Supertracker, and the fallacy of believing everything you see online

Options
I've put my numbers into the USDA's supertracker tool several times and each time I'm skeptical of the result. If I chose my leisure activity level as "Moderate", (more than once weekly of walking or gardening), it tells me that I can lose .5 lb per week by eating over 2100 calories daily. Further, it tells me that I can maintain at 160 lb by eating 2450 calories daily.

In the real world, I eat 1700 + some of my exercise calories and lose at that rate.

I created an account on Supertracker and started entering my physical activity. First is my job, in which I stand at my desk for 8 hours a day. Supertracker has an entry for that, "Standing, general". With 8 hours, 480 minutes per day of standing, Supertracker says I burn 2041 calories each workday.

In my mfp exercise logging, I created an exercise to account for standing, and I calculated it as burning about .75 calories per minute, such that a day of standing at my desk gives me about 350 extra calories.

If I were to trust Supertracker, I'd be eating over 4000 calories each day.
I've done that a few times.
It's called a "binge".

It's sad that the USDA does such a good job with the food database but such poor job with the exercise database.

«1

Replies

  • Seffell
    Seffell Posts: 2,222 Member
    Options
    I just tried it. Told it that I do 30 to 60 minutes of moderate activity per day (brisk walking) and it gave me 2200cal to maintain. LOL! I maintain on 1700...
    And I walk more than 60min a day briskly.

    Why such a rediculously bad estimate?
  • DamieBird
    DamieBird Posts: 651 Member
    Options
    Wow, Supertracker thinks that I should be eating 2400 calories a day o_O. That's a gross overestimate!
  • JaydedMiss
    JaydedMiss Posts: 4,286 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    im 5 ft 3 135 pounds and it gave me 2200 to lose weight xD? hah ...even when i understated my activity level it gave me WAY to many
  • DamieBird
    DamieBird Posts: 651 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    So, I went back in and played around with some setting and found this:

    https://supertracker.usda.gov/bwp/index.html

    It gives a much more reasonable estimate of weight loss/gain/maintenance, but still overestimates your activity levels. I should be at about a 1.45 multiplier, and when I input my actual activity using their estimator it reads at a 1.6, which is just too much based on my personal TDEE trend. I like that the estimate data for weight loss/gain/maintenance can be exported to an excel file. It looks like this part of the website could be useful as far as data collection goes. It's interesting to play around with target dates, etc.

    ETA: You'll get the most information if you switch to "expert mode", located on the top right
  • Old_Cat_Lady
    Old_Cat_Lady Posts: 1,193 Member
    Options
    I just tried the USDA dri - daily reference intakes. At least that seems right.
    jerome, if you try it, what do you think =here it is https://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/interactiveDRI/
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    I've put my numbers into the USDA's supertracker tool several times and each time I'm skeptical of the result. If I chose my leisure activity level as "Moderate", (more than once weekly of walking or gardening), it tells me that I can lose .5 lb per week by eating over 2100 calories daily. Further, it tells me that I can maintain at 160 lb by eating 2450 calories daily.

    In the real world, I eat 1700 + some of my exercise calories and lose at that rate.

    I created an account on Supertracker and started entering my physical activity. First is my job, in which I stand at my desk for 8 hours a day. Supertracker has an entry for that, "Standing, general". With 8 hours, 480 minutes per day of standing, Supertracker says I burn 2041 calories each workday.

    In my mfp exercise logging, I created an exercise to account for standing, and I calculated it as burning about .75 calories per minute, such that a day of standing at my desk gives me about 350 extra calories.

    If I were to trust Supertracker, I'd be eating over 4000 calories each day.
    I've done that a few times.
    It's called a "binge".

    It's sad that the USDA does such a good job with the food database but such poor job with the exercise database.

    I don't think the 2041 is "additional" calories like you would get exercise calories beyond your activity level...but rather the gross calorie expenditure including your BMR, etc. Your net difference between standing and sitting is likely 350-400 calories.

    From what I've researched, standing vs sitting will burn roughly 50 calories per hour more than sitting...so if you sat, instead of "burning" 2,041 calories, you would burn an estimated 1,641 calories.
  • Enjcg5
    Enjcg5 Posts: 389 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    I have friends who post on social media a "burn" of 3,287 calories after they leave the gym. Or burned 2,654 calories "by just taking 11,000 steps" I imagine it's info from their fitbit. (These are average sized people mind you) Sooooo much misinformation out there in the world regarding fitness and weighloss.
  • seska422
    seska422 Posts: 3,217 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    DamieBird wrote: »
    So, I went back in and played around with some setting and found this:

    https://supertracker.usda.gov/bwp/index.html

    It gives a much more reasonable estimate of weight loss/gain/maintenance, but still overestimates your activity levels. I should be at about a 1.45 multiplier, and when I input my actual activity using their estimator it reads at a 1.6, which is just too much based on my personal TDEE trend. I like that the estimate data for weight loss/gain/maintenance can be exported to an excel file. It looks like this part of the website could be useful as far as data collection goes. It's interesting to play around with target dates, etc.

    ETA: You'll get the most information if you switch to "expert mode", located on the top right
    I love this and have played with it for more than a year now.

    I had to play with the activity multiplier as well and 1.3 was my magic number while losing to get a weight loss rate that matched my real-world results. I've added some walking and I'm close to maintenance so I need to go play with the numbers again.

    Everything (including Fitbit) overestimates how many calories my body actually burns. I don't know if some people naturally burn closer to the estimates or they are getting people's calories from notoriously-inaccurate self-reported calorie intake or what. I saw a story a while back talking about how the Nutritional Facts calorie counts on food labels of 2000 for women and 2500 for men were too low and should be increased because people were undereating if they followed those general amounts. :|
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    Enjcg5 wrote: »
    I have friends who post on social media a "burn" of 3,287 calories after they leave the gym. Or burned 2,654 calories "by just taking 11,000 steps" I imagine it's info from their fitbit. (These are average sized people mind you) Sooooo much misinformation out there in the world regarding fitness and weighloss.

    Or they are misinterpreting what they're looking at. I burn around 3,000+ calories per day...that's not all exercise...that's my BMR, my day to day activity, and my exercise...a Fitbit or similar would tell me I burn 3,000 calories in a day...if I posted that, probably a lot of people would misinterpret that and think I'm full of it...but it's not just exercise, it's everything.
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    I've put my numbers into the USDA's supertracker tool several times and each time I'm skeptical of the result. If I chose my leisure activity level as "Moderate", (more than once weekly of walking or gardening), it tells me that I can lose .5 lb per week by eating over 2100 calories daily. Further, it tells me that I can maintain at 160 lb by eating 2450 calories daily.

    In the real world, I eat 1700 + some of my exercise calories and lose at that rate.

    I created an account on Supertracker and started entering my physical activity. First is my job, in which I stand at my desk for 8 hours a day. Supertracker has an entry for that, "Standing, general". With 8 hours, 480 minutes per day of standing, Supertracker says I burn 2041 calories each workday.

    In my mfp exercise logging, I created an exercise to account for standing, and I calculated it as burning about .75 calories per minute, such that a day of standing at my desk gives me about 350 extra calories.

    If I were to trust Supertracker, I'd be eating over 4000 calories each day.
    I've done that a few times.
    It's called a "binge".

    It's sad that the USDA does such a good job with the food database but such poor job with the exercise database.

    I don't think the 2041 is "additional" calories like you would get exercise calories beyond your activity level...but rather the gross calorie expenditure including your BMR, etc. Your net difference between standing and sitting is likely 350-400 calories.

    From what I've researched, standing vs sitting will burn roughly 50 calories per hour more than sitting...so if you sat, instead of "burning" 2,041 calories, you would burn an estimated 1,641 calories.

    It has space to put exercises for the 7 days of the week. As my standing at work was the first thing I entered, both Sunday and Saturday remained with no exercises at all. Both of those days listed 'calories burned' as "0", From this, I have confidence that the 2041 number was the site's idea of net exercise calories, not the gross number of BMR + exercise.
  • Mezzie1024
    Mezzie1024 Posts: 380 Member
    Options
    It came back at about 1940 for maintenance at my activity level. My experience says closer to 1850, but it's still pretty close.
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    Options
    I just tried the USDA dri - daily reference intakes. At least that seems right.
    jerome, if you try it, what do you think =here it is https://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/interactiveDRI/

    I chose an activity level of "low active". It gives me "Estimated Daily Caloric Needs: 2569 kcal/day"
    to maintain at 170.4 lb.

    Even if I completely disregard my 8 hours of MET 2.0 standing, I believe that my 3+ hours weekly of weight lifting and 3+ hours weekly of deliberate intense cardio + 1-2 hrs of walking, gardening, etc would match a higher level of activity with a higher calorie target.

    It's also interesting that the supertracker wants to know activity levels for work and for leisure, while the DRI tool only asks for one comprehensive activity level.

    Overall, the DRI site is similarly as generous as the supertracker site.
  • MommyMeggo
    MommyMeggo Posts: 1,222 Member
    Options
    Sounds a lot like my damn FitBit HR giving me 2200+cals/ day...my TDEE is actually around 1800 after analyzing 3+weeks of data. Hail to the spreadsheet!

    I have just recently started standing up at my desk since my knee injury last summer so- hopefully Ill get a little more for it. (But Im not counting it as extra)
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    Options
    The data I used to calculate my standing came from www.juststand.org.

    It's like any other deliberate exercise, though at MET 2.0 it only accumulates slowly by raising your heart rate by about 10 beats per minute above resting. It is your decision if you want to eat those calories. I have occasionally justified some workplace snacking with those.
  • Ironandwine69
    Ironandwine69 Posts: 2,432 Member
    Options
    Why should I believe this post?
  • Enjcg5
    Enjcg5 Posts: 389 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    Enjcg5 wrote: »
    I have friends who post on social media a "burn" of 3,287 calories after they leave the gym. Or burned 2,654 calories "by just taking 11,000 steps" I imagine it's info from their fitbit. (These are average sized people mind you) Sooooo much misinformation out there in the world regarding fitness and weighloss.

    Or they are misinterpreting what they're looking at. I burn around 3,000+ calories per day...that's not all exercise...that's my BMR, my day to day activity, and my exercise...a Fitbit or similar would tell me I burn 3,000 calories in a day...if I posted that, probably a lot of people would misinterpret that and think I'm full of it...but it's not just exercise, it's everything.

    That's the thing! After conversations with several different people- they actually think that they are "burning" this with an hour of zumba class or their daily walks. When I ask if they've accounted for their TDEE- blank stare. Usually the gadget was gifted to them (and therefore set up for them by someone else) and they have no idea how to interpret the numbers.
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    Options
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    It gives me 2413 to maintain my current weight. That's reasonable based on my records.
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    Options
    jemhh wrote: »
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    It gives me 2413 to maintain my current weight. That's reasonable based on my records.

    What activity level did you give it?
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    Why should I believe this post?

    Perhaps it is my OP you doubt. Following is a copy-paste of the Body Weight Planner with my data inputs.
    My body fat % was hydrostrostatically measured a couple of weeks ago at 14.3. I rounded it down to 14 to account for recent weight loss. I Bold-ed the calorie values at the end.

    Starting Information Advanced Controls: ON
    Starting Weight in lbs
    Weight
    170.4

    Age
    55
    yrs
    Height in Inches
    Height
    5
    ft.
    10
    in.
    Physical Activity Level
    Physical
    Activity Level
    1.7
    Estimate Your Level
    Uncertainty Range
    Uncertainty Range %
    % Calories from Carbs
    % Calories from Carbs
    50
    %
    Sodium Intake (mg/day)
    Sodium Intake
    4000
    mg/day
    Initial Body Fat %
    % Body Fat
    14
    %
    Initial Resting Metabolic Rate as Cal/day
    Resting Metabolic Rate
    1618
    Cal/day
    Goal Weight
    Lifestyle Change
    Weight Goal
    Goal Weight
    160
    lbs
    I want to reach my goal in
    49
    days
    OR select a date
    I want to reach my goal by
    8/17/2017
    calendar
    Physical Activity Change (Optional)
    Weight Change Phase
    To reach my goal, I will
    change my physical activity by
    0
    Calculate
    %
    Goal Maintenance Phase
    To maintain my goal, I will
    change my physical activity by
    0
    Calculate
    %
    Results
    Calories Kilojoules
    In order to maintain
    your current weight,
    you should eat:
    2,750
    Calories/day
    To reach your goal of
    160 lbs in 49 days,
    you should eat:
    2,107
    Calories/day
    To maintain your goal
    of 160 lbs,
    you should eat:
    2,614
    Calories/day


    Initial Weight (lbs): 170.4 Initial % Fat: 14 Initial BMI: 24.4
    Final Weight (lbs): 160.9 Final % Fat: 12.1 Final BMI: 23.1