MFP method actually work for anyone?
Options
Replies
-
Well, there is over 3 million members. It must be working for someone.0
-
MFP absolutely works, but I think it's important to remember that MFP is a TOOL to aid us in achieving our health, fitness, and weight loss goals. It's not up to MFP to do the work, though. It's up to YOU to commit yourself to the process and do the work. So, if you are having difficulties achieving your goals, you need to figure out where adjustments are needed and how to best make those changes.0
-
Wored great for me......consistently lost 1/2 lb or so per week until I got to my goal and I have been maintaining ever since. Important to accurately track your food and calories burned through exercise in order for it to work.0
-
So Far MFP is working for me. Not always losing 1lb. per week but that us usually my fault.....LOL In my opinion it works!0
-
I'm just curious if it's worked for anyone or if you've had to alter it to work for you? Mine is set to lose 1lb a week and let me tell you, I'm not losing near that. I lost .3 last week and nothing this week. I eat back some of my exercise calories, not all of them usually because I don't want to eat back that much because I'm not that hungry. I also use a hrm to track and measure my food. I have tried TDEE in the past and that was way too much food and I gained weight.
The thing that jumps out at me is the HRM.
If you're using the HRM to calculate calories burned during exercise, I'd guess that it's significantly overestimating calorie burns. HRMs are notorious for doing that in people who don't have very high levels of cardiovascular fitness.
HRMs are not calorie calculators, and relying on them often leads to this.
I'd say knock 30% off your HRM numbers before you enter them.
Also, open your diary and we might see where you're going wrong.
This keeps getting more and more confusing to me. So many ppl say you should have a HRM to determine calories bunred. Im not expert so I am not arguing your point, but it just seems like there are so MANY variables involved depending on how you look at it0 -
260 days using it and 77lbs down. It works.0
-
Ohh. Was the question do we lose at the suggested rate?
Um. Well when I was using MFP setting I was losing a over a pound a week. But then I got hungry and quit, lol. But that wasn't the fault of the site, it was clearly my fault for not setting my activity level higher (Lesson I took from that: If you work out five nights a week you are not sedentary.).0 -
Tracking calories helps, but I won't say it's like science.
For example I lost in average 1 lbs per week in the last 40 weeks (which is my original setting), but it wasn't liniar. Some weeks I lost more, some I lost less. Human bodies are imperfect you know, not machines build to lose the weight you program.
Also, in the end, the MFP calorie intake is just an aproximation. Maybe your body needs less calories or more than the BMR/TDEE MFP calculates. So you must find your own balance.
Moreover, weight is not that important (at least in my opinion). Losing inches is... becoming smaller, healthier, leaner... and sometimes the weight does not reflect that.
Like I said, weight loss is not linear. I had periods when I lost weight like crazy and did not see any inch comming off (or very little). And I had weeks in which I didn't lose weight, but I lost tons of inches... and those where the best weeks.
Overall, I do not want to praise MFP. But portion control and giving your bodies the nutrients it needs (without to much extra junk) does work. For weightloss, for health. For some people portion control comes from counting calories (MFP style), for others comes from point (WW style) and so on. You should find your own portion control method.0 -
I'm just curious if it's worked for anyone or if you've had to alter it to work for you? Mine is set to lose 1lb a week and let me tell you, I'm not losing near that. I lost .3 last week and nothing this week. I eat back some of my exercise calories, not all of them usually because I don't want to eat back that much because I'm not that hungry. I also use a hrm to track and measure my food. I have tried TDEE in the past and that was way too much food and I gained weight.
The thing that jumps out at me is the HRM.
If you're using the HRM to calculate calories burned during exercise, I'd guess that it's significantly overestimating calorie burns. HRMs are notorious for doing that in people who don't have very high levels of cardiovascular fitness.
HRMs are not calorie calculators, and relying on them often leads to this.
I'd say knock 30% off your HRM numbers before you enter them.
Also, open your diary and we might see where you're going wrong.
This keeps getting more and more confusing to me. So many ppl say you should have a HRM to determine calories bunred. Im not expert so I am not arguing your point, but it just seems like there are so MANY variables involved depending on how you look at it
HRMs are not good at calculating calories. Heart rate simply isn't a very good proxy for calorie burn. For one thing, there are a number of variables that affect heart rate without affecting calorie burn (think anxiety, drugs like caffeine, etc). For another, cardiovascular efficiency matters. The HRM has to simply guess how good your CV system is at delivering oxygen to your tissues. It really has no idea. Ever notice how your heart rate at a given speed on the treadmill goes down over time? Well you're burning the same calories (assuming your weight is the same) but your HRM will measure fewer calories burned.
HRMs seem more or less calibrated to people who are rather fit. I see HRMs greatly exaggerating calorie burns for a LOT of people.
People automatically think that since the HRM is measuring something directly, it's automatically accurate. It's not.0 -
If you're using the HRM to calculate calories burned during exercise, I'd guess that it's significantly overestimating calorie burns. HRMs are notorious for doing that in people who don't have very high levels of cardiovascular fitness.
HRMs are not calorie calculators, and relying on them often leads to this.
I'd say knock 30% off your HRM numbers before you enter them.
^^ I hit a small bump in the road when I started using my HRM calorie calculation. I started knocking off 30% and started losing steadily again.0 -
I'm just curious if it's worked for anyone or if you've had to alter it to work for you? Mine is set to lose 1lb a week and let me tell you, I'm not losing near that. I lost .3 last week and nothing this week. I eat back some of my exercise calories, not all of them usually because I don't want to eat back that much because I'm not that hungry. I also use a hrm to track and measure my food. I have tried TDEE in the past and that was way too much food and I gained weight.
The thing that jumps out at me is the HRM.
If you're using the HRM to calculate calories burned during exercise, I'd guess that it's significantly overestimating calorie burns. HRMs are notorious for doing that in people who don't have very high levels of cardiovascular fitness.
HRMs are not calorie calculators, and relying on them often leads to this.
I'd say knock 30% off your HRM numbers before you enter them.
Also, open your diary and we might see where you're going wrong.
This keeps getting more and more confusing to me. So many ppl say you should have a HRM to determine calories bunred. Im not expert so I am not arguing your point, but it just seems like there are so MANY variables involved depending on how you look at it
HRMs are not good at calculating calories. Heart rate simply isn't a very good proxy for calorie burn. For one thing, there are a number of variables that affect heart rate without affecting calorie burn (think anxiety, drugs like caffeine, etc). For another, cardiovascular efficiency matters. The HRM has to simply guess how good your CV system is at delivering oxygen to your tissues. It really has no idea. Ever notice how your heart rate at a given speed on the treadmill goes down over time? Well you're burning the same calories (assuming your weight is the same) but your HRM will measure fewer calories burned.
HRMs seem more or less calibrated to people who are rather fit. I see HRMs greatly exaggerating calorie burns for a LOT of people.
People automatically think that since the HRM is measuring something directly, it's automatically accurate. It's not.
Interesting and I see your point. Maybe I will not invest in one now. Let me ask you this? How would i determine how many calories i have burned when I doing a workout video or have went to an exercise class. Is there really no way to know? It's just a stab in the dark?0 -
Um, yeah. Of course, you have to measure your portions and log every bite and correctly estimate your exercise loss. The latter can sometimes be a bit of trial and error. And, of course, if you have a lower than average metabolism, you may have lower than average losses.0
-
If you're using the HRM to calculate calories burned during exercise, I'd guess that it's significantly overestimating calorie burns. HRMs are notorious for doing that in people who don't have very high levels of cardiovascular fitness.
HRMs are not calorie calculators, and relying on them often leads to this.
I'd say knock 30% off your HRM numbers before you enter them.
^^ I hit a small bump in the road when I started using my HRM calorie calculation. I started knocking off 30% and started losing steadily again.
Yup. You and a lot of other people.0 -
It has worked great for me! I don't eat my exercise calories and typically eat more protein and less carbs than what MFP recommends. I use a HRM for exercise because I felt like MFP was totally over exagerating what my calorie burn was. I have not complaints :bigsmile:0
-
I'm just curious if it's worked for anyone or if you've had to alter it to work for you? Mine is set to lose 1lb a week and let me tell you, I'm not losing near that. I lost .3 last week and nothing this week. I eat back some of my exercise calories, not all of them usually because I don't want to eat back that much because I'm not that hungry. I also use a hrm to track and measure my food. I have tried TDEE in the past and that was way too much food and I gained weight.
Weight loss isn't linear...you don't lose exactly 1 Lb per week. If I average my 40 Lbs lost out over the period of time that I lost it it comes out to roughly 1 Lb per week...you need to take a much LONGER view than a week or two.
And yes...the MFP method (NEAT method) works just fine and is a common method of calorie counting that has been around far longer than MFP itself. I did the MFP method for quite awhile until I customized my goals to go with TDEE method instead. I only did so because my exercise routine became regular and consistent and I didn't want to "eat back" calories...so I just built my workout calories in instead.
Also, keep in mind that calorie burns are estimate. Databases can be wildly off because there are just too many variables for them to be accurate. Machines are better, but a HRM is your best bet...even then, the Polar models have been independently tested to be about 70% accurate for calorie burn during an aerobic event.
Usually if it doesn't work, it's because the individual is overestimating burn and/or underestimating intake, even when they think they're doing everything right. Foods scales are your friend here as well...get one...use it.0 -
I'm just curious if it's worked for anyone or if you've had to alter it to work for you? Mine is set to lose 1lb a week and let me tell you, I'm not losing near that. I lost .3 last week and nothing this week. I eat back some of my exercise calories, not all of them usually because I don't want to eat back that much because I'm not that hungry. I also use a hrm to track and measure my food. I have tried TDEE in the past and that was way too much food and I gained weight.
The thing that jumps out at me is the HRM.
If you're using the HRM to calculate calories burned during exercise, I'd guess that it's significantly overestimating calorie burns. HRMs are notorious for doing that in people who don't have very high levels of cardiovascular fitness.
HRMs are not calorie calculators, and relying on them often leads to this.
I'd say knock 30% off your HRM numbers before you enter them.
Also, open your diary and we might see where you're going wrong.
This keeps getting more and more confusing to me. So many ppl say you should have a HRM to determine calories bunred. Im not expert so I am not arguing your point, but it just seems like there are so MANY variables involved depending on how you look at it
HRMs are not good at calculating calories. Heart rate simply isn't a very good proxy for calorie burn. For one thing, there are a number of variables that affect heart rate without affecting calorie burn (think anxiety, drugs like caffeine, etc). For another, cardiovascular efficiency matters. The HRM has to simply guess how good your CV system is at delivering oxygen to your tissues. It really has no idea. Ever notice how your heart rate at a given speed on the treadmill goes down over time? Well you're burning the same calories (assuming your weight is the same) but your HRM will measure fewer calories burned.
HRMs seem more or less calibrated to people who are rather fit. I see HRMs greatly exaggerating calorie burns for a LOT of people.
People automatically think that since the HRM is measuring something directly, it's automatically accurate. It's not.
Interesting and I see your point. Maybe I will not invest in one now. Let me ask you this? How would i determine how many calories i have burned when I doing a workout video or have went to an exercise class. Is there really no way to know? It's just a stab in the dark?
It's a stab in the dark. You can certainly use an HRM and take some factor off of it. You can also use the MFP database and estimate.
There's also the BodyMedia Fit and the Fitbit. I think the Fitbit is the best, most accurate device on the market. I have a lot of reasons to think that but I won't really go into them here. I've been using mine over 4 months now, and the data from it has been extraordinarily accurate for me. My GF also has been following hers very closely and is losing exactly as predicted. I've been extremely impressed with how good it is.0 -
I would say MFP does work. basically ANY WEBSITE that lets you log calories and exercise will help you. I once lost weight doing this in a notebook. You just have to log everything in.0
-
I'm just curious if it's worked for anyone or if you've had to alter it to work for you? Mine is set to lose 1lb a week and let me tell you, I'm not losing near that. I lost .3 last week and nothing this week. I eat back some of my exercise calories, not all of them usually because I don't want to eat back that much because I'm not that hungry. I also use a hrm to track and measure my food. I have tried TDEE in the past and that was way too much food and I gained weight.
The thing that jumps out at me is the HRM.
If you're using the HRM to calculate calories burned during exercise, I'd guess that it's significantly overestimating calorie burns. HRMs are notorious for doing that in people who don't have very high levels of cardiovascular fitness.
HRMs are not calorie calculators, and relying on them often leads to this.
I'd say knock 30% off your HRM numbers before you enter them.
Also, open your diary and we might see where you're going wrong.
This keeps getting more and more confusing to me. So many ppl say you should have a HRM to determine calories bunred. Im not expert so I am not arguing your point, but it just seems like there are so MANY variables involved depending on how you look at it
HRMs are not good at calculating calories. Heart rate simply isn't a very good proxy for calorie burn. For one thing, there are a number of variables that affect heart rate without affecting calorie burn (think anxiety, drugs like caffeine, etc). For another, cardiovascular efficiency matters. The HRM has to simply guess how good your CV system is at delivering oxygen to your tissues. It really has no idea. Ever notice how your heart rate at a given speed on the treadmill goes down over time? Well you're burning the same calories (assuming your weight is the same) but your HRM will measure fewer calories burned.
HRMs seem more or less calibrated to people who are rather fit. I see HRMs greatly exaggerating calorie burns for a LOT of people.
People automatically think that since the HRM is measuring something directly, it's automatically accurate. It's not.
Interesting and I see your point. Maybe I will not invest in one now. Let me ask you this? How would i determine how many calories i have burned when I doing a workout video or have went to an exercise class. Is there really no way to know? It's just a stab in the dark?
It's a stab in the dark. You can certainly use an HRM and take some factor off of it. You can also use the MFP database and estimate.
There's also the BodyMedia Fit and the Fitbit. I think the Fitbit is the best, most accurate device on the market. I have a lot of reasons to think that but I won't really go into them here. I've been using mine over 4 months now, and the data from it has been extraordinarily accurate for me. My GF also has been following hers very closely and is losing exactly as predicted. I've been extremely impressed with how good it is.
Right on. Thx for the info. I will google fitbit and see what its all about-appreciate it0 -
-
Site worked best when I was 100% honest about logging.
No offense but 2,000+ plus posts and being a member since 2011, I would have thought you would have figured it out.
BTW. I've found that when you are close to your goal (or if you are at a fairly low bodyfat %), even 1 lb/per week is too much.
I adjusted mine from 1lb to 0.5lb a week and it seems to be working better.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 988 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions