Do You Follow MFP’s Calorie Limit?
Replies
-
Larkspur94 wrote: »I'm recommended 1200, which is pretty much my bmr. I struggle to get to 1000 each day. Just under it and I get scolded by the site. I pretty much have to either have a meal full of cream and cheese, or have 2 servings. An 8oz rump steak covers 800 but I can't afford nor want that each day. Veggies and a chicken portion just don't have that many cals.
Even when I was eating unhealthy and 17lb heavier, I didn't eat all that much. Didn't track the calories but pretty sure 2 bowls of chocolate cereal and a few biscuits led to the recommended amount here. No wonder I never gained or lost.
As said, I'm aiming for that 1000 each day and losing a pound a week. However, before I started tracking the cals to be that here, I was losing 2 pound a week. Believe my daily total was around 700. Wonder if I should go back to that or stick to the 1000.
No you shouldn’t go to 700 cals/day that’s a VLCD and not at all healthy.
You didn’t get to the point of needing to lose weight by not being able to eat more than 1000 calories.
Are you doing OMAD? You mention a steak for 800 calories - what about breakfast and lunch? What about starches? Why do you feel you can’t eat chocolate cereal or biscuits anymore?
How much weight do you have to lose?8 -
frenchy807 wrote: »Hi All!
This seems like an “obvious” question, but I am wondering if any of you strictly follow MFP’s calorie limit or do you set your own? For example, my calorie limit says I should eat 1600 calories, but I tend to eat around 2,000 because 1600 just seems so low. Just curious if anyone else does this or if they strictly stay at what MFP suggests?? Thanks!!
I think a lot of people seem to think of their MFP goal as some sort of magic number generated by some fancy supercomputer or something, when in reality it is just simple mathematics. MFP calculates your calorie goal in 3 simple steps.
1. It calculates your BMR for you using your height, weight, age, and gender.
2. It takes your BMR and multiples it by the activity level you select.
3. It then subtracts (or adds) the number of calories you would need to burn each day to meet your weekly loss/gain target.
That is it. The goal is a net goal, so if you do exercise that is not accounted for in your activity level, you are expected to eat the calories back, to maintain the deficit you have set as your goal.
For those finding the MFP target too low, I think one of two things is usually happening: 1. You set your weight loss goal too aggressively. Many people seem to think 2 pounds is the default when in reality, they would be better suited to target a slower weight loss, especially if they don't have a lot of fat to lose. 2. You are underestimating your activity level. I think most people default to sedentary, when some may actually be more active than that.
However if you have a good handle on your targeted loss and activity level, I think the calorie targets are pretty good.
For me, BMR for a 5'11", 227 pound, 32 year old male according to MFP's calculations is 1992 calories per day. Using the sedentary level activity multiplier (1.25), that puts my daily calorie burn at 2490. I am about 50 pounds above "normal" BMI, so I've targeted 1.5 pounds per week of loss, which works out to 750 calories per day. 2490-750 = 1740, which is my net calorie goal.
I then exercise 4-6 times per week and burn 300-600 calories per exercise, which I try to eat back. That gives me most days a food target of between 2050 and 2400, which I feel usually is a good amount for both weight loss and sufficient nutrition.8 -
frenchy807 wrote: »Hi All!
This seems like an “obvious” question, but I am wondering if any of you strictly follow MFP’s calorie limit or do you set your own? For example, my calorie limit says I should eat 1600 calories, but I tend to eat around 2,000 because 1600 just seems so low. Just curious if anyone else does this or if they strictly stay at what MFP suggests?? Thanks!!
I think a lot of people seem to think of their MFP goal as some sort of magic number generated by some fancy supercomputer or something, when in reality it is just simple mathematics. MFP calculates your calorie goal in 3 simple steps.
1. It calculates your BMR for you using your height, weight, age, and gender.
2. It takes your BMR and multiples it by the activity level you select.
3. It then subtracts (or adds) the number of calories you would need to burn each day to meet your weekly loss/gain target.
That is it. The goal is a net goal, so if you do exercise that is not accounted for in your activity level, you are expected to eat the calories back, to maintain the deficit you have set as your goal.
For those finding the MFP target too low, I think one of two things is usually happening: 1. You set your weight loss goal too aggressively. Many people seem to think 2 pounds is the default when in reality, they would be better suited to target a slower weight loss, especially if they don't have a lot of fat to lose. 2. You are underestimating your activity level. I think most people default to sedentary, when some may actually be more active than that.
However if you have a good handle on your targeted loss and activity level, I think the calorie targets are pretty good.
For me, BMR for a 5'11", 227 pound, 32 year old male according to MFP's calculations is 1992 calories per day. Using the sedentary level activity multiplier (1.25), that puts my daily calorie burn at 2490. I am about 50 pounds above "normal" BMI, so I've targeted 1.5 pounds per week of loss, which works out to 750 calories per day. 2490-750 = 1740, which is my net calorie goal.
I then exercise 4-6 times per week and burn 300-600 calories per exercise, which I try to eat back. That gives me most days a food target of between 2050 and 2400, which I feel usually is a good amount for both weight loss and sufficient nutrition.
This is all true but it's also just an estimator based on one formula and will be off for some people even with the setting as close to accurate as possible. Same with any other formula.
And that's okay. Starting points are just that.7 -
Because I eat the extra calories "earned" from exercise, I usually have 100 - 200 calories of my daily limit (1720 without exercise) "left on the table" (pun intended...LOL). Being newer at this, I do have a question that I'd appreciate some help with...I've lost 20 lbs so far using MFP (avg. 1.4 lb p/wk); so do I have to do anything to have the system recalculate my calories to continue my goal of 1 lb per week? Thanks in advance for your help. Oh, and Happy Thanksgiving!!!!
@mds2017 @patrickaa5
If you are using the Android app you click on Goals, chose the weekly goal and it will ask you whether you want to recalculate. If you are doing that put your current weight too as it will give you a calorie goal based on how much you currently weigh.
On PC go to Goals also and look for the link on that screen.
1 -
Cahgetsfit wrote: »
To be fair though, have you told it you wanted to lose at a less aggressive rate, it would have given you a much different number. So to some extent, you are not following it because you set it up to aggressively. Or is this another neat vs tdee situation?
That was quite some time ago when I first started to diet. I think I set it to the aggressive option. I did stick to it for 2 months and was doing exercise classes at the gym, but then i derailed badly because was soooooooo starving and the 4 kilos I lost came back on with interest.
So I got a coach. Who told me to never eat less than 1500. And also would increase my calories every time I got starving. By the end I was on 2100 cals and pretty content with life.
Too many people think that MFP's calorie goals are too low when they're the ones choosing goals that are too aggressive for their current weight and not eating back exercise calories.11 -
I use it as a guide but I'm not strict about it. MFP way overestimates how much I'm burning with exercise, so I try not to eat my exercise calories back, but sometimes I do a little. I'm averaging a loss of 5-6 lbs a month, so whatever I'm doing it's working for me.0
-
When I rejoined MFP this spring I went thru the process and the goal was 1600 calories for a 1 pound a week loss. I knew from personal experience that was too high and manually set it at 1500. Wasn't losing a pound a week. Talked to my doctor, he said I could easily do 1200 a day. I know I can do 1200 a day, I've done it before but I also know how I was and how difficult it was to maintain. I travel for work about 3 weeks a month, a diet that restrictive is more difficult than I'm willing to do. I reset my goal to 1400 and have been losing approximately a pound a week. Still feels slow like molasses but it's something I can maintain easily even when I'm on the road. Now if we could get restaurants to STOP using so much sodium in everything my life would be better.0
-
Honestly I find the very phrasing of this question odd. MFP is a diary to track calories. I don't do what my diary tells me to do, I use my diary as a means of logging and tracking what I am already planning on doing. So I guess the answer is yes, I try to stick to the calorie goals that I myself set. MFP also has some calculators but again I don't follow calculators, I use calculators. MFP doesn't give you a personalized calorie limit, MFP gives you a tool to use and the results that tool gives you is totally based on how you choose to use that tool. So I guess to try to answer the question with my own phrasing, yes I follow my own calorie plan that I happened to use this website's diary and calculator as part of. If I choose to not follow my own plan then presumably that is because I have decided to change the plan.
I think people who view MFP as just a tool to keep track of the information they are tracking will have a better view of it than people who expect MFP to someohow know exactly how many calories they need to eat to lose X amount of weight in X number of days.11 -
MFP gives me 1200 calories (I’m 5’, set to lose 1 lb a week) not including any calories I add back from exercise. I aim for somewhere between 1200-1300 unless it’s a run day and then I can add around 200ish to that number.
I’m actually losing closer to 1.5 lbs a week so I could eat more (I guess more than I already do because I’m almost always over 1200) than MFP says but I’m happy with being between 1200-1300. It’s not hard for me, I don’t feel deprived or hungry.2 -
I use MFP's target. Some people use calculators to figure out their estimated TDEE and then just eat a steady amount each day which works too. I like using MFP target because I have my fitbit linked and it's just easy.1
-
Also to add, I think for the people saying MFP gives them a calorie goal that is too low, the activity level settings are (in my experience) lower than you'd think. For example, based on the description it gives, I would select sedentary but I'm actually more like active or lightly active without any exercise.2
-
Aaron_K123 wrote: »I think people who view MFP as just a tool to keep track of the information they are tracking will have a better view of it than people who expect MFP to someohow know exactly how many calories they need to eat to lose X amount of weight in X number of days.
I think that's a good point. I see people saying that MFP advised them to eat a certain way without realizing that MFP's targets aren't personal -- it's not saying you need no more than 1200 cal to lose, or 600 cal of that to come from fat -- it's plugging in what you tell it to simple formulas used for everyone, and if you claim to be sedentary and to want to lose 2 lb/week, it will give 1200 if you are the size/age of a huge percentage of women, but that doesn't mean it's prescribed 1200.
That aside, I think that if you are reasonable and accurate in what you tell MFP, log accurately, and realize that you are expected to eat exercise back, MFP's goal is a decent starting point, especially for someone who hasn't really looked into how to calculate a goal. Everyone should be prepared to adjust based on results.4 -
0somuchbetter0 wrote: »I use it as a guide but I'm not strict about it. MFP way overestimates how much I'm burning with exercise, so I try not to eat my exercise calories back, but sometimes I do a little. I'm averaging a loss of 5-6 lbs a month, so whatever I'm doing it's working for me.
And this is the key point to the whole process. Whether you use MFP as set up or do you own thing and use MFP to track, it'e the end result that actually matters. So if what you do is working, then stick with it. If what you are doing isn't giving you the results you need, then change it up.
3 -
Larkspur94 wrote: »I'm recommended 1200, which is pretty much my bmr. I struggle to get to 1000 each day. Just under it and I get scolded by the site. I pretty much have to either have a meal full of cream and cheese, or have 2 servings. An 8oz rump steak covers 800 but I can't afford nor want that each day. Veggies and a chicken portion just don't have that many cals.
Even when I was eating unhealthy and 17lb heavier, I didn't eat all that much. Didn't track the calories but pretty sure 2 bowls of chocolate cereal and a few biscuits led to the recommended amount here. No wonder I never gained or lost.
As said, I'm aiming for that 1000 each day and losing a pound a week. However, before I started tracking the cals to be that here, I was losing 2 pound a week. Believe my daily total was around 700. Wonder if I should go back to that or stick to the 1000.
If you struggle to eat 1000 calories a day then how did you end up needing to lose weight? There is more in the world of food than pure cream cheese and dry chicken and broccoli you know....it isn't that black and white. How about you eat some peanuts as a snack for example....they cost, well, peanuts....and they are high calorie with a good mix of fats and protein.8 -
Larkspur94 wrote: »I'm recommended 1200, which is pretty much my bmr. I struggle to get to 1000 each day. Just under it and I get scolded by the site. I pretty much have to either have a meal full of cream and cheese, or have 2 servings. An 8oz rump steak covers 800 but I can't afford nor want that each day. Veggies and a chicken portion just don't have that many cals.
Even when I was eating unhealthy and 17lb heavier, I didn't eat all that much. Didn't track the calories but pretty sure 2 bowls of chocolate cereal and a few biscuits led to the recommended amount here. No wonder I never gained or lost.
As said, I'm aiming for that 1000 each day and losing a pound a week. However, before I started tracking the cals to be that here, I was losing 2 pound a week. Believe my daily total was around 700. Wonder if I should go back to that or stick to the 1000.
I think the answer to this conundrum is a food scale and accurate logging.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10634517/you-dont-use-a-food-scale/p110 -
For those of you saying the MFP calorie goal was too low, do you mean the MFP calorie goal + exercise calories was too low?
I should clarify. I wanted consistency in my daily target, rather than the variability that came with adding in exercise calories. The 1200 calories on non-activity days was too little. I used a TDEE calculator to determine a daily target. I also had to get real with my logging habits, my daily activity, and my exercise habits.5 -
MFPs calorie goal is a math formula. If it gave you the "wrong answer" it is because it was given incomplete information or the wrong numbers.
If you tell it you want to lose 2 pounds a week (which is a deficit of 7000 calories a week or 1000 calories per day) and you tell it you are a 150 pound 5'4'' woman who is sedentary then it is most certainly going to tell you to eat 1200 calories a day (it bottoms out at 1200 won't go below that number) whether that is a good idea or not or whether or not you accurately represented your activity level because that is the math.
Here is what MFP does. It takes your gender height and weight you provide it and it uses it with the currently accepted formula to calculate your basal metabolic rate (which is an estimate). You then tell it your activity level and it then uses that as a modifier to your BMR. I don't know the exact numbers but it will do something like if you say sedentary multiply your BMR by 1.1, if you say moderatly active multiply by 1.2, if you say active multiply by 1.3 etc.
That means even if you say you are active it is probably going to calculate a BMR of 1500 and tack on like 450 for your activity level to 1950 and then subtract 1000 calories from that which is 950 and then bump that up to 1200 because that is its minimum reportable value that it considers "safe". That isn't MFP telling you something, that is you putting numbers into a calculator and getting an answer from it. Not only that but if you get a reported value of 1200 that isn't the actual value, that is the lowest MFP will go so that means your value is below 1200 and you don't know how much below.
That doens't mean its a good idea or accurate or anything of that nature, it is a calculator and nothing more. If you set an unreasonable goal MFP won't tell you that you have set an unreasonable goal, it will just spit out the calculated value for your unreasonable goal. You set the goal, MFP does some math based on some broad generalizations of population averages and what you happened to tell it.5 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »For those of you saying the MFP calorie goal was too low, do you mean the MFP calorie goal + exercise calories was too low?
I should clarify. I wanted consistency in my daily target, rather than the variability that came with adding in exercise calories. The 1200 calories on non-activity days was too little. I used a TDEE calculator to determine a daily target. I also had to get real with my logging habits, my daily activity, and my exercise habits.
That's essentially what I've done. I don't like the moving target of NEAT + activity.1 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »For those of you saying the MFP calorie goal was too low, do you mean the MFP calorie goal + exercise calories was too low?
I should clarify. I wanted consistency in my daily target, rather than the variability that came with adding in exercise calories. The 1200 calories on non-activity days was too little. I used a TDEE calculator to determine a daily target. I also had to get real with my logging habits, my daily activity, and my exercise habits.
That's essentially what I've done. I don't like the moving target of NEAT + activity.
Exactly. And then after a few months of logging data, I moved away from using the calculators, and I go off my own numbers to set my targets.2 -
Sort of...not really. I calculated a BMR of 1336 and TDEE of 2000. This seems pretty accurate based on my logging. mfp gave me a daily goal of 1440, and it goes up to about 2440 on workout days. I can't vary my meals that much, so I try to eat 1900 every day. Some days I do eat up to 2400 and I get worried because I can't seem to ever eat less than 1800. I'm maintaining with a little bit of fluctuation, which I am OK with.1
-
@RAinWA
I haven't actually heard of TDEE before. Went through the calculator and It's about 1600 for me. So I guess 1100 makes a good deficit then, right? I have plenty of energy and only get a bit hungry around my meal time, so not exactly weak and starving here. I also make sure to get plenty of nutrition in my meals so no deficiencies.
@WinoGelato
Yeah I do OMAD with IF. If it's a meal going to the 1000 cal mark the that would be it, otherwise It could be double portion, a dessert, or snacks few hours after meal. I'm on the keto diet so don't have more than 20g net carb each day. I was 11 stone (154p) when I started, now at 9 11 (137p), I'm 5 foot 5. I'm not sure how much to lose in total as I'm going more on look (Belly fat needs to go). I figure 8 1/2 (119) should be around the weight that's good but could be several pounds heavier, we'll see. Haven't got into weights yet.
@Aaron_K123
I make lots of tasty dishes, It was just easier to give that as example. I've never been slim. Poor eating habits through childhood and teen years led to reaching a max of 14 stone (196p). I've lost weight over the years with smaller portion, less often junk and that, not really following a strict diet (some diet here and there). I stayed 11 stone for the past year after losing a stone from stress and depression. Both of which didn't really end until recently, I just stopped losing weight.2 -
People always neglect the most critical step. MFP or any other calculators is only truly relevant for about the first four weeks of logging.
The final step is monitor progress and adjust as neccessary. After that point you are moving away from the calculator to your true energy needs.7 -
Larkspur94 wrote: »@RAinWA
I haven't actually heard of TDEE before. Went through the calculator and It's about 1600 for me. So I guess 1100 makes a good deficit then, right? I have plenty of energy and only get a bit hungry around my meal time, so not exactly weak and starving here. I also make sure to get plenty of nutrition in my meals so no deficiencies.
@WinoGelato
Yeah I do OMAD with IF. If it's a meal going to the 1000 cal mark the that would be it, otherwise It could be double portion, a dessert, or snacks few hours after meal. I'm on the keto diet so don't have more than 20g net carb each day. I was 11 stone (154p) when I started, now at 9 11 (137p), I'm 5 foot 5. I'm not sure how much to lose in total as I'm going more on look (Belly fat needs to go). I figure 8 1/2 (119) should be around the weight that's good but could be several pounds heavier, we'll see. Haven't got into weights yet.
@Aaron_K123
I make lots of tasty dishes, It was just easier to give that as example. I've never been slim. Poor eating habits through childhood and teen years led to reaching a max of 14 stone (196p). I've lost weight over the years with smaller portion, less often junk and that, not really following a strict diet (some diet here and there). I stayed 11 stone for the past year after losing a stone from stress and depression. Both of which didn't really end until recently, I just stopped losing weight.
Which calculator, using what for inputs? If you're talking about MFP's guided setup, and you put in that you wanted to lose X per week, your deficit is already built into the goal number it gives you. You wouldn't subtract more from it to get a goal.
If you're talking about other TDEE calculators, they often will give you a target somewhere in their output that includes a deficit already, too. (MFP is a NEAT calculator, not a TDEE calculator - TDEE includes intentional exercise, NEAT doesn't. If you use MFP's NEAT calculator, you're supposed to log and eat back exercise calories, on top of the base calories.
It would be conservative (best odds of good health) to avoid losing more than about 1% of your current body weight per week, and perhaps less than that within about 50 pounds of goal weight.4 -
I do. I follow it pretty strictly since I have started seriously trying to loose weight. Because it works for me. It’s taken a long time to find something to actually work for me, and this keeps me on track. I’m a big believer in listening to your body and finding something that works for you and your needs.2
-
I try and stick to 1500 calorie intake a day. I also use a Fitbit so make sure my calorie burn is more than 1500. If I want to eat more I need to move more.1
-
So we've got 3 pages of personal experiences, with a few concepts and recommendations thrown in. But what's the take-away from this thread?
IMO, these are the key points...- MFP is a very good starting point for people new to calorie management and weight loss. Is it guaranteed to be right all the time? No, certainly not. But it's a very reasonable starting point for those just starting out.
- Some will be able to set it and forget it... and follow MFP's numbers long term for steady results. Others will need to make adjustments along the way (once they have enough data to draw meaningful conclusions from) until they find their sweet spot. Most people will probably fall into the second group.
- Ultimately, MFP is just a bunch of calculations and estimates. It's up to the user to give it good, reliable, reasonable, and consistent numbers.
9 -
I set my own calorie goal and I go with that. MFP and I weren't too far off. MFP recommended 1490 and I set it to 1400.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
I’m eating under what MFP recommends (1600) intentionally. Initially I set it to lose only 1/2 pound a week, but then I wanted more weight loss. I’m eating 1200 now (don’t eat back exercise calories - which is 600+ calories when I go to the gym, 3-4 times a week). For a while I was losing 2.5 pounds a week. I’m worried my weight loss is stalling out though and I don’t know what to do. I’m so frustrated
You need to go back and read the replies to your other threads, and get in touch with your doctor and/or treatment team. You are headed down a dangerous road, please get some help.12 -
This content has been removed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 424 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