PDA

View Full Version : What should my Caloric intake be?



STATUS
04-09-2009, 01:50 PM
I'm 6'3, about 195 pounds on a good day...People call me skinny but I'm relatively well built.. I'm trying to put on some poundage but I don't know how many calories I SHOULD be eating daily... Is there any formula to tell based on my metabolism. I do cardio everyday as well due to high blood pressure problems I was having (at only 20, sad right lol)... So I have to cardio to keep it in check... before I started the stair master my blood pressure normally was 133/80, now its down to 111-119/72...But enough with the medical background just thought you should know since cardio burns off the calories... And also whats the best way to eat based on a 3 meal a day diet... Should it be proteins in the morning w/ simple carbs to wake you up, heavier meals at night...etc etc?? Thanks guys

Unreal
04-09-2009, 01:55 PM
Track your intake and weight and find out what you need. There are forumulas for ballpark figures but they are just that.

As for diet plan, do whatever makes you comfy and happy while keeping protein at ~1g/lb and fat at ~.5g/lb.

STATUS
04-09-2009, 02:01 PM
Whats the ball park range...like 3500 right?

Unreal
04-09-2009, 04:04 PM
Some people use 15xBW to start, so that would be about 2900. Who knows though. Do you sit at a desk all day or dig ditches? Are you 10% BF or 40%. There are too many factors for formulas to work well.

whiteman90909
04-09-2009, 07:52 PM
3,215.26548 calories exactly.


Unreal's right, there can be way too much variation. Track your normal diet for a week and use your average daily intake as your base caloric intake. Add 500 cals/day after that if you're trying to gain weight. If you still don't gain or you stall, add a few more.

Trainwreck
04-10-2009, 08:36 AM
Basal Metabolic Rate (Harris-Benedict Formula)

66 + (13.7 x bodyweight in kg) + (5 x height in cm) - (6.8 x age in years)

Take that number and multiply it by the activity multiplier below (whichever suits you best)

Sedentary = BMR X 1.2 (little to no exercise)
Lightly Active = BMR X 1.375 (light exercise: 1-3 days a week)
Moderately Active = BMR X 1.55 (moderate exercise: 3-5 days a week)
Very active = BMR X 1.725 (intense exercise: 6-7 days a week)
Extremely Active = BMR X 1.9 (intense daily exercise and strenuous physical job)

*If you're bulking you should have a 15-20% caloric surplus, if you're cutting; the opposite.

Pimpstick
04-10-2009, 08:57 AM
Basal Metabolic Rate (Harris-Benedict Formula)

66 + (13.7 x bodyweight in kg) + (5 x height in cm) - (6.8 x age in years)

Take that number and multiply it by the activity multiplier below (whichever suits you best)

Sedentary = BMR X 1.2 (little to no exercise)
Lightly Active = BMR X 1.375 (light exercise: 1-3 days a week)
Moderately Active = BMR X 1.55 (moderate exercise: 3-5 days a week)
Very active = BMR X 1.725 (intense exercise: 6-7 days a week)
Extremely Active = BMR X 1.9 (intense daily exercise and strenuous physical job)


*If you're bulking you should have a 15-20% caloric surplus, if you're cutting; the opposite.

Get that weak ass **** outta here. No, there is no maintenance formula. You have to track your calories and find out yourself.

AKMass
04-10-2009, 11:09 AM
3,215.26548 calories exactly.


Unreal's right, there can be way too much variation. Track your normal diet for a week and use your average daily intake as your base caloric intake. Add 500 cals/day after that if you're trying to gain weight. If you still don't gain or you stall, add a few more.

You're actually off a little it's 3,215.26549.



*If you're bulking you should have a 15-20% caloric surplus, if you're cutting; the opposite.

Not buying this. Using a percentage increase on a bulk would mean that as your weight increases, so does your surplus. As weight increases, you'll put on more and more fat (due to nutrient partitioning), so increasing the calorie surplus would only serve to put on even more fat. Maybe ok for hardcore PLers, but not for most ppl.

MadScientist
04-10-2009, 12:29 PM
Too much micromanagement is counterproductive.

When you are bulking, add 1000 cals right out of the gate. For every 10 lbs you gain, add another 350-500 cal (diminishing gains if you do not)

iF you get too fat, cut back. When your bulking its not time to be picky though, you SHOULD add fat which usually increases your strength as a result of high cals and excess nutrients.

If you maintain your BF% while bulking, you ARE adding fat, as if you did not add fat, but increased your LBM, your BF% would have decreased slightly.

When you cut, I would NOT recommend decreasing cals by 15-20%. Maybe 5-10% and adjust from there. Just eat cleaner, get your diet in check, and do some very light cardio, if you decrease cals too much you will just lose muscle which will just INCREASE your BF%

MadScientist
04-10-2009, 12:48 PM
You're actually off a little it's 3,215.26549.



Not buying this. Using a percentage increase on a bulk would mean that as your weight increases, so does your surplus. As weight increases, you'll put on more and more fat (due to nutrient partitioning), so increasing the calorie surplus would only serve to put on even more fat. Maybe ok for hardcore PLers, but not for most ppl.



Your surplus does not increase, rather as you gain weight your maintenance cals increase (of course, since you weigh more). And you need to add more cals to make up for that or else face diminishing gains.

J.C.
04-10-2009, 01:11 PM
Too much micromanagement is counterproductive.

When you are bulking, add 1000 cals right out of the gate. For every 10 lbs you gain, add another 350-500 cal (diminishing gains if you do not)

iF you get too fat, cut back. When your bulking its not time to be picky though, you SHOULD add fat which usually increases your strength as a result of high cals and excess nutrients.


This is very good advice. Even if it comes from someone who's almost 400lbs at 22%BF!

I was in a similar situation to you a year ago. I just decided to bulk and didn't care too much about calorie counting or protein amounts or whatever, I just ate significantly more food. The mass came pretty quickly once I figured out how much was enough. After a few months I had a bit of a belly (but people thought I was "huge" apparently) so I just scaled back a little, did some running and it went away quite quickly.

I'm a big fan of operating on feel, I never plan to be a competitive bodybuilder or anything so this works fine for me.

Trainwreck
04-10-2009, 01:24 PM
The Harris-Benedict formula is more of a rough estimate, not something thats set in stone ... it doesn't take into account body fat or lean muscle mass so it isn't 100% accurate.
So on his 3,215.26549 cal/day diet his surplus/deficit would be around 482 cals give or take, according to that formula.
Based on reading and what I'm doing right now, its working for me...everyone is different though so I don't know, don't quote me on that.

MadScientist
04-10-2009, 01:39 PM
22% BF is nothing. I am on a bulk. I can still see my 6 pack even though I dont have deep cuts.

Dropping 10% BF would only be 38 lbs, which would leave me with a nice 6 pack at over 340 lbs.

I plan on hitting 32% BF before I cut.

I should be around 420 lbs. Dont laugh stoners.

bass slayer
04-10-2009, 01:41 PM
Im about the same as you except maybe 6 pounds heavier. I really dont track my calories, I just usually pick up food and eat it. I usually eat every 2-3 hrs. If I dont gain a pound or so a week I know I need to eat more. If you eat to much you will get fat and flabby so then you know you need to back off.

MadScientist
04-10-2009, 01:43 PM
+500 cals is hardly considered a bulk. Unless that is, you only eat 1500 to begin with.


and -500 cals is going to make you lose more muscle than you would want to.

It could work if your diet was perfect and you were on a cut that DID NOT include cardio.

-500 is just too much to cut out,

I would say -200 on a cut and +1000 on a bulk, and adjust accordingly on a weekly or boweekly basis.