Why don't people use MFP to set their calorie goals?
Replies
-
I personally do. It has always worked for me. I do the adjust calorie burns for exercise to remove the amount i would have spent sedentary for the same amount of time.0
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »I don't use it because mfp gives me a 1500 calorie goal as a 6'1 male who walks 3-4 miles a day. My sex drive is already tanking from eating only 1800. So sod that
That's because you chose 2 pounds a week. That's the thing new people don't understand, you don't have to pick 2 pounds a week. That's what MFP calculated based on the rate of weight loss you chose, it hasn't forced that number on you and that rate of weight loss is not possible without going that low (or in your case possibly even lower since 1500 is the lowest it would go for men).
ETA: I'm not sure if this is already a thing, but does MFP have (Recommended) next to a moderate rate of weight loss? If it doesn't, this may help some people.
I want 2lbs per week loss, I dont have to eat 1500 cals a day to do that, Imho.
Well, you're 26, 6'1" and 192(ish) pounds. Aiming for a goal of 2 pounds per week probably isn't achievable for you, even if you want to hit that. Most people really can't lose that quickly without having to take their calories down to an unreasonable level.
@phwdjones at 6'1" and 192(ish) pounds, you must be pretty close to your goal weight, yes? In that case you need to adjust your expectations and be patient.0 -
Back to the OP's question... I think that people are a little bit naive and would like to take the quick/easy way out...
It would be lovely if the guided setup was the first screen that popped up after registering as a user. It would also be lovely if, upon registering your starting weight and goal weight, mfp defaulted to a reasonable rate of weight loss (not 2 lbs a week!) to help folks manage their expectations.
I was under the impression it did. It was 2.5 years ago when I signed up, but from what I can recall, as soon as I registered, it took me to a guided set up screen ... and everything seemed pretty clear to me.
But ................ maybe things have changed in 2.5 years???
0 -
Again, for me, even if you I type in the highest activity level, it's still just too low at maintenance. And when I eat the amount I need to maintain, it tells me I am going to gain weight. Sometimes we need other sources of information, calculation, along with our own trial and error. But, when people first join they don't know all of that yet. So people post, and others share what they have learned. Plus some people just do better calculating TDEE, seeing the range of possibilities based on activity levels, and not doing the exercise calorie thing day to day.1
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »I don't use it because mfp gives me a 1500 calorie goal as a 6'1 male who walks 3-4 miles a day. My sex drive is already tanking from eating only 1800. So sod that
That's because you chose 2 pounds a week. That's the thing new people don't understand, you don't have to pick 2 pounds a week. That's what MFP calculated based on the rate of weight loss you chose, it hasn't forced that number on you and that rate of weight loss is not possible without going that low (or in your case possibly even lower since 1500 is the lowest it would go for men).
ETA: I'm not sure if this is already a thing, but does MFP have (Recommended) next to a moderate rate of weight loss? If it doesn't, this may help some people.
I want 2lbs per week loss, I dont have to eat 1500 cals a day to do that, Imho.
You do need to eat that low if you are sedentary. These are simple calculations. If you are active, any activity you add would increase your calories and in that case you could eat more and keep that rate of weight loss.
Perhaps that's the problem--the calculations are too simple to be accurate for everybody. MFP recommended 1600 calories/day for me for 2 lbs/week weight loss (back when I had over 150 lbs to lose) but that daily calorie amount had me binge eating every few days (I thought I just lacked "will power"). However, that calorie level was way too low for me for sedentary (about 35% too low) as I eventually figured out (2 years later) that 2200 calories/day @ sedentary is about right for me for a 2 lbs/week weight loss rate. That daily calorie level for me has recently (July2017) been confirmed by an RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate) test--I just wish I had done that RMR test 2 years ago when I was having such a difficult time sticking to my diets (i.e. any diet I tried, including MFP--and binged on all of them because I followed the diet guidelines or ate the recommended daily calories).
0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »In five years here, I'd have to say that a whole lot of people are just generally clueless as to how this tool works and is designed to work...which I really don't understand because it seemed pretty straight forward to me.
Do You follow the macros or calories?0 -
I think some people generally have trouble with numbers1
-
Back to the OP's question... I think that people are a little bit naive and would like to take the quick/easy way out...
It would be lovely if the guided setup was the first screen that popped up after registering as a user. It would also be lovely if, upon registering your starting weight and goal weight, mfp defaulted to a reasonable rate of weight loss (not 2 lbs a week!) to help folks manage their expectations.
I was under the impression it did. It was 2.5 years ago when I signed up, but from what I can recall, as soon as I registered, it took me to a guided set up screen ... and everything seemed pretty clear to me.
But ................ maybe things have changed in 2.5 years???
It may very well--it's been 5 years for me and I can't remember what I did last week, let alone 5 years ago
It seems that there has been a uptick in the number of "tell me how much to eat" posts lately (and it's not even January) so maybe they discontinued it? Or common sense is even less common than it used to be?2 -
I didn't know you could skip all of that when you start an account (honestly I don't recall anything about the start-up process). I don't use MFP's method anymore but it was pretty obvious what to do in the beginning.0
-
So, I used MFP's tool to establish my caloric goal. It said 1200, which I know is the minimum recommended for females. But then I read the "most helpful posts" thread listed as a sticky, and there are very compelling posts about why 1200 calories should never be your caloric goal, that it's simply not enough to live on, and might actually thwart weight loss. So I followed the links to find out my TDEE and BMR, and I came up with ~1400 calories for a goal. So yeah, I'm confused too, and I DID use the MFP tool at set-up, and read the most helpful posts thread.4
-
krystenmlee1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »In five years here, I'd have to say that a whole lot of people are just generally clueless as to how this tool works and is designed to work...which I really don't understand because it seemed pretty straight forward to me.
Do You follow the macros or calories?
If you want to lose weight, you must be eating fewer calories than you spend, which generally means following the calories. Many people do lose weight by cutting down certain macros (carbs being popular right now), but that only works if cutting those macros also cuts calories far enough. The tool is really designed to track calories first, macros second if at all - many people (including me) rarely pay much attention to them.1 -
If you're small and sedentary, 1200 may be okay. I'm 5'3" with 41 lbs before I reach goal (31 to hit the healthy BMI) and MFP has me on 1240 to lose 1lb/week. In practice, I take 2-hour plus walks and do resistance training 3 times a week, so the only reason I'm 'sedentary' is because if I didn't choose to do this, I'd never move around, unlike, say, a retail worker who spends a good part of their day on their feet and moving around. I eat back my exercise calories, so I'm usually eating more like 1700 or so. But on a day when I can't exercise, 1240 is my caloric goal.2
-
So, I used MFP's tool to establish my caloric goal. It said 1200, which I know is the minimum recommended for females. But then I read the "most helpful posts" thread listed as a sticky, and there are very compelling posts about why 1200 calories should never be your caloric goal, that it's simply not enough to live on, and might actually thwart weight loss. So I followed the links to find out my TDEE and BMR, and I came up with ~1400 calories for a goal. So yeah, I'm confused too, and I DID use the MFP tool at set-up, and read the most helpful posts thread.
How much do you weigh right now? If you are on the lower end of the scale, it can be very difficult to lose weight quickly and still stay healthy. 1200 is an educated estimate for the bottom end of what women should be eating to get sufficient nutrition, so the app will not give you a calorie goal below that. It can also happen if you're short and moderately overweight. Assuming that's what's going on, I'd probably say to start with 1400 for a month or two and see what happens.
ETA: Finally, if you're new to calorie counting, know that these are just estimates and you have to get real life data to see what's going to work for you. MFP gave me a much lower goal than necessary, which was a nice surprise. Track your calories and your weight, see what happens, and adjust as needed.2 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »So, I used MFP's tool to establish my caloric goal. It said 1200, which I know is the minimum recommended for females. But then I read the "most helpful posts" thread listed as a sticky, and there are very compelling posts about why 1200 calories should never be your caloric goal, that it's simply not enough to live on, and might actually thwart weight loss. So I followed the links to find out my TDEE and BMR, and I came up with ~1400 calories for a goal. So yeah, I'm confused too, and I DID use the MFP tool at set-up, and read the most helpful posts thread.
How much do you weigh right now? If you are on the lower end of the scale, it can be very difficult to lose weight quickly and still stay healthy. 1200 is an educated estimate for the bottom end of what women should be eating to get sufficient nutrition, so the app will not give you a calorie goal below that. It can also happen if you're short and moderately overweight. Assuming that's what's going on, I'd probably say to start with 1400 for a month or two and see what happens.
ETA: Finally, if you're new to calorie counting, know that these are just estimates and you have to get real life data to see what's going to work for you. MFP gave me a much lower goal than necessary, which was a nice surprise. Track your calories and your weight, see what happens, and adjust as needed.
I currently weigh 171 (down from 185 10 weeks ago). So I've lost 14 lb in 10 weeks, most of which was before I started using MFP and logging food. I just cut way back on sugar and alcohol, and upped my exercise to lose that first 14 lb. I'm a 55 yo female, 5'7" with a goal weight of 150 (so 21 more lb to go). I went in to MFP and changed my settings to lightly active as opposed to sedentary, as I have a desk job, but still get in 10,000 steps per day. In addition, I exercise 6 days per week, combination of cardio and strength, so MFP does add calories back when I exercise (though I read I should only eat back a portion of these?). I changed my goal from 1.5 lb a week to 1 lb a week, and my new caloric goal (before exercise calories) is 1460. That seems a lot more reasonable. I hope I keep losing!2 -
I'm just glad I was dumb enough and/or trusting enough to just do what MFP told me.
When my results stopped being what I expected and/or I started feeling like death, I raised or lowered my calories a little bit. Small increments are the best changes.
This site's numbers don't fit everyone. The recommended maintenance numbers are way too low for me, for instance.
The only way to find out is to run the experiment and use the best inputs you can create. Then adjust. Pretty much forever.6 -
You have people terrified by technology and want someone to do it for them, confused and cautious about technology and need step by step instructions so they don't mess it up, and those that bravely dive in and are, "Ooohhh! Let's see what this does!"
I thought weight loss was starvation. Nothing but salad and water. No flavor. Exercising 24/7. It's how I grew up. It's what I was shown..taught.. I also thought that one days mistake ruined the entire week. I had to eat 1200 calories (or less) PERIOD. So 1400 calories that day screwed you up and you just lost all that hard work. So with no will power and several days of 2000+ calories? You are a fat loser who will never lose weight!
I knew nothing of deficients or .5lb loss vs 2lb loss. Or that you can calculate for the week and it was OK to go over set goals just so long it wasn't above maintanence. THIS realization made a world of difference in my commitment. So I'm set at 1400 calories a day but go over by 600 all week. Wait? I still lost weight!? Because I'm still under maintanence.. This is do much more sustainable and less discouraging.
Thankfully I'm the "jump right in" type of person so when I found mfp, I just input all the info I was told. Still took me months to TRUST that I could eat 2000 calories and still lose. It's hard to get out of the 1200 calorie mindset. And I know as I lose weight, that 2000 becomes 1900..1800..1500.. 1200. But now I can ease myself into it and not feel deprived.9 -
I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.5
-
shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
Yeah, you've said that a bunch of times. It still isn't so.
There is plenty of information provided at setup and in the blogs, the "Help" pages and in sticky posts. That you didn't read them is on you, not the site.7 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »So, I used MFP's tool to establish my caloric goal. It said 1200, which I know is the minimum recommended for females. But then I read the "most helpful posts" thread listed as a sticky, and there are very compelling posts about why 1200 calories should never be your caloric goal, that it's simply not enough to live on, and might actually thwart weight loss. So I followed the links to find out my TDEE and BMR, and I came up with ~1400 calories for a goal. So yeah, I'm confused too, and I DID use the MFP tool at set-up, and read the most helpful posts thread.
How much do you weigh right now? If you are on the lower end of the scale, it can be very difficult to lose weight quickly and still stay healthy. 1200 is an educated estimate for the bottom end of what women should be eating to get sufficient nutrition, so the app will not give you a calorie goal below that. It can also happen if you're short and moderately overweight. Assuming that's what's going on, I'd probably say to start with 1400 for a month or two and see what happens.
ETA: Finally, if you're new to calorie counting, know that these are just estimates and you have to get real life data to see what's going to work for you. MFP gave me a much lower goal than necessary, which was a nice surprise. Track your calories and your weight, see what happens, and adjust as needed.
I currently weigh 171 (down from 185 10 weeks ago). So I've lost 14 lb in 10 weeks, most of which was before I started using MFP and logging food. I just cut way back on sugar and alcohol, and upped my exercise to lose that first 14 lb. I'm a 55 yo female, 5'7" with a goal weight of 150 (so 21 more lb to go). I went in to MFP and changed my settings to lightly active as opposed to sedentary, as I have a desk job, but still get in 10,000 steps per day. In addition, I exercise 6 days per week, combination of cardio and strength, so MFP does add calories back when I exercise (though I read I should only eat back a portion of these?). I changed my goal from 1.5 lb a week to 1 lb a week, and my new caloric goal (before exercise calories) is 1460. That seems a lot more reasonable. I hope I keep losing!
First, I want to commend you for reading the stickied most helpful posts! So many people never seek that out, and I think there is a wealth of information in there.
Second, I think that all the changes you made sound perfectly appropriate for your stats and goals. You have about 20 lbs to lose, so 1 lb/week is good, in a few pounds you may want to drop that to 0.5 lb/week. Changing your activity level from sedentary to lightly active also makes sense, I'm in a similar situation, I have a desk job but average >12K steps/day.
Anecdotally - my story was very similar. I originally let MFP select my goal, but based on the stats that I entered, it also defaulted to 1200 (I am petite, and was overweight and sedentary at the time). I read good advice on the boards that most people, even petite females over 40 with desk jobs, can lose weight eating more than 1200 cals. I set my goal to 1400 and still continued to log and eat back exercise calories, and I continued to lose. Over time I became more active and after about 6 months when I got my FitBit and had lost about 20 lbs, I changed my goal and my activity level and got even more calories in my baseline. Now I'm in maintenance, and my TDEE according to my FitBit and actual results is 2200. There's no way that MFP would have predicted that for me, based on the stats I entered at the time, and to be fair, I'm far more active now and my maintenance calories are higher than from before I lost the weight! But starting with the MFP numbers, then reading more, and adjusting based on my own individual results worked really well for me and is what I'd recommend for almost every new user to this site.
I'd keep monitoring your results over the next few weeks but I think this all sounds really great - good luck!3 -
shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
It's a weight loss site, what part of goal setting and weight loss specifically confuses you?1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
It's a weight loss site, what part of goal setting and weight loss specifically confuses you?
Look around at the forums. Every day there's 5 threads of new people asking how MFP arrived at their calorie goal. You put in your stats and MFP commands you only eat X amount, but doesn't explain why that is, what went into calculating that number, the fact that that number might not be right for everyone, why the number might change as you lose weight, how that number is linked to your activity level, how you should handle exercise with that... need I go on?3 -
stanmann571 wrote: »shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
It's a weight loss site, what part of goal setting and weight loss specifically confuses you?
Look around at the forums. Every day there's 5 threads of new people asking how MFP arrived at their calorie goal. You put in your stats and MFP commands you only eat X amount, but doesn't explain why that is, what went into calculating that number, the fact that that number might not be right for everyone, why the number might change as you lose weight, how that number is linked to your activity level, how you should handle exercise with that... need I go on?
At the top of every page on this site is: "Help"
Everything is explained there or in the sticky threads.3 -
Well, I know for me, my initial MFP goal was something in the ballpark of 2600 calories baseline for my sedentary job, in order to lose 2lbs/week, when I first started. The calorie goal was not correct for me, however.
MFP uses an average calculation that is based on certain criteria and when your body type falls outside of average parameters... usually up to 100-150lbs overweight and within average heights for an adult... the numbers start to get skewed.
MFP overestimated my sedentary basal metabolic burn, but underestimated every single exercise burn (as does absolutely every calculator out there). I have had to manually readjust my numbers on MFP throughout the course of my using it based on my calorimeter measurements. I knew when I started on MFP that its estimations were incorrect, so I might have been guilty of asking similar questions... However, I chose instead to research for myself and buy tech that would give me the personalized information I needed.
For the record, however, I started at 535lbs and 6'1" which is exceptionally outside of averages for a woman. My counts were off by at least a meal or more per day, which can't often be said for others... I would presume that most people are asking because they are ultimately seeking support and the reassurance they need to feel confident that they are not about to blow their entire goal by following their MFP parameters.6 -
I know I got confused one day when I changed my goal to lose 0.5kg a week and my daily calorie allowance didn't change. Extra research showed that my calorie goal was the bottom of the allowed limit so I understood why it hadn't changed.
Maybe it's a case of people not understanding the information that's presented to them. Could be because it's unexpected or because they don't trust it. Maybe they trust the opinions of others more? Who knows.2 -
stanmann571 wrote: »shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
It's a weight loss site, what part of goal setting and weight loss specifically confuses you?
Look around at the forums. Every day there's 5 threads of new people asking how MFP arrived at their calorie goal. You put in your stats and MFP commands you only eat X amount, but doesn't explain why that is, what went into calculating that number, the fact that that number might not be right for everyone, why the number might change as you lose weight, how that number is linked to your activity level, how you should handle exercise with that... need I go on?
I don't think this should all be listed at sign up. People don't like to read, especially when signing up for something. Little hints and remarks may be okay, like the word (Recommended) and something very short at the end. An option for an interactive tutorial with concise explanations for numbers and functions may be more acceptable (especially the fact the exercise is meant to be eaten back), but getting into the gritty of how the calculations were made is not something of interest to the average app user.4 -
No calculator is accurate. I'm 6', 200 lbs...you could get 9 other guys the same age, height, weight and activity level as me and us all have different calorie requirements based on LBM, type of workouts and so on.2
-
joemac1988 wrote: »No calculator is accurate. I'm 6', 200 lbs...you could get 9 other guys the same age, height, weight and activity level as me and us all have different calorie requirements based on LBM, type of workouts and so on.
MFP specifically accounts for differences in workouts by not including them when estimating the initial calorie goal. You log your workouts and get adjustments based on that.2 -
I know I got confused one day when I changed my goal to lose 0.5kg a week and my daily calorie allowance didn't change. Extra research showed that my calorie goal was the bottom of the allowed limit so I understood why it hadn't changed.
Maybe it's a case of people not understanding the information that's presented to them. Could be because it's unexpected or because they don't trust it. Maybe they trust the opinions of others more? Who knows.
When it calculates your goal calories, it does say how many lb/wk that corresponds to (in large bold red font)..Apparently about 0% of people actually read the screen when it spits out the floor number.
4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »joemac1988 wrote: »No calculator is accurate. I'm 6', 200 lbs...you could get 9 other guys the same age, height, weight and activity level as me and us all have different calorie requirements based on LBM, type of workouts and so on.
MFP specifically accounts for differences in workouts by not including them when estimating the initial calorie goal. You log your workouts and get adjustments based on that.
Workouts aside, it's true that no calculator is going to be accurate for everyone. (I realized after doing this for a while that, controlling for exercise, I've got the estimated TDEE of a man a foot taller than me, which is hilarious - how did I get this fat in the first place!?!) MFP gives you a starting point, though, which is important. Since the thread is about MFP's set-up, I wonder if there might be a way to let people know that they need to adjust their expectations based on their lived experience? Or maybe that's just adding too many variables - too much information and people stop paying attention.3 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »joemac1988 wrote: »No calculator is accurate. I'm 6', 200 lbs...you could get 9 other guys the same age, height, weight and activity level as me and us all have different calorie requirements based on LBM, type of workouts and so on.
MFP specifically accounts for differences in workouts by not including them when estimating the initial calorie goal. You log your workouts and get adjustments based on that.
Workouts aside, it's true that no calculator is going to be accurate for everyone. (I realized after doing this for a while that, controlling for exercise, I've got the estimated TDEE of a man a foot taller than me, which is hilarious - how did I get this fat in the first place!?!) MFP gives you a starting point, though, which is important. Since the thread is about MFP's set-up, I wonder if there might be a way to let people know that they need to adjust their expectations based on their lived experience? Or maybe that's just adding too many variables - too much information and people stop paying attention.
Yeah, that would probably be the one thing I would change in the set-up process -- letting people know that the goal was based on estimates and that people should track their progress and adjust based on their real life results.
Of course, when I started I didn't know hardly anything about calorie counting and I wouldn't have had any idea how to make those observations or adjustments. It was the forums that taught me. So maybe the current process (where lots of people are getting their education on the forums) is a good thing.
It does make me wonder how many people may be setting up accounts, never visiting the forums, and quitting after they don't see the results they want.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions