Accuracy of mfp?

Plutodreams

Just curious how accurate the mfp calculations have been for others in terms of alloted daily calories based on weight loss goals.

I'm 32, 5'9, 131 lb female and mfp told me I should NET 1470 a day to lose .5 lbs a week. This sounds kinda high and for the past week or two I've been eating around there and lost zero (though I could be dealing with some pms, not sure, period has skipped this past month since I started losing weight.)

I mean, I would love if MFP were correct. I'd kinda be ok to maybe even maintain for a bit I just don't want to gain on this. I run 2.3 miles 5 days a week and 4.6 miles the other 2 days.

So what are your experiences with the accuracy of MFP calculators? Would be curious especially to hear what other females around my size/age lose/maintain on.

Bearbo27

It's been accurate for me. I started at 258.9. I've been logging since July 2nd and am now down 30 lbs as of this morning. Since I had so much to lose, I set mine for 2 lb loss per week and I eat that amount.

Bearbo27

Just looked at your stats and at 5'9" and 131 lbs, you are already at a healthy weight. This may be why you are no losing.

Plutodreams

I know I'm at a healthy weight but I would just like to lose a little more, no more than 5 pounds. MFP is saying I can do this at x amount so I was just wondering how accurate this calculator is for others. There has to be a point where a deficit can be reached, even if a person is at a healthy weight.

Btw just saw your first comment. Thanks and congratulations on your weight loss

cmriverside

Yes, exactly. You have very little (safe) weight to lose. You NEED 1400 calories to keep your body healthy. I hope you are also eating a few hundred more calories on run days.

Why do you feel a need to be thinner? At 19.3 BMI, you're already at the low end. Don't cut calories any more.

Plutodreams

I always eat above 1400. Just the NET of 1470 would put me at 1700-1900 a day. I know sone people might not understand why I would want to lose, but basically that's just where I feel my best. I think people have vastly different sizes that are right for them. I don't think other people have to be thin, but I like to be thin(ish.)

singingflutelady

Bmi 19.3 is quite thin

rileysowner

It has been pretty good for me. However, the numbers are only as good as the accuracy of my logging. If I don't weigh all solids and measure all liquids I consume along with making sure the database entries and correct and current, I can pretty easily be thinking I am eating my calorie goal and actually be eating far beyond it. The bigger issue is the exercise calories. Some are nice and accurate, others not so much. Thankfully since I do mainly the same workouts I know which are which from experience.

frankiesgirlie

I'm not gonna tell you your goal is too thin because I'm 5'9" and have been all kinds of different weights at different ages.
At 19 I weighed 119. At 30 I weighed 135. At 40 I weighed 140. That's where I felt best, at 140.
If you lost 5 lbs you still would be in a normal (not underweight) BMI of 19.3.
Some people do feel better thinner, as a long as you have a healthy relationship with food, which it sounds like you do if your eating 1700-1800 calories, then you're doing fine.
I'm 55, with a goal of 140ish. I'm currently 150ish.
I'm currently eating between 1700-2000 per day and losing slowly(1/2 lb week approx). But I do exercise about 5-6 hours per week.
The weights gonna come off very slow if you're doing it right, meaning slow and easy so as not to lose any more muscle than you have to.
I net 1440, because of our age difference MFP gives me less calories.
You're doing great. Hang in there!!

AnnPT77

There's no way to know, for you outside of your personal results. The estimates MFP gives you are based on the results of research. They're the average of some study population. You, as an individual, are likely to be close to average. . . but you could differ.

Typically, these results fall in a pretty narrow bell curve, with most folks pretty close to the population average (i.e., close to what the calculator tells you.) So, use that as a starting point, weigh your food, track your exercise carefully, see how your results fall out.

Use your results (after, say, a month or two): If you're losing at the rate that matches your target rate, and feeling good, you're golden. If you're losing faster than your target or feeling fatigued/hangry/weak, increase your calorie goal (eat more). If you're losing more slowly, but feeling completely normal, consider decreasing your calorie goal to lose a little faster (but losing slowly is just fine!).

Me? I found I needed to eat substantially more calories than MFP estimated, to reach my target weight loss (i.e., to not to lose more than was sustainably healthy, while feeling strong & energetic). OTOH, some of my MFP friends - whose logging I've watched for months, and whom I believe - need to eat substantially less than MFP estimates.

Your personal results will give you the right answer.

JeromeBarry1

It's been accurate for me. I've had a goal of losing 0.5 lb per week from the time I started in January, and have consistently eaten far below my goal. I often finish the day 1000 calories below my food allowance. I've been doing this for about 29 weeks now, and have lost about 72 lb. That is about 2.5 lb per week. My 7000 calorie weekly deficit mathematically justifies a 2 lb weekly loss, and my mfp-generated food allowance would have produced a 0.5 lb weekly loss. 2 + .5 = 2.5

At this time I'm not trying to finish most days that far below my eating plan. I'm approaching my goal weight and trying to 'glide in' by slowly halting my weight loss just before reaching my goal.