Accurate calculation of calorie goal (MFP seems way off)
xandralaw
Posts: 50 Member
So I enter my weight, height, gender and goal as well as my sedentary life style and MFP sets my goal at 1200 cals!? That seems insane... it most certainly isn't something I can maintain so is setting me up for failure.
http://www.health-calc.com/diet/energy-expenditure-advanced
This link is a very accurate BMI calculator that is giving me very different numbers. With a 500 cal reduction of my "total energy expenditure", based on same stats that MFP asks, my weight loss calorie goal is 1900 cals. HUGE difference.
So what gives???
http://www.health-calc.com/diet/energy-expenditure-advanced
This link is a very accurate BMI calculator that is giving me very different numbers. With a 500 cal reduction of my "total energy expenditure", based on same stats that MFP asks, my weight loss calorie goal is 1900 cals. HUGE difference.
So what gives???
0
Replies
-
The link you provide - did you enter time for exercise? Keep in mind that MFP does not include exercise in your initial calorie intake - you are to log those and eat more accordingly. Beyond exercise, is your lifestyle (according to what you entered in the web link) actually sedentary? Make sure you're comparing apples to apples.
For MFP - did you put in 1 pound per week loss? If you did, is your exercise enough to account for 700 calories a day? If so, or close, they're about even.0 -
Keep in mind that MFP does not use TDEE... it doesn't include exercise activities. Those are to be added on an individual basis and those calories eaten back, as opposed to the TDEE method where activity is averaged over the week. TDEE is great if your activity level is relatively stable, but if it's not, if it changes a lot from day to day and week to week, then you're better off with MFP 's method. Or better yet, get a good activity tracker which will add activity calories automatically.0
-
MFP bases your goal on "I want to lose XX pounds per week"....if you put in 1 pound that would be 500. This number is BEFORE exercise. With MFP you get "credit" when you log exercise.
TDEE includes exercise up front. If you are going to exercise regularly then TDEE is generally less hassle.1 -
So the way that I did MFP was sedentary with zero exercise because, unfortunately, that is just where I'm at right now. I said I wanted to lose 2 lbs/week. It said 1200 calories.
Sedentary for me is - I spend a MIN of 2 hours in the car commuting, then spend 7+ hours at my desk. I sleep maybe 7 hours and the rest of the time is getting ready for work, for bed, cooking, desk work at home, picking up after my kids and running a few errands. So I don't think my activity level is very inaccurate.
I entered the same thing on the calculator and that is where I am seeing 1200 (MFP) vs 1900 (calculated).0 -
I've never seen MFP offer any more than 1200 for anyone, but we are all short in my family. Like everyone else says, you can certainly eat a lot more if you start to exercise.
What I would do would be to try 1900 for a good few weeks, see how that works out. No change? Lower it a little (LITTLE!). If it works, stick with it :-)0 -
So the way that I did MFP was sedentary with zero exercise because, unfortunately, that is just where I'm at right now. I said I wanted to lose 2 lbs/week. It said 1200 calories.
Sedentary for me is - I spend a MIN of 2 hours in the car commuting, then spend 7+ hours at my desk. I sleep maybe 7 hours and the rest of the time is getting ready for work, for bed, cooking, desk work at home, picking up after my kids and running a few errands. So I don't think my activity level is very inaccurate.
I entered the same thing on the calculator and that is where I am seeing 1200 (MFP) vs 1900 (calculated).
2 Pounds per week is a 1000 calorie deficit from TDEE, not 500. If what you posted in your first post was correct, that the other site took 500 off TDEE, then you are comparing a 1Lb/week goal there to a 2Lb/week goal here. Even with that there is still a difference of 200 calories, but that is not the same as a 700 calorie difference. That could be accounted for by a bunch of factors including using different calculations for coming up with your BMR or for the multiplier for activity to get to TDEE.
0 -
So I enter my weight, height, gender and goal as well as my sedentary life style and MFP sets my goal at 1200 cals!? That seems insane... it most certainly isn't something I can maintain so is setting me up for failure.
http://www.health-calc.com/diet/energy-expenditure-advanced
This link is a very accurate BMI calculator that is giving me very different numbers. With a 500 cal reduction of my "total energy expenditure", based on same stats that MFP asks, my weight loss calorie goal is 1900 cals. HUGE difference.
So what gives???
Well for one you're using a 500 calorie deficit, for MFP you're using a 1000 calorie deficit, so the difference really is 200 calories, which isn't much. Just try 1700 or 1800 and see how it goes.
For what it's worth, I've tried the calculator above and it gives me a TDEE that's about 200 calories more than what mine really is, so I'd go with MFP and losing 1 pound a week.0 -
So the way that I did MFP was sedentary with zero exercise because, unfortunately, that is just where I'm at right now. I said I wanted to lose 2 lbs/week. It said 1200 calories.
Sedentary for me is - I spend a MIN of 2 hours in the car commuting, then spend 7+ hours at my desk. I sleep maybe 7 hours and the rest of the time is getting ready for work, for bed, cooking, desk work at home, picking up after my kids and running a few errands. So I don't think my activity level is very inaccurate.
I entered the same thing on the calculator and that is where I am seeing 1200 (MFP) vs 1900 (calculated).
2lbs per week is a very aggressive goal if you've not got much to lose. Your profile is private, so I can't tell, but based on your photo I would say your goal is way too aggressive.0 -
You are comparing 2 completely things.
MFP uses the NEAT method - it assumes zero exercise. You log exercise and those calories are added to your total. So if MFP gives you 1200 and you exercise to burn 300, your new daily goal is 1500.
TDEE includes exercise calories. You do not add those in or eat them back.
If you set them both at the same weight loss goal (as other have said you are comparing a 2 lbs a week loss on MFP to a 1 lb a week loss with TDEE) MFP goal + exercise calories will approx equal your TDEE when averaged out over the week.
2 lbs a week loss is only reasonable if you are obese.0 -
I agree with the comments above, but I also found that the calculator in the link is way off the mark for me (overestimates my BMR and TDEE by a long shot). I experimented with putting in amounts to make me completely sedentary and the multiplier seemed to be around 1.3 (it's usually 1.2).0
-
I too thought the same thing. MFP put me at 1,240 and I'm 5'8 and had a goal of 15 pounds. I set it to lose one pound per week. It's worked but I mistakenly thought my height would bump me up. It just seemed....off.
Oh well, it's completely manageable (especially on days I exercise) and I've lost 13 pounds so far.0 -
I agree with the comments above, but I also found that the calculator in the link is way off the mark for me (overestimates my BMR and TDEE by a long shot). I experimented with putting in amounts to make me completely sedentary and the multiplier seemed to be around 1.3 (it's usually 1.2).
This is my experience too--I find the scooby site pretty on the nose with my actual experience, and the one linked is always significantly higher.
But of course the big difference is 1 lb vs 2 lb goals, as others have said.0 -
PeachyPlum wrote: »0
-
OK - so if I play with MFP and tell it to auto calculate my calorie target setting my goal to no weight loss and no exercise and sedentary - it puts my goal at 1,940 cals.
If I do the same on the calculator - only log sleep time and the rest i'm just sitting - it puts my BMR at 1589 and my TDEE at 2,220.
Is this the fair way to compare the two? MFP "goal" vs TDEE - they should be the same or similar right?
(sorry if i'm being dense - this is confusing and I just want to be sure the goal i am setting for myself is reasonable)
0 -
-
I just did the calculator and it seems to overestimate by about 200 calories for me too. I recently calculated my TDEE and came up with just over 2100 calories to lose 1.25 lb per week. That calculator gave me almost 2400.
I still prefer NEAT but will use TDEE when I get closer to goal and transition into maintenance.0 -
The linked calulator is accurate for me at my current obese weight, but when I scaled it down to my goal weight it seemed to over estimate my BMR and TDEE.0
-
Depending on whether I use iifym or scooby to get my TDEE, the calculator site is either 300 or 400 calories off for me. Massively wrong.
0 -
Wait....do people log sleep? Did I read that right???0
-
Yes, in that scenario, setting MFP to maintain your weight should be equivalent to running a TDEE calculator with no exercise factored in. You're getting a difference of 280 calories, which is significant but not outrageous. I'd try Scooby's Workshop or IIFYM.com for a better calculator, though.OK - so if I play with MFP and tell it to auto calculate my calorie target setting my goal to no weight loss and no exercise and sedentary - it puts my goal at 1,940 cals.
If I do the same on the calculator - only log sleep time and the rest i'm just sitting - it puts my BMR at 1589 and my TDEE at 2,220.
Is this the fair way to compare the two? MFP "goal" vs TDEE - they should be the same or similar right?
(sorry if i'm being dense - this is confusing and I just want to be sure the goal i am setting for myself is reasonable)
Other people have said this, but MFP uses a different method to calculate calories than other sites, so you need to be aware of the difference. MFP calculates your target with no exercise, so you're expected to eat your exercise calories back, whereas other sites average your weekly exercise burn and include that in your daily total. If you're not going to factor exercise in, it won't be that much of a difference, but that's why people typically see lower targets with MFP than they do with TDEE calculators.
The reason MFP gave you 1200 calories in the beginning is because you selected 2 pounds per week. (1200 is the bottom number the calculator will give you, whether or not it's appropriate). 2 pounds per week is really only attainable if you have 75+ pounds to lose -- with a lower TDEE and no exercise, trying to create a 1000 calorie daily deficit isn't a good idea for you, and even if you had the time to do a ton of cardio every day, it wouldn't be smart.
What are your stats? (Height, weight, age)? If you tell MFP you want to lose 0.5 or 1 pound per week, how many calories does it give you?
0 -
Fair question - I have no idea how I "decided" that - I am pretty easily influenced right now and am just trying to collect data. 1200 cals a day feels like a guaranteed failure to me so I was relieved to find something that said different. That is as honest as I can get.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »
I will try iifym and/or scoobysworkshop - but before I do and confuse myself more - what is the difference?
0 -
The one at IIFYM allows a TDEE calculation that accounts for body fat %age. Anyone over 25% or so should be using that, as otherwise you'll end up with an inflated number, which inevitably leads to starting "Help! I'm stalled!" threads on MFP.
0 -
Yes, in that scenario, setting MFP to maintain your weight should be equivalent to running a TDEE calculator with no exercise factored in. You're getting a difference of 280 calories, which is significant but not outrageous. I'd try Scooby's Workshop or IIFYM.com for a better calculator, though.OK - so if I play with MFP and tell it to auto calculate my calorie target setting my goal to no weight loss and no exercise and sedentary - it puts my goal at 1,940 cals.
If I do the same on the calculator - only log sleep time and the rest i'm just sitting - it puts my BMR at 1589 and my TDEE at 2,220.
Is this the fair way to compare the two? MFP "goal" vs TDEE - they should be the same or similar right?
(sorry if i'm being dense - this is confusing and I just want to be sure the goal i am setting for myself is reasonable)
Other people have said this, but MFP uses a different method to calculate calories than other sites, so you need to be aware of the difference. MFP calculates your target with no exercise, so you're expected to eat your exercise calories back, whereas other sites average your weekly exercise burn and include that in your daily total. If you're not going to factor exercise in, it won't be that much of a difference, but that's why people typically see lower targets with MFP than they do with TDEE calculators.
The reason MFP gave you 1200 calories in the beginning is because you selected 2 pounds per week. (1200 is the bottom number the calculator will give you, whether or not it's appropriate). 2 pounds per week is really only attainable if you have 75+ pounds to lose -- with a lower TDEE and no exercise, trying to create a 1000 calorie daily deficit isn't a good idea for you, and even if you had the time to do a ton of cardio every day, it wouldn't be smart.
What are your stats? (Height, weight, age)? If you tell MFP you want to lose 0.5 or 1 pound per week, how many calories does it give you?
I am 38 (for a little while longer), 5'4" and 192 lbs. At the end of last summer I was 153 and then I binged all winter (don't do well with NE winters). So I have around 40 lbs to lose - in truth I'd rather be in the 140s but I'm afraid I may never see that number again so am trying to be more reasonable and aim for 155.
I think I am beginning to understand all of this a little more now - so many calculation methods just makes it all the more confusing (and discouraging). I started this again because I desperately need to find a way to maintain a healthy lifestyle which will hinge on achievable goals - 1200 cals a day is just not achievable for me - so does that mean I'll never get there?0 -
Fair question - I have no idea how I "decided" that - I am pretty easily influenced right now and am just trying to collect data. 1200 cals a day feels like a guaranteed failure to me so I was relieved to find something that said different. That is as honest as I can get.
Set MFP goal at 1 lb a week, eat back about half your exercise calories. Try that for a month and adjust from there. 2 lbs a week is too aggressive for 40 lbs loss. What is the purpose of running these comparisons? MFP was so low because you had it set to 2 lbs a week.
ETA - Just tried that calculator, and it is also overestimating my TDEE by about 250 calories as compared to my observed TDEE through logging and weight loss over the last 3 months.0 -
OK - so if I play with MFP and tell it to auto calculate my calorie target setting my goal to no weight loss and no exercise and sedentary - it puts my goal at 1,940 cals.
If I do the same on the calculator - only log sleep time and the rest i'm just sitting - it puts my BMR at 1589 and my TDEE at 2,220.
Is this the fair way to compare the two? MFP "goal" vs TDEE - they should be the same or similar right?
(sorry if i'm being dense - this is confusing and I just want to be sure the goal i am setting for myself is reasonable)
MFP is based on the NEAT method. This means it gives you a base calorie number that puts you at a deficit/maintenance/surplus (depending on goals) and you net that number. This means you eat this plus exercise calories back.
TDEE minus 5-20% (depending on your goals) includes exercise calories. This means if you use this method you don't log your exercise, or you log it as a 1 cal burn, or you just don't eat them if you decide to log them normally.
The main method difference is one includes your exercise calories in the calorie goal it gives you while the other doesn't and expects you to eat them back.
That's why you aren't going to get those numbers to line up.0 -
All calculators are just an estimate. Pick one, use the number for a few weeks (4-6 is generally a good sample size) and look at your loss. Have you loss the amount expect? Yes.Good, readjust every 5-10lbs lost. Looks like you can trust the calculator to some degree. No. Lost less. Adjust down by 100-200 calories and repeat the process. No. Lost More. Adjust up by about 100 -200 calories and repeat the process.
Now Scooby's accurate calculator I get for you:
Mifflin Method -
TDEE - 1848
20% reduction - 1478
Benedict Method -
TDEE - 1928
20 % reduction - 1542
The other 2 methods require BF% and since I don't know yours, I'm just going to leave them alone.
I'm pretty sure you will be able to lose weight on more than 1200 calories. I'm decently active and lose on an average of 1800-2000 calories (5'4.5" and 147.5lbs). I think since your less active (or so you say) than either of the numbers from Scooby's calculator should result in weight loss for you.0 -
shadow2soul wrote: »All calculators are just an estimate. Pick one, use the number for a few weeks (4-6 is generally a good sample size) and look at your loss. Have you loss the amount expect? Yes.Good, readjust every 5-10lbs lost. Looks like you can trust the calculator to some degree. No. Lost less. Adjust down by 100-200 calories and repeat the process. No. Lost More. Adjust up by about 100 -200 calories and repeat the process.
^ THIS is key. Every online calculator is a starting point, but you have to look at your results and adjust things. People differ a lot in their caloric needs (fidgeting alone can burn a couple hundred calories a day), the accuracy of their logging, and their response to exercise. Whatever number you start with has to be reassessed in the light of experience. People who don't realize that often get frustrated because their results don't match what some random website predicts.0 -
Fair question - I have no idea how I "decided" that - I am pretty easily influenced right now and am just trying to collect data. 1200 cals a day feels like a guaranteed failure to me so I was relieved to find something that said different. That is as honest as I can get.
You aren't alone. I've encountered several people who are so certain that this tool or that tool must be wrong, but when you question them about why they are so certain, they are comparing it to some other tool that they happen to like for some reason or another.
Just start somewhere and see what kind of results you get. If you don't like your results, adjust accordingly. If you don't think you can handle 1200 calories, go with something higher. Works some exercise into your week and you may find that you can handle a bigger calorie deficit than you think.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions