Does your daily calorie requirement reduce with fitness?

[Globalti]

Thanks to having gone over to road riding I am fitter now than I've ever been in my life. Yet I feel more and more inclined to get podgy around my waist. Is this because being so fit, my daily calorific requirement is lower or is it just being 55 and having less testosterone than at 20?

 

[jowwy]

you normally only lower your calorific amount if trying to lose weight - (3000 less calories = 1 pound fat loss)

 

[ColinJ]

you normally only lower your calorific amount if trying to lose weight - (3000 less calories = 1 pound fat loss)

I think what Globalti is suggesting is that his body has become more efficient so he doesn't need to eat as much as before to maintain his energy levels and weight, but since he is still eating the same he is tending to put weight on.

It is 3,500 calories of fat burning for a loss of 1 pound of fat.

 

[lulubel]

I don't know if increased fitness makes a difference at rest, but it definitely makes a difference when you exercise (unless you make sure you are continuing to use the same effort).

And yes, your daily calorie requirement does (sadly) decrease as you get older.

 

[Saluki]

I can probably go look it up somewhere, but generally speaking if you are 6' tall and weigh 12 stone, you will need to eat less calories to maintain that weight than if you were the same height and 15 stone. This obviously varies from person to person depending on musculature, bone density and other factors.
This does depend on lifestyle and exercise taken. Someone who is sedantary would not require the same amount as a person who takes a moderate (which is a very subjective term) amount of exercise. Someone who wanted to maintain weight and took a lot of exercise i.e. marathon runners, tri-athletes etc would need to consume far more calories to maintain their weight.

I found a nice website which alleges to show a guide to calorific intake needed based on height, weight and amount of exercise taken. http://www.caloriecontrol.org/healthy-weight-tool-kit/weight-maintenance-calculator-women
Gives a *rough* guide for women. I don't seem to be able to find a similar one for men.

 

[Seamab]

As you mature (ahem) in general your metabolic rate slows down so you burn less calories overall - certainly when not exercising. So getting rid of fat around the waist is more difficult. So, i guess that you'd need to find ways of boosting your metabolic rate.
I recall reading somewhere that lots of very short sharp hard interval repeats (10 secs on 10 off times as much as you can manage type of thing) can do this better than just general cycling around. Caffeine after exercise can also apparently keep the metabolism going faster for longer.

 

[Smurfy]

When you are lighter, you need less calories to live on.

What about having large muscles? If I weigh the same as before, but have larger muscles, do I become more, or less efficient? In normal day-to-day life (i.e. not heavy exertion) isn't having large muscles the equivalent of using a 6 litre V12 engine to pop out and pick up a pint of milk?

 

[Zoiders]

When you are lighter, you need less calories to live on. I have found since I lost a stone or two, that to maintain my current weight, that I consume less calories than I did to maintain a higher weight.
This was all explained properly to me by a nutritionist. I can probably go look it up somewhere, but generally speaking if you are 6' tall and weigh 12 stone, you will need to eat less calories to maintain that weight than if you were the same height and 15 stone.

Lighter might mean less calories.

More active and lighter does not equate to the same thing.

Dangerous premise you are putting forward, please have a think and reword or remove that post.

I am sick to death of posts suggesting a grown man needs much less than 3000 cals a day if they are putting in a full working day and lot's of commuting miles on the bike, it's harmful crash dieting coupled with over exercise and I wish it would stop getting recirculated in the health section as being the thing to do.

You might get past 40, you might have a bit of belly and love handles - sod that and think about your CV fitness and what you can actually do - not how you look.

The fitter you are your calorific intake should go up or stay about the same for less weight unless you were seriously over eating or eating the wrong foods.

 

[screenman]

"When you are lighter, you need less calories to live on." Zoiders, it is the last 2 words that count in this sentence. Are you saying that a 18 stone person doing exactly the same as a 12 stone person needs the same daily calorie count, I suggest not.

 

[Globalti]

Interesting. One thing I'm sure about is that as I age and the testosterone levels diminish, my chest, shoulders and arms are less muscled than when I was younger and simple DIY tasks make them ache a lot more. I guess less muscle means it takes you longer to saw a piece of wood and uses less calories?

Even though I'm skinny the man boobs are slightly worrying; another consequence of the changing hormonal balance.

 

[VamP]

There are several contradicting processes taking place in OP's body.

On the one hand he is getting fitter, and with increased muscle mass and activity his calorie burn is increasing. Remember that it is virtually only within muscle mass that metabolic calorie consumption is taking place.

However, with fitness his efficiency at using fuel is also increasing.

Finally, as he gets older his metabolic capacity is gradually decreasing as well.

On balance, despite getting fitter, his calorific daily requirement is ''probably'' on the decrease.

 

[Globalti]

Damn. Just as I thought; fewer pies and more exercise needed!

 

[fossyant]

30 plus and it's hard work keeping the belly in.

As a youngster you go 'what ever' and then it catches up ! Balls !

 

[JonnyBlade]

An increased fitness usually leads to increased exercise and a larger intake of calories to sustain the extra activity

 

[ColinJ]

In the days when I did a lot of riding and was slim and fit, my ex made the following accusation:

"You only do all that cycling so you can eat and drink what you want! Why don't you eat less and drink less, and then you won't have to ride your bike so much!"

I tried explaining that lots of exercise = fun + slim + fit + healthy, and the need to eat more food and drink to supply the energy to keep going = a fantastic enjoyable bonus, but she wouldn't have it. People should sit around a lot so they didn't burn much energy, then they could survive on tiny unenjoyable meals.

My reaction could be summarised as - "WTF!"