Yup - the simple equation is that if more calories go in than are used then weight goes on (and visa versa). But there's no profit for the diet companies that way is there?
Uh oh - I'm getting cynical now :eek:
I always said that Mars was behind Weight Watchers, so they have the whole market!!!
I always think of poor Lena Zavaroni when I think of Anorexia. There's a very interesting programme on her life and battle to stay alive, then her harrowing death on youtube.
The picures of her towards the end are harrowning. She was 4 and a half stone at one time. Very sad.
thats for somebody who is a normal weight, if you are overweight your meabolic rate increases with your weight, she would need far more than 2000 cals to maintain her weight even being sedentary, if you type her weight into one of those calorie maintenance calculators it would probably be more than 3000 just to even maintain i would imagine, Dr jessen is correct. I find this whole calories for maintenance thing confusing as my calories to maintain is 1700, if i was to eat 2000 cals like the government recommend i would actually put on weight :eek: lol
Thats what I was saying! An average person would need 2000 to maintain with exercise, so for her 3000 a day ( at1000 calories over a normal maintenance allowance for an active female) would probably maintain her weight at 24 stone!
According to a BMR calculator a female of her age and weight with little to no exercise would require 2758 to maintain! (Harris Benedict method)
Are we (as a country) in the state we are in because we've lost the ability to think for ourselves or that we are obsessed with numbers.
Would it be better if we had no idea about calories at all - if we are putting weight on we just eat less, if we're losing weight then eat more. None of this "I'm 6 feet 1 inch so I should weigh X kg so I need to eat Y calories a day"?
The thing I dislike about the 'reveal' to this programme is generally the very skinny one is congratulated for gaining 3lb, in 3 months, that's when you know the programme is pointless!
Thats what I was saying! An average person would need 2000 to maintain with exercise, so for her 3000 a day ( at1000 calories over a normal maintenance allowance for an active female) would probably maintain her weight at 24 stone!
According to a BMR calculator a female of her age and weight with little to no exercise would require 2758 to maintain! (Harris Benedict method)
But shes not the average weight, so would need more than that extra 1000 calories to maintain her weight of 24stone!
But shes not the average weight, so would need more than that extra 1000 calories to maintain her weight of 24stone!
I'm not sure your understanding the formulae of weight maintenance!
She's 336lbs 5ft 4'' tall
her BMR is 2299 as she is sedentary you x the bmr by 1.2 which gives you a daily maitenance calorie amount of 2758 calories to maintain her weight of 336lbs or 24 stone!
I'm not sure your understanding the formulae of weight maintenance!
She's 336lbs 5ft 4'' tall
her BMR is 2299 as she is sedentary you x the bmr by 1.2 which gives you a daily maitenance calorie amount of 2758 calories to maintain her weight of 336lbs or 24 stone!
Hth.
thats basal metabolic rate though, thats what you'd burn if you lay in bed all day and didnt do anyting at all, even sitting burns calories, she has also been putting on weight not maintaining so therefore must be eating more than 3000 calories. I think thats why Dr Jessen was saying she has to be eating more than shes saying as it doesnt make sense that she is putting on weight.
I'm not sure your understanding the formulae of weight maintenance!
She's 336lbs 5ft 4'' tall
her BMR is 2299 as she is sedentary you x the bmr by 1.2 which gives you a daily maitenance calorie amount of 2758 calories to maintain her weight of 336lbs or 24 stone!
Hth.
I understand it completely, but someone on this thread has already said, they need 1700 to maintain their weight, so already the 2000 a day calculation doesn't work for them! And she already admitted, out in the garden that her diary was probably for a "good week", which I took to mean she wasn't entirely truthful with the amount she is actually eating!!
"I like food" "It tastes nice" "That's Why I Eat It"
fair enough I spose, sums up most of us probably (although obviously to a lesser degree) FATFIGHTERS beckons for me tomorrow night! :eek:
"BRING ON THE SCALES!"
Comments
I always said that Mars was behind Weight Watchers, so they have the whole market!!!
Agreed = it may be because we are a country where food is plentiful - that gives the overweight "more of an excuse" than the underweight
The picures of her towards the end are harrowning. She was 4 and a half stone at one time. Very sad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy7E1JXf0Ls
In 6 parts
&Oh fuksticks - just realised I'm also missing delightful Miss Dahl! :eek::eek:
Thats what I was saying! An average person would need 2000 to maintain with exercise, so for her 3000 a day ( at1000 calories over a normal maintenance allowance for an active female) would probably maintain her weight at 24 stone!
According to a BMR calculator a female of her age and weight with little to no exercise would require 2758 to maintain! (Harris Benedict method)
Would it be better if we had no idea about calories at all - if we are putting weight on we just eat less, if we're losing weight then eat more. None of this "I'm 6 feet 1 inch so I should weigh X kg so I need to eat Y calories a day"?
oh lol, so did I
But shes not the average weight, so would need more than that extra 1000 calories to maintain her weight of 24stone!
She looks fiiiiiiiine to me.
I do like blonde men bestest....:o
yeah, she just needs to tone up.
I think he does too, and i prefer them dark:p
:eek: Whaaaat!? :eek:
I'm not sure your understanding the formulae of weight maintenance!
She's 336lbs 5ft 4'' tall
her BMR is 2299 as she is sedentary you x the bmr by 1.2 which gives you a daily maitenance calorie amount of 2758 calories to maintain her weight of 336lbs or 24 stone!
Hth.
Yes, poor lady
thats basal metabolic rate though, thats what you'd burn if you lay in bed all day and didnt do anyting at all, even sitting burns calories, she has also been putting on weight not maintaining so therefore must be eating more than 3000 calories. I think thats why Dr Jessen was saying she has to be eating more than shes saying as it doesnt make sense that she is putting on weight.
I understand it completely, but someone on this thread has already said, they need 1700 to maintain their weight, so already the 2000 a day calculation doesn't work for them! And she already admitted, out in the garden that her diary was probably for a "good week", which I took to mean she wasn't entirely truthful with the amount she is actually eating!!
fair enough I spose, sums up most of us probably (although obviously to a lesser degree) FATFIGHTERS beckons for me tomorrow night! :eek:
"BRING ON THE SCALES!"