Calories per day formula

[Spider]

A friend of mine who knows a lot about nutrition shared this with me. It seems like it's pretty accurate, since it gave me around 4150, which seems about right for my height and weight. Anyways, I thought I'd post this for you all:

[655 + (6.2 x Weight in pounds) + (12.7 x Height in inches)] - (6.8 x Age in years) = total calories per day

[Jonnycat]

It depends a lot on your level of activity throughout the day, which yields a modifier based on the Harris-Benedict equation.

More here: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-ca...dict-equation/

[LDog]

It depends a lot on your level of activity throughout the day, which yields a modifier based on the Harris-Benedict equation.

More here: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-ca...dict-equation/

And, according to the BMR formulas posted on the above site, that first constant should be 66 vice 655 for males. The BMR formula for females is:

655 + ( 4.35 x weight in pounds ) + ( 4.7 x height in inches ) - ( 4.7 x age in years )

[SassyWindsor]

If one is aggressively distance hiking then eat all the calories you can, you'll still, most likely, loose weight

[leaftye]

If one is aggressively distance hiking then eat all the calories you can, you'll still, most likely, loose weight

For a thru hiker it doesn't need to get any more complicated than that.

[LDog]

For a thru hiker it doesn't need to get any more complicated than that.

I wonder. For the younguns that's probably true. But these formulas suggest that for me - a 6', 190 lb, 56yo, I'd be burning ~3388 calories. A goodly distance from the oft quoted 4K! A 22 yo of the same gender, height and weight is closer to that 4K figure at 3828 calories.

[Spokes]

4150 seems low to me but I just let my gut figure out the math. Amazing how that works.

[sixhusbands]

I am 5'8", 180 , 60 year old and I come up with 2227 as my calorie for the day. This is fairly accurate for me in a normal day. What factor is used for increased activity such as hiking for 8 hours day? I see the high counts and i am curious as to how they reached them

[Bati]

As a woman, I can only state that I managed to lose over 10 percent of my body weight by the time I saw my first scale (Hot Springs) while eating way more than twice what the formula calls for (when using the high value, not the lower body weight value). There simply no way to backpack in tough conditions on less than 1500 calories per day without losing weight.

This might work for a sedentary lifestyle, have no muscles, and stay in a heat-controlled environment all day, but there's no way it's accurate if your fighting cold weather and carrying a pack all day.

[jbwood5]

I assume you add full pack weight (incl water) to the weight part of that formula, correct?

[Lexi1987]

It estimated 2,142.8 for me. Uh, what, for dinner? Lol. :O

[jbwood5]

Yeah, that formula can't possibly take into account hiking rugged terrain plus it seems to be missing a component for hours or minutes of hiking. For the guy or gal that hikes 10 or 12 hours a day the calories burned will be much greater than for 6-8 hour hiker.

[WY Fan]

A friend of mine who knows a lot about nutrition shared this with me. It seems like it's pretty accurate, since it gave me around 4150, which seems about right for my height and weight. Anyways, I thought I'd post this for you all:

[655 + (6.2 x Weight in pounds) + (12.7 x Height in inches)] - (6.8 x Age in years) = total calories per day

Hate to point this out but to end up with 4150 calories based upon this formula, assuming you weigh 200lbs and noting your age as 19 years old, you would need to be 187 inches tall or...15.6 feet tall. Maybe you are six feet tall and weigh 437lbs?

I'm 6'6" and weigh 230 at age 37 and end up with 2820 calories which doesnt even come close to my needs on an active day.

[DWAYNEEDWARDMOORE1@r]

you will always be hungry on a thru/hike.Easy method carry food thats lite but high in calories carb.& protein.When you get to town load up on calories.

[LDog]

The way I understand it, the basic formula determines one's "Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR)" which is the number of calories you'd burn if you stayed in bed all day. These formulas are different for men and women. The site cited by Johnnycat lists these as the formulas for BMR:

Men - BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x weight in pounds ) + ( 12.7 x height in inches ) - ( 6.8 x age in years)
Women - BMR = 655 + ( 4.35 x weight in pounds ) + ( 4.7 x height in inches ) - ( 4.7 x age in years)

I am 5'8", 180 , 60 year old and I come up with 2227 as my calorie for the day. This is fairly accurate for me in a normal day. What factor is used for increased activity such as hiking for 8 hours day? I see the high counts and i am curious as to how they reached them

It depends a lot on your level of activity throughout the day, which yields a modifier based on the Harris-Benedict equation.

More here: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-ca...dict-equation/

As Johnnycat pointed out above, you figure your BMR then multiply it by a factor based on level of activity - The site listed these:

If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.2
If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725
If you are extra active (very hard exercise/sports & physical job or 2x training) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.9

Yeah, that formula can't possibly take into account hiking rugged terrain plus it seems to be missing a component for hours or minutes of hiking. For the guy or gal that hikes 10 or 12 hours a day the calories burned will be much greater than for 6-8 hour hiker.

Great point. Is a 12 hr a day hiker a 1.9? A 3?

I assume you add full pack weight (incl water) to the weight part of that formula, correct?

Good question. I'd think so. It'd make a strong argument for going ultralight

[Jonnycat]

Great point. Is a 12 hr a day hiker a 1.9? A 3?

Darn good question. There are websites which give "calories burned per hour" ratings; one site (http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/calories_burned.asp) gives a rating of a little less than 600 calories per hour for a person of my weight, hiking (climbing hills) with an UL load.

Fortunately, most hiking isn't all climbing hills, so maybe the average would be somewhat less than that.

[Dogwood]

I caution you to not live life, plan you trailfood needs, and hikes according to an equation. Use the equation as a general base line and work from there. YOU should be flexible in your approaches and aware of your needs. This equation is only a tool that probably leads to some ballpark caloric recommendations. NO caloric equation can determine exactly how many cals you will need because too many variables come into play concerning your individual caloric needs that the equation does not recogonize!

[leaftye]

Darn good question. There are websites which give "calories burned per hour" ratings; one site (http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/calories_burned.asp) gives a rating of a little less than 600 calories per hour for a person of my weight, hiking (climbing hills) with an UL load.

Fortunately, most hiking isn't all climbing hills, so maybe the average would be somewhat less than that.

That link won't work like that. This one should:

http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/...sp?exercise=11

It says I burn nearly 800 calories per hour. That sounds about right based on my daily intake and weight lost last year. Even though I was eating 4500 calories a day on the trail, I still lost a pound a day for every day I was on the trail. And it requires a calorie deficit of ~3500 calories to lose a pound.

[LDog]

That link won't work like that. This one should:

http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/...sp?exercise=11

Interesting that it doesn't take age or gender into account ...

[Jonnycat]

Interesting that it doesn't take age or gender into account ...

My guess would be that during an activity, it is only the physics of the activity that matter, which would only be concerned with a person's weight. An analogy could be made to how much force it takes to move a lever, regardless of the composition of the lever, that sort of thing.

A BMR, in contrast, does depend upon age, as younger people tend to have a higher resting metabolism than those with more experience under their belts.

I would still think it would include height, though.

------------

Back to your original question, as to what the modifier would be for a person hiking 12 hours a day, if we assumed that (for me), an hour of hiking burned 550 calories, a 12 hour day would burn 6600 additional calories.

Given that my BMR is 1772, and a base state Harris-Benedict modifier of 1.2 gives 2126 calories per day to maintain my weight, my total for day of hiking 12 hours at 550 calories per hour would be 8726, which would yield a Harris-Benedict modifier of about 4 if my math is correct.