More calories when sick?
Options
Replies
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Noni, I have only been on mfp for 27 days, hopefully missing the initial water weight loss. In those days, I've lost 5lbs which is pretty close to 1 pound per week?
Really need a minimum of four weeks, to account for hormonal fluctuations. Let's give it another week and I'll help you work it out
As others have explained, that 1746 would be what your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) would be if you were sedentary, so that minus 500 is indeed 1246. But we've established that you are at least lightly active, even on a sick day.
I think she said her total yesterday was 1926 and she subtracted 180 (but I wasn’t sure where that came from) because she though that was the exercise portion of the 1926.
Yup, the 1746 is (I think) truly sedentary TDEE. She was close to 5000 steps yesterday, which is what I'm basing the at least lightly active on.
1746 is definitely not BMR, or even RMR.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what the confusion is. If I laid around all day, my Fitbit said that I would burn 1746 calories. So that is my BMR. Yesterday I had an additional 4000 steps which burned 180 calories.
Nope, that's not BMR. BMR is the calories you need just to stay alive, in a coma. RMR is your metabolic rate at rest (so includes things like cals for digestion, but not a lot else). Even just sitting burns more calories than lying down, then add all your little incidental movements.2 -
So my BMR is actually less than that? 😬0
-
I do have a low resting heart rate, BP0
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Noni, I have only been on mfp for 27 days, hopefully missing the initial water weight loss. In those days, I've lost 5lbs which is pretty close to 1 pound per week?
Really need a minimum of four weeks, to account for hormonal fluctuations. Let's give it another week and I'll help you work it out
As others have explained, that 1746 would be what your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) would be if you were sedentary, so that minus 500 is indeed 1246. But we've established that you are at least lightly active, even on a sick day.
I think she said her total yesterday was 1926 and she subtracted 180 (but I wasn’t sure where that came from) because she though that was the exercise portion of the 1926.
Yup, the 1746 is (I think) truly sedentary TDEE. She was close to 5000 steps yesterday, which is what I'm basing the at least lightly active on.
1746 is definitely not BMR, or even RMR.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what the confusion is. If I laid around all day, my Fitbit said that I would burn 1746 calories. So that is my BMR. Yesterday I had an additional 4000 steps which burned 180 calories.
Nope, that's not BMR. BMR is the calories you need just to stay alive, in a coma. RMR is your metabolic rate at rest (so includes things like cals for digestion, but not a lot else). Even just sitting burns more calories than lying down, then add all your little incidental movements.
So it's my RMR? Isn't my FB tracking those incremental movements using slight increases of hr?0 -
So my BMR is actually less than that? 😬
Yes, but everyone's is. You really don't need to worry about BMR, because you're not in a coma. TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) is what you take your deficit from - that's your basal calorie needs (BMR), NEAT (non-exercise activity thermogenesis, your general day to day moving around doing stuff), and EAT (exercise activity thermogenesis) combined. And the number Fitbit gives you at the end of the day is TDEE.
Have a play with this calculator and you can see how much varying levels of activity affect your TDEE (note, the examples they give for each activity level are just examples, you can have really high NEAT without doing any formal exercise) - https://www.sailrabbit.com/bmr/2 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Noni, I have only been on mfp for 27 days, hopefully missing the initial water weight loss. In those days, I've lost 5lbs which is pretty close to 1 pound per week?
Really need a minimum of four weeks, to account for hormonal fluctuations. Let's give it another week and I'll help you work it out
As others have explained, that 1746 would be what your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) would be if you were sedentary, so that minus 500 is indeed 1246. But we've established that you are at least lightly active, even on a sick day.
I think she said her total yesterday was 1926 and she subtracted 180 (but I wasn’t sure where that came from) because she though that was the exercise portion of the 1926.
Yup, the 1746 is (I think) truly sedentary TDEE. She was close to 5000 steps yesterday, which is what I'm basing the at least lightly active on.
1746 is definitely not BMR, or even RMR.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what the confusion is. If I laid around all day, my Fitbit said that I would burn 1746 calories. So that is my BMR. Yesterday I had an additional 4000 steps which burned 180 calories.
Nope, that's not BMR. BMR is the calories you need just to stay alive, in a coma. RMR is your metabolic rate at rest (so includes things like cals for digestion, but not a lot else). Even just sitting burns more calories than lying down, then add all your little incidental movements.
So it's my RMR? Isn't my FB tracking those incremental movements using slight increases of hr?
Yes, Fitbit is tracking those via HR increases, that's why you can have a higher daily burn when you think you really haven't done much. Yesterday (minus the steps) was probably close to RMR if you were lying down for much of the day.
TDEE is the one you want to concentrate on.2 -
I know all these acronyms and what they mean can be confusing 2
-
Wow, that site is really interesting!
0 -
Don't know which to listen to0
-
Seems like my FB with 1746 was pretty spot on.0
-
So 1746, eat cals back seems wise to me.0
-
Fitbit's baseline uses the same formulas (I forget which one exactly), hence why the same. But again, I think you are at least lightly active. It ends up the same though, so long as you eat your exercise cals (and I would eat all of them at this point). Setting yourself to lightly active just gives you a base calorie amount more in line with what yours should actually be without the adjustment from Fitbit.1
-
So 1746, eat cals back seems wise to me.
Why are you trying to customize your goal based on one day’s number from FitBit? MFP will give you a baseline starting point. What does it tell you if you select 1lb/week and sedentary? What about 1 lb/week and lightly active? If you choose one of those and have it synced with FitBit you’ll still get the benefit of the higher cals when you move more. If you enable negative cals you’ll get the assurance of a lower calorie target if you end up being even more sedentary than this.4 -
Fitbit = tdee
Low hr means less likelihood of Fitbit over estimating
Fitbit a bit dumb. Cheats a bit. Still works well for most. Fudges sleep at 1x RMR instead of 0.95. fudges watching tv lying on couch as 1x RMR instead of 1.1 to 1.3. counts walking for five minutes at 3.3 RMR as walking 5 minutes at 3.3 RMR unless heart rate data screws things up. (Of course HR data help it figure out a 6*RMR hike instead of thinking it a 3*RMR walk)
MFP sedentary fudges even more. Assumes 1.25 RMR when sleeping. Assumes 1.25 RMR when walking at 3.3x RMR.
Fitbit better fudger for most people especially if you're not gaming it with higher HR that is not related to exercise.
Fitbit - MFP exercise adjustment has nothing to do with exercise.
It is an accounting ledger transaction to update your self selected NEAT (based on what you told MFP about your activity level) and make it equal to what your Fitbit thinks it detected about you.
Trending weight value probably more useful than scale values for pre menopausal women who are not losing too aggressively.
25% deficit when obesse, 20% when overweight are already aggressive, and certainly enough for most to see results if they are correctly dialed in (measured)
Here is how your government supported institutions review the current literature on longevity and caloric restriction: https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/calorie-restriction-and-fasting-diets-what-do-we-know
I worry much more about just controlling my weight and remaining within the normal weight range and avoiding any bouncebacks since this is a definite and real health benefit for this formerly morbidly obese puppy!
BTW in January with several eating out guesses and AYCE buffets discussed in other threads, my Fitbit - MFP balance would indicate that I ought to have gained weight equal to about 700 Cal. The scales indicate a 350 Cal loss during the month (154.8 to 154.7 weight trend)
Given that at maximum I'm dealing with 3.33% errors (in terms of TDEE based on these figures), I'll call my logging and fitbit evenly matched---which makes my Fitbit TDEE accurate to within 5% or less over any span I've successfully measured during the past 5 years--for me of course. This finding is individual and depends on how close to the mean one tracks.3 -
You tracked at an AYCE buffer? That's willpower right there!1
-
WinoGelato wrote: »So 1746, eat cals back seems wise to me.
Why are you trying to customize your goal based on one day’s number from FitBit? MFP will give you a baseline starting point. What does it tell you if you select 1lb/week and sedentary? What about 1 lb/week and lightly active? If you choose one of those and have it synced with FitBit you’ll still get the benefit of the higher cals when you move more. If you enable negative cals you’ll get the assurance of a lower calorie target if you end up being even more sedentary than this.
I entered my data into the website that nono provided!0 -
Wino, if I eat back all my calories as I earn them (which I'm more comfortable with) it's identical to setting it lightly active!1
-
Wino, if I eat back all my calories as I earn them (which I'm more comfortable with) it's identical to setting it lightly active!
It's fine to do it that way if you're more comfortable, just make sure that you've set MFP to 1lb loss per week so that your deficit isn't too aggressive (ie, you end up 500 cals below your end of day Fitbit total).2 -
I have a lot of pressure from my parents. They will ask how much I've lost. They will be disappointed and act sad for me if I only lose one pound per week!
I know, I'm 35, what is wrong with me. I guess you never get too old to want your parents approval.....2 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Wino, if I eat back all my calories as I earn them (which I'm more comfortable with) it's identical to setting it lightly active!
It's fine to do it that way if you're more comfortable, just make sure that you've set MFP to 1lb loss per week so that your deficit isn't too aggressive (ie, you end up 500 cals below your end of day Fitbit total).
I think she is wanting to set her MFP goal at 1746? This is what I’m confused about. Sometimes I think too many data points can be overwhelming and I think that may be what happened here.
I recommend letting MFP set the goal based on current stats and a 1lb/week loss. She wants to go with sedentary and with the FitBit and eating back cals that should be fine.
2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions