Forums >Health and Nutrition>Interesting Diet
Vim
Good Bad & The Monkey
about 2000
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
I've got a fever...
Ah, you all are into stuff white people like (#11 asian girls).
On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office. But you will wish that you'd spent more time running. Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.
http://mattfitzgerald.org/blog/?p=6 Yesterday I had my body fat rechecked. I weighed 170 but body fat decresed to 7.2%. I gained weight eating 2500 calories a day and running 50+ miles a week. On top of that my diet is squeeky clean. My metabolism has to be on autopilot right now.
<www.runningahead.com/groups/veggies/
Marcus, to actually address your original post, this calculator does a good job of weight loss / caloric intake calculations including running.
The Greatest of All Time
Based on what? Most 167 lb muscular adults maintaining weight with a sedentary lifestyle need only 1200-1500. Add to that calories for effort, say ~125 per mile run, averaged over the week.
My point was that the calculators or equations that are typcially used are not accurate for me currently. And as I saw the scale slowly going up over the last two months, I assumed somehow I was gaining fat. When that turned out not to be the case I was pretty astounded.
Agreed. I am not sure why most scales online predict a caloric need of ~2100 for you, and they may be using old governmental estimates of caloric need, but biologically and as can be confirmed through metabolic testing, most lean adults need far less than that. I could scream conspiracy theory about why we see estimates >2000, theories having to do with pushing subsidized calories, but I won't. Suffice it to say that 2000 is to many for base.
But you only need 1500. Try it for a few weeks and see what happens. Make sure to add cals for your miles tho -
Most dieticians don't recommend healthy men going under 1800 per day with no activity.
Someone is lying, misinformed, or totally full of b.s.
Think Whirled Peas
Just because running is simple does not mean it is easy.
Relentless. Forward. Motion. <repeat>
Trent, As a person gets accustomed to running (running easier at the same pace) wouldn't their caloric deficit decrease as well? For example, if one assumes 125 kcal/mile at 9 m/m pace when starting out as a new runner, would the 125 kcal/mile at 9 m/m still be true if the person had now been running for a year or more? Does that make sense?