I've read several posts saying that calorie intake should be about 10x weight. That would be around 2400 calories for me, and I've been getting about 1500-1900 calories a day, and am losing weight. Should I leave well enough alone? Or do I really need more calories? Or does the 10x rule even apply to somebody my size?

Btw, I don't consciously keep track of calories, just notice them on the daily totals. I eat when I'm hungry, and stop when I'm full.

Hi litlbirdie!

I'd say leave well enough alone if you are losing. What I've been recommending is to eat about 12x your goal weight which is right about where you are. The guideline in an of itself is not a hard and fast rule, but a guideline to make sure that you are getting enough calories to at least support your basic metabolic needs and not stress your body by sending it into starvation mode. A stressed body will not easily let go of weight, but it seems that you are doing just fine with where you are.

OOOHHHHHHHH!! DUH!!

It's 10x GOAL weight, not current weight! Thank you so much for straightening me out on that one!

whoa-kayyyy....I thought it was 10x current. As of today, I'm 199 and I age 1992 cals (what a co-inky-dink ). I've been losing steadily so far (12 lbs in 18 days) and going with the 10x current. If I went to 10x GOAL, I would only be getting 1400 cals, yet on FitDay it's telling me that my basal metabolic rate is something like 1600 cals (don't have exact number in front of me). Add the cals burned with lifestyle-2 jobs, 3 kids, housework, exercise, etc., I'd be in trouble, wouldn't I

I'm just getting confused with this whole 10x-12x thing.

Can anybody clear this up???

Thanks,
Nicole

Nicole...

It's roughly 12 times your goal weight which would put you at 1,680 calories. This also assumes your goal weight is a reasonable one. The guideline is for minimum amount of calories, not a maximum. Where each person will have to be over and above that (or right at that) is very individual and usually requires quite a bit of tweaking and experimenting to discover. The goal here is make sure that you get enough calories, not that you have to cut them lower if you're above that, especially if you're still losing.

got it!

Thanks, Lisa!

Nicole

WHAT!!!????

I'm sure I've read on here that it's 10-12 x your current weight!

I've been making myself insane thinking I'm not getting enough calories. I really have to push to make it up to 1500! I'd decided that that was the best I could do. If I was still losing weight, I wouldn't sweat it.

What a relief to hear that I'm in the right ball park. 10-12 x my GOAL not my CURRENT!!

YEE-HAW!!

Lolli

(now watch this - someone is going to come along and say, no, it should be the other way! Where do I find the icon for bashing my head against my desk?)

Yep, here I am!

Actually, as Lisa said originally, it's mainly a matter of eating sufficient calories so that you don't go into starvation mode. Mostly on this site when we tell folk to eat 10 times their current weight, they have been undereating and are wondering why their weight loss has stopped.
So if you are eating 1500, 1800, whatever, and you are losing well, I'd say carry on as you are doing.

But if you are only taking in, say, 800 cals, that's when we invoke the 10 times your current weight suggestion.

Meanwhile, there is some good info here in a former thread about this very subject.

Rosebud

I am positive that only a few days ago, I was reading a thread where the consensus was that you should be eating 10-12 times your CURRENT weight. It seems every few days, I see something different on here and now I am getting really confused. What should I be aiming for? I haven't lost any weight in over a week (not pounds or inches) and I've only be LC'ing for 4 weeks, so I can really assume that I'm doing it right.

so my solution for ME is--

I been getting 1500-1900 calories a day, I been losing, it's working for me, so I'm stickin with it!

Thanks for all the info tho! It was interesting to see the differing opinions, and the reasoning behind them.

I think that you may be right, GeorgiaB. It seems to me that I remember some times when the recommendation WAS 10-12 times your current weight. But that could put a huge strain on some people.

I think that the most current consensus is now (Feb. 2003) to eat 10-12 times your goal weight.

I tend to vote for the 'goal' weight, too. IMHO, the 10% rule refers to basal metabolism, and carrying extra fat doesn't make your basal metabolism much higher. Now, that's just your *absolute bare minimum* caloric intake - how much you want to have on top of that depends on lifestyle.

10-12 times your goal weight sounds soooo much better. 10-12 times my current weight would be 2500-3000 and that is a) way too hard to do without sugar and b) just doesn't sound conducive to weight loss. I mean, I'd have to wholy pig-out to eat that many calories. LOL Ok, 10-12 times my goal weight...I can live with that.

I seem to have the exact opposite problem Georgia. I've gone to FitDay.com to punch in my food for the day, thinking I've not eaten all that much, and find out I packed away 2600 calories. One day was even as high as 2900. There has to be a point where it's too much, right?

Yes, chromedome, even Atkins says that calories DO count. Perhaps right at first when we switch from insulin to glucagon, they aren't as important. But eventually, they are. Just because we can eat "as much as we need to feel satisfied" but not STUFFED in the beginning, we are still not free from the formula that we must USE more calories than we take in to lose. The kind of calories ARE also very important to get the glucagon metabolism started and avoid losing lean muscle.

I have read posts about someone who called the Atkins Center because she was not losing even though she ate ONLY from the Induction List. When they read her journal of what and how much she ate, they recommended that she not consume a stick of unsalted butter practically every day! She soon began to lose. I guess that illustrates that 'too much of a good thing' IS too much.