Subject: RE: calories consumed vs.calories burned vs net calories?! Originally posted by mtrunner6
Okay, I know this should be simple but for some reason I just cannot find a clear explanation on this issue. So I need to consume roughly 1400 calories to lose a pound per week (in an effort to lose a bit of weight for the next race). My issue arises with the whole calories burned and consumed equation, I like many of you, train quite a bit and can easily burn anywhere from 300cals (on a light day) up to well over 1000 through exercise, in any case I am wondering if I should be looking at it as calories consumed- calories burned= net calories.or, if this is totally off? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
To lose one pound you need a 3500 calorie deficit. That's 500 per day for a week. You need to burn 500 calories more than you consume
Your body, without any exercise, burns calories. I use the number 1500 per day. This varies from person to person
On top of that, you do exercise. So let's say you burn 400 doing that
Your body basic burning is 1500+400 exercise that's 1900.
If I eat 1900 I am net 0. I do not gain or lose weight
If I eat 1400 I have a deficit of 500. If I do this 7 days, that's 3500, there goes a pound
If I eat 2400 I have a surprus of 500. If I do this 7 days I put on a pound.
So when someone told you 1400 to lose a pound per week, they made an assumption of your basic burn rate and your exercise level.
|