Help me decipher weight gain after tracking calories/macros for a week

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just used MyFitnessPal to calculate my calories/macros for a normal week. I didn't make an effort to diet or change anything because I wanted to see where I was currently. I've gained about 5 pounds in the last 6 months.

What I found is that I'm naturally eating about 1500-1600 calories a day and working out (according to my apple watch and MFP app) gives me 200 calories credit most days. So I am netting 1300-1400 calories a day! That seems really low and I don't feel like I should have to stay under that to be a healthy weight. for the past decade I've been about 148-150 pounds and I'm 5'6". The weight gain has put me up to about 155 at 5'6". I'm 45 years old, female.

What do I do? Do I really need to cut calories further? My macros were a weekly average of 34% carbs, 46% fat, 20% protein. Is that the issue? My foods highest in fats were eggs and the good cheese I eat. I also eat one pat of real butter on my whole grain toast in the mornings.

Ugh . . .

Yeah, you need to cut calories. It's the unfortunate part of getting older. One truly needs less calories to maintain themselves.
there is no magic number. You might need to go down to 1200 or 1000
I have to eat around 800 cals a day to lose weight. I can't eat that much fat and have to really eat a ton of protien
I am not suffering from muscle loss, my doctor has no concerns. He was the one who told me that as we age we really need less calories than we think.

Oh, shut up. Nobody needs to eat 800 calories. I would change doctor if I was told this. The part about dropping calories just because of age is BS too. If you let yourself waste away and never move, then yes, your calorie needs will drop. Older active individual do not need to drop calories and definitely not to some insane below 1000 calorie levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do yourself a favor and have your rmr tested. I did dexafit and it was eye opening. My base rate was 987 although I’m petite (5’1” and around 117). I’ve slowly increased it by adding a little muscle and a bit more activity but it’s still like 1075. So maintenance for me with my usual level of activity is 1400-1500. I don’t really need to lose weight at this point but I have to work hard not to gain and also hard to maximize nutrition, fiber, etc. That being said I find that I won’t gain weight with the occasional indulgence; it’s the long term habits that are most important. Sleep, activity, hydration, fiber, gut health all play a role.

Do you live the DMV? Where did you get your rmr measurement?

There are several places in the DMV, including Composition ID for example, but quite frankly I would not bother. Your BMR is largely determined by your size and will differ minimally between two individuals of weight and body composition. What matters is your total calorie expenditure, which can vary widely across individuals due to differences in activity level. In this regard people tend to overfocus on exercise, but we actually burn significantly more calories in non-exercise activity like daily steps and any movements we make throughout the day. People who tend to be described as having high metabolism are generally those who tend to fidget and generally move around a lot. Their BMR would not be dramatically different from someone built like them but sitting around all day.

Respectfully, I completely disagree. Your body fat percent is a huge and underrated part of the equation. Online calculators assume a much lower body fat percentage than the typical person who needs to lose weight will have. Like PP said, it will be majorly eye-opening for most people.

I am not sure where we have the disagreement. If you have a sense of your body fat percentage you can get a solid estimate of your BMR. And it will vary minimally across individuals built the same way, like within 100-200 calories max depending on the size of the individual. Therefore, I do not see a point in paying for the test. Just get an estimate and assume the lower end. But the big part of my point was also that whatever the BMR is, it is not very helpful for determining fat loss calories, as there is a significant component you cannot measure very well. In my case, from long term observation, this would be about 1000 calories that I burn beyond my BMR. If the only piece of info I would have would be my 1500 BMR, it would be pretty useless for me. And I have done these measurements, but never found them really useful. If people want to spend on something, they should do the DEXA instead to determine their bodyfat.