Calorie intake and Fitbit reliability
Replies
-
Duck_Puddle wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice
).
I would definitely contact Fitbit. Based on your 270, you weigh 128 pounds - which is a whole lot less than me. And my 40 min 5k gives me roughly the same calories as yours (only it's right for me as a gross total which is what a 24/7 tracker would be counting). So either your Fitbit thinks you weigh like 40 lbs more than you do, or it's broken.
Also when I contacted them, the girl I spoke to had no idea what BMR meant. Nor TDEE. It was impossible to even explain the issue...
OP, I wouldn't bother if I were you. I lost time trying and regret it.0 -
gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
How do you 'know' for sure you are definitely burning 1850? Has this been professionally tested or just based on your TDEE? Your resting heart rate compared to your moving heart rate might actually indicate that you burn that much.
I know that when I get 10k steps in a causal, running errands manner vs. 10k steps taking a brisk 3 mile walk, the FitBit reports a higher burn when I exerted more energy doing the 10k steps. It's actually quite intelligent.
4 -
gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
How are you so certain that your estimate of 1850 is correct and the FitBit estimate of 2100 is incorrect?
I'm a 5'2 female over forty weighing less than 120 lbs, with a desk job, and FitBit estimates my TDEE to be 2200. No one ever believes that a petite female could burn that much, but my results from trusting it and eating back my calories have shown it is accurate for me. Maybe you burn more than you think as well...
4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
I suspect you may not be understanding how FitBit and MFP work together. Is the 455 cals you saw, was that on the FitBit? Or Was that the adjustment that MFP gave you after syncing with the FitBit? Regardless, FitBit is measuring total calories burned including your BMRc whereas when logging exercise in MFP only, the estimates are for the exercise itself since the BMR and NEAT is included in the base cals that MFP gives you. Additionally, the calories are adjusted throughout the day so that if you have a period of high activity from a purposeful exercise, especially earlier in the day, the systems expect you to keep up that level of activity for the full 24 hours. When you don't then the calories are adjusted downward as is often seen when someone goes to bed thinking they have 100 cals left for the day and then wake up the next morning to find those and additional cals have disappeared.
MFP and FitBit are just trueing up, from what MFP thinks you would burn based on the stats and activity level you chose during set up, and what FitBit says you are actually burning, adjusted for your deficit or to keep with your overall goals. Usually when people are skeptical of very large adjustments it's because they are more active than they realized and the two systems are saying you need to eat more in order to account for that.
Many of us have found the two to be quite accurate an helpful when understanding how it's supposed to work and what it's actually measuring.
It's not for everyone though so if you think it's wrong, unsync the devices.
This.... when you are awarded x number of calories from your Fitbit activity, that does not mean you earned x number of calories for the number of steps. What is means is your total activity exceeds your default calories given your selected MFP activity level. Pretty sure this is where everyone gets confused...
If your activity level is selected as sedentary you will get bigger adjustments than lightly active, etc.4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
I suspect you may not be understanding how FitBit and MFP work together. Is the 455 cals you saw, was that on the FitBit? Or Was that the adjustment that MFP gave you after syncing with the FitBit? Regardless, FitBit is measuring total calories burned including your BMRc whereas when logging exercise in MFP only, the estimates are for the exercise itself since the BMR and NEAT is included in the base cals that MFP gives you. Additionally, the calories are adjusted throughout the day so that if you have a period of high activity from a purposeful exercise, especially earlier in the day, the systems expect you to keep up that level of activity for the full 24 hours. When you don't then the calories are adjusted downward as is often seen when someone goes to bed thinking they have 100 cals left for the day and then wake up the next morning to find those and additional cals have disappeared.
MFP and FitBit are just trueing up, from what MFP thinks you would burn based on the stats and activity level you chose during set up, and what FitBit says you are actually burning, adjusted for your deficit or to keep with your overall goals. Usually when people are skeptical of very large adjustments it's because they are more active than they realized and the two systems are saying you need to eat more in order to account for that.
Many of us have found the two to be quite accurate an helpful when understanding how it's supposed to work and what it's actually measuring.
It's not for everyone though so if you think it's wrong, unsync the devices.
Yes, I thought workout was BMR and the exercise together. That's why I substracted around 55kcal, which is roughly my BMR for one hour. And again, Fitbit and MFP are not linked. Thus this is the number I see in my app/on the fitbit website.
Again: 400 net exercise calories from fitbit compared to around 270 much more realistic net exercise calories from years of tracking and analysing my own in and out: that's quite a difference.0 -
gebeziseva wrote: »Duck_Puddle wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
I would definitely contact Fitbit. Based on your 270, you weigh 128 pounds - which is a whole lot less than me. And my 40 min 5k gives me roughly the same calories as yours (only it's right for me as a gross total which is what a 24/7 tracker would be counting). So either your Fitbit thinks you weigh like 40 lbs more than you do, or it's broken.
Also when I contacted them, the girl I spoke to had no idea what BMR meant. Nor TDEE. It was impossible to even explain the issue...
OP, I wouldn't bother if I were you. I lost time trying and regret it.
That's pretty much what I'm thinking. But it allows me to argue with someone
0 -
MommaGem2017 wrote: »gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
How do you 'know' for sure you are definitely burning 1850? Has this been professionally tested or just based on your TDEE? Your resting heart rate compared to your moving heart rate might actually indicate that you burn that much.
I know that when I get 10k steps in a causal, running errands manner vs. 10k steps taking a brisk 3 mile walk, the FitBit reports a higher burn when I exerted more energy doing the 10k steps. It's actually quite intelligent.
I know my numbers because I've been tracking calories for over three years now. I'm always using a scale as I'm am a scientist. Estimating is not in my nature (yes, I know that some food is digested better than others. I cannot go as precise as I'd like). I've had extensive periods were I was sick and could not work out. Thus I have a very good idea how much weight I lost with how much food, and likewise for maintaining. I had extensive periods where I only did one certain workout type. With the information above I get a pretty good idea how much calories those exercises burn for me. I have numbers for running, breast stroke swimming and interval strength training. Tried to quantify weight lifting, but those numbers just vanished in the statistical backscatter. It's too low. I don't have numbers for walking, but it stands to reason that walking should not burn more calories than running. Comparing my tried and tested running calories to fitbit's high walking on flat terrain calories I can only conclude that Fitbit is way off.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
How are you so certain that your estimate of 1850 is correct and the FitBit estimate of 2100 is incorrect?
I'm a 5'2 female over forty weighing less than 120 lbs, with a desk job, and FitBit estimates my TDEE to be 2200. No one ever believes that a petite female could burn that much, but my results from trusting it and eating back my calories have shown it is accurate for me. Maybe you burn more than you think as well...
@MommaGem2017, @WinoGelato
I have been keeping spreadsheets of detailed data for 18 months. I know exactly how much I burn. I lose exactly the amount my deficit predicts.
Edited to add:
I have lost 30lbs by eating at around 200-250cal deficit per day. I.e. pretty small space for errors.2 -
My fitbit, if anything, underestimates my calorie burns.
A lot of people who say that Fitbit overestimates actually underestimate their food intake. But there are indeed some faulty fitbits out there.gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
Unless you're short and over 50, there's no way you only burn 350 calories from 10k steps.
And whoever said they got a 2800 calories burn from 18km... that definitely sounds pretty right to me.
2 -
My fitbit, if anything, underestimates my calorie burns.
A lot of people who say that Fitbit overestimates actually underestimate their food intake. But there are indeed some faulty fitbits out there.gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
Unless you're short and over 50, there's no way you only burn 350 calories from 10k steps.
And whoever said they got a 2800 calories burn from 18km... that definitely sounds pretty right to me.
Not at all. Others with my stats will confirm that 10k steps burn around 350cals.
I'm 5'7, 138lbs and 37yo female.
I'm surprised you think otherswise. All my pedometer apps and MFP estimate the same calories for 10k steps. Only fitbit is the odd one.
But anyway I don't want to steal the post. I have no issues with losing weight or estimating burns.0 -
My fitbit, if anything, underestimates my calorie burns.
A lot of people who say that Fitbit overestimates actually underestimate their food intake. But there are indeed some faulty fitbits out there.gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
Unless you're short and over 50, there's no way you only burn 350 calories from 10k steps.
And whoever said they got a 2800 calories burn from 18km... that definitely sounds pretty right to me.
I'm sorry but that's bull. Calculators give a calorie burn of 100kcal per miles for running for an average person. A light woman will burn much less than that. A half marathon, 21km or 13 miles would thus come down to about 1300 for this average person, or 18km/11 miles to 1100kcal for running. There is no way that walking burns a similar or higher amount of calories.0 -
My fitbit, if anything, underestimates my calorie burns.
A lot of people who say that Fitbit overestimates actually underestimate their food intake. But there are indeed some faulty fitbits out there.gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
Unless you're short and over 50, there's no way you only burn 350 calories from 10k steps.
And whoever said they got a 2800 calories burn from 18km... that definitely sounds pretty right to me.
I'm sorry but that's bull. Calculators give a calorie burn of 100kcal per miles for running for an average person. A light woman will burn much less than that. A half marathon, 21km or 13 miles would thus come down to about 1300 for this average person, or 18km/11 miles to 1100kcal for running. There is no way that walking burns a similar or higher amount of calories.
My sedentary TDEE is 1700ish. On days I walk 11 miles and I can definitely burn 2800 calories in a day, no problem. I'm 5'5", 142 lbs, 39yo (note that a good part of my walking is at a small incline though).
I should have specified I guess - 2800 calories burned on the days I walk 25,000 steps or 11 miles. I didn't mean I'd burn 2800 calories from that walking, obviously, because that would be insane. And as I said, I'd have to do at least half those steps at a 3% incline or more to burn that many calories from it. But I'm only 5'5", 142 lbs, and 39yo. A younger/bigger person would hit 2800 calories that way easily.
Obviously we all have a different metabolism but as I said, Fitbit has been accurate for me in the last 7 months - if anything, it underestimates, because I should probably have gained 6 or 8 lbs, not 2.0 -
My fitbit, if anything, underestimates my calorie burns.
A lot of people who say that Fitbit overestimates actually underestimate their food intake. But there are indeed some faulty fitbits out there.gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
Unless you're short and over 50, there's no way you only burn 350 calories from 10k steps.
And whoever said they got a 2800 calories burn from 18km... that definitely sounds pretty right to me.
I'm sorry but that's bull. Calculators give a calorie burn of 100kcal per miles for running for an average person. A light woman will burn much less than that. A half marathon, 21km or 13 miles would thus come down to about 1300 for this average person, or 18km/11 miles to 1100kcal for running. There is no way that walking burns a similar or higher amount of calories.
That's great, but most of us are here for weight loss and are rather a lot above average. For example, I will burn 176 calories in a mile of running. At a brisk(13 minute mile walking) pace, I'll burn 150 calories.
That's close enough to the margin of error for my scale in weighing out a 150 calorie serving of almonds. to be the same.
0 -
MommaGem2017 wrote: »Yes it is, and I provided the links if you had read any of my other posts.
In MFP setting, both sedentary and "low active" translate to the sedentary setting.Just because someone is not spending daily time in the gym does not mean they are not getting a calorie burn other ways.
No, it doesn't. But that doesn't mean there is a blank check for fitness band abuse, either. Over-estimation of burn calories by people who are essentially sedentary is probably the single most often seen reason for failed weight loss.
0 -
stanmann571 wrote: »For example, I will burn 176 calories in a mile of running.
That requires a body weight of around 275 pounds.
0 -
stanmann571 wrote: »For example, I will burn 176 calories in a mile of running.
That requires a body weight of around 275 pounds.
Nope, 242.
http://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn
0 -
MommaGem2017 wrote: »It's actually quite intelligent.
And often wrong.
An easy example to see this is...10k casual steps waitressing versus 10k steps brisk walking while otherwise desk jobbing. The waitress will almost certainly burn quite a few more calories than the person doing the intentional "brisk walking".
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »nosebag1212 wrote: »Mine is very accurate. I'm convinced people who say it's way off for them either aren't using it properly i.e. trying to use it to measure stuff like weight lifting, HIIT, cycing (things it's not designed for) etc, horribly inaccurate with their tracking or they just have a faulty unit.
^This.
I'm 5'2 and average 15k steps per day but that has increased steadily in the 3 years since I got my FitBit. My total calories burned/day is 2200, and since I'm active, I have my activity level set accordingly in MFP. Mine has been accurate enough to help me lose the weight I set out to lose and maintain with no issues by trusting and eating back the calorie adjustments from the two systems working together.
This is my story.0 -
MommaGem2017 wrote: »It's actually quite intelligent.
And often wrong.
An easy example to see this is...10k casual steps waitressing versus 10k steps brisk walking while otherwise desk jobbing. The waitress will almost certainly burn quite a few more calories than the person doing the intentional "brisk walking".
I think you've got that exactly backwards... in fact I know you do. Pace does in fact matter for walking.0 -
I'm sorry but that's bull. Calculators give a calorie burn of 100kcal per miles for running for an average person. A light woman will burn much less than that. A half marathon, 21km or 13 miles would thus come down to about 1300 for this average person, or 18km/11 miles to 1100kcal for running. There is no way that walking burns a similar or higher amount of calories.
Well this 165lb (at the time), 5'2", 45yo would disagree with you, this was my first trail half and I burnt a hell of a lot more than 1300 Calories (and that was recorded on my Garmin that generally underestimates my Calorie burn)
1 -
On exercise calories and diet Yoni Freedhoff seems to have a pretty good story to tell in the video, albeit not one most people like to hear.
His blog is insightful as well.
http://www.weightymatters.ca/
video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7FK8noIc5I
The one thing that I'd like to see is what the supposed science is, the biochemistry. From the video, it seems like the most sensible explanation is that exercise induces your body to subsequently slow down energy expenditure; example you may without exercise burn your natural 2500 calories in energy in a day. Add exercise and although you burn 500 calories at that activity the body, following exercise, slows down its energy expenditure such that at the end of the day you are still right around the 2500. If there is any, and there is a question in the data if there is with both opponents and proponents, one thing seems to be clear, the effective calorie deficit from exercise is probably in the single digits %'s.
Debate of Forks vs Feet, which is more critical to weight loss. Interesting discussion.
http://blogs.plos.org/obesitypanacea/2011/06/14/forks-vs-feet-video-and-podcast/
An important element of how to read this also has to do with where you are starting from and others in the thread have noted this. If you are truly sedentary, like you hardly move, and you begin to march off 10-15k steps a day you will probably find, especially if you have also introduced a consumptive caloric restriction of -500 to -1000 calories a day, that you will need to eat back some of those calories to avoid severe hunger. Most wise folks seem (there is some subjectivity here) to suggest though that this should only be done while your metabolism adjusts and it WILL adjust. I'm on a 1600 calorie plan (53 years, 6' tall ~200 lb although threatening 195 regularly), don't walk much during a normal day, even though I walk to work (I live close). I go to the gym 7 days a week to lift and for HIIT and generally 1-2 days a week do a long (30-50 miles with an attention to elevation gain) mtn or road bike ride. Most weekend days and some weekdays when I ride my overall MFP calorie count is negative thanks to Strava's counting methods. I don't generally eat back any exercise calories UNLESS, after eating my normal meals, I'm still hungry, generally though I'm not and when I am I find that maybe an extra 100 calories added to a meal is all that's needed.2 -
caloriemuse wrote: »On exercise calories and diet Yoni Freedhoff seems to have a pretty good story to tell in the video, albeit not one most people like to hear.
His blog is insightful as well.
http://www.weightymatters.ca/
videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7FK8noIc5I
The one thing that I'd like to see is what the supposed science is, the biochemistry. From the video, it seems like the most sensible explanation is that exercise induces your body to subsequently slow down energy expenditure; example you may without exercise burn your natural 2500 calories in energy in a day. Add exercise and although you burn 500 calories at that activity the body, following exercise, slows down its energy expenditure such that at the end of the day you are still right around the 2500. If there is any, and there is a question in the data if there is with both opponents and proponents, one thing seems to be clear, the effective calorie deficit from exercise is probably in the single digits %'s.
Except every controlled study that measured actual energy expenditure shows that EPOC or "afterburn" is a real component of exercise calorie burn.
The more likely explanation is that being rungry leads to estimating calorie consumption even more poorly than usual.1 -
MommaGem2017 wrote: »Yes it is, and I provided the links if you had read any of my other posts.
In MFP setting, both sedentary and "low active" translate to the sedentary setting.Just because someone is not spending daily time in the gym does not mean they are not getting a calorie burn other ways.
No, it doesn't. But that doesn't mean there is a blank check for fitness band abuse, either. Over-estimation of burn calories by people who are essentially sedentary is probably the single most often seen reason for failed weight loss.
I'm so confused are you saying that calories earned from daily activities somehow count less than intentional exercise?
I'd also argue that underestimation of intake leads to failed weight loss FAR more often than overestimation of calorie burns as a lot of people don't ever log exercise calories and even more are wary of eating some or any back at all.1 -
Caloric burn for fitness bands are known to be pretty inaccurate, so I'm not sure if I'd rely on them for anything other than a very broad estimate. Relevant study: http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4426/7/2/3
0 -
My fitbit, if anything, underestimates my calorie burns.
A lot of people who say that Fitbit overestimates actually underestimate their food intake. But there are indeed some faulty fitbits out there.gebeziseva wrote: »MommaGem2017 wrote: »Seems like the calorie estimate of fitbit is even worse than the MFP database. My 40 minute slow 5k came back as being 455kcal. Now I suspect these to be gross calories. So if I'm very generous I substract 55kcal and get 400. Personally, from experience I'd not give myself more than 270 net calories for this run. I'm confident to eat all of them back though (and just did, Dutch licorice ).
As suggested before, if your FitBit is that inaccurate, then you should call FitBit tech support. It does your data nerdery no good if you have a flawed device.
Many people have already called them. It is a popular issue in their forums. They don't care. I'm tired of reading the same issue over and over again there. I called them too but they said the only thing they can do is replace my device. My device is fine. It counts my steps correctly. But their algorithms calculate 700cals for my 10k steps instead of 350cals (I'm 138lbs female). So for 10k steps a day and no other exercise it gives me 2100cals while I actually burn only 1850.
The best place for my fitbit is in the trash.
Unless you're short and over 50, there's no way you only burn 350 calories from 10k steps.
And whoever said they got a 2800 calories burn from 18km... that definitely sounds pretty right to me.
I'm sorry but that's bull. Calculators give a calorie burn of 100kcal per miles for running for an average person. A light woman will burn much less than that. A half marathon, 21km or 13 miles would thus come down to about 1300 for this average person, or 18km/11 miles to 1100kcal for running. There is no way that walking burns a similar or higher amount of calories.
Again, it seems like you are talking specifically about the calories burned from the purposeful exercise - while the rest of us (and what FitBit is designed to measure) are referring to the total calorie burn of an individual including BMR, non exercise activity, and purposeful exercise.
I have no need to figure out how many calories I burn during my walk and whether I burn more if I do a brisk pace or a slow pace, or if I get my 15k steps in a single endeavor or through the course of the day. My FitBit calculates my total calories burned at ~2200 for the day, and since MFP thinks my NEAT for my Active setting is 1860, my adjustments are anywhere from 300-500 depending on just how active I am that day. I eat back all of these calories, did so while losing, and now while maintaining successfully for multiple years.
And again, looking at TOTAL calories burned, 2800 total calories for a day that included 18 kilometers of steps (regardless of how fast you were moving) seems reasonable, depending on the person's height, weight and age - it could even be more.0 -
MommaGem2017 wrote: »Yes it is, and I provided the links if you had read any of my other posts.
In MFP setting, both sedentary and "low active" translate to the sedentary setting.Just because someone is not spending daily time in the gym does not mean they are not getting a calorie burn other ways.
No, it doesn't. But that doesn't mean there is a blank check for fitness band abuse, either. Over-estimation of burn calories by people who are essentially sedentary is probably the single most often seen reason for failed weight loss.
The only thing I am trying to communicate is that people who walk more than 10k steps a day, every day (as I stated before), are not actually sedentary. So many reasonably active people feel like they are sedentary and are terrified to eat any of the adjustment back. They wonder why they feel starving and then eventually fail because they can't maintain it in the long term.
MFP asks the following about activity level:
Sedentary: Spend most of the day sitting (e.g. bank teller, desk job)
Lightly Active: Spend a good part of the day on your feet (e.g. teacher, salesperson)
Active: Spend a good part of the day doing some physical activity (e.g. food server, postal carrier)
Very Active: Spend most of the day doing heavy physical activity (e.g. bike messenger, carpenter)
MFP asks nothing about number of days at the gym or minutes of cardio completed a week. When MFP calculates Activity level is it about how active one's lifestyle is, not anything about how much additional intentional exercise one does.
10,000 steps is equivalent to 5 miles of walking, every day, and it takes focused and intentional work from me to complete it each day around work and family responsibilities.1 -
Not sure how exactly Fitbit calculates daily activity, but 10,000 walking steps is likely around 200 calories, and nowhere near 500.
And how it "translates" to MFP depends on your MFP activity setting. I'm set to "active," so while MFP gives me extra calories for under 10,000 steps that come in from Garmin, I don't count them until I'm over that because the first 10,000 are part of my setting.
And I do give myself less than MFP for steps, usually about 30 calories per 1000 steps. I read that somewhere online and used it as a base number and it's worked well for me, not including purposeful exercise.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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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
- 96.3K 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