An incentive to strength train and retain (or even build) muscle during weight loss: Someone who is 163 lbs and 10% body fat requires the same amount of calories to maintain their weight as someone who is 230 lbs and 36% body fat.

One of the biggest fears I had when I started to lose weight was that I would not be able to eat at the lower calorie levels that were required to maintain my new weight. At the time, I had the (wrong) impression that I would require far more calories at my starting weight (230 lbs) than at my future weight (163 lbs).

Most people do not consider the option to input a body fat percentage (Bf %) when using a TDEE calculator (justifiably so, as an accurate BF % is difficult to measure). However, if you input a BF % in the calculator, you may (depending on what BF % you input) see a drastic difference in the predicted maintenance calories. Using my current stats as an example (M, 6"1, 32, 163 lbs), without a BF % entered, my maintenance calories at sedentary are estimated to be 2,092; where as, if I input my current BF % (~10%), the number is estimate to be 2,169. With this in mind, I decided to work backwards and determine what my original BF % would be if all of the 67 lbs I lost was fat mass.

163 lbs * 0.9 = 146.7 lbs of fat-free mass

146.7 lbs fat free mass / 230 lbs total mass = 0.64

(1-0.64) = 0.36 ; or 36% body fat.

The estimated calorie need for someone who is M, 6'1", 32, and 230 lbs with a BF % of 36 is 2,175 or only 6 calories higher than the estimated needs for a male of the same height and age at 163 lbs and 10% BF.

Now, the entirety of my loss was not all fat. There is definitely a reduction in water as you lose weight; however, if you consider a prediction for the reduction in water and work backwards, it would make my starting BF % even higher than 36, and the predicted calorie needs at 230 lbs would be even less than needed at 163 lbs.

While, TDEE calculators are estimates, I am at least a sample size of n =1 (and I refuse to think I am somehow special and that this doesn't apply to a majority of people) that these estimates are applicable to real life. It can be rather annoying to see a "I'm maintaining at X number of calorie" posts when X seems ridiculously high compared to what you are currently eating; however, I assure you it's just math.

If you are strength training, eating sufficient levels of protein, and losing weight at a slow pace then the majority of your weight loss will come from fat. In addition, you calorie needs will stay consistent throughout your loss and there is little to no reason to change the calorie levels you are eating at or recalculate your deficit. I ate at 1,900 calories/day for 7 months and went from 205 to 163 this year. I strength trained throughout and my weight loss never stagnated , the loss was linear, and I did not have to recalculate my calorie requirements.

submitted by /u/rlb_12
[link] [comments]

from loseit - Lose the Fat https://ift.tt/k7nyXWj