PDA

View Full Version : Screwed up body/metabolism, not sure how much to eat



Whartonian
07-25-2012, 08:16 AM
I am 6'2 (74 inches) tall, 26 years old, 235 pounds, and probably have around 35% body fat (horrifying mid-section) which is calculated by using waist circumference about the navel at 48 inches with a neck measurement of 16 inches. I've read the stickies but feel like a lot of the advice is geared towards people with lower bf%. I also have some custom questions regarding my personal situation.


1. Do these numbers sound OK?

I'm having a real tough time figuring out a good diet. I've been using the K-M formula with 35% and it pretty much tells me my BMR is around 1900. However, from there, I don't know what to do. When I calculate current maintenance (sedentary, desk job, no exercise right now), that's 1900*1.2 = 2280 calories or so.


2. Is this a realistic goal?

Now, I am aiming to do some serious fat-cutting because my goal is 15% body fat so I can then begin bulking muscle to have a nice, lean physique. But right now I'm a big ol' tub of blubber with low muscle mass, so I want to cut first.

fat + lean = total
Where I want .15*total = fat, and lean held relatively constant for now during cutting
Thus
.15*total + lean = total
total = lean/.85 = ((1-.35)*235)/.85 = 179 = ~180 pounds

This means the goal is to lose 235 - 180 = 55 pounds. At a rate of 2 pounds per week, that means achieving this target weight in 27.5 weeks or about half a year.


3. Is this a justifiable deficit?

2 pounds per week means 7000-calorie weekly deficit, as 3500 calories go to a pound of fat. per day, this is 1000 calories. Apparently it is more justifiable to cut more when your bodyfat is higher, but there is a curiosity I don't know how to assess and why. If I take my current maintenance of 2280 and lop off 1000, that's 1280 calories net. Is this considered safe for me? If not, how come this isn't so considering my high bf%? I should also mention that I ate under 1000 calories yesterday and didn't feel hungry until, quite literally, I was in bed and half-asleep. I'm not sure if this is normal or not.


4. is 40/40/20 right for me?

Protein is 4 calories per gram, carbs are 4 calories per gram, and fat is 9 calories per gram. This implies that if I were to eat 1280 calories per day, 512 calories come from 128g protein, 512 calories come from 128g carbs, and 256 calories come from 28 grams of fat. Is this about right?


5. Is this diet OK?

I am mainly thinking I should be eating lean white chicken, tuna, salad, oats, eggs, protein shakes, lots of water, veggies, almonds, etc. Are there any other foods I should add? Anything else I could be missing?


6. Should I be rescaling all this somehow by factoring in workout?

I'm not sure if I should be doing mostly weight-lifting or cardio or a mix of both -- and for how long. Would this mean I need to change my multiplier from 1.2 to 1.3 or 1.4 or something?

LJKB
07-25-2012, 08:36 AM
EDIT: Did not read your profile stats. Realized you made a typo. Made a fool of myself, sorry.

My advice - Your caloric intake is too low on a daily basis and you will likely be miserable eating like that. Go for 1lb/week imho. also, your fats are too low.

Read the stickies and find the correct macros. Don't go by percentages

SideSteal
07-25-2012, 08:37 AM
^ Pretty sure he meant 235.

SideSteal
07-25-2012, 08:39 AM
OP:

Katsch McArdle is more accurate in relatively lean individuals. I would recommend using other forumulas (EDIT: <--- that was typo that I was about to correct, but I can't quit LOLing at the idea of "FORUMulas") for for TDEE estimate, or at the very least another solution would be to choose a reasonable (and rather arbitrary) starting point for kcals and macros and monitor your rate of loss, adjust as you go.

I can't tell you exactly what that number would be, but I would wager that it's far above 1200 calories given your size.


Chances are you would do fine in the neighborhood of 2000-2500, but realize this suggestion is quite arbitrary and you should check other estimation tools first.

Whartonian
07-25-2012, 08:49 AM
Sorry, I am indeed 235 pounds -- typo corrected.

I still don't understand how to reconcile the two things:

1. Higher-bf% individials can typically afford to shed 2 lbs/week

2. However, in my case, for some reason that puts things at a low caloric level?

Eating 2000+ calories feels like a lot of food compared to what I normally eat, which is why all of this is confusing me since I am trying to cut.



Can anyone point me to particular stickies that are relevant for my particular body type? I tried the macro thread and it all seems to revolve around finding the right maint./deficit first.

Whartonian
07-25-2012, 09:13 AM
Can anyone explain how 2000 is a decent place to eat at when the total caloric output is not far above this?

Then again, the K-M formula is something like BMR = 370 + (9.79759519 X Lean Mass in pounds)

So if I have relatively low lean mass despite being a bigger guy, will this give me an inaccurate estimate of my BMR?

Are there any decent estimate methods for bigger guys like me with high bf%?

texicus
07-25-2012, 09:17 AM
OP I used similar macros during a cut I did last year from 14%-8%bf (with a little more carbs/protein bc I was doing more sh*t) and lose no strength. As far as I'm concerned your macros are fine. You might want to look into IF though because you're gonna be hungry.

Whartonian
07-25-2012, 09:50 AM
Thing is my bf% is quite a bit higher than that.

Whartonian
07-25-2012, 01:31 PM
Anyone else able to add any advice?

LJKB
07-25-2012, 01:50 PM
Just get er done bro. Pick a number based on a formula, do it for 3 weeks consistently and calibrate from there.