View Single Post
Old 04-17-2011, 03:18 PM   #6 (permalink)
Super Moderator
cjohnson728's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,083

I put my two cents in for the OP on the other thread, but just wanted to throw out the caution that, in recommending calories, be sure to take into account all factors. The OP is 5'3" and 54, and female, I'm assuming, so that all plays into it. Just for comparison, I'm an inch shorter, 12 years younger, and I burn, total, on days I don't exercise, about 1500 calories. That's to maintain my weight, not lose.

I'm in agreement with skysaff in that 1600-2500 is too many calories for consistent weight loss, even with the exercise. The 1600 might work for a while, but as you get smaller, you'll have to drop it further or deal with a much slower loss. I run, too, and it only burns about 245 calories in about 40 minutes. But as I posted on the other thread, you can't get crazy low on calories, either, and cycling them might be a good thing.

And now that you don't have to be perfect, you can be good.
-John Steinbeck
cjohnson728 is offline   Reply With Quote