The Cunningham Equation -An accurate way to predict calories

[Giacomo]

Excellent equation! Thanks a lot.

A couple of points though:
1. Looking across the internet I found various conflicting ranges for the Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis Factor. One range stated the factor for bed-bound individuals at just 0.3 and for strenuous working individuals at just 1.4, which compare with our values of 1.2 and 2.1 respectively.
2. Does anyone know where I can find a table of values for the Metabolic Effect of Training Factor related to different exercises?

Thanks again.

[Shox]

This cant be right... it says i need 3,333 calories to maintain my weight, wtf? I thought it was like 2000 calories :S

[mjh]

This cant be right... it says i need 3,333 calories to maintain my weight, wtf? I thought it was like 2000 calories :S

Yeah this is probably pretty close. How tall and heavy are you? I'm 189cm and 92kg and I lose weight on 3000 cals per day.

[Shox]

Im 6 ft 2 and 83kg, it just seems impossible :S Does working in shop (standing up) count as "or occupation with prolonged standing"? I just couldnt see myself losing weight on 3000 calories a day lol

[lovestolift]

This cant be right... it says i need 3,333 calories to maintain my weight, wtf? I thought it was like 2000 calories :S

Why did you think that you needed 2000 k/cal? Because the U.S. government says so? When have they gotten anything right? An active individual who strength trains needs more to maintain than the average person whose only activity is getting up to get another bag of Cheetos.

Besides, this calculator is meant to get you very, very close to what you need to eat for maintenance, but you need to play around with the numbers a bit based on how you react to it. It may be right on the money for most, a little off for others, and perhaps very far off for a scant few.

[steelcutoats]

I'd like to wake up this old thread.... does anybody else feel like the equation is giving very weird results? I've tried it three times, and keep getting nonintuitive results that are wildly disparate from my experience.

Even when exercise is not figured in, this equation says I should be eating 3500 cal/day (4000 with exercise figured in). But for months, if not years, I've been living on about 2000-2500 calories day, maintaining a weight of about 200lbs (Certainly not dropping weight like crazy), working, chasing after a toddler and doing moderate exercise about 5 times per week. I certainly have not felt particularly fatigued, nor have I fainted from hypoclycemia.

Is the equation targeted at guys in their late teens with their metabolisms set to "grow"? My first guess is that it's something like that. I'm 35 years old now. I used to eat like that when I was a teenager and growing tall, but around age 22 I stopped growing tall and started growing fat. It took some time to get that under control.

While I have grown hungrier and started eating more since I've started weight training, I think will take a more incremental approach than just upping the calories from 2500 to 4000 one day.

[TempestTenor]

I'd like to wake up this old thread.... does anybody else feel like the equation is giving very weird results? I've tried it three times, and keep getting nonintuitive results that are wildly disparate from my experience.

This equation gives me really high results as well. At 200 lbs bodyweight and 20% bodyfat, the Cunningham equation says I should eat ~3200 calories on rest days and ~3600 calories on training days. That is certainly much higher than 3000 calories estimation derived from the the 14-16 cal/lbs rule of thumb that Lyle McDonald uses. I've found that 3000 calories per day feels about right. I am neither hungry nor stuffed.

[Greenja]

I found it pretty accurate for me, i had to eat at least 500 cals over what the cunningham gave me to see any gains in weight which is what im trying to do atm.

[lovestolift]

I hate to point out the obvious, but if you feel that 2000-2500 k/cal is appropriate for you, then just go with that. No one is forcing you to use this equation.

And no, it is not made for a young population. Actually there is very little difference since this takes activity level into account.

[steelcutoats]

Well, of course nobody is forcing anybody to eat as much as the equation says. I knew that I was eating more than I had been before doing free weight training, so I looked at the equation. And it was really shocking to see it saying that I should be eating about twice as much as I had been eating a month ago. I knew I was hungry, but that hungry? But, maybe over time the equation will prove correct, and maybe it will prove to be the eye opener that I needed.

Since my appetite has changed, I've been keeping more careful eating diaries. So far 3000 calories per day seems about right to keep away hunger and that awful low-blood-sugar feeling. I'll change the plan if I get hungrier, or fatter, or my progress stalls, or whatever.

[lovestolift]

I'll change the plan if I get hungrier, or fatter, or my progress stalls, or whatever.

That's the right attitude.

"However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results." - Sir Winston Churchill.

[dylanamus]

Just thought I'd report my experiences while cutting.

I started off eating at precisely the Cunningham Equation -500kcal, taking into consideration the deviance on exercise days.

As my BF% has lowered, my calorie requirements have exponentially dropped. Meaning, based on my new weight, I am now eating more like Cunningham - 750kcal. Things are heading towards this becoming -1000, unless I exercise every day instead.

It is worth noting that the bulk of my fat loss (ie 22% to 17% bf) occurred while eating CE-500kcal.

In conclusion, I think this equation is a very good starting point. It may not work out perfectly accurate for everyone, and being a general rule, there are variables that it cannot take into account, but it certainly provides an insightful alternative to the other calculators out there.

[PhoenixAD]

I made a little desktop application .NET application that calculates the equation based on the input parameters. Anyone interested in this? I can post it up if there's someone that wants it.

[PhoenixAD]

Already had a PM so I will post this up...
http://d01.megashares.com/dl/4a8db18/CunninghamCalculator.zip


This program assumes you have .NET framework 2.0 installed..
if you dont you can find it here
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856EACB-4362-4B0D-8EDD-AAB15C5E04F5&displaylang=en

[iCookie]

hm, phoenixAD, I seem to get an error saying "you entered someting improperly"...

I entered all numbers and tried both comma and period to separate decimals...