Re: Determining appropriate caloric level

[Guest guest]

The best caloric level is the one that you can comfortably maintain for the

rest of your life. I suspect that many try to go too low, can't sustain it

and give up.

Since metabolisms are all different; our ages are all different (CRON should

be more moderate in older people), our physical activity all different, our

caloric levels will depend on these variables.

BTW at the stage you're at, I wouldn't worry about it too much. It'll all

fall into place. It may turn out to be different from the theory or

formula.

on 2/3/2004 10:08 PM, bernadettepawlik at bernadettepawlik@... wrote:

> I'd be curious to learn how others are determining their appropriate

> calorie level. What I have done is to use a website which calculates

> calorie levels for persons of a certain age, gender and activity level

> given a certain weight.

>

> I've determined based upon my setpoint that my optimum CRON weight is

> 125, and according to the formula my caloric level at that weight is

> approximately 1,500 calories.

>

> Again, just curious as to how others determined their best caloric level.

[Guest guest]

" CDC researchers found that women between the ages of 20 and 74

consumed an average 1,877 calories per day in 2000, 22 percent more

than in 1971. The average intake for males in the same age group was

up 8 percent to 2,618 calories in 2000. "

http://story.news./news?

tmpl=story & cid=594 & e=2 & u=/nm/20040205/hl_nm/health_diet_dc

[Guest guest]

Hi folks:

It may possibly be of help to those who are seriously over weight to

know (if they don't already) how even very minor changes in caloric

intake have huge effects in the long term.

For example, eating just one banana's-worth too much calories each

day for ten years results in a weight gain of more than 100 pounds.

(A banana contains about 100 calories. So 100 calories x 365.25 days

x 10 years / 3500 calories per pound = 104 lbs)

If that seems depressing to some people, consider the reverse. If

you just eat 100 calories a day less than you need, you will lose a

huge amount of weight in due course. Most people who are way over

weight got that way by eating just a little too much each day over a

long period.

Perhaps I am just lucky. But in the past whenever I have wanted to

lose five or ten pounds to get back to where I wanted to be, all I

had to do was resolve to eat nothing after dinner. It takes a bit of

effort, but for me, that was all I needed to do.

Those who tend to snack in the evening after dinner might find it

instructive, and perhaps motivating, to calculate how many calories

those snacks contain and then figure what it means over a ten year

period.

Another trick I use sometimes to help lose weight if need to, is to

weigh myself before deciding whether to have dinner, and then

calculate how much I will weigh next morning IF I DON'T EAT DINNER!

To make the calculation I weigh myself and then deduct 4 1/2 pounds.

Of those 4 1/2, three are the weight I normally will lose if I do not

eat or drink between 6 pm and 8 am, and the other 1 1/2 pounds is the

weight, approximately, of the clothing I wear in the evening. The

numbers one comes up with this way are often startling, and really

quite persuasive about the desirability of omitting dinner!

Just some anecdotal stuff that works for me. FWIW.

Rodney.

--- In , " katrinacrader " <katnap@f...>

wrote:

> " CDC researchers found that women between the ages of 20 and 74

> consumed an average 1,877 calories per day in 2000, 22 percent more

> than in 1971. The average intake for males in the same age group

was

> up 8 percent to 2,618 calories in 2000. "

>

> http://story.news./news?

> tmpl=story & cid=594 & e=2 & u=/nm/20040205/hl_nm/health_diet_dc