What we talked about in the that instalment was determining our actual requirements, rather than just sticking to the numbers we expect to work based on our mathematical formulas. As I said, in most cases we will get an accurate prediction using the Mifflin - St Joer equation... but if we're not seeing results, we're not using the right targets.
These days the issue often gets further confused by the popular habit of tracking (or attempting to) the amount of calories burned while exercising. I've discussed this already in the Cardio vs Weight Training entry (about half way down) in the Free Weight Loss Education Program. So, what I notice on people's weight loss & exercise blogs is that they seem to be talking about three different sets of calories they need to work to. One being their "base" or minimum requirement, then the amount they have burned off at training, and then a third amount which is the extra they need to "eat back" due to training.
Or something. I can barely follow the logic of it all, to be honest with you. It just seems way over complicated and confusing, and that's never the best strategy for anything in my opinion. I talk about it more in this post about eating back calories burned while exercising.
Over the past few years an idea seems to have spread that "more calories burned" = "a better workout". Well, without getting too pedantic and going into the difference between a workout and training for results, I don't think this is necessarily correct. So in this entry I talk about the difference between training methodically to produce a specific result, and just working out to burn calories.
Plenty of good information! Study up!