Remaining calories

monarchysix9
monarchysix9 Posts: 14 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Can somone please explain to me what is the remaining cAlories after tracking your food for the day means? Two days in a row I'm like way under is that good or bad? I'm new to this app thanks..
«1

Replies

  • TimothyFish
    TimothyFish Posts: 4,925 Member
    MFP gives you the number of calories you should eat to reach you goal. If you are way under, then you may not be eating enough to stay healthy.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    MFP determines your daily net caloric needs using NEAT (Non Exercise Activity Thermogenisis). That daily goal includes the deficit needed to meet your projected weekly weight loss goals. If you are "way under" it means you are missing your net calorie goals and possibly undereating and failing to provide your body with key nutrients needed for a healthy weight loss program. It is impossible to honestly assess with a closed diary, but if your logging matches the tone of your post, you probably need to up the net intake.
  • monarchysix9
    monarchysix9 Posts: 14 Member
    Ok does that mean weight will drop quicker if your way under? For example last night it said I had 2,255 calories left? That's what I don't get im eating pretty clean and working out should I try to hit all the calories its setting for me? Or is it good to be under?
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Let's take a giant step back. What is your current height and weight? How much do you have MFP set to lose per week? How many calories are you eating total per day? What is your net intake?

    2255 calories under your MFP set daily target is a huge amount ... potentially unhealthy. If you could please answer the questions and open your diary, it would help give informed answers.
  • monarchysix9
    monarchysix9 Posts: 14 Member
    Ok my diary is public now. I'm 5ft 7 218 lbs. I set it to loose 1 pound per week and it's giving me 2,910 for the goal?i ate about 1,170 it's only giving me credit for 510 calories burned this is all kinda confusing
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • monarchysix9
    monarchysix9 Posts: 14 Member
    The tone of my post?what is that supposed to mean?
  • Dawnb2014
    Dawnb2014 Posts: 2 Member
    curious, you say don't log exercise calories....how come? I was going to ask if I should add in calories burned from weight training as it doesn't seem like the program takes those calories into account.
  • missiontofitness
    missiontofitness Posts: 4,059 Member
    edited November 2014
    monarchysix9 wrote: »
    Ok my diary is public now. I'm 5ft 7 218 lbs. I set it to loose 1 pound per week and it's giving me 2,910 for the goal?i ate about 1,170 it's only giving me credit for 510 calories burned this is all kinda confusing


    Your calorie goal is 2,910 after factoring in exercise. I'm assuming your daily goal is 2,400 per day before exercise. You need to eat more when you exercise to net a healthy amount of calories per day.

    1,170 is far too low. Your 1lb a week deficit is built in to your 2,400 calorie goal already, so there is no need to eat under it. The reason it is giving you even more is because you have netted 660 calories today (1,170 - 510). You need to be netting far more!

    Edit: Also, as a male, 1,170 is far too low for you.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    After looking at your diary, it says for a male your age, you're not eating enough.
  • glevinso
    glevinso Posts: 1,895 Member
    monarchysix9 wrote: »
    Ok my diary is public now. I'm 5ft 7 218 lbs. I set it to loose 1 pound per week and it's giving me 2,910 for the goal?i ate about 1,170 it's only giving me credit for 510 calories burned this is all kinda confusing

    What do you have set as your "activity level"? And how did you arrive at your decision to set it at that setting?

    2900 per day sounds way too high to me.
  • MYhealthyjourney70
    MYhealthyjourney70 Posts: 276 Member
    you are not eating enough...
  • deksgrl
    deksgrl Posts: 7,237 Member
    MFP calculates what you need to lose weight based on how many pounds you said you want to lose, and based on your calculated needs NOT including exercise. When you exercise and log it, it adds more calories for you to eat for fuel. If you said you want to lose 1 pound per week, it is subtracting 500 calories per day from your needs. If you said you want to lose 2 pounds per week, it is subtracting 1,000 calories per day. So this deficit by itself is enough to lose weight without exercising.

    Eating only 1170 is WAY under goal. 1,200 is a minimum amount for women, not nearly enough for a young man who exercises. You can't possibly get enough nutrition.

  • 20yearsyounger
    20yearsyounger Posts: 1,630 Member
    Maybe you should set it to 2 pounds a week. No need trying to force yourself to eat 1000 calories more than you seem to be averaging. If that's not working off for you then you could ease off. 2900 just seems like a lot for someone at your height trying to get a healthy BMI (if that's what you are trying to do). You should reasonably do above 1600, but every one is different.

  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    You are eating too little for a short, inactive woman at the lower end of a healthy BMI ... never mind what a 5'7, 218lb male needs. Your logging shows a net of around 700 calories per day ... missing every macronutrient goal.
    monarchysix9 wrote: »
    The tone of my post?what is that supposed to mean?

    It means you have an app telling you that you're undereating, and you keep asking is it good .. will you lose faster ... etc. You will lose a lot of weight that way ... from muscle, fat, bone ... all while risking permanent damage ...

  • missiontofitness
    missiontofitness Posts: 4,059 Member
    edited November 2014
    20yearsyounger wrote: »
    Maybe you should set it to 2 pounds a week. No need trying to force yourself to eat 1000 calories more than you seem to be averaging. If that's not working off for you then you could ease off. 2900 just seems like a lot for someone at your height trying to get a healthy BMI (if that's what you are trying to do). You should reasonably do above 1600, but every one is different.


    This is a male. Not a female. There is no need for him to do 2lbs a week when his goal isn't 75lbs or more. That goal will be far too aggressive if he is severely undereating as it is.
  • 20yearsyounger
    20yearsyounger Posts: 1,630 Member
    I understand he is a male and Im a few inches taller and started a few pounds lighter. I'm just sharing my experience.2lbs a week is nothing for him based on what he is currently averaging. If he is severely under eating as it is, then 2lbs a week is actually higher than what he is doing.
  • missiontofitness
    missiontofitness Posts: 4,059 Member
    20yearsyounger wrote: »
    I understand he is a male and Im a few inches taller and started a few pounds lighter. I'm just sharing my experience.2lbs a week is nothing for him based on what he is currently averaging. If he is severely under eating as it is, then 2lbs a week is actually higher than what he is doing.

    This floats around frequently:
    If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal
    If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal
    If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lb/week is ideal
    If you have 15-25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lb/week is ideal
    If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lb/week is ideal


    He should be doing 1.5lbs at most per week. 1lb per week is more reasonable and sustainable, and he's already done that. He's just not eating up to that amount.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    20yearsyounger wrote: »
    I understand he is a male and Im a few inches taller and started a few pounds lighter. I'm just sharing my experience.2lbs a week is nothing for him based on what he is currently averaging. If he is severely under eating as it is, then 2lbs a week is actually higher than what he is doing.

    The OP is netting 704.5 calories per day. His weekly loss goal isn't the big issue ... the intake is.
  • 20yearsyounger
    20yearsyounger Posts: 1,630 Member
    Understand that the intake is. This is all about variables. 2lbs a week is still more, so why set a goal of 1lb when it seems like he is naturally doing 4lbs a week? I agree is needs to eat more, does he need to force himself to eat 2xxx? Maybe not
  • missiontofitness
    missiontofitness Posts: 4,059 Member
    20yearsyounger wrote: »
    Understand that the intake is. This is all about variables. 2lbs a week is still more, so why set a goal of 1lb when it seems like he is naturally doing 4lbs a week? I agree is needs to eat more, does he need to force himself to eat 2xxx? Maybe not

    Water weight drops are huge. Water weight drops do not last. Daily fluctuations happen, and can be more or less up to five pounds or more per day.

    This is not a consistent plan, nor will it be a consistent weight loss. Telling the OP to restrict their intake more when the amount they have it set to is perfectly fine isn't a good idea. If you also look at the OP's diary, they are skipping meals and barely eating enough to cover workouts and their BMR.

    2,400 is not a large amount, especially if you fit in a few calorie dense foods (eg: peanut butter, avocado, ect).

  • fluffyasacat
    fluffyasacat Posts: 242 Member
    brianpperkins wrote: »
    You are eating too little for a short, inactive woman at the lower end of a healthy BMI ... never mind what a 5'7, 218lb male needs. Your logging shows a net of around 700 calories per day ... missing every macronutrient goal.
    monarchysix9 wrote: »
    The tone of my post?what is that supposed to mean?

    It means you have an app telling you that you're undereating, and you keep asking is it good .. will you lose faster ... etc. You will lose a lot of weight that way ... from muscle, fat, bone ... all while risking permanent damage ...

    QFT
  • LAWoman72
    LAWoman72 Posts: 2,846 Member
    edited November 2014
    I used to see this all the time on WW...often it was the "honeymoon period." You just started? Sometimes, with a new way of eating, and especially focusing on health (macros, etc.), people would be surprised they felt as satisfied as they did on what used to look to them like SO little food. Once they started doing it, they'd think, "Hey, I don't feel like I'm starving" and would kind of ride that wave for a few days. Within about two weeks, they'd be saying, "Okay...all of a sudden I'm grateful for every point I'm allowed!"

    Not saying this is definitely you. Just putting it out there as one possibility as it's something I've observed (including in myself) and I don't know you personally, so am just throwing a possibility out there.

    If it continues and you just can't seem to eat enough to healthfully sustain yourself (i.e. you're getting dizzy or have other symptoms and/or you can not seem to make yourself eat enough to reasonably get in your macros), or if it just goes on and on and you never do start feeling hungry again, you might see a doctor. Something physical could be going on, or something psychological that's staying beneath the surface. But only a couple of days...I personally wouldn't worry about it. Again, that's just how I view it myself, I don't know you, your lifestyle, your overall health or anything else and I don't want to be sitting here saying "Oh, it's totally healthy" when I don't know for a fact that it is. Good luck, hope you get into your groove soon!
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    20yearsyounger wrote: »
    Understand that the intake is. This is all about variables. 2lbs a week is still more, so why set a goal of 1lb when it seems like he is naturally doing 4lbs a week? I agree is needs to eat more, does he need to force himself to eat 2xxx? Maybe not

    So when a person on MFP drastically undereats, just up the weekly goal so it doesn't look as bad? Is that really what you're advocating?

    The OP is netting 704.5 calories per day. That is the problem and far too low no matter what the setting for a weekly loss goal on a website may be.
  • monarchysix9
    monarchysix9 Posts: 14 Member
    My work keeps me very active, the reason I put on so much weight was unhealthy eating habits such as McDonald's pizza fast food etc... The way I came up with that amount for a goal was when asked how much weight I want to loose I put 2 pounds a week and it gave me something about its unhealthy to try to aim for a high number. So I kept it at a reasonable 1 pound per week. Would you guys say by looking at my diary am I eating healthy enough?
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    edited November 2014
    monarchysix9 wrote: »
    My work keeps me very active, the reason I put on so much weight was unhealthy eating habits such as McDonald's pizza fast food etc... The way I came up with that amount for a goal was when asked how much weight I want to loose I put 2 pounds a week and it gave me something about its unhealthy to try to aim for a high number. So I kept it at a reasonable 1 pound per week. Would you guys say by looking at my diary am I eating healthy enough?

    NO!
  • monarchysix9
    monarchysix9 Posts: 14 Member
    zu1l5y7x69q4.jpg
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    You're just building more of a case that you're not eating enough. 704.5 net calories according to your diary is not enough for a short, older, sedentary woman. You keep highlighting you are an active male.

  • missiontofitness
    missiontofitness Posts: 4,059 Member
    monarchysix9 wrote: »
    zu1l5y7x69q4.jpg

    I don't know why you're posting this, because this does not change any of the answers you have gotten saying so far that this is not a good idea, and you are doing damage to your body.

  • missiontofitness
    missiontofitness Posts: 4,059 Member
    brianpperkins wrote: »
    You're just building more of a case that you're not eating enough. 704.5 net calories according to your diary is not enough for a short, older, sedentary woman. You keep highlighting you are an active male.

    I think it's pointless to continue arguing semantics. None of our posts have been listened to thus far.

    And I completely agree with you.

Categories