Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

A Flaw in the Numbers?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

My wife wrote this after seeing the post I forwarded to her.

 

This formula only works for skinny people.

 

290 x 11 = 3190

3190 x .30 = 957.0

3190 + 957 = 4147

if this person wants to lose bodyfat 4147 - 500 = 3647

 

Even for me at 200

 

200 x 11 = 2200

2200 x .3 = 660

2200 + 660 = 2860

if this person wants to lose bodyfat 2860 - 500 = 2360

 

If I ate 2360 calories, I'd be a porker and this is for moderately active

people. 

 

> so, for a 125-lb moderately active person, the formula would be:

>

>

> 125 x 11 = 1375

>

> 1375 x .30 = 412.50

>

> 1375 + 412 = 1787

>

> if this person wants to lose bodyfat: 1787 - 500 = 1287

>

> ROUND THIS NUMBER UP TO 1500 AND START FROM THERE.

>

 

 

 

When Alexander the Great visited Diogenes and asked whether he could do

anything for the famed teacher, Diogenes replied: 'Only stand out of my

light.' Perhaps some day we shall know how to heighten creativity.

Until then, one of the best things we can do for creative men and women is

to stand out of their light.

--John W. Gardner, author and educator (1912-2002)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually, for a 290-lb. moderately active person, 2500-3500 calories would be

in the ballpark of what that person would need to sustain him/herself (like i

said, the formula is just a baseline). as the weight goes down, so do the

numbers. a drastic reduction in calories for a person with a lot of extra

weight could cause a lot of health problems.

 

if this person is already eating within this calorie range and it is not

helping, (s)he might want to adjust down to 2000 calories and see if that works.

i would be cautious about dropping much lower than that at this point.

 

no matter what, i would definitely have this person increase his/her activity

level.

 

hope this helps to clarify.

 

melody

 

http://www.melodysmusic.net

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounded about right to me, too. One has to

keep in mind it burns a lot more calories for

a larger person to be active. Besides, I also read

it is bad for a person to cut calories too

drastically as it can cause their body to go

into starvation mode and slow the metobolic

rate too much. Best to cut the calories a little

and lose the weight slowly; lasts longer and

is a change most people can live with as they

lose the weight.

 

~ feral ~

 

If you do a good job for others, you heal yourself at the

same time, because a dose of joy is a spiritual cure.

It transcends all barriers.

~ Ed Sullivan

~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~~~~~>

, nadiana1@a... wrote:

> actually, for a 290-lb. moderately active person, 2500-3500

calories would be

> in the ballpark of what that person would need to sustain

him/herself (like i

> said, the formula is just a baseline). as the weight goes down,

so do the

> numbers. a drastic reduction in calories for a person with a lot

of extra

> weight could cause a lot of health problems.

>

> if this person is already eating within this calorie range and it

is not

> helping, (s)he might want to adjust down to 2000 calories and see

if that works.

> i would be cautious about dropping much lower than that at this

point.

>

> no matter what, i would definitely have this person increase

his/her activity

> level.

>

> hope this helps to clarify.

>

> melody

>

> http://www.melodysmusic.net

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...