb dieters smell funny, and of course their kidneys rapidly turn to mahogany (j/k)
But I digress. Being a successful dieter means that you've mastered the 'tricks' that work for you and it's really somewhat pointless to try and tell others to use these. Likewise it's rather pointless to talk about 'eating good healthy food', and balanced diets and ratios.
Dieting isn't easy, isn't pretty and 'good smelling food' and lots of delicious recipes are good ways to fail to cut calories.
Finally, if you think dieting is hard, wait until you make your goal. Maintaining is MUCH harder than dieting.
Why?
Well when you're dieting you have things to look forward to, such as fitting into new clothes or seeing a lower number on the scale.
Though it is fun to be thin (I has a lap!) it's actually more fun getting thin and there are no rewards coming anymore.
There's a trick here too, but you'll discover it on your own.
Nice article, but I suspect the author has never had to lose 50lbs and keep it off, or else they'd know that talking about 'balanced diets' and slowly lowering calories is unrelated to real world dieting.
Posted by: Crystal | Mar 3, 2008 9:12:15 PM
ok i was reading about shifting your metabolism. is that healthy and if so how would i do that. i only want to lose about 15-20 pounds. i had my tubes tied after my third child and i have gain alot of weight. thank you for you time.
Posted by: tara | Mar 4, 2008 11:17:37 AM
Hi I'm 150 pounds I can't fit into anything anymore and i just would like to know what i can do to lose at least 20-25 pounds.I was thinking of just starving myself,doing pilates,or something to lose weight but I'm not sure how to do it so if anyone can help that would be so great thank you,
Posted by: haley | Mar 14, 2008 11:28:35 PM
i am 111 pounds and i am always getting made fun of because of how big i am and i do not like it anymore i just want to lose at least 25 to 30 pounds and i want to lose some so i do not have to hid it anymore
Posted by: PJ | Apr 6, 2008 10:59:30 PM
Can only speak from my own experience, b/c everyone is different. However, have tried lots of diets, diets + exercise, exercise only, etc. There is only one approach which works for me, is consistent, and reliable.
The answer was to:
1) Cut carbs (almost completely)
2) Cut calories to 1200-1500 /day.
3) Take an appetite suppressant, do a little exercise daily.
I am not going to get into a huge debate with the nutritionists - just make the point that for me, this works, always.
Posted by: TWR | Apr 11, 2008 7:37:23 PM
Try the grapefruit diet !!! It's not a long term thing but with a little cardio (hip hop abs-but only for 10 days so far),my wife and I have lost 20-25 lbs. each in about 6 weeks.
Posted by: CURTIS | Apr 26, 2008 5:42:43 PM
Weight loss has ALWAYS been a simple equation. Total Calories needed - (Food Calorie intake - Calories burned) = a calorie negative or positive balance. It's all about the calories you take in and the calories you use. It's that simple. I lost 50 lbs. with this approach. No special diets. I just ate all the foods we all know we "should" be eating. Fresh vegetables, low-fat dairy, lean meat, and fruits. And I stayed away from the nasty stuff. Like soda, candy, greasy food, processed food and most fast-food. Not that I don't eat the "bad" stuff. I do from time to time. I just have little desire to eat them. I like food that tastes good AND contributes to my health. It's just a matter of habit. And it IS all about counting calories. Nutritiondata has good solid advice and great tools. Not fad diets that no one can stay with. I know I tried them!
Posted by: PJ | Apr 26, 2008 6:48:17 PM
Unfortunately Curtis, weight loss is not that simple. If it were, we would all be thin.
Noone debates the math. However your approach is flawed b/c it assumes all food consumed is burned to the full extent of its calorie value.
Low carb foods are proven not to result in calorie storage (fat storage) in the absence of carbohydrate. Therefore a proportion of the food is discarded by the body. This is really simple, does not contradict any math and is very obvious. This is why a normal person eating 2500 cal / day consisting exclusively, of say, milk chocolate, will probably put on weight, whereas 2500 cal of low carb (lean meat, green veges only) results in significant weight loss.
No math problem here, just food either being burned and stored (chocolate) and burned and/or discarded (meat & veges).
Posted by: Tanya | May 21, 2008 1:36:57 PM
According to to daily needs calculator here on ND, I only use about 1,900 calories a day. In this article, is says that 1,500 calories would feel restrictive. How do I balance it out? I use this website to track my daily intake. I am just as interested in healthy eating and making sure I eat enough of a variety of foods to get maximum nutrition. I am finally losing weight, but it is coming off slowly, and I average about 1,200 calories. (I am still a couch potato).
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | May 26, 2008 10:28:14 AM
Tanya,
For the individual I was talking about in the post, a diet of 1500 calories would have meant cutting a thousand calories a day. For you, a diet of 1500 calories a day means a reduction of only 400 calories a day. So, my comment about 1500 a day feeling restrictive may not necessarily apply to you. How do you balance it out? The answer is in your last sentence: get off the couch! When you burn more calories through exercise, you can eat more calories and still lose (or maintain) your weight.
Posted by: Cindy | Jun 4, 2008 11:11:23 PM
Question for Skeptic - to focus for a second on the 10% (or however many) who have lost weight and kept it off successfully. What do you think they did that the other 90% didn't? Even 5% or 10% of dieters is a lot of people in the world who have succeeded, and they didn't all have bariatric surgery.
Posted by: Cindy | Jun 4, 2008 11:57:28 PM
I have a question that no one has ever answered to my satisfaction. When I ask, no one seems to know. I've heard all my life that the quick first few pounds one loses on a new diet plan are due to water loss. Why does starting a diet make the body suddenly drop liters of water? Don't we need that water? If not, why were we storing it in the first place?
Posted by: madeline | Jul 4, 2008 6:01:16 AM
i have been walking for 30 minutes everyday and doing weight training along with eating 1200 calories or less for a month. what do you think i should do. may i have a thyroid problem, because my grandma and great- grandma have to take medicine for her thyroid? i've only lost 4 lbs. i'm starting to lose faith because i am not seeing much of a change.
Posted by: LMiller | Jul 4, 2008 6:36:05 PM
I don't know, but I think extra helpings of COMMON SENSE is what all of us over-weight people need in our daily diet!!!
Posted by: Charisma | Jul 18, 2008 1:01:40 PM
I don't know if its just me. But its easy for me to not eat that many calories.. I've actually been eating more- just things with less calories. Will my body still think that i'm starving myself if I'm eating the same (if not more), but less calories? I'm trying to eat 1500 calories a day- but often end up only eating about 1000..
Posted by: slb06005 | Aug 8, 2008 9:38:42 AM
hi, Im 5'6" and weigh 165. I'm tryn to get to 140. I est less than a 1000 calories a day and 10 fat grams or less. I have been exercising everyday. My question is I usually walk 4.5-6 miles but I have my three children (6,8,10) with me so I am continually stopping to wait on them. Last night we walked 6 miles and it took us 2 hours. Is this giving me quality exercise or am I wasting my time? Thanks
Posted by: Allie | Aug 21, 2008 11:25:54 PM
I'm currently 115 pounds, 5'1", strength training and running. I am really struggling to understand what/how much I should be eating in a day to keep up with my body's need without starving myself and/or over doing the intake.
My goal is to loose the fat and tone what I have...nothing drastic I just want to be solid.
Any suggestions???
