MFP calorie goals VS. TDEE

imgr8stmom

Hi, I'm just wondering if you go with the goals provided by MFP, or if you use the TDEE amount?
I get more calories with TDEE calculator and I'm not sure which one I should be using.
My stats:
48/F
CW-202
Desk job
Workout- HIIT 4/20 min. Days a week, 1/30 min step aerobics, steps 6-10k per day

Currently my calorie goal is 1800

I was losing 1-2 lbs, but haven't lost anything in two weeks.
Any ideas ???????

shadow2soul

TDEE includes exercise calories

MFP doesn't include exercise until you do it.

Tacklewasher

All the TDEE calculators I've seen are more conservative on weight loss rates. So you won't get the same loss. If you don't do the less 20% but do the less 500 calories, will they be the same?

SafioraLinnea

I feel happier and enjoy life more when I eat at a rate that has me losing roughly 1 pound per week. I personally go with TDEE because MFP calculations are counterintuitive for me. I don't exercise to earn more calories. I'm active to be healthy and eat to feed my body.

I also find that MFP heavily underestimates my calorie needs. My TDEE says I need 2100 calories a day to achieve my goal to lose 1 pound a week and feed my baby. MFP recommends 1670 for 1 pound of loss weekly and feeding my baby. That is a substantial difference. If I ate that low, my nursing daughter would cry all day from hunger because my milk supply drops. At 2100, I lose successfully and my daughter is a happy healthy little lamb.

nowine4me

I find them to be almost identical. It's just a matter of preference. My calorie burns are pretty consistent day-to-day, so I prefer TDEE for planning purposes.

TDEE: 2200 set to moderately active, minus 500 cals for loss of 1# a week = 1700
-OR-
MFP set at lose 1# is 1,700, plus add in exercise of 500 = 2200

kimny72

Mfp expects you to log your exercise and eat at least some of your exercise calories
TDEE already includes it.

In a perfect world over the course of a week MFP + Exercise = TDEE

sijomial

They should work out roughly the same when you add exercise to the MFP goal as you are supposed to.
One is an average, one varies day by day but over time should be similar.

I prefer the MFP method of accounting for exercise as mine varies enormously (daily/weekly/seasonally...) and sometimes has to be fuelled specifically on the day (multi hour cycling).

Do you prefer eating the same level every day (that would bore me to death!) or do you prefer to eat a variable amount? It's just a personal choice in the end as both methods work.

If you have an extended plateau (much longer than two weeks) then it's not the method - it's your calorie balance.

SpoonInTheRoad

Do what works best for you overall. MFP tells me I will lose 1 lb. a week on the calories they give me but I lose two (23 so far) because I rarely eat my exercise cals. But in the 11.5 weeks I've been doing it, I've also had double calorie days for 3-4 days in a row while traveling (3 different times), celebrated birthdays, had treats, etc. I've just tried to up my exercise for traveling time to compensate. I have days I am starving all day long and then I'll eat some of my exercise calories. What will be sustainable in the long run is what will WORK for you in the long run. If you are temporarily stalled in weight loss, change it up for a week and then go back to your workable plan. Sounds like you've got it dialed in.

fitmom4lifemfp

I don't use the MFP goal - I set my own.

rileysowner

sijomial wrote: »

They should work out roughly the same when you add exercise to the MFP goal as you are supposed to.
One is an average, one varies day by day but over time should be similar.

I prefer the MFP method of accounting for exercise as mine varies enormously (daily/weekly/seasonally...) and sometimes has to be fuelled specifically on the day (multi hour cycling).

Do you prefer eating the same level every day (that would bore me to death!) or do you prefer to eat a variable amount? It's just a personal choice in the end as both methods work.

If you have an extended plateau (much longer than two weeks) then it's not the method - it's your calorie balance.

Pretty much this. Now that warmer weather has returned to our area I will have days where I also go for multi-hour bike rides. On those days I need to fuel my workouts. Other days the calorie burns would be much lower, and so my calorie burns are lower. In that case MFP numbers make more sense. If I was generally burning the same around, I would probably go with TDEE. In the end once exercise calories are added to the MFP goal they usually come in pretty close for those who exercise consistently.

Daddy78230

I find using the average calories burned on my Fitbit, when I'm moderately active, to be a better fit for me (minus 250 calories). I'll take the averages of my most recent weekly averages when I moderately exercised. I set my calories on MFP, and I don't allow MFP to adjust my calories based on exercises (I already calculated that myself).

It's probably best for you to experiment with what works well for yourself, after a while you should get a feel of what is best. I have a desk job, but take frequent walk breaks. I also lift weights and do sprint intervals 2-4 times a week (30-45 minutes at the gym).

JeromeBarry1

I don't do the same exercises every day, so I don't use the TDEE numbers. I've compared the two systems a few times and the calorie targets for the two systems are often within 50 of each other in my case.

middlehaitch

I am a pretty standard person and MFP's NEAT + exercise, TDEE (I found scooby high, sailrabbit and IIFYM accurate), and my own data were close enough that weight loss and maintenance weren't affected no matter which method I used.

The first thing i would look at would be my food logging accuracy.
I think just about everyone can have flaws in how they log. I, for example have an orange every morning. I would just enter a standard orange entry, I have done it when I've logged since 2010, but if I started having problems I would re assess that orange as -satsuma orange, peeled, USDA and weigh it daily.

We all have quirks and if how you manage your quirk keeps you on track, no need for revision however, logging is the first thing to look at when things no longer work.

Energy out is the 2nd. No matter how you gauge it, any device or website is giving you an estimate taken from the masses. This is a great way to give a ball park figure but your own data over time will give you a truer feedback.
I did zumba for a couple of years and got incredibly high burn numbers. I thought they were too high for my age, weight, and perceived energy expenditure. So I logged the calories burnt then after 2 weeks (6 classes) I extrapolatedy burn from the MFP data I had. Turned out my burn was just a tad shy of 350 cals, not the 650-750 MFP and different websites had said.

So, look to your personal numbers to get the balance that works for you. TDEE and NEAT are good, but not always accurate guidelines.

Cheers, h.

lynn_glenmont

I've been logging for three and a half years, so I've used my own data to calculate my NEET, set a goal off of that just to have a reference number that should let me lose between a pound and a pound and a half a week if I stick to it, and I eat back exercise calories if I'm hungry or I want them.

I hit my initial goal in less than three months on MFP using the number MFP gave me for losing a pound a week, with my activity level at lightly active (office job), and eating back at least some of my exercise calories (and during that period pretty much all of my exercise was walking). I was losing two pounds a week on a one pound a week setting, which motivated me to start using my own data -- discovered that initially my NEET was about 300 calories higher than MFP calculated it should be, and when I recalculated after a year in which I was much more active (weights, dance classes, more cardio, etc.), I found my NEET was about 400 calories higher than MFP calculated it should be (possibly some combination of increased muscle mass, the supposed increase in calories burned post-exercise, and feeling better physically so I was more likely to do little everyday things that add up like doing dance steps to whatever music is on when I'm puttering about the house).

Nothing beats your own data. Even if the difference is due to something like food labeling errors and bad logging, as long as you're reasonably consistent, it won't matter, since you're using your logging methods on both sides of the system (setting the goal and adhering to the goal).

I eventually changed my MFP setting to active (still same office job, except I telecommute 2 or 3 days a week now, still logging what little exercise I get -- I've kind of fallen off the exercise train) just to have it be closer to what my own data was telling me was the right number. (Also, I decreased my deficit to try to slow the weight loss, and eventually mentally moved more into maintenance as a goal, because I can live -- both metaphorically and literally, since my blood work and blood pressure have improved -- at the weight I am now, but I dread regaining what I've lost. It would be nice to lose some more, but it's also nice not to feel I have to stick to a set number of calories when I don't want to, so the days I stick to the deficit goal and the days I eat more (including above-maintenance days typically once or twice a week) seem to be roughly balancing out lately. And I'm OK with that.