Myfitnesspal is crazy! It says I would gain on 2000 calories a day...
Replies
-
At 52, I would gain at 2k calories a day. I'm allotted 1990 without exercise.
Male: 5'8" 209 lbs.0 -
5'7 166, 2500 for me, but I workout 5x a week. With no exercise ~2000 to maintain
1 -
Mary_Anastasia wrote: »Sounds right. I'm 5'7", 219lb and I maintain at 1,400 calories. More than that and I gain.
You are either netting calories or logging inaccurately if that is the case.
False. That is why they're called averages. Some people have very bad metabolic rates - sad but true. Add in room for error and they could be maintaining at 1500 and just be sedentary.0 -
It's really bothersome that people seriously don't realize even TDEE estimates unless you have your body tested a lot are only estimates and averages of people of the same weight as you - there are exceptions way higher, exceptions way lower, and many that have small variations. So if it says you maintain on 1800 on a calculator, you test it out and you may find out you maintain at 1500, or 2200, or 1800, and it does not mean you log wrong every time - it means people differ and metabolic rates, genetics, etc differ so there are exceptions. The majority will be close to what the calculation shows, but you might be one of the unlucky or lucky few who have a decent sized variation from what typical maintenance calories are for your weight and activity. Especially because exercise intensity and so forth can be difficult to estimate.
& to the original poster: some people do gain on 2000, while some people lose on 2000... you need a lot more information or to test it out to see if it's true. Personally, I'd rather trust MFP and test a lower number first, because I would rather risk losing a little extra than risk gaining. lol. Then adjust as needed after a few weeks of trial and error..3 -
Verity1111 wrote: »It's really bothersome that people seriously don't realize even TDEE estimates unless you have your body tested a lot are only estimates and averages of people of the same weight as you - there are exceptions way higher, exceptions way lower, and many that have small variations. So if it says you maintain on 1800 on a calculator, you test it out and you may find out you maintain at 1500, or 2200, or 1800, and it does not mean you log wrong every time - it means people differ and metabolic rates, genetics, etc differ so there are exceptions. The majority will be close to what the calculation shows, but you might be one of the unlucky or lucky few who have a decent sized variation from what typical maintenance calories are for your weight and activity. Especially because exercise intensity and so forth can be difficult to estimate.
& to the original poster: some people do gain on 2000, while some people lose on 2000... you need a lot more information or to test it out to see if it's true. Personally, I'd rather trust MFP and test a lower number first, because I would rather risk losing a little extra than risk gaining. lol. Then adjust as needed after a few weeks of trial and error..
Thanks! I think I should assess later after seeing how it goes. I have considered getting my expenditure tested medically, just as you mentioned in your post. There are lots of research studies I could be a gineau pig for, which would pay me to test my calorie burns. I live in a city where there are lots of research labs! I have definitely ate on the lower side of my calories given by myfitnesspal since I joined..today was an exception as a rest day.. where I hit 2k calories for the first time in a month. I was eating 1300-1500 before and losing on that (pretty quickly). I will see what happens.. if I were to gain 1/10th of a pound from today.. doesn't exactly bother me.
Also, I don't know who to quote for this..but someone asked if I'm sedentary? I run 70-80 miles a week..so I'm more active than 90%+ of the people on this site.. on top of that I bike and have to run around at work all day
0 -
Tropicoolblonde wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »It's really bothersome that people seriously don't realize even TDEE estimates unless you have your body tested a lot are only estimates and averages of people of the same weight as you - there are exceptions way higher, exceptions way lower, and many that have small variations. So if it says you maintain on 1800 on a calculator, you test it out and you may find out you maintain at 1500, or 2200, or 1800, and it does not mean you log wrong every time - it means people differ and metabolic rates, genetics, etc differ so there are exceptions. The majority will be close to what the calculation shows, but you might be one of the unlucky or lucky few who have a decent sized variation from what typical maintenance calories are for your weight and activity. Especially because exercise intensity and so forth can be difficult to estimate.
& to the original poster: some people do gain on 2000, while some people lose on 2000... you need a lot more information or to test it out to see if it's true. Personally, I'd rather trust MFP and test a lower number first, because I would rather risk losing a little extra than risk gaining. lol. Then adjust as needed after a few weeks of trial and error..
Thanks! I think I should assess later after seeing how it goes. I have considered getting my expenditure tested medically, just as you mentioned in your post. There are lots of research studies I could be a gineau pig for, which would pay me to test my calorie burns. I live in a city where there are lots of research labs! I have definitely ate on the lower side of my calories given by myfitnesspal since I joined..today was an exception as a rest day.. where I hit 2k calories for the first time in a month. I was eating 1300-1500 before and losing on that (pretty quickly). I will see what happens.. if I were to gain 1/10th of a pound from today.. doesn't exactly bother me.
Also, I don't know who to quote for this..but someone asked if I'm sedentary? I run 70-80 miles a week..so I'm more active than 90%+ of the people on this site.. on top of that I bike and have to run around at work all day
I think you misunderstood the question. MFP's goal is based on the ACTIVITY LEVEL you put in and is before exercise, which is why you log exercise (it cannot know what exercise you do until you log it). The question was probably whether you put in a sedentary activity level (if it was my question that's what it was).
If you run that much obviously your maintenance is not 2000, but MFP is not "crazy" unless it is giving you that much after you log exercise, which presumably it is not, right?4 -
I'd be Jabba the Smut in no time on 2000 calories a day. (That's not a misspelling, it's what I call myself when I'm feeling big.
)
It's all about stats. Height, weight, activity level, age plus that little sprinkling of your own uniqueness.0 -
@Theo166Tropicoolblonde wrote: »Just realized I didn't answer the question about activity level... I put sedentary and I add "exercise calories" as I go.
You still haven't shared your specific stats, please do so when you ask for help.
If you exercise regularly, sedentary is the wrong setting.
The bold is incorrect!
Sedentary is the activity setting - nothing to do with exercise on here. It reflects day to day activity, lifestyle, job.
I work at a desk - that's seated, sedentary.
I also cycle for exercise in excess of 500 miles a month plus weight training - my activity setting is still sedentary.
If I boosted my activity setting because of my exercise and then logged my exercise as well that would be double counting.
The other confusion many seem to have is they think they only add exercise calories if they have a sedentary setting - that is also false.
An example would be my son, he's a builder so a very active job and therefore activity setting. He also exercises, he still would need to log and eat those exercise calories.5 -
Tropicoolblonde wrote: »[
Also, I don't know who to quote for this..but someone asked if I'm sedentary? I run 70-80 miles a week..so I'm more active than 90%+ of the people on this site.. on top of that I bike and have to run around at work all day
Yo! Could you re-read your OP?
You are wondering if MFP is crazy by saying you should maintain at 2000 Cal.
You got various answers that basically boil down to MFP did not tell you that you will maintain at 2000 Cal unless YOU TOLD MFP that you're sedentary and did not continue on to log your actual difference between sedentary and what you really are.
In other words, not crazy... just user error.7 -
Tropicoolblonde wrote: »[
Also, I don't know who to quote for this..but someone asked if I'm sedentary? I run 70-80 miles a week..so I'm more active than 90%+ of the people on this site.. on top of that I bike and have to run around at work all day
Yo! Could you re-read your OP?
You are wondering if MFP is crazy by saying you should maintain at 2000 Cal.
You got various answers that basically boil down to MFP did not tell you that you will maintain at 2000 Cal unless YOU TOLD MFP that you're sedentary and did not continue on to log your actual difference between sedentary and what you really are.
In other words, not crazy... just user error.
Log your exercise. Running that many miles is 10 miles a day. Yes you need these calories. My goodness, even training programs emphasize the need to hydrate and eat when running this much. I am really concerned you are not fueling enough actually
3 -
Tropicoolblonde wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »It's really bothersome that people seriously don't realize even TDEE estimates unless you have your body tested a lot are only estimates and averages of people of the same weight as you - there are exceptions way higher, exceptions way lower, and many that have small variations. So if it says you maintain on 1800 on a calculator, you test it out and you may find out you maintain at 1500, or 2200, or 1800, and it does not mean you log wrong every time - it means people differ and metabolic rates, genetics, etc differ so there are exceptions. The majority will be close to what the calculation shows, but you might be one of the unlucky or lucky few who have a decent sized variation from what typical maintenance calories are for your weight and activity. Especially because exercise intensity and so forth can be difficult to estimate.
& to the original poster: some people do gain on 2000, while some people lose on 2000... you need a lot more information or to test it out to see if it's true. Personally, I'd rather trust MFP and test a lower number first, because I would rather risk losing a little extra than risk gaining. lol. Then adjust as needed after a few weeks of trial and error..
Thanks! I think I should assess later after seeing how it goes. I have considered getting my expenditure tested medically, just as you mentioned in your post. There are lots of research studies I could be a gineau pig for, which would pay me to test my calorie burns. I live in a city where there are lots of research labs! I have definitely ate on the lower side of my calories given by myfitnesspal since I joined..today was an exception as a rest day.. where I hit 2k calories for the first time in a month. I was eating 1300-1500 before and losing on that (pretty quickly). I will see what happens.. if I were to gain 1/10th of a pound from today.. doesn't exactly bother me.
Also, I don't know who to quote for this..but someone asked if I'm sedentary? I run 70-80 miles a week..so I'm more active than 90%+ of the people on this site.. on top of that I bike and have to run around at work all day
You don't absolutely need the metabolic test: You just need to log consistently and accurately, and judge based on your experience. Then you'll know whether 2000 is crazy for you, or not.
Try to get the settings accurate as a starting point (weight, age, activity level = non-exercise activity, etc.). Make your food logging as accurate as you can (weigh portions, use accurate database entries, etc.). Estimate your exercise reasonably. Be consistent about that for a few weeks.
At the end of that, throw out the first couple of weeks' data (because of initial water weight loss), take the next couple or three weeks results. If your target loss is 1.5 pounds/week, and your average loss is 1.5 pounds per week, MFP's estimates are accurate for you. If your loss is greater than your target, eat more (increase your activity level setting, just manually set your calorie goal, whatever). If your loss is slower than your target (and you stuck to your calorie goal), then eat less or exercise more.
If you weren't compliant with your goal calories, or if you feel the need for an accurate estimate of your maintenance calories around your current weight range, you can do fancier arithmetic with your average calories eaten daily, your average calories exercised daily, and your average weight loss daily (1 pound roughly = 3500 calories) and still figure this out.
The MFP settings are just a starting point. What matters for real is your personal results, over a time period. Anyone else's results are irrelevant.
(Personally, I'm 5'5", female, around 130 pounds, 61 years old, and would lose, albeit slowly, on 2000 gross calories. But I'm weird, like everyone else, so that doesn't matter in the slightest for you.)1 -
@Theo166Tropicoolblonde wrote: »Just realized I didn't answer the question about activity level... I put sedentary and I add "exercise calories" as I go.
You still haven't shared your specific stats, please do so when you ask for help.
If you exercise regularly, sedentary is the wrong setting.
The bold is incorrect!
Sedentary is the activity setting - nothing to do with exercise on here. It reflects day to day activity, lifestyle, job.
I work at a desk - that's seated, sedentary.
I also cycle for exercise in excess of 500 miles a month plus weight training - my activity setting is still sedentary.
If I boosted my activity setting because of my exercise and then logged my exercise as well that would be double counting.
The other confusion many seem to have is they think they only add exercise calories if they have a sedentary setting - that is also false.
An example would be my son, he's a builder so a very active job and therefore activity setting. He also exercises, he still would need to log and eat those exercise calories.
Your level of exercise does affect your metabolism when you aren't doing the actual exercise.0 -
Tropicoolblonde wrote: »Any idea why? That seems pretty low for weight gain.
I would definitely be gaining on 2000 calories a day! Especially if I did no exercise. In fact, that's how I got to my highest weight ever (just within the overweight range on the BMI scale).
Turns out my maintenance is 1500 calories a day, with no exercise.
Fortunately, I exercise quite a lot ... otherwise life would be rather miserable.1 -
@Theo166Tropicoolblonde wrote: »Just realized I didn't answer the question about activity level... I put sedentary and I add "exercise calories" as I go.
You still haven't shared your specific stats, please do so when you ask for help.
If you exercise regularly, sedentary is the wrong setting.
The bold is incorrect!
Sedentary is the activity setting - nothing to do with exercise on here. It reflects day to day activity, lifestyle, job.
I work at a desk - that's seated, sedentary.
I also cycle for exercise in excess of 500 miles a month plus weight training - my activity setting is still sedentary.
If I boosted my activity setting because of my exercise and then logged my exercise as well that would be double counting.
The other confusion many seem to have is they think they only add exercise calories if they have a sedentary setting - that is also false.
An example would be my son, he's a builder so a very active job and therefore activity setting. He also exercises, he still would need to log and eat those exercise calories.
Your level of exercise does affect your metabolism when you aren't doing the actual exercise.
Not as much as you think.
Sijomial has it right - your activity level should match your everyday non-exercise activity. Then you log your workouts and eat all/part of those calories back - at least if you're trying to do it the way MFP has it set up. The EPOC/"afterburn" effects from exercise isn't enough to alter your everyday activity status.2 -
Wait wait wait. OP has been back. Are you saying you run 70-80 miles a week and are grossing about 1500 calories at the moment?! No wonder you're losing quickly! Yikes!2
-
WinoGelato wrote: »Mary_Anastasia wrote: »Sounds right. I'm 5'7", 219lb and I maintain at 1,400 calories. More than that and I gain.
That seems...... unlikely. I'm 5 inches shorter, 100 lbs lighter, and I maintain on 2200. I'm active, but even if I were sedentary, my maintenance cals would be more than 1400.
Agreed seems unlikely, mfp tells me I would maintain at 1850cal when sedentary being 5'7 and 164.5lbs.0 -
I'd gain on 2000 if I was sedentary, so I make sure I'm not.
My 20k+ daily steps add up to 1000 calories sometimes.2 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Wait wait wait. OP has been back. Are you saying you run 70-80 miles a week and are grossing about 1500 calories at the moment?! No wonder you're losing quickly! Yikes!
Yep, it's tough when info comes little by little, but my guess is she hasn't been logging exercise so obviously MFP isn't giving her enough calories.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions