Calories
Dawda01
Posts: 16 Member
Just wondering how many calories you have ... I’m 14 stone and 10lbs I’m on 1,550 does this sound write I want to loose 4-5 stone x
0
Replies
-
If that's what MFP estimated for you to lose 1-1.5 pounds a week (maybe 2 pounds for a short time), that's a sound, statistically-derived, research-based estimate.
A good way to proceed would be to stick with that for 4-6 weeks, adding exercise calories on top of that and eating a fair fraction of those if you do much exercise, then look at your average weekly weight loss after the first couple of weeks. Adjust intake based on that average, to keep sensible, sustainable progress.
At a smaller size, I lost around 50 pounds, most of it on 1400-1600 calories plus all exercise calories. But each of us is an individual. The statistics-based estimates (like MFP's) will be close for most people, and certainly are likely to be closer than random other individuals' experience. (Other people have different jobs, ways of eating, fidgetyness, and more, that could affect weight loss rate, compared to you.)
Best wishes!1 -
Trust the numbers mfp gives you.
Good luck!0 -
Idk what a stone is.
And please don't trust mfps numbers lol. They put me at 1200 calories. No way! I was so hungry!
What are your stats?2 -
Bradleys8299 wrote: »Idk what a stone is.
And please don't trust mfps numbers lol. They put me at 1200 calories. No way! I was so hungry!
What are your stats?
No, YOU put you at 1200cal by selecting unrealistic and overly aggressive goals.
MFP is just a calculator that takes the information you give it. If you give MFP appropriate input it will absolutely give you accurate and appropriate goals.16 -
Bradleys8299 wrote: »Idk what a stone is.
And please don't trust mfps numbers lol. They put me at 1200 calories. No way! I was so hungry!
What are your stats?
A stone is 14 pounds.
Common unit of measurement in countries like U.K. ( and Australia way back before we went metric)
So, OP is 14. Stone, 10 lb - or 206 pounds ( 14 x 14 then add 10)
6 -
I think the trick to MFP is to play with the "Losing .5/1/1.5/2 numbers" and find a calorie level you can live with, for a while, consistently.
I know that if I eat no more than 1570/day I can lose .5lbs a week. I know that if I eat no more than 1320/day I lose 1lb a week.
How? Because I played around the numbers on the app, and followed the recommendations. I find these pretty accurate if I'm consistent, since weight loss isn't linear.
If I were you (and I was YEARS ago) I'd follow what it tells you for 1lb/week for 1 month and average your loss at the end. I bet you'll lose 1lb/week. What do you have to lose other than weight?
While following this be VERY accurate in you logging (aka weigh food, no measuring cups). Only eat back 1/2 your exercise calories if any. Figure out what foods keep you full, eat those. Avoid foods that tend to leave you feeling hungrier than you were before.3 -
Bradleys8299 wrote: »Idk what a stone is.
And please don't trust mfps numbers lol. They put me at 1200 calories. No way! I was so hungry!
What are your stats?
No, YOU put you at 1200cal by selecting unrealistic and overly aggressive goals.
MFP is just a calculator that takes the information you give it. If you give MFP appropriate input it will absolutely give you accurate and appropriate goals.
Really? People get flooded with supermarket aisle magazines lose 20 pounds in a weekend with this simple no sugar, keto, ultra no fat skinny soup coffee diet, while MFP is supposed to be a system that is supposed to guide users, but she has set the wrong goal? MFP could very easily take in user's weight or BMI and tell them it won't advise them to lose 2 pounds a week.
People have unreasonable expectations sure, but let's not pretend MFP isn't willing to indulge someone's expectations instead of taking the time to explain the road bumps they'll hit trying to lose to fast, and leave it to the forums to explain to the person later.2 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Bradleys8299 wrote: »Idk what a stone is.
And please don't trust mfps numbers lol. They put me at 1200 calories. No way! I was so hungry!
What are your stats?
No, YOU put you at 1200cal by selecting unrealistic and overly aggressive goals.
MFP is just a calculator that takes the information you give it. If you give MFP appropriate input it will absolutely give you accurate and appropriate goals.
Really? People get flooded with supermarket aisle magazines lose 20 pounds in a weekend with this simple no sugar, keto, ultra no fat skinny soup coffee diet, while MFP is supposed to be a system that is supposed to guide users, but she has set the wrong goal? MFP could very easily take in user's weight or BMI and tell them it won't advise them to lose 2 pounds a week.
People have unreasonable expectations sure, but let's not pretend MFP isn't willing to indulge someone's expectations instead of taking the time to explain the road bumps they'll hit trying to lose to fast, and leave it to the forums to explain to the person later.
While it's fair to argue that MFP should warn people who set an overly aggressive goal, and I agree with that point, it would be more productive to direct this comment to MFP support rather than to OP or other posters.8 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Bradleys8299 wrote: »Idk what a stone is.
And please don't trust mfps numbers lol. They put me at 1200 calories. No way! I was so hungry!
What are your stats?
No, YOU put you at 1200cal by selecting unrealistic and overly aggressive goals.
MFP is just a calculator that takes the information you give it. If you give MFP appropriate input it will absolutely give you accurate and appropriate goals.
Really? People get flooded with supermarket aisle magazines lose 20 pounds in a weekend with this simple no sugar, keto, ultra no fat skinny soup coffee diet, while MFP is supposed to be a system that is supposed to guide users, but she has set the wrong goal? MFP could very easily take in user's weight or BMI and tell them it won't advise them to lose 2 pounds a week.
People have unreasonable expectations sure, but let's not pretend MFP isn't willing to indulge someone's expectations instead of taking the time to explain the road bumps they'll hit trying to lose to fast, and leave it to the forums to explain to the person later.
MFP, at it's core is nothing more than a fancy calculator and database. It doesn't offer expectations nor does it make any claims or offer any 'guidance' beyond it's hard cap on minimum daily caloric deficit.
The user gives it input and the app preforms it's calculations and provides the results based on what it has been provided. It's no different than someone complaining that a financial budgeting app can't be trusted because it gave them an unrealistic saving goal for their entry level salary to afford the fancy sport car and big house they're seeing in those same supermarket aisle magazines.4 -
I both agree and disagree with the more general discussion.
I agree that in the past it may not have been expected. But I also feel that expectations change over time and it is called a guided setup.
So while in the past correcting misconceptions may have been too much to handle for then state-of-the-art software, expecting some better guidance to be baked in with current more intelligent software would make sense to me
I just discovered today that the activity multipliers and macro mix recommendations were changed a couple of months back (see support Zendesk) based on research and generally speaking moderate decisions.
So MFP are doing some work in the back end and adjusting their internal workings to be "reasonable".
It would not be a big stretch then to expect them to communicate this--but it is something that seems to persistently elude them!
When we combine this lack of communication with promotional blog posts that mostly emphasize large and rapid weight loss while characterising it as moderate... this combination makes me think that marketing is happier with over-promising... and hey people can always come back to lose again when they regain after a rapid weight loss...
2 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Bradleys8299 wrote: »Idk what a stone is.
And please don't trust mfps numbers lol. They put me at 1200 calories. No way! I was so hungry!
What are your stats?
No, YOU put you at 1200cal by selecting unrealistic and overly aggressive goals.
MFP is just a calculator that takes the information you give it. If you give MFP appropriate input it will absolutely give you accurate and appropriate goals.
Really? People get flooded with supermarket aisle magazines lose 20 pounds in a weekend with this simple no sugar, keto, ultra no fat skinny soup coffee diet, while MFP is supposed to be a system that is supposed to guide users, but she has set the wrong goal? MFP could very easily take in user's weight or BMI and tell them it won't advise them to lose 2 pounds a week.
People have unreasonable expectations sure, but let's not pretend MFP isn't willing to indulge someone's expectations instead of taking the time to explain the road bumps they'll hit trying to lose to fast, and leave it to the forums to explain to the person later.
@magnusthenerd
Way before you joined MFP asked for suggestions on how to improve the goal setup process and got tons of good ideas. Many were incredibly easy to implement, informational text rather than functionality programming.
None of the suggestions were implemented - which is why the forums continue to have to explain the implications of setting aggressive goals, how exercise should be accounted for, what the activity setting means etc. etc.
I come from a generation where we did RTFM but that makes me a dinosaur now and people (quite understandably) expect online tools to be a little smarter. But in the end it's the user's resposibility to understand the tool they select so I've got a bit of a foot in both camps.4 -
@magnusthenerd
Way before you joined MFP asked for suggestions on how to improve the goal setup process and got tons of good ideas. Many were incredibly easy to implement, informational text rather than functionality programming.
None of the suggestions were implemented - which is why the forums continue to have to explain the implications of setting aggressive goals, how exercise should be accounted for, what the activity setting means etc. etc.
I come from a generation where we did RTFM but that makes me a dinosaur now and people (quite understandably) expect online tools to be a little smarter. But in the end it's the user's resposibility to understand the tool they select so I've got a bit of a foot in both camps.
Sort of agree. But how hard would it be for MFP to just say this, after a user bangs in their height/weight/age:
"Based on data you provided, we estimate your 'break even' calories at 2150, meaning that if you eat 2150 calories per day, you won't gain or lose weight. A pound of fat is 3500 calories and a week has seven days, so if you eat 500 less calories than your break-even, or in your case 1650 calories, you'll lose 1 lb per week. To lose 2 pounds per week, you'd have to eat 1000 calories less than your 'break even' each day, or in your case 1150 calories. However, we believe that 1200 is the lowest calorie level that's safe to eat and we don't let users set calorie targets below 1200, so the maximum goal you can set is 1.5 pounds per week. Please keep in mind that more aggressive goals are not necessarily better; a goal of losing half a pound per week will allow you 500 calories more food each day than a goal of losing 1.5 pounds per week. If you're comfortable with how all this works, hit 'Continue' to choose your weight loss goal."5 -
@magnusthenerd
Way before you joined MFP asked for suggestions on how to improve the goal setup process and got tons of good ideas. Many were incredibly easy to implement, informational text rather than functionality programming.
None of the suggestions were implemented - which is why the forums continue to have to explain the implications of setting aggressive goals, how exercise should be accounted for, what the activity setting means etc. etc.
I come from a generation where we did RTFM but that makes me a dinosaur now and people (quite understandably) expect online tools to be a little smarter. But in the end it's the user's resposibility to understand the tool they select so I've got a bit of a foot in both camps.
Sort of agree. But how hard would it be for MFP to just say this, after a user bangs in their height/weight/age:
"Based on data you provided, we estimate your 'break even' calories at 2150, meaning that if you eat 2150 calories per day, you won't gain or lose weight. A pound of fat is 3500 calories and a week has seven days, so if you eat 500 less calories than your break-even, or in your case 1650 calories, you'll lose 1 lb per week. To lose 2 pounds per week, you'd have to eat 1000 calories less than your 'break even' each day, or in your case 1150 calories. However, we believe that 1200 is the lowest calorie level that's safe to eat and we don't let users set calorie targets below 1200, so the maximum goal you can set is 1.5 pounds per week. Please keep in mind that more aggressive goals are not necessarily better; a goal of losing half a pound per week will allow you 500 calories more food each day than a goal of losing 1.5 pounds per week. If you're comfortable with how all this works, hit 'Continue' to choose your weight loss goal."
Perhaps I'm jaded but in my experience Users are impatient and wouldn't read past the first sentence (perhaps 2) before clicking 'Next'.
Then you'll find the forums inundated with irate new users who are outraged because MFP is 'broken' and they can't pick the rate of loss they want to achieve. This is evident by the number of people who completely ignore the 'minimum calorie' warning that is already in place and just do what they want. They're already being told in less direct terms that they're picking a too aggressive goal and picking it anyway. Taking that option away from them won't all of a sudden make them pick a reasonable calorie target it will just drive them to some other app that will let them do what they're gonna do anyway.
This doesn't even touch on the fact that in order to offer such specific and tailored advice is beyond the broad general calculations used. To offer that type of individualised advice would require a level of specificity that is beyond a tool like this.5
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
- 422 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
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions