I am trying to figure out what the best caloric intake for me is - or at least how to calculate it. According to FT I should be around 3500 per day. According to BFL it should be around 1800 (5-6 meals 300 cal each). My goal is to first take off some weight and lose some fat (stomach area) and increase my overall muscle definition. I just cannot imagine losing pounds by taking in 3500 cal per day.
I will be adding cardo to my routine next week after I finish the 8 week FT excersize program.
Thoughts?
2004/01/20, 10:37 AM
fsdk, 1800 cals would be maintainance calories for a 175 lb person. In other words he would burn that much just breathing without much exercise. I took the FT guidlines and reduced calories by 250 per day for 2 weeks at a time. My maintainance calories plus what I burned exercising worked out to be 3 or 4 hundred less than FT suggested. Give the adjustments you make time to work. Now when I want to reduce body fat, I adjust downward 250 per day and give it a week to gage the results.
It makes a lot of sense.
How fine is the line between reducing calories to lose fat but not enough to take away from muscle?
Should my cals increase as I add cardio to my routine?
I also thought the FT guide was taking into account rigorous exercise. I am I wrong?
I appreciate your help!
2004/01/20, 11:39 AM
The FT guide definitly takes heavy exercise into account. Everybody is a little different. You mainly have to be pretty rigid in your calorie count and then experiment.
The debate about gaining muscle and losing weight simultaniously is age old. You will get a lot of differing opinions on that. The closest I have come to doing it is maintaining a given weight and losing body fat . In other words I have weighed around 210 for 5 months. My body fat % per calipers has dropped from 20 to 15 in those months.