Cathe Friedrich Forums

Want our Forums on the go?
Get Cathe’s forum app for the iPhone, iPad or Android device.

 

Go Back   The Cathe Nation > Cathe Friedrich Fitness Forums > Open Discussion

Open Discussion Talk about anything you like in this forum including other videos you like or dislike.We would like to once again remind everyone that we don’t allow posts from people whose end purpose is to sell or promote other companies DVDs. We want open discussion to continue to be used for “customers” who want to openly and honestly discuss fitness DVDs, not to be used by other companies to promote or sell their products.

Caloric Intake

This is a discussion on Caloric Intake within the Open Discussion forums, part of the Cathe Friedrich Fitness Forums category;; Where do I find out how many calories a person should intake when working as hard as we do with ...

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Fit_mommy

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-25-2012, 09:31 PM
kristi's Avatar
Cathlete
kristi's Profile Fields
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,615
Default Caloric Intake

Where do I find out how many calories a person should intake when working as hard as we do with Cathe? On Mondays and Wednesdays I do a 1 1/2 hr taekwondo class. It is intense. I don't want to undereat. Thanks!
__________________
Kristi aka Taekwondo Mom
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-25-2012, 09:42 PM
nkhansen1's Avatar
Cathlete
nkhansen1's Profile Fields
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 461
Default

The way I calculate my calories is by using the Mifflin Method. A friend of mine is a trainer and nutritionist, and she goes over it in depth here:

Counting Calories: Round 3! | Trainer Momma

This is the method I've used for a long time, and it works very, very well both for weight loss and maintenance. This method works the best if you have a heart rate monitor. The other method I've used before is take your goal weight and times it by 10. Then add 300-400 for very active days, and 100-200 for moderate days. I personally like the Mifflin Method better. I've always had consistent results with it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-26-2012, 01:43 PM
kristi's Avatar
Cathlete
kristi's Profile Fields
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,615
Default

Thanks for your response! I've never heard of this method before. Will this formula work even if I don't own a heart rate monitor?
__________________
Kristi aka Taekwondo Mom
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-26-2012, 02:20 PM
Fit_mommy's Avatar
DeCathelete
Fit_mommy's Profile Fields
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 24,946
Blog Entries: 7
Send a message via Yahoo to Fit_mommy
Default

I have had success with this formula in the past...

Harris Benedict Equation
nkhansen1 likes this.
__________________
STS 5.5 Month Rotation Graduate: 1/2/11-7/10/11

Wendy
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-26-2012, 02:34 PM
nkhansen1's Avatar
Cathlete
nkhansen1's Profile Fields
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 461
Default

Yes, it will give you a caloric number to shoot for depending on your activity level regardless of a monitor. The heart rate monitor makes it really precise because you can take your RMR x PAL factor results, subtract your weight loss calories, and then add in exactly how many calories you are burning during your workouts.

With my slow metabolism I have discovered that I need to always subtract 300-500 calories from my RMR x PAL results and then add back in my calories burned during exercise in order to maintain my weight. However, I've been tracking my calories like this for so long that I rarely wear my monitor anymore; I just use the RMR x PAL number. I use 1.3 for my PAL factor since my workout is the most strenuous part of my day. The rest of the day is rather sedentary at a desk or doing normal housework.

So my equation looks like this (I weigh about 130): RMR 1275 x PAL 1.3= 1657.5 calories/day for maintenance.

If I wanted to lose a few pounds, I would subtract 300-500 from 1657, and then add back in my workout calories from the reading on my monitor (to be very precise).
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-26-2012, 02:43 PM
nkhansen1's Avatar
Cathlete
nkhansen1's Profile Fields
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fit_mommy View Post
I have had success with this formula in the past...

Harris Benedict Equation
The Mifflin Method is an updated version of the Harris-Benedict equation with more science behind it. It's much more accurate, even though the numbers can be pretty close at times. My numbers were more than 300 off though with the Harris-Benedict as opposed to the Mifflin.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-26-2012, 09:02 PM
kristi's Avatar
Cathlete
kristi's Profile Fields
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,615
Smile

Thanks for all the help! Time for me to start crunching numbers.
__________________
Kristi aka Taekwondo Mom
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:47 AM.


Copyright ©1997-2011 Cathe dot Com