if everyday was like this in 5wks you would weigh...

lexylondon
lexylondon Posts: 89 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
I weigh 87.4kgs. I chose the option to lose 0.75kgs a week meaning my goal is to to consume 1280 calories. I'm usually coming under that eating around 1000 calories. Yet it says "if everyday was like this you would weigh 86.7kgs in 5wks!" If I'm exceeding my goal surely in 5 weeks I would weigh AT LEAST 3.75kgs less?? am I missing something???

Replies

  • lexylondon
    lexylondon Posts: 89 Member
    Sorry that's slightly inacurate. I'm eating about 1500 calories a day but burning 500 a day leaving. Leaving it as if I had eaten 1000. I dont know if that makes a difference. I'm new to this.

  • ilex70
    ilex70 Posts: 727 Member
    Eh, I think it is meant to be encouraging. You as an individual may or may not exactly lose on MFPs schedule.

    And you should really try to eat at least close to 1200 most of the time, even if that means a late snack.
  • lexylondon
    lexylondon Posts: 89 Member
    ilex70 wrote: »
    Eh, I think it is meant to be encouraging. You as an individual may or may not exactly lose on MFPs schedule.

    And you should really try to eat at least close to 1200 most of the time, even if that means a late snack.

    Encouraging? That I would lose so much less than 0.75kgs a week! I'm so confused...lol.

    In regards to eating the 1200 is that so my body doesn't go into starvation mode?

  • BoaRestrictor
    BoaRestrictor Posts: 194 Member
    lexylondon wrote: »
    Sorry that's slightly inacurate. I'm eating about 1500 calories a day but burning 500 a day leaving. Leaving it as if I had eaten 1000. I dont know if that makes a difference. I'm new to this.

    Little off topic but the burn calculators on here are more generous than not. If MFP is saying you burned 500 it's probably more like 300-400 or lower. Thus why people who eat their exercise calories back only eat half of them.

  • ilex70
    ilex70 Posts: 727 Member
    edited February 2016
    No, starvation mode is a myth. 1200 is to get a good level of nutrition to fuel your body.

    Just saw this:
    Sorry that's slightly inacurate. I'm eating about 1500 calories a day but burning 500 a day leaving. Leaving it as if I had eaten 1000. I dont know if that makes a difference. I'm new to this.

    If you are eating 1500 then you should be good. Not everyone eats back all their exercise calories and like H4N4H said the burn calculator is generous.
  • lexylondon
    lexylondon Posts: 89 Member
    H4N4H wrote: »
    lexylondon wrote: »
    Sorry that's slightly inacurate. I'm eating about 1500 calories a day but burning 500 a day leaving. Leaving it as if I had eaten 1000. I dont know if that makes a difference. I'm new to this.

    Little off topic but the burn calculators on here are more generous than not. If MFP is saying you burned 500 it's probably more like 300-400 or lower. Thus why people who eat their exercise calories back only eat half of them.
    I go off the calories on gym equipment I use that goes off your Wright age heartbeat etc. I know they are still not that accurate so I take that into account. I also do aerobics classes and if they say you can burn say 600 calories I'll bring it down to 500 when I log.
  • BoaRestrictor
    BoaRestrictor Posts: 194 Member
    lexylondon wrote: »
    ilex70 wrote: »
    Eh, I think it is meant to be encouraging. You as an individual may or may not exactly lose on MFPs schedule.

    And you should really try to eat at least close to 1200 most of the time, even if that means a late snack.

    Encouraging? That I would lose so much less than 0.75kgs a week! I'm so confused...lol.

    In regards to eating the 1200 is that so my body doesn't go into starvation mode?

    Starvation Mode doesn't exist. 1200 kcal is assumed to be enough to get all your nutrients so you aren't malnourished. Under that you are likely not getting enough.
  • lexylondon
    lexylondon Posts: 89 Member
    I just don't understand how losing 0.75kgs for 5wks equates to a less than 1kg weight loss in their little "in 5 weeks...." encouraging post when you complete the entry? Bamboozled...
  • BoaRestrictor
    BoaRestrictor Posts: 194 Member
    lexylondon wrote: »
    H4N4H wrote: »
    lexylondon wrote: »
    Sorry that's slightly inacurate. I'm eating about 1500 calories a day but burning 500 a day leaving. Leaving it as if I had eaten 1000. I dont know if that makes a difference. I'm new to this.

    Little off topic but the burn calculators on here are more generous than not. If MFP is saying you burned 500 it's probably more like 300-400 or lower. Thus why people who eat their exercise calories back only eat half of them.
    I go off the calories on gym equipment I use that goes off your Wright age heartbeat etc. I know they are still not that accurate so I take that into account. I also do aerobics classes and if they say you can burn say 600 calories I'll bring it down to 500 when I log.

    Okay good! Then yeah you should be aiming to net 1200 ish not 1000 ish. MFP may be giving you a lower projection because extreme deficits like this lead to people not sticking to it and then binge eating or cheating. I remember when I struggled with depression super bad and was eating barely 1000 MFP weight loss projections didn't add up. I dunno for sure, maybe someone can confirm or deny that for me I am under the assumption that the projection algorithm isn't black and white but takes multiple things into account.
  • lexylondon
    lexylondon Posts: 89 Member
    H4N4H wrote: »
    lexylondon wrote: »
    H4N4H wrote: »
    lexylondon wrote: »
    Sorry that's slightly inacurate. I'm eating about 1500 calories a day but burning 500 a day leaving. Leaving it as if I had eaten 1000. I dont know if that makes a difference. I'm new to this.

    Little off topic but the burn calculators on here are more generous than not. If MFP is saying you burned 500 it's probably more like 300-400 or lower. Thus why people who eat their exercise calories back only eat half of them.
    I go off the calories on gym equipment I use that goes off your Wright age heartbeat etc. I know they are still not that accurate so I take that into account. I also do aerobics classes and if they say you can burn say 600 calories I'll bring it down to 500 when I log.

    Okay good! Then yeah you should be aiming to net 1200 ish not 1000 ish. MFP may be giving you a lower projection because extreme deficits like this lead to people not sticking to it and then binge eating or cheating. I remember when I struggled with depression super bad and was eating barely 1000 MFP weight loss projections didn't add up. I dunno for sure, maybe someone can confirm or deny that for me I am under the assumption that the projection algorithm isn't black and white but takes multiple things into account.

    Hmm that's interesting because the day before when I ate a little more (but still meeting the 1200) I did have a better projection - 85.4kgs or so I believe (still not the 3.75kgs plus I would have expected though).
  • markrgeary1
    markrgeary1 Posts: 853 Member
    The projection is an arithmetic statement. No more, no less. It's frequently as accurate as the weather forcast. Ignore it!
  • lexylondon
    lexylondon Posts: 89 Member
    markrgeary1 wrote: »
    The projection is an arithmetic statement. No more, no less. It's frequently as accurate as the weather forcast. Ignore it!

    Shall do!!

    That's pretty simple arithmetic you think someone in the company would be able to master! That's why I thought for sure there HAD to be something I was missing about the whole set up?!

    Anyway thanks for your input guys.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories