Short woman trying to figure out calories - former Weight Watchers member
Replies
-
This discussion really helped me too, thanks!!!!2
-
WinoGelato wrote: »witchaywoman81 wrote: »2 lbs per week is pretty aggressive for the weight you have to lose, 1-1.5 lb/week would be a better goal for you. Losing quickly and at low cals compared to your activity can have adverse effects: loss of lean body mass (aka becoming skinny fat), fatigue, hair loss, sallow skin, brittle nails, etc. eating at a modest deficit appropriate for your activity also helps ensure a smoother transition when you get closer to maintenance.
Yeah, I’ve thought about this, too. I’m the heaviest I’ve ever been in my life, though. I need to lose 17 pounds to get out of the “obese” bracket, and I’d like to do that sooner rather than later. If I feel like I’m starving all the time or that it’s coming off too fast, I’ll adjust accordingly, but I feel like I have a better understanding of how everything works on MFP now, so thank you! I have my profile set to “very active” now so I’m curious to see how my adjustments work now.0 -
witchaywoman81 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »witchaywoman81 wrote: »
You are very wise! The reason I think I’m overthinking it is twofold:WW circa 1960's was 1200 cal for women. That's never really changed regardless of point system variations on a theme. Back then you couldn't game the system by eating through all of your points with artificially sweetened multi-cr@p. You could only eat the foods listed in the menu plan - weighing and measuring portions.
MFP does not support eating under 1200 cal aday either. When you add your activity, everything is figured for you. Don't overthink it. Just start with 1200 and you can bump that up with your activity levels.
I tried the WW in 2015. I resented the point system and it backfired for me. Good fats came with a penalty, including greek yogurt but the artificially sweetened multi-cr@p was rewarded. I don't use any sweeteners. The weekly weigh-ins...I felt like I was with a herd of cattle using a cattle prod.
WW lifers don't graduate. They keep going forever.
I can motivate myself, track my food and save whopping boatloads of money by using MFP. I've had success here since 2016.
1) with all of my previous weight watchers experience, i don’t really have a good understanding of how many calories my body actually needs.
2) I’m getting a LOT of “extra” calories from Fitbit. For example, today I took roughly 10,500 steps and mfp is giving me 900 “extra” calories based on my
Fitbit activity. That number doesn’t seem to change when I alter my minimum calorie goal (eg I changed from 1200 to 1000 to experiment)
What activity level did you choose on MFP? What does FitBit say your total calorie burn is?
The adjustment is the difference between what MFP thinks you would burn in a day, based on what you entered for stats and activity level, and what FitBit says you actually burned. Large adjustments usually mean that your activity level is set to Sedentary, when you aren’t. MFP won’t let you set your goal at 1000 cals, so that’s why you don’t see a change.
If 10k or more steps a day is typical for you then you aren’t Sedentary, you are lightly to moderately active. Changing that setting will increase your baseline calorie target in MFP and then the adjustments will be smaller. If you still are concerned with accuracy then eat back only 50-75% of the adjustment until you determine how accurate they are for you, ie do you lose at the desired rate you’ve chosen after about 6-8 weeks?
Ok, this is is interesting. I played around with the activity levels and this is what I get:
Not very active: 1200
Lightly active: 1200
Active: 1260
Very active: 1550
I might try using one of the other settings and turning off my “extra” calories from Fitbit.
Based on these numbers, I'm guessing you set your weekly weight loss goal to 2 lbs. Most people chose this because they think it will go faster. The reality is that you don't have enough activity to support such an aggressive deficit, nor do you have enough weight to lose.
As someone above already suggested, I'd strongly recommend you change your goal to lose no more than 1.5 lbs/wk. And once you get below 40 or so I'd switch to 1 lb. It will give you more to eat and you'll be so much more likely to succeed in the long run which I assume is your ultimate goal (to keep to weight off long term).
All the best.1 -
ladyhusker39 wrote: »witchaywoman81 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »witchaywoman81 wrote: »
You are very wise! The reason I think I’m overthinking it is twofold:WW circa 1960's was 1200 cal for women. That's never really changed regardless of point system variations on a theme. Back then you couldn't game the system by eating through all of your points with artificially sweetened multi-cr@p. You could only eat the foods listed in the menu plan - weighing and measuring portions.
MFP does not support eating under 1200 cal aday either. When you add your activity, everything is figured for you. Don't overthink it. Just start with 1200 and you can bump that up with your activity levels.
I tried the WW in 2015. I resented the point system and it backfired for me. Good fats came with a penalty, including greek yogurt but the artificially sweetened multi-cr@p was rewarded. I don't use any sweeteners. The weekly weigh-ins...I felt like I was with a herd of cattle using a cattle prod.
WW lifers don't graduate. They keep going forever.
I can motivate myself, track my food and save whopping boatloads of money by using MFP. I've had success here since 2016.
1) with all of my previous weight watchers experience, i don’t really have a good understanding of how many calories my body actually needs.
2) I’m getting a LOT of “extra” calories from Fitbit. For example, today I took roughly 10,500 steps and mfp is giving me 900 “extra” calories based on my
Fitbit activity. That number doesn’t seem to change when I alter my minimum calorie goal (eg I changed from 1200 to 1000 to experiment)
What activity level did you choose on MFP? What does FitBit say your total calorie burn is?
The adjustment is the difference between what MFP thinks you would burn in a day, based on what you entered for stats and activity level, and what FitBit says you actually burned. Large adjustments usually mean that your activity level is set to Sedentary, when you aren’t. MFP won’t let you set your goal at 1000 cals, so that’s why you don’t see a change.
If 10k or more steps a day is typical for you then you aren’t Sedentary, you are lightly to moderately active. Changing that setting will increase your baseline calorie target in MFP and then the adjustments will be smaller. If you still are concerned with accuracy then eat back only 50-75% of the adjustment until you determine how accurate they are for you, ie do you lose at the desired rate you’ve chosen after about 6-8 weeks?
Ok, this is is interesting. I played around with the activity levels and this is what I get:
Not very active: 1200
Lightly active: 1200
Active: 1260
Very active: 1550
I might try using one of the other settings and turning off my “extra” calories from Fitbit.
Based on these numbers, I'm guessing you set your weekly weight loss goal to 2 lbs. Most people chose this because they think it will go faster. The reality is that you don't have enough activity to support such an aggressive deficit, nor do you have enough weight to lose.
As someone above already suggested, I'd strongly recommend you change your goal to lose no more than 1.5 lbs/wk. And once you get below 40 or so I'd switch to 1 lb. It will give you more to eat and you'll be so much more likely to succeed in the long run which I assume is your ultimate goal (to keep to weight off long term).
All the best.
Ok, that does make sense. I’ll give it a shot. And I know I also need to work on tracking EVERYTHING I eat. By not tracking it, I’m only hurting myself.
Thank you all so much for your help! ❤️❤️❤️
1 -
5'1" who wears fitbit here! I eat somewhere between 1200 and 1500 calories a day, and it works for me. Ignore the fitbit calories, the ones that sync with mfp are just strange, and the ones they claim you burn is highly exaggerated. Right now it says I've burned almost 3000 calories, and that is just...not right.
I'm pretty sure you've set your weightloss to the highest. I'd go for the mid option instead since you don't have that much to lose.1 -
5'1" who wears fitbit here! I eat somewhere between 1200 and 1500 calories a day, and it works for me. Ignore the fitbit calories, the ones that sync with mfp are just strange, and the ones they claim you burn is highly exaggerated. Right now it says I've burned almost 3000 calories, and that is just...not right.
I'm pretty sure you've set your weightloss to the highest. I'd go for the mid option instead since you don't have that much to lose.
If you're going to ignore the fitbit calories, why have one then?1 -
musicfan68 wrote: »5'1" who wears fitbit here! I eat somewhere between 1200 and 1500 calories a day, and it works for me. Ignore the fitbit calories, the ones that sync with mfp are just strange, and the ones they claim you burn is highly exaggerated. Right now it says I've burned almost 3000 calories, and that is just...not right.
I'm pretty sure you've set your weightloss to the highest. I'd go for the mid option instead since you don't have that much to lose.
If you're going to ignore the fitbit calories, why have one then?
*this!1 -
@WinoGelato one thing I’m realizing today based on this whole discussion is that I have no concept of what my baseline/maintenance calories should be, and I’m also used to thinking of losing weight as being hungry often. I took your advice and reset my loss to 1.5 lbs/week so we will see how that goes. I have also seen how easy it is to put food in your mouth without tracking it, but I’m happy to say that I’ve gone all day without doing that.2
-
witchaywoman81 wrote: »@WinoGelato one thing I’m realizing today based on this whole discussion is that I have no concept of what my baseline/maintenance calories should be, and I’m also used to thinking of losing weight as being hungry often. I took your advice and reset my loss to 1.5 lbs/week so we will see how that goes. I have also seen how easy it is to put food in your mouth without tracking it, but I’m happy to say that I’ve gone all day without doing that.
You’re off to a great start! Once I figured out that weight loss (and maintenance) is just a simple math game it became really effortless for me. Understanding how many cals I burn in a day, thanks to my FitBit, ensures that I was able to lose at my desired rate and maintain pretty easily. I think as you transition from WW, just taking a few weeks to log the foods you normally eat and let MFP and FitBit start working together would be really helpful. Then as time goes on play around with adding more satiating foods if hunger is an issue, play with your macro nutrient ratios if you want to focus on protein or carbs specifically, and add in foods you love In moderation and as your calories allow.
Good luck!2 -
I'm not short nor I see how that would affect weight loss but I suggest using this TDEE (Total Daily Energy Expenditure) calculator. https://tdeecalculator.net/ It accounts for your weight and height and it's what I used on my journey to losing 100lb+
Sounds like you're pretty active I suggest just subtracting 200 calories. So all you need to do is burn 300 calories (which sounds easy considering your activity level) and you'll be on track to lose 1lb a week!
In case you're wondering 3500 calories are in a pound of fat so burning 500 everyday will do the job.
I know this doesn't sound amazing and that you may want to lose weight faster but this is most effective long term. And who knows everyones body is different, you might lose weight faster than you thought.
I also don't suggest eating 1200 cal, when you limit calorie intake your body goes into "starvation mode" and it will be a lot more tight when managing it's calorie expenditure.
Hope this helps and I'll be glad to answer any other questions you may have (:0 -
jonathongomez98 wrote: »I'm not short nor I see how that would affect weight loss but I suggest using this TDEE (Total Daily Energy Expenditure) calculator. https://tdeecalculator.net/ It accounts for your weight and height and it's what I used on my journey to losing 100lb+
Sounds like you're pretty active I suggest just subtracting 200 calories. So all you need to do is burn 300 calories (which sounds easy considering your activity level) and you'll be on track to lose 1lb a week!
In case you're wondering 3500 calories are in a pound of fat so burning 500 everyday will do the job.
I know this doesn't sound amazing and that you may want to lose weight faster but this is most effective long term. And who knows everyones body is different, you might lose weight faster than you thought.
I also don't suggest eating 1200 cal, when you limit calorie intake your body goes into "starvation mode" and it will be a lot more tight when managing it's calorie expenditure.
Hope this helps and I'll be glad to answer any other questions you may have (:
Starvation mode doesn’t exist.
Why do you think the TDEE calculator you’ve recommended is more accurate than the FitBit she’s wearing regularly?1
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