recommended daily intake

techead

techead

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
12,185
Reaction score
48
Location
by the mountain
anyone here know what theirs is? do you monitor what your intake REALLY is vs what it should be?

I believe its calculated based on your weight, age, height and activity level. I assume its quite a rough estimation as you cant take into account your metablism.

Im becoming more and more aware of that cr@p that I eat(used to eat)... its quite bad...
 
in take of what? fibre? starch? water?

I assume in general?

Yes. I have a 2 liter water bottle I finish daily and refill in the mornings (I keep enough left over from the previous day for a glass or 2 full for immediate consumption after I wake up before breakfast). I eat 3 weetbix blocks in the morning, no salt, no sugar, no milk.

A good rule of thumb is to keep any food purchase under R15 for a meal for lunch, I usually have fresh fruit to the value of R15 (normally about 250gr)

Dinner is always salad with whatever else I want. Sometimes I'll buy a bag of chips (the puffy kind with lower calories/fat than Simba) and have that as a snack throughout the day, which is kind of unhealthy I guess. But that's my daily consumption (excluding 3 cups of coffee and 2 cups of tea on an average day with the same amount of water)

Since I've started noticing what I eat, how much and at what time, I've really come to dislike take aways (even though I do get them once a month maybe)
 
Yup!

Roughly 2500 cals a day. Less if I'm not exercising.
 
Unless you are a halve starved female (or super skinny male) - eating only fruit for any meal is a BAD idea.

You should be eating protein with every single meal. (This is not to say you should go for a full Ketogenic diet though)

Without knowing your exact body fat and lean tissue percentage - the most accurate method is the Harris Benedict.

First calculate your BMR


Women: BMR = 655 + ( 9.6 x weight in kilos ) + ( 1.8 x height in cm ) - ( 4.7 x age in years )
Men: BMR = 66 + ( 13.7 x weight in kilos ) + ( 5 x height in cm ) - ( 6.8 x age in years )

To determine your total daily calorie needs, multiply your BMR by the appropriate activity factor, as follows:

If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.2
If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725
If you are extra active (very hard exercise/sports & physical job or 2x training) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.9


This will give you your TDEE value. If you wish to lose weight - simply cut 500 to 1000 calories from it per day (make sure to buffer enough for that required cheat meal or 2)...

If you wish to lose a kilogram of fat you will have to have a deficit of 9000 calories.
 
Oh.

Using the above information - a lot of trail and error - a little self control and a metric **** ton of sweat - I managed to go from 130kg to 83kg.
 
requiem said:
Oh.

Using the above information - a lot of trail and error - a little self control and a metric **** ton of sweat - I managed to go from 130kg to 83kg.
Click to expand...

You sir are a BOSS :D

That is insane bro, well done. Is it nice to see your dick again?
 
A dick? - what is that thing :P

To be honest killadoob - best thing I ever did with my life.

I spent the last year pickup up weight and building some muscle - so now back on a cutting phase to lose even more fat.

Being able to run 10km without dying is simply a great ****ing feeling.
 
By my calculation, I get 1867 calories a day. If I want to lose more weight, its around 1400? That seems ridiciously low...
 
Last edited:
2749 based on the above calculation. 2320 based on the fitness app I use on my phone. There is a difference in the reference to your activity levels. The one above seems to refer specifically to amount of exercise done, my phone one refers to activity related to your occupation (ie desk job, bank teller = sedentary, waitress, mailman = active etc).

An average day of eating as I normally do fulfills these calorie needs.

Now this part will be cruel for those who battle to lose weight, but I cannot understand why people can't lose weight! I cycled for 2h23m yesterday at an average heart rate of 153.

Based on this formula:

calories burned = (0.2017 x age in years + 0.09036 x weight in pounds + 0.6309 x average heart rate - 55.0969) x elapsed time / 4.184

I burnt 2213 calories! So I pretty much had to eat twice as much as I normally would throughout the entire day just to ensure I maintain my current weight. It is for this reason that I always advise on exercise when someone is looking to lose weight. Yeah, a better diet would speed up the process but just by exercising you should lose weight without changing what you eat (unless you are already eating for three! :))
 
And just out of interest, I did a few calculations to see the effect of your average heart rate while exercising on the amount of calories burnt. This was for my own interest but I had in mind those who frequent the gym but spend an hour on the stationary bikes reading a book and barely working up a sweat.

At an average heart rate of 150 I would burn off 847 calories in an hour.
At an average heart rate of 120 I would burn off 575 calories in an hour.

Make that exercise time work for you.
 
ClintZA said:
And just out of interest, I did a few calculations to see the effect of your average heart rate while exercising on the amount of calories burnt. This was for my own interest but I had in mind those who frequent the gym but spend an hour on the stationary bikes reading a book and barely working up a sweat.

At an average heart rate of 150 I would burn off 847 calories in an hour.
At an average heart rate of 120 I would burn off 575 calories in an hour.

Make that exercise time work for you.
Click to expand...

yes, but it depends in what heart rate 'zone' you are. youll burn more fat averaging 65% of your max than 80% of your max HR. the higher your hr the more glycogen it burns vs fat, IIRC. my body fat was 5% at one stage measured by stellenbosch sports science department.
 
I've never bought into that. If I workout in the recommended heart rate zone I'd barely work up a sweat. I always push myself and I've never been overweight so something is not gelling with that.
 
HeftyCrab said:
yes, but it depends in what heart rate 'zone' you are. youll burn more fat averaging 65% of your max than 80% of your max HR. the higher your hr the more glycogen it burns vs fat, IIRC. my body fat was 5% at one stage measured by stellenbosch sports science department.
Click to expand...
It's basically irrelevant. You want to maximise the totally energy consumed.
 
I think this is what people always forget. Although the percentage of fat burned in the +85% zone may be lower the overall fat burnt maybe higher :

Aerobic and Anaerobic Zones
The third and fourth levels -- called the aerobic zone and anaerobic zones, respectively -- are geared towards more serious athletes. These tiers are also referred to as the endurance and performance training zones. The aerobic/endurance zone provides all the benefits of the fitness zone, but also works your cardiovascular and respiratory systems to a greater degree. At 70 to 80 percent of your max heart rate (135-155 bpm for a 32-year-old woman, 131-150 bpm for a 32-year-old man), only half the calories burned will be from fat. However, since a higher intensity workout also means you'll be burning more calories overall, it is possible you could burn as many fat calories during an aerobic workout as during a fitness zone workout -- the difference being a lower proportion of fat calories burned in the aerobic workout.

The anaerobic/performance zone also conditions your cardiovascular and respiratory systems, but to a higher degree. The target heart rate for this zone is 80 to 90 percent of your max -- 155-174 bpm for a 32-year-old woman and 150-169 bpm for a man of the same age. In this zone, just 15 percent of calories burned are from fat, although the overall number of calories burned in this workout -- provided it is the same form of exercise and same duration -- is greater than during any of the others. However, since it forces the body to work at such a high intensity, it is harder to work out in this zone for prolonged periods of time.
Click to expand...
 
IzZzy said:
By my calculation, I get 1867 calories a day. If I want to lose more weight, its around 1400? That seems ridiciously low...
Click to expand...

Izzzy - what are your actual values - PM me if you don't want it public -
 
ClintZA said:
2749 based on the above calculation. 2320 based on the fitness app I use on my phone. There is a difference in the reference to your activity levels. The one above seems to refer specifically to amount of exercise done, my phone one refers to activity related to your occupation (ie desk job, bank teller = sedentary, waitress, mailman = active etc).

An average day of eating as I normally do fulfills these calorie needs.

Now this part will be cruel for those who battle to lose weight, but I cannot understand why people can't lose weight! I cycled for 2h23m yesterday at an average heart rate of 153.

Based on this formula:

calories burned = (0.2017 x age in years + 0.09036 x weight in pounds + 0.6309 x average heart rate - 55.0969) x elapsed time / 4.184

I burnt 2213 calories! So I pretty much had to eat twice as much as I normally would throughout the entire day just to ensure I maintain my current weight. It is for this reason that I always advise on exercise when someone is looking to lose weight. Yeah, a better diet would speed up the process but just by exercising you should lose weight without changing what you eat (unless you are already eating for three! :))
Click to expand...


My Endocrinologist has the answer for you, You not going to like it though, its not just simply energy in less energy out, if that was the case its only people like myself with hypopituitarism that would have an excuse as to why we carry excess weight.
 
pulling wire said:
My Endocrinologist has the answer for you, You not going to like it though, its not just simply energy in less energy out, if that was the case its only people like myself with hypopituitarism that would have an excuse as to why we carry excess weight.
Click to expand...
Apparently some people have body's that magically create or destroy matter/energy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X