site tells me to eat almost 3k cals a day,,,but I eat half that and still dont loose
Replies
-
Hmmm, so Mr cvc wont accurately measure some foods, doesn't measure other foods at all that he consumes, goes by a HRM for calorie burns which are not really accurate (though relatively good compared to other measures for aerobics), is inaccurate enough with spelling to make consistent inaccuracies with weighing even more probable (loose is not the same word as lose), is a 55yo man of only 140lbs at 5'8" who has already lost 57lbs (reduced muscle probable through weight loss and age risks=reduced daily burn), and then we find it all doesn't matter, he's not trying to lose weight, he just doesn't like MFP's inaccurate "fun" predictor of how much you will weigh "if every day were like today"...
So in summary: if you aren't losing, and you are getting a large enough variety of nutrients and not having health problems: 1) everything is fine 2) you either are making errors (like everyone does) and have a problem measuring your food (already verified) and/or measuring your exercise (also probable, almost everyone does) OR you have a different metabolic rate than the average normal human. I'm going to go with the already proven situation: there are errors in your calculations, you can fix them or not, your choice!
If you come to terms with the idea of portion sizes probably being larger than you record and really want to find out whats going on, here are some probable ideas as to where to look for your most likely errors in things you eat commonly in your log:
-Nuts -do you actually count the nuts? I always go over, 23 nuts in a serving of 160 cals means one nut is getting close to 10 cals, that matters, I can eat a extra serving in a "just a handful".
-wine -do you measure out the volume or just pour a glass? I find everyone fills a glass higher than "standard" at home, actually measure and you will fill far below full for a "full glass".
-pretzels -again, did you actually count out how many you ate of the exact type you ate? Big differences in calories of types and I lose track a lot/dont bother counting and guesstimate all the time.
-cheese -it always, always is more than I think if I measure, and it always is a significant amount of calories. We already found you think its not even important enough to log in some cases, yet still think you are accurate...and you think you are accurate to have 0.025 cup of it?!?! You seriously think you are accurate and are satisfied with 1/40th a cup of cheese...
-pastries -did you measure it to standard size and weigh it? I'll usually pick out one with more frosting or bigger or both when I eat one, and guess what? That can mean double the calories.
-corn with butter? -really? Now that is the most inaccurate type of measure you can get: how much of the corn did you actually eat? Some eat just a light bit off the external kernels, some scrape the kernels to the cobb. How much butter is 'with butter'?? I can get a tiny bit, or a whole 1/4 stick of butter on my ear of corn depending on how hot it is and how deep the troughs are between kernels...I'm just pointing out error sources here, this one alone could be 100 cals easy.
-oatmeal -yes sigh, I'm pretty certain you will shut down here since you are so adamant about this but I'll try: you log one tablespoon cooked, but you say you have one tablespoon dry. Dry swells up, increases volume when cooked, some more than others. A tablespoon of cooked oatmeal has LESS calories than a tablespoon of dry, its just the way things work when you add water to a dried grain. Think of this like popcorn: if you were to log a cup of popcorn, and went and took one whole cup of popcorn kernels and ate that after popping it, you'd eat a ton more calories. Oatmeal is the same way, not quite as dramatic though. I don't think the oatmeal calories are all that significant in the scope of things, but you are still wrong about this and refuse to acknowledge it, continuing a strong pattern of making probable errors and refusing to acknowledge its even possible.
Another tip is try to anticipate servings being a big more than you expect by not recording every single activity and all the minutes of exercise that you do. Try to anticipate how you respond vs the calculator, and customize to your patterns of eating and exercise and forget the exact numbers. I never measure things, and when I have switched to measuring, I have proven errors in serving estimation. Yet, right now I'm in a many month plateau and I still maintain +/-3 to 4lb range with no measurement, that's within scale, hydration and inflammation normal fluctuations. I will remember things I even forgot to log in retrospect...this can be yet another problem for you too. I know I make measurement errors all the time, I know they are there, and I account for them, try to change habits, try to make compensatory choices, don't log some activity here or there, etc.
If I were to think I was measuring accurately and insist on it as you are, I'd be a "miracle" in my own mind too, and get frustrated at why I'm not losing, after all the numbers in MFP say I should be... I'm not even going to go into how inaccurate measuring exercise burns can be, but the more you burn, the bigger an error gets here too, and from what you say you burn a lot = any error is amplified. Its tough to realize all of this sometimes and be honest with yourself and remember every single thing you ate. Good luck in fixing these error sources, should you choose to...I'm actually betting you will dismiss what I wrote, but someone who didn't respond may actually get help from it.0 -
isnt it funny all the DIFFERENT "opinions" here...starvation mode, no starvation mode, eat more, eat less, log exercise,dont log exercise...I wish there was a way to be accurate on the exercise burn...I know for an hour my HR stays at or above 80 percent everyday ...my Garmin shows one burn this site another0
-
shai...thats plain bs....I lost over 50 pounds drinking red wine,,,10 ozs everyday....again a calorie is a calorie no matter what you think...its been proven over and over again...my carbs are high ????? man you are loosing your mind NOT weight lol tell ya what...come run or bike with me and Ill see where you are when we are done...then eat about 150 carbs a day...then we will see where YOU are
Hmm, so people have gone about this the wrong way, and physical performance is what is proof to you? Then, she shouldn't follow you, you should follow ME to the gym, I'll put you and an equal weighted friend on either end of the bar and do bench presses with it. Following your train of thought here, this proves to you I'm right!
0 -
JustFindingMe wrote: »This has gotten really outrageous...
Can I ask, OP? Are you asking, because the "you should weigh _____ Lbs " under your food list, says you should be losing but you're not?
BINGO !!!!! Someone here CAN read,,,wow !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ok, so where's the problem?
If you're happy with your weight, what you are eating, and are eating enough to sustain your health and activity level, what does it matter what it says? So somewhere the math is slightly off in your energy balance equation compared to what you think it should be based on the numbers, but you've found what works for you and you've found your maintenance calories. Why worry about it?
Ok,,,,one more time,,,,ill go sllloooowwwww,,,,,,pls try and grasp my point is/was other than some VERY slight errors in my logging entries....I logged my exercise, food etc...I eat WAY under what the site says I should be eating...now im being told..dont log exercise ...and put your goals in as sedentary not active...so.....why ? Shouldnt the site be accurate ? Shouldnt we be honest ? so I need to lie about exercise and lifestyle to come up with daily cals of 1500 to 1700 for somebody that works out 7 days a week ????
The site only gives you calculations based on the information you enter. I'm 5'7", F, 36, about 140 lbs, and the number I get as "lightly active," not counting exercise calories, is around 1700, which is pretty consistent with other calculators I've used. I exercise 6 days a week and end up around 2000 calories per day in reality to lose 1/2 lb per week, which is pretty consistent with what I would get from MFP if I was inputting exercise calorie burns and eating back calories.
So either the information you entered is way off to the point where it gives you 3000 calories, the calories you are logging for food or exercise are off, or there's a glitch in the system that's throwing off your account. Try double checking your account to make sure the settings are correct, or just switch over to the TDEE method. This is a good site for calculating your TDEE:
scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/
ive been to Scooby;s before and do his workouts with the weights...when I log honest exercise and food and lifestyle NOT sedentary but active...it tells me to eat like 2900 AFTER exercise...even with errors in my food weights,,,I still DONT eat that much...and it keeps telling me ill weigh 127 pounds and Im not loosing weigh ( I dont really want to either ) or changing size...I wear a 3 waist pants and I could probably go to a 30....I dont go much by that either because I think the clothes co's put smaller size labels to make people feel better
Now what is your 6 day a week workout ? I do 6-8 miles or running a day at a 8 pace or sometimes a little better...I log at 8.5 pace because of cool down...I also bike 3 days a week at about 19mph pace on the road,,,14-16 on my mtn bike,,,min 1 hour,,,some days 2 or more hours...in addition,,,active job and lifestyle and weights and resistance stuff 3 days a week.....
So you are eating 2k a day ? Again curious your workout schd.
Why the hell are you only eating 1500 - 1700 cals a day when you are exercising that much? Seriously? If you are burning that many calories and doing that much exercise, and you are a male with a decent weight... assuming no underlying medical conditions, you SHOULD be eating way more that 1500 - 1700 cals.
I am a 6'1 female, currently not exercising much at all, and I maintain at 2000 - set to just above sedentary. (have been for months)
Perhaps you need to see a doctor to see why you are NOT losing on 1500 -1700 cals...
Also... I think I would kill myself if I exercised that much and didn't eat WAY more.
0 -
SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »shai...thats plain bs....I lost over 50 pounds drinking red wine,,,10 ozs everyday....again a calorie is a calorie no matter what you think...its been proven over and over again...my carbs are high ????? man you are loosing your mind NOT weight lol tell ya what...come run or bike with me and Ill see where you are when we are done...then eat about 150 carbs a day...then we will see where YOU are
Hmm, so people have gone about this the wrong way, and physical performance is what is proof to you? Then, she shouldn't follow you, you should follow ME to the gym, I'll put you and an equal weighted friend on either end of the bar and do bench presses with it. Following your train of thought here, this proves to you I'm right!
no that proves to me nothing...I could do the same !0 -
MireyGal76 wrote: »JustFindingMe wrote: »This has gotten really outrageous...
Can I ask, OP? Are you asking, because the "you should weigh _____ Lbs " under your food list, says you should be losing but you're not?
BINGO !!!!! Someone here CAN read,,,wow !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ok, so where's the problem?
If you're happy with your weight, what you are eating, and are eating enough to sustain your health and activity level, what does it matter what it says? So somewhere the math is slightly off in your energy balance equation compared to what you think it should be based on the numbers, but you've found what works for you and you've found your maintenance calories. Why worry about it?
Ok,,,,one more time,,,,ill go sllloooowwwww,,,,,,pls try and grasp my point is/was other than some VERY slight errors in my logging entries....I logged my exercise, food etc...I eat WAY under what the site says I should be eating...now im being told..dont log exercise ...and put your goals in as sedentary not active...so.....why ? Shouldnt the site be accurate ? Shouldnt we be honest ? so I need to lie about exercise and lifestyle to come up with daily cals of 1500 to 1700 for somebody that works out 7 days a week ????
The site only gives you calculations based on the information you enter. I'm 5'7", F, 36, about 140 lbs, and the number I get as "lightly active," not counting exercise calories, is around 1700, which is pretty consistent with other calculators I've used. I exercise 6 days a week and end up around 2000 calories per day in reality to lose 1/2 lb per week, which is pretty consistent with what I would get from MFP if I was inputting exercise calorie burns and eating back calories.
So either the information you entered is way off to the point where it gives you 3000 calories, the calories you are logging for food or exercise are off, or there's a glitch in the system that's throwing off your account. Try double checking your account to make sure the settings are correct, or just switch over to the TDEE method. This is a good site for calculating your TDEE:
scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/
ive been to Scooby;s before and do his workouts with the weights...when I log honest exercise and food and lifestyle NOT sedentary but active...it tells me to eat like 2900 AFTER exercise...even with errors in my food weights,,,I still DONT eat that much...and it keeps telling me ill weigh 127 pounds and Im not loosing weigh ( I dont really want to either ) or changing size...I wear a 3 waist pants and I could probably go to a 30....I dont go much by that either because I think the clothes co's put smaller size labels to make people feel better
Now what is your 6 day a week workout ? I do 6-8 miles or running a day at a 8 pace or sometimes a little better...I log at 8.5 pace because of cool down...I also bike 3 days a week at about 19mph pace on the road,,,14-16 on my mtn bike,,,min 1 hour,,,some days 2 or more hours...in addition,,,active job and lifestyle and weights and resistance stuff 3 days a week.....
So you are eating 2k a day ? Again curious your workout schd.
Why the hell are you only eating 1500 - 1700 cals a day when you are exercising that much? Seriously? If you are burning that many calories and doing that much exercise, and you are a male with a decent weight... assuming no underlying medical conditions, you SHOULD be eating way more that 1500 - 1700 cals.
I am a 6'1 female, currently not exercising much at all, and I maintain at 2000 - set to just above sedentary. (have been for months)
Perhaps you need to see a doctor to see why you are NOT losing on 1500 -1700 cals...
Also... I think I would kill myself if I exercised that much and didn't eat WAY more.
I eat when im hungry I guess ???...its not like I starve myself0 -
so it was suggested I chg my goals to "sed" and dont log my exercise...this seems pretty silly as the site isnt set up this way but ok...I did it and it tells me to still eat over 1700 cals...now I WILL be doing my daily hard cardio 7 days a week...in addition I WILL be doing weights 3 times a week with resistance workout...in addition to that my job that IS alot of walking and carrying boxes,tools etc....but im not going to log that ??? makes zero sense
I think they mean:
Sedentary & log exercise (including activity at work)
Very active & don't log exercise
If you really want to do both, you could pick moderately active and log 50-100% of estimated calories.
I don't know how many calories you should be eating, but you're in a great spot if you do eat in a surplus with all the exercise and manual labor. I'm guessing MFP thinks you will lose weight if you are eating at maintenance but counting both a high activity level and also logging exercise calories. (I can't remember if you said you were or not. Entertaining thread, but not a re-read thread.
)
0 -
so it was suggested I chg my goals to "sed" and dont log my exercise...this seems pretty silly as the site isnt set up this way but ok...I did it and it tells me to still eat over 1700 cals...now I WILL be doing my daily hard cardio 7 days a week...in addition I WILL be doing weights 3 times a week with resistance workout...in addition to that my job that IS alot of walking and carrying boxes,tools etc....but im not going to log that ??? makes zero sense
I think they mean:
Sedentary & log exercise (including activity at work)
Very active & don't log exercise
If you really want to do both, you could pick moderately active and log 50-100% of estimated calories.
I don't know how many calories you should be eating, but you're in a great spot if you do eat in a surplus with all the exercise and manual labor. I'm guessing MFP thinks you will lose weight if you are eating at maintenance but counting both a high activity level and also logging exercise calories. (I can't remember if you said you were or not. Entertaining thread, but not a re-read thread. )
0 -
Ignore the site. There, I have solved all your problems.
Or better yet YOU ignore this post and then go to another one to fight
Wow, you are a little testy aren't ya?
I was sincerely trying to be helpful. Good luck here crabby.0 -
Ignore the site. There, I have solved all your problems.
Or better yet YOU ignore this post and then go to another one to fight
Wow, you are a little testy aren't ya?
I was sincerely trying to be helpful. Good luck here crabby.
crabby ? You were trying to be helpfull...lol thats funny.....good one0 -
SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »Hmmm, so Mr cvc wont accurately measure some foods, doesn't measure other foods at all that he consumes, goes by a HRM for calorie burns which are not really accurate (though relatively good compared to other measures for aerobics), is inaccurate enough with spelling to make consistent inaccuracies with weighing even more probable (loose is not the same word as lose), is a 55yo man of only 140lbs at 5'8" who has already lost 57lbs (reduced muscle probable through weight loss and age risks=reduced daily burn), and then we find it all doesn't matter, he's not trying to lose weight, he just doesn't like MFP's inaccurate "fun" predictor of how much you will weigh "if every day were like today"...
So in summary: if you aren't losing, and you are getting a large enough variety of nutrients and not having health problems: 1) everything is fine 2) you either are making errors (like everyone does) and have a problem measuring your food (already verified) and/or measuring your exercise (also probable, almost everyone does) OR you have a different metabolic rate than the average normal human. I'm going to go with the already proven situation: there are errors in your calculations, you can fix them or not, your choice!
If you come to terms with the idea of portion sizes probably being larger than you record and really want to find out whats going on, here are some probable ideas as to where to look for your most likely errors in things you eat commonly in your log:
-Nuts -do you actually count the nuts? I always go over, 23 nuts in a serving of 160 cals means one nut is getting close to 10 cals, that matters, I can eat a extra serving in a "just a handful".
-wine -do you measure out the volume or just pour a glass? I find everyone fills a glass higher than "standard" at home, actually measure and you will fill far below full for a "full glass".
-pretzels -again, did you actually count out how many you ate of the exact type you ate? Big differences in calories of types and I lose track a lot/dont bother counting and guesstimate all the time.
-cheese -it always, always is more than I think if I measure, and it always is a significant amount of calories. We already found you think its not even important enough to log in some cases, yet still think you are accurate...and you think you are accurate to have 0.025 cup of it?!?! You seriously think you are accurate and are satisfied with 1/40th a cup of cheese...
-pastries -did you measure it to standard size and weigh it? I'll usually pick out one with more frosting or bigger or both when I eat one, and guess what? That can mean double the calories.
-corn with butter? -really? Now that is the most inaccurate type of measure you can get: how much of the corn did you actually eat? Some eat just a light bit off the external kernels, some scrape the kernels to the cobb. How much butter is 'with butter'?? I can get a tiny bit, or a whole 1/4 stick of butter on my ear of corn depending on how hot it is and how deep the troughs are between kernels...I'm just pointing out error sources here, this one alone could be 100 cals easy.
-oatmeal -yes sigh, I'm pretty certain you will shut down here since you are so adamant about this but I'll try: you log one tablespoon cooked, but you say you have one tablespoon dry. Dry swells up, increases volume when cooked, some more than others. A tablespoon of cooked oatmeal has LESS calories than a tablespoon of dry, its just the way things work when you add water to a dried grain. Think of this like popcorn: if you were to log a cup of popcorn, and went and took one whole cup of popcorn kernels and ate that after popping it, you'd eat a ton more calories. Oatmeal is the same way, not quite as dramatic though. I don't think the oatmeal calories are all that significant in the scope of things, but you are still wrong about this and refuse to acknowledge it, continuing a strong pattern of making probable errors and refusing to acknowledge its even possible.
Another tip is try to anticipate servings being a big more than you expect by not recording every single activity and all the minutes of exercise that you do. Try to anticipate how you respond vs the calculator, and customize to your patterns of eating and exercise and forget the exact numbers. I never measure things, and when I have switched to measuring, I have proven errors in serving estimation. Yet, right now I'm in a many month plateau and I still maintain +/-3 to 4lb range with no measurement, that's within scale, hydration and inflammation normal fluctuations. I will remember things I even forgot to log in retrospect...this can be yet another problem for you too. I know I make measurement errors all the time, I know they are there, and I account for them, try to change habits, try to make compensatory choices, don't log some activity here or there, etc.
If I were to think I was measuring accurately and insist on it as you are, I'd be a "miracle" in my own mind too, and get frustrated at why I'm not losing, after all the numbers in MFP say I should be... I'm not even going to go into how inaccurate measuring exercise burns can be, but the more you burn, the bigger an error gets here too, and from what you say you burn a lot = any error is amplified. Its tough to realize all of this sometimes and be honest with yourself and remember every single thing you ate. Good luck in fixing these error sources, should you choose to...I'm actually betting you will dismiss what I wrote, but someone who didn't respond may actually get help from it.
Humm I did read your reply...I think people are zooming in on the oatmeal TOOOOO much...adding 10 or 20 cals here and there does NOT make up over 1000 that it said I was undereating UNTIL I chgs my goals to sedentary and no exercise,,,which I still think is stupid to have to do....I also understand cooked vs dry....I USE 1 tblspoon DRY...even after its cooked its still slightly over but still fits in the tablespoon,,,which I posted pics of..
Again my entire point that MOST here missed and just wanted to stir things up was...even though there were some SLIGHT errors in logging food...the site told me I was undereating and I would weigh 127 pounds....not true...then others said " well chg your life style to sedentary, and dont log exercise" well duh thats going to drop down my cals to 1790 that I should be eating but im lying to the site !!
I have a VERY active lifestyle, I exercise hard every day 7 days a week, weights 3 days a week,walk, walk the dog etc....so now IF I lie and say im a slug,,,the site will say eat 1790 cals,,,I will loose weight....smh0 -
Ignore the site. There, I have solved all your problems.
Or better yet YOU ignore this post and then go to another one to fight
Wow, you are a little testy aren't ya?
I was sincerely trying to be helpful. Good luck here crabby.
You just dont want this post to end,,,,you look forward to it....you need it...its your whole life....:)0 -
Well...for the sake of science & to improve MFP, you could do a little experiment. Try eating your current calories in pre-measured things like protein shakes & bars & weighing all the food you eat (every morsel or drop that isn't pre-packaged). After a couple of weeks of that plus this rigorous workout schedule you have, report back & let us know what happened.0
-
pscarolina wrote: »Well...for the sake of science & to improve MFP, you could do a little experiment. Try eating your current calories in pre-measured things like protein shakes & bars & weighing all the food you eat (every morsel or drop that isn't pre-packaged). After a couple of weeks of that plus this rigorous workout schedule you have, report back & let us know what happened.
uh,,,,,no thanks....0 -
SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »Hmmm, so Mr cvc wont accurately measure some foods, doesn't measure other foods at all that he consumes, goes by a HRM for calorie burns which are not really accurate (though relatively good compared to other measures for aerobics), is inaccurate enough with spelling to make consistent inaccuracies with weighing even more probable (loose is not the same word as lose), is a 55yo man of only 140lbs at 5'8" who has already lost 57lbs (reduced muscle probable through weight loss and age risks=reduced daily burn), and then we find it all doesn't matter, he's not trying to lose weight, he just doesn't like MFP's inaccurate "fun" predictor of how much you will weigh "if every day were like today"...
So in summary: if you aren't losing, and you are getting a large enough variety of nutrients and not having health problems: 1) everything is fine 2) you either are making errors (like everyone does) and have a problem measuring your food (already verified) and/or measuring your exercise (also probable, almost everyone does) OR you have a different metabolic rate than the average normal human. I'm going to go with the already proven situation: there are errors in your calculations, you can fix them or not, your choice!
If you come to terms with the idea of portion sizes probably being larger than you record and really want to find out whats going on, here are some probable ideas as to where to look for your most likely errors in things you eat commonly in your log:
-Nuts -do you actually count the nuts? I always go over, 23 nuts in a serving of 160 cals means one nut is getting close to 10 cals, that matters, I can eat a extra serving in a "just a handful".
-wine -do you measure out the volume or just pour a glass? I find everyone fills a glass higher than "standard" at home, actually measure and you will fill far below full for a "full glass".
-pretzels -again, did you actually count out how many you ate of the exact type you ate? Big differences in calories of types and I lose track a lot/dont bother counting and guesstimate all the time.
-cheese -it always, always is more than I think if I measure, and it always is a significant amount of calories. We already found you think its not even important enough to log in some cases, yet still think you are accurate...and you think you are accurate to have 0.025 cup of it?!?! You seriously think you are accurate and are satisfied with 1/40th a cup of cheese...
-pastries -did you measure it to standard size and weigh it? I'll usually pick out one with more frosting or bigger or both when I eat one, and guess what? That can mean double the calories.
-corn with butter? -really? Now that is the most inaccurate type of measure you can get: how much of the corn did you actually eat? Some eat just a light bit off the external kernels, some scrape the kernels to the cobb. How much butter is 'with butter'?? I can get a tiny bit, or a whole 1/4 stick of butter on my ear of corn depending on how hot it is and how deep the troughs are between kernels...I'm just pointing out error sources here, this one alone could be 100 cals easy.
-oatmeal -yes sigh, I'm pretty certain you will shut down here since you are so adamant about this but I'll try: you log one tablespoon cooked, but you say you have one tablespoon dry. Dry swells up, increases volume when cooked, some more than others. A tablespoon of cooked oatmeal has LESS calories than a tablespoon of dry, its just the way things work when you add water to a dried grain. Think of this like popcorn: if you were to log a cup of popcorn, and went and took one whole cup of popcorn kernels and ate that after popping it, you'd eat a ton more calories. Oatmeal is the same way, not quite as dramatic though. I don't think the oatmeal calories are all that significant in the scope of things, but you are still wrong about this and refuse to acknowledge it, continuing a strong pattern of making probable errors and refusing to acknowledge its even possible.
Another tip is try to anticipate servings being a big more than you expect by not recording every single activity and all the minutes of exercise that you do. Try to anticipate how you respond vs the calculator, and customize to your patterns of eating and exercise and forget the exact numbers. I never measure things, and when I have switched to measuring, I have proven errors in serving estimation. Yet, right now I'm in a many month plateau and I still maintain +/-3 to 4lb range with no measurement, that's within scale, hydration and inflammation normal fluctuations. I will remember things I even forgot to log in retrospect...this can be yet another problem for you too. I know I make measurement errors all the time, I know they are there, and I account for them, try to change habits, try to make compensatory choices, don't log some activity here or there, etc.
If I were to think I was measuring accurately and insist on it as you are, I'd be a "miracle" in my own mind too, and get frustrated at why I'm not losing, after all the numbers in MFP say I should be... I'm not even going to go into how inaccurate measuring exercise burns can be, but the more you burn, the bigger an error gets here too, and from what you say you burn a lot = any error is amplified. Its tough to realize all of this sometimes and be honest with yourself and remember every single thing you ate. Good luck in fixing these error sources, should you choose to...I'm actually betting you will dismiss what I wrote, but someone who didn't respond may actually get help from it.
Humm I did read your reply...I think people are zooming in on the oatmeal TOOOOO much...adding 10 or 20 cals here and there does NOT make up over 1000 that it said I was undereating UNTIL I chgs my goals to sedentary and no exercise,,,which I still think is stupid to have to do....I also understand cooked vs dry....I USE 1 tblspoon DRY...even after its cooked its still slightly over but still fits in the tablespoon,,,which I posted pics of..
Again my entire point that MOST here missed and just wanted to stir things up was...even though there were some SLIGHT errors in logging food...the site told me I was undereating and I would weigh 127 pounds....not true...then others said " well chg your life style to sedentary, and dont log exercise" well duh thats going to drop down my cals to 1790 that I should be eating but im lying to the site !!
I have a VERY active lifestyle, I exercise hard every day 7 days a week, weights 3 days a week,walk, walk the dog etc....so now IF I lie and say im a slug,,,the site will say eat 1790 cals,,,I will loose weight....smh
I am assuming that you do log your food and exercise, as I've not read every single response. That said, here goes....
I think the point is that MFP has many inaccurate estimates in their calorie counts for both food and exercise. I'm so glad I have my heart rate monitor because it has proven to be the most accurate of all methods (MFP, internet, gym machines) for calories burned. If I used the exercise estimates from any of those three aforementioned sources, I would have calorie burns of anywhere from 90 to 200 calories more than what my heart rate renders.
For example, for a 45 minute run at 6.0 average, these are the numbers that come up:- MFP: 421
- Treadmill: 530
- Internet resources: 423, 448, 483.
- Heart rate monitor: 332
That's a lot of inaccuracy. On a day-to-day basis, if I entered those numbers into MFP, I would be told I was going to lose weight too, but I know from now maintaining my weight that it's not true. If I ate up to those inaccurate numbers (which I know you are not), I would gain weight and be right back where I started.
0 -
Humm I did read your reply...I think people are zooming in on the oatmeal TOOOOO much...adding 10 or 20 cals here and there does NOT make up over 1000 that it said I was undereating UNTIL I chgs my goals to sedentary and no exercise,,,which I still think is stupid to have to do....I also understand cooked vs dry....I USE 1 tblspoon DRY...even after its cooked its still slightly over but still fits in the tablespoon,,,which I posted pics of..
Again my entire point that MOST here missed and just wanted to stir things up was...even though there were some SLIGHT errors in logging food...the site told me I was undereating and I would weigh 127 pounds....not true...then others said " well chg your life style to sedentary, and dont log exercise" well duh thats going to drop down my cals to 1790 that I should be eating but im lying to the site !!
I have a VERY active lifestyle, I exercise hard every day 7 days a week, weights 3 days a week,walk, walk the dog etc....so now IF I lie and say im a slug,,,the site will say eat 1790 cals,,,I will loose weight....smh
But see, you ARE "a slug", so am I, in my work. IF you are not on your feet all day like a teacher, you belong in that category, its not a lie, its how you do the MFP method. I walk the dogs daily, hike mountains and lift weights almost daily, I do exercise length averages per day longer than you most weeks from what I have seen of your exercise routine, but I'm still "a slug" as you put it, that level of baseline activity because of my job. You are missing that the activity level does NOT include things like weights, walking the dog, biking, running, etc...because those you actually log MANUALLY. It is essentially your work activity you put as your baseline. MFP method, that you and I both do, you DO eat back the calories of your activities (best do only eat back about 80% or less though), and if you include anything in your baseline activity level, you do NOT record the activity as exercise (a teacher shouldn't add exercise credit for walking between classes, out to recess to supervise kids, etc).
*IF* you log just an activity level in the TDEE method, you don't individually log these things, but put them averaged in your baseline activity level (like you wanted to do) and don't eat back the exercise of the day's worth of calories because that is included in the average for your daily calories to consume.
You are mixing the two methods here, which never works out.
P.S. If you really can bench as much as you said, you should do a weightlifting competition, 325lb bench for reps for a 140lb guy is incredible! But I'm almost certain you were just trying to do an "I'm not impressed" there, because you are more an aerobic exerciser, and for that weight class, a 325lb for reps bench is getting close to a record for your size and age... 0 -
SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »Humm I did read your reply...I think people are zooming in on the oatmeal TOOOOO much...adding 10 or 20 cals here and there does NOT make up over 1000 that it said I was undereating UNTIL I chgs my goals to sedentary and no exercise,,,which I still think is stupid to have to do....I also understand cooked vs dry....I USE 1 tblspoon DRY...even after its cooked its still slightly over but still fits in the tablespoon,,,which I posted pics of..
Again my entire point that MOST here missed and just wanted to stir things up was...even though there were some SLIGHT errors in logging food...the site told me I was undereating and I would weigh 127 pounds....not true...then others said " well chg your life style to sedentary, and dont log exercise" well duh thats going to drop down my cals to 1790 that I should be eating but im lying to the site !!
I have a VERY active lifestyle, I exercise hard every day 7 days a week, weights 3 days a week,walk, walk the dog etc....so now IF I lie and say im a slug,,,the site will say eat 1790 cals,,,I will loose weight....smh
But see, you ARE "a slug", so am I, in my work. IF you are not on your feet all day like a teacher, you belong in that category, its not a lie, its how you do the MFP method. I walk the dogs daily, hike mountains and lift weights almost daily, I do exercise length averages per day longer than you most weeks from what I have seen of your exercise routine, but I'm still "a slug" as you put it, that level of baseline activity because of my job. You are missing that the activity level does NOT include things like weights, walking the dog, biking, running, etc...because those you actually log MANUALLY. It is essentially your work activity you put as your baseline. MFP method, that you and I both do, you DO eat back the calories of your activities (best do only eat back about 80% or less though), and if you include anything in your baseline activity level, you do NOT record the activity as exercise (a teacher shouldn't add exercise credit for walking between classes, out to recess to supervise kids, etc).
*IF* you log just an activity level in the TDEE method, you don't individually log these things, but put them averaged in your baseline activity level (like you wanted to do) and don't eat back the exercise of the day's worth of calories because that is included in the average for your daily calories to consume.
You are mixing the two methods here, which never works out.
P.S. If you really can bench as much as you said, you should do a weightlifting competition, 325lb bench for reps for a 140lb guy is incredible! But I'm almost certain you were just trying to do an "I'm not impressed" there, because you are more an aerobic exerciser, and for that weight class, a 325lb for reps bench is getting close to a record for your size and age...
I disagree that the answer is changing the activity setting of sedentary. I sit at my desk for most of day, investigating, writing, analyzing, and the only way to stop myself from losing weight was to set my activity level to active. I weigh food, measure all liquids, research to make sure that I am using correct calorie counts, use a heart rate monitor for cardio only (not weight lifting or high intensity training I sometimes do with weight lifting, because it's too difficult to get accuracy), log exercise, eat my calories back, and I'm set to active. Sometimes I take a walk on my lunch break, walk other times I don't log, and don't log anything at all except for cardio.
If you use the MFP exercise database for exercise and calories, you will get wacky high numbers.
In my opinion, it's not about changing the activity level, but realizing (1) the MFP database is inaccurate as to calories burned, (2) the MFP contains a lot of inaccurate calories for food, and some very generic ones as well, which screws with the calories logged, and (3) when using counts from MFP, it's smart not to eat all those calories back because then you will most likely gain weight.
None of us here are special snowflakes. Everything we log in our food/exercise diaries are estimates only, and it's important to get in the ballpark of how many calories we should be eating, how many calories to attribute to exercise. If I'm maintaining as I want to, I need to continue with what I'm doing and not worry about the numbers that MFP gives me.
0 -
I disagree that the answer is changing the activity setting of sedentary. I sit at my desk for most of day, investigating, writing, analyzing, and the only way to stop myself from losing weight was to set my activity level to active. I weigh food, measure all liquids, research to make sure that I am using correct calorie counts, use a heart rate monitor for cardio only (not weight lifting or high intensity training I sometimes do with weight lifting, because it's too difficult to get accuracy), log exercise, eat my calories back, and I'm set to active. Sometimes I take a walk on my lunch break, walk other times I don't log, and don't log anything at all except for cardio.
If you use the MFP exercise database for exercise and calories, you will get wacky high numbers.
In my opinion, it's not about changing the activity level, but realizing (1) the MFP database is inaccurate as to calories burned, (2) the MFP contains a lot of inaccurate calories for food, and some very generic ones as well, which screws with the calories logged, and (3) when using counts from MFP, it's smart not to eat all those calories back because then you will most likely gain weight.
None of us here are special snowflakes. Everything we log in our food/exercise diaries are estimates only, and it's important to get in the ballpark of how many calories we should be eating, how many calories to attribute to exercise. If I'm maintaining as I want to, I need to continue with what I'm doing and not worry about the numbers that MFP gives me.
Well you can disagree, but the fact remains that for most people, if your job is a sedentary job, you should choose sedentary, whether or not you do any other exercise if you are going to log it. If you don't, then most people's, mine, and other users I've looked at and the OP's baseline calorie burn assumption will all be too high. You have to remember these levels are just an estimate, each level will be too low for some, too high for others. Its up to you to make adjustments after you choose your activity level. It is much more likely that you are going to over estimate your exercise burn and under estimate your caloric intake and this is a great "correction" to compensate for all those little errors and under estimate your baseline burn if you find this happening.
You are a runner? Maybe you are a bit of a "hyper" type personality and dont actually sit down much? You do say you take walks for lunch which you dont always record, your HRM could be low, who knows exactly why yours is higher, I'm not trying to explain this new information, I am not claiming you are "special", you seem to be. I think it much more likely there are probably errors that you aren't recognizing (everyone has them, I'm not saying anything about you). I just know for everyone I've looked at, if you choose active and you have a sedentary job, and you log all your exercise burns, your weight loss is not going to end up well!
Another way to look at this is: it doesn't matter much how you actually find what numbers are working, even if your numbers compared to the "average" numbers don't agree, find what works, and adjust from there. Everyone has errors, so cancel out those errors and go with what works.
Nobody is actually doing a scientific measurement of intake and burn, there are HUGE errors in all of our numbers and measurements keeping track. So, if you under estimate some things and over estimate others, and find your scale is responding, even if it doesn't agree with someone's theory of what you are "supposed to be burning at x activity level", go with that, you have probably cancelled out your errors. Its not that complicated really.0 -
SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »
I disagree that the answer is changing the activity setting of sedentary. I sit at my desk for most of day, investigating, writing, analyzing, and the only way to stop myself from losing weight was to set my activity level to active. I weigh food, measure all liquids, research to make sure that I am using correct calorie counts, use a heart rate monitor for cardio only (not weight lifting or high intensity training I sometimes do with weight lifting, because it's too difficult to get accuracy), log exercise, eat my calories back, and I'm set to active. Sometimes I take a walk on my lunch break, walk other times I don't log, and don't log anything at all except for cardio.
If you use the MFP exercise database for exercise and calories, you will get wacky high numbers.
In my opinion, it's not about changing the activity level, but realizing (1) the MFP database is inaccurate as to calories burned, (2) the MFP contains a lot of inaccurate calories for food, and some very generic ones as well, which screws with the calories logged, and (3) when using counts from MFP, it's smart not to eat all those calories back because then you will most likely gain weight.
None of us here are special snowflakes. Everything we log in our food/exercise diaries are estimates only, and it's important to get in the ballpark of how many calories we should be eating, how many calories to attribute to exercise. If I'm maintaining as I want to, I need to continue with what I'm doing and not worry about the numbers that MFP gives me.
Well you can disagree, but the fact remains that for most people, if your job is a sedentary job, you should choose sedentary, whether or not you do any other exercise if you are going to log it. If you don't, then most people's, mine, and other users I've looked at and the OP's baseline calorie burn assumption will all be too high. You have to remember these levels are just an estimate, each level will be too low for some, too high for others. Its up to you to make adjustments after you choose your activity level. It is much more likely that you are going to over estimate your exercise burn and under estimate your caloric intake and this is a great "correction" to compensate for all those little errors and under estimate your baseline burn if you find this happening.
You are a runner? Maybe you are a bit of a "hyper" type personality and dont actually sit down much? You do say you take walks for lunch which you dont always record, your HRM could be low, who knows exactly why yours is higher, I'm not trying to explain this new information, I am not claiming you are "special", you seem to be. I think it much more likely there are probably errors that you aren't recognizing (everyone has them, I'm not saying anything about you). I just know for everyone I've looked at, if you choose active and you have a sedentary job, and you log all your exercise burns, your weight loss is not going to end up well!
Another way to look at this is: it doesn't matter much how you actually find what numbers are working, even if your numbers compared to the "average" numbers don't agree, find what works, and adjust from there. Everyone has errors, so cancel out those errors and go with what works.
Nobody is actually doing a scientific measurement of intake and burn, there are HUGE errors in all of our numbers and measurements keeping track. So, if you under estimate some things and over estimate others, and find your scale is responding, even if it doesn't agree with someone's theory of what you are "supposed to be burning at x activity level", go with that, you have probably cancelled out your errors. Its not that complicated really.
Well, you seem to be just repeating a lot of what I said, and making presumptions about other things.
Nope, don't have a hyper personality. In fact, In everyday life, I am laid back and tend to move on the slow side.
I don't claim to be special. In fact, I said none of us are special snowflakes, which includes me, you, and the whole universe.
Nobody said it's complicated, and I didn't imply that at all.
Also, I said in my response that all these numbers are estimates. Even my HRM provides estimates, but those have proven to be most accurate thus far. Doing my own research for calories by reading packages and searching USDA nutrition information has proven to be most accurate as well.
There are indeed times to either lower or increase you activity levels, but if you're getting high MFP numbers that does not mean you should just automatically change your activity settings. It means if you are maintaining your weight, and you choose to use the MFP entries, ignore the numbers and do what's been working for you.
Do you realize how many people come on MFP, take the MFP database as gospel when it comes to calories for food and exercise, eat their calories back, and then post threads about why they are not losing weight?0 -
SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »Humm I did read your reply...I think people are zooming in on the oatmeal TOOOOO much...adding 10 or 20 cals here and there does NOT make up over 1000 that it said I was undereating UNTIL I chgs my goals to sedentary and no exercise,,,which I still think is stupid to have to do....I also understand cooked vs dry....I USE 1 tblspoon DRY...even after its cooked its still slightly over but still fits in the tablespoon,,,which I posted pics of..
Again my entire point that MOST here missed and just wanted to stir things up was...even though there were some SLIGHT errors in logging food...the site told me I was undereating and I would weigh 127 pounds....not true...then others said " well chg your life style to sedentary, and dont log exercise" well duh thats going to drop down my cals to 1790 that I should be eating but im lying to the site !!
I have a VERY active lifestyle, I exercise hard every day 7 days a week, weights 3 days a week,walk, walk the dog etc....so now IF I lie and say im a slug,,,the site will say eat 1790 cals,,,I will loose weight....smh
But see, you ARE "a slug", so am I, in my work. IF you are not on your feet all day like a teacher, you belong in that category, its not a lie, its how you do the MFP method. I walk the dogs daily, hike mountains and lift weights almost daily, I do exercise length averages per day longer than you most weeks from what I have seen of your exercise routine, but I'm still "a slug" as you put it, that level of baseline activity because of my job. You are missing that the activity level does NOT include things like weights, walking the dog, biking, running, etc...because those you actually log MANUALLY. It is essentially your work activity you put as your baseline. MFP method, that you and I both do, you DO eat back the calories of your activities (best do only eat back about 80% or less though), and if you include anything in your baseline activity level, you do NOT record the activity as exercise (a teacher shouldn't add exercise credit for walking between classes, out to recess to supervise kids, etc).
*IF* you log just an activity level in the TDEE method, you don't individually log these things, but put them averaged in your baseline activity level (like you wanted to do) and don't eat back the exercise of the day's worth of calories because that is included in the average for your daily calories to consume.
You are mixing the two methods here, which never works out.
P.S. If you really can bench as much as you said, you should do a weightlifting competition, 325lb bench for reps for a 140lb guy is incredible! But I'm almost certain you were just trying to do an "I'm not impressed" there, because you are more an aerobic exerciser, and for that weight class, a 325lb for reps bench is getting close to a record for your size and age...
I never said I could bench anything ????0 -
Hahahah I love how the thread has five flags but it's back. Take that, whiners0
-
Pro-tip: when someone quotes someone in their post, it's likely they are referring to the quoted post, not the OP.0
-
Well, you seem to be just repeating a lot of what I said, and making presumptions about other things.
Nope, don't have a hyper personality. In fact, In everyday life, I am laid back and tend to move on the slow side.
I don't claim to be special. In fact, I said none of us are special snowflakes, which includes me, you, and the whole universe.
Nobody said it's complicated, and I didn't imply that at all.
Also, I said in my response that all these numbers are estimates. Even my HRM provides estimates, but those have proven to be most accurate thus far. Doing my own research for calories by reading packages and searching USDA nutrition information has proven to be most accurate as well.
There are indeed times to either lower or increase you activity levels, but if you're getting high MFP numbers that does not mean you should just automatically change your activity settings. It means if you are maintaining your weight, and you choose to use the MFP entries, ignore the numbers and do what's been working for you.
Do you realize how many people come on MFP, take the MFP database as gospel when it comes to calories for food and exercise, eat their calories back, and then post threads about why they are not losing weight?
To quote my friend: "Lady, this wasn't about you, why are you trying to make it about you to complicate things?". I didn't know anything about your information, your calorie burns, intakes, anything, so really, I wasn't talking about you, and because of that, we shouldn't talk about you. You kind of inserted yourself as an example in here. And the way you are presenting yourself you are saying you also seem to be "different/special/insert term here that means not like the typical activity levels the typical MFP people enter for burn rates___" just like the OP's -- I am not saying that's the case, I don't know enough about you, but I'll bet there are errors in your data, just like everyone else's (myself included).
Some people may find it advantageous to increase activity level even if their job is sedentary to get a balanced equation, yes. And most of you "exist" because you have mis-estimated something, or many things, just like 99.999% of people on here do (I'd say all, but maybe there is one special person who gets all calorie intakes and burns very close to even 90% right, it is after all possible!). All I'm saying is maybe its better to adjust your activity level if you can't find your errors. Its really a process and you take a look at your data, and you make adjustments based on your outcomes and fine tune your numbers/find your errors, it's simple.0 -
people love my threads !0
-
Yeah, nice try.SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish wrote: »Well, you seem to be just repeating a lot of what I said, and making presumptions about other things.
Nope, don't have a hyper personality. In fact, In everyday life, I am laid back and tend to move on the slow side.
I don't claim to be special. In fact, I said none of us are special snowflakes, which includes me, you, and the whole universe.
Nobody said it's complicated, and I didn't imply that at all.
Also, I said in my response that all these numbers are estimates. Even my HRM provides estimates, but those have proven to be most accurate thus far. Doing my own research for calories by reading packages and searching USDA nutrition information has proven to be most accurate as well.
There are indeed times to either lower or increase you activity levels, but if you're getting high MFP numbers that does not mean you should just automatically change your activity settings. It means if you are maintaining your weight, and you choose to use the MFP entries, ignore the numbers and do what's been working for you.
Do you realize how many people come on MFP, take the MFP database as gospel when it comes to calories for food and exercise, eat their calories back, and then post threads about why they are not losing weight?
To quote my friend: "Lady, this wasn't about you, why are you trying to make it about you to complicate things?". I didn't know anything about your information, your calorie burns, intakes, anything, so really, I wasn't talking about you, and because of that, we shouldn't talk about you. You kind of inserted yourself as an example in here. And the way you are presenting yourself you are saying you also seem to be "different/special/insert term here that means not like the typical activity levels the typical MFP people enter for burn rates___" just like the OP's -- I am not saying that's the case, I don't know enough about you, but I'll bet there are errors in your data, just like everyone else's (myself included).
I joined a conversation and used my situation as an example because it's the one I live, and I've read where countless other people strive for accuracy as well and have found that balance to where they get results they want.
I am not saying I'm special, and you know it--at least no more special than anyone else.Some people may find it advantageous to increase activity level even if their job is sedentary to get a balanced equation, yes. And most of you "exist" because you have mis-estimated something, or many things, just like 99.999% of people on here do (I'd say all, but maybe there is one special person who gets all calorie intakes and burns very close to even 90% right, it is after all possible!).
Oh my.....
If you are getting results--in this example,for weight loss--then your calorie intakes and burns are indeed right, other wise you would be gaining or maintaining weight. What the numbers on MFP or any other app say do not matter. What matters is you find the place where you get results and you stick with it and trust the process.
MFP, or any other app, is a tool but people make those entries for both food and exercise. Well, let's face it, the reason most of us end up at a calorie counting website is that we have been in great denial about portions, calories, etc.All I'm saying is maybe its better to adjust your activity level if you can't find your errors. Its really a process and you take a look at your data, and you make adjustments based on your outcomes and fine tune your numbers/find your errors, it's simple.
You use tools that minimize your errors:- Research to get the most accurate calorie counts
- Get a food scale and weigh portions
- Log everything you eat
- Use a properly calibrated heart rate monitor or, if you use MFP, gym machine, or internet/phone app sources for calorie counts, don't eat all your calories back.
- Engage trial and error.
Of course this calorie counting thing is not a perfect science.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions