Clarification on Calories

whalertly

Okay, so I am slightly confused about how all of this works, and I want to check and see if I am looking at this right. I have entered sedentary as my life style, and no exercise as my plan. As a result, MFP has said I consume 2760 cal just living, and recommended 1760 based on my goals. Now, If I add exercise, those new calories are simply added when i enter them, and they are not already assumed by MFP, correct?

4lafz

When you enter exercise MFP calculates the calories burned (just an estimate but most are fairly close). You are allowed to eat those extra exercise calories - most of us eat some but not all. So if you burned 500 calories and that gets added to your 1760 that would be 2260 that you COULD eat. Hope that helps! Good luck!

whalertly

When you enter exercise MFP calculates the calories burned (just an estimate but most are fairly close). You are allowed to eat those extra exercise calories - most of us eat some but not all. So if you burned 500 calories and that gets added to your 1760 that would be 2260 that you COULD eat. Hope that helps! Good luck!

That is what I was hoping, but just making sure (so i wouldn't freak out)
additionally, why is this one telling me 2760 when almost all others are in the 2400?

whalertly

actually, that leads to another quandry. The BMR on this site says 2200, but the goal area says 2760, which should i go with (i.e. should i change my 1760 to 1200?)

sarahsmom1

It depends what you height, weight, gender, age exersie and amount you want to lose per week . Recheck the info you entered and make sure its correct

whalertly

I did, and yet the one recommending is still spitting out 2760, while the other is 2200

Punktorian

actually, that leads to another quandry. The BMR on this site says 2200, but the goal area says 2760, which should i go with (i.e. should i change my 1760 to 1200?)

Short answer, daily needs cannot be calculated exactly based on a formula. There is more than one formula to determine your needs, the other site may use a different one or not factor in activity level.

For more information you can check this site. It explains the different formulas.
http://www.shapefit.com/basal-metabolic-rate.html

whalertly

actually, that leads to another quandry. The BMR on this site says 2200, but the goal area says 2760, which should i go with (i.e. should i change my 1760 to 1200?)

Short answer, daily needs cannot be calculated exactly based on a formula. There is more than one formula to determine your needs, the other site may use a different one or not factor in activity level.

For more information you can check this site. It explains the different formulas.
http://www.shapefit.com/basal-metabolic-rate.html

thanks for the info, will just trust this number for now

dgroulx

Also, what you need to realize is that calorie calculators are based on muscle weight, not fat weight. For best results, enter the weight that you should be at when finding your basal rate. Muscle burns much more calories just sitting there. Fat burns zero just sitting there. No calculator can be accurate that is based on weight. BMI is a better way. To get an accurate BMI you need calipers and it's a pain. To save trouble just do it the easy way and use your normal (as you should be) weight.

whalertly

so I should enter a weight that is about 100 pounds lighter than I am now?

stormieweather

Your BMR is not the calories you burn every day. It is what your body WOULD use if you were in a coma 24/7. It's what is required in order to run your organs and bodily functions just to keep you alive. Everything you DO burns even more calories. THese are added to your BMR to come to your TDEE (total daily enegy expenditure). MFP estimates this number depending on what you entered as your activity level. There are several formulas that can calculate these numbers and their results will all be somewhat different.

If you want MFP to work effectively, use it honestly. Enter your actual scale weight right now, be reasonable about your goals (ie: not 15 pounds per month!), log your food and follow the plan, which is to eat your exercise calories. It works! :flowerforyou:

SHBoss1673

Also, what you need to realize is that calorie calculators are based on muscle weight, not fat weight. For best results, enter the weight that you should be at when finding your basal rate. Muscle burns much more calories just sitting there. Fat burns zero just sitting there. No calculator can be accurate that is based on weight. BMI is a better way. To get an accurate BMI you need calipers and it's a pain. To save trouble just do it the easy way and use your normal (as you should be) weight.

???

BMI is directly based on weight. You're thinking of Body Fat %.

BMI is a horrible way to measure your health, it's a very flawed calculation that was originally designed for macro measurements (I.E. large groups of people, not individuals) to spot trends, it doesn't work at all for pregnant women, people with high percentages of muscle mass, and adolescents. Even for adults with normal muscle mass, it can be misleading. Body Fat % on the other hand is a very good way to track your health, that along with waist to hip ratio, and VO2 max can give you a very good overall picture of your current health status.

Anyway, to the OP, don't worry about BMR for now, use the site. With your current situations, you could even think about going slightly over the 1000 calorie a day deficit, but I wouldn't go much below 1100 calories a day. And disregard that 1200 calorie thing, that's a baseline minimum that really is only there to warn people about not eating enough micro-nutrients. If you eat a 1000 calorie deficit (2 lbs a week), eat healthy food, and do some moderate exercise 5 days a week, the odds are you'll lose the weight safely, and effectively.

SHBoss1673

so I should enter a weight that is about 100 pounds lighter than I am now?

no, that's incorrect. not sure what that person is referring to.

whalertly

"Your BMR is not the calories you burn every day. It is what your body WOULD use if you were in a coma 24/7. It's what is required in order to run your organs and bodily functions just to keep you alive. Everything you DO burns even more calories. THese are added to your BMR to come to your TDEE (total daily enegy expenditure). MFP estimates this number depending on what you entered as your activity level. There are several formulas that can calculate these numbers and their results will all be somewhat different.

If you want MFP to work effectively, use it honestly. Enter your actual scale weight right now, be reasonable about your goals (ie: not 15 pounds per month!), log your food and follow the plan, which is to eat your exercise calories. It works! flowerforyou"

oh, so that is where the extra calories come from, that makes a lot more sense now (i was trying to find the extra 500 or so, that is simply doing more than living)
I am honest so far with it, and planning on staying that way, even though it upsets me when i eat too much (otherwise i would simply be lying to myself)

whalertly

Also, what you need to realize is that calorie calculators are based on muscle weight, not fat weight. For best results, enter the weight that you should be at when finding your basal rate. Muscle burns much more calories just sitting there. Fat burns zero just sitting there. No calculator can be accurate that is based on weight. BMI is a better way. To get an accurate BMI you need calipers and it's a pain. To save trouble just do it the easy way and use your normal (as you should be) weight.

???

BMI is directly based on weight. You're thinking of Body Fat %.

BMI is a horrible way to measure your health, it's a very flawed calculation that was originally designed for macro measurements (I.E. large groups of people, not individuals) to spot trends, it doesn't work at all for pregnant women, people with high percentages of muscle mass, and adolescents. Even for adults with normal muscle mass, it can be misleading. Body Fat % on the other hand is a very good way to track your health, that along with waist to hip ratio, and VO2 max can give you a very good overall picture of your current health status.

Anyway, to the OP, don't worry about BMR for now, use the site. With your current situations, you could even think about going slightly over the 1000 calorie a day deficit, but I wouldn't go much below 1100 calories a day. And disregard that 1200 calorie thing, that's a baseline minimum that really is only there to warn people about not eating enough micro-nutrients. If you eat a 1000 calorie deficit (2 lbs a week), eat healthy food, and do some moderate exercise 5 days a week, the odds are you'll lose the weight safely, and effectively.

thanks for the clearup, and the recommendations
you are all so very helpful

dgroulx

To clear up confusion on what I was trying to say: Muscle weighs more than fat. Muscle burns calories while you are sitting on your butt. Fat does not burn calories when not active. When you plug your weight into an exercise online at various websites, the calories burned are for a normal (non-obese) individual.

Rather than get bogged down in science, figure out your own basal rate. Before dieting, I tracked all my food. I ate anywhere from 1800 to 2000 calories per day. This kept my weight at 242 for a 5'2" frame. If that were muscle, I would need to be eating at least 4,000 caloies per day (probably more) to support that weight. The amount I was eating would support about 120 pounds of a normal (non-obese) body. I eat at a 1,000 calorie per day deficit (800 to 1000) per day now to lose weight and it is working fine.

dgroulx

From "The Body Fat Guide" -

But, the actual amount of calories burned by a pound of resting muscle in a day is not nearly as much as 50 calories, unless you include the activity that muscle performs. To determine how many calories a person burns at rest, scientists calculate a person’s Resting Metabolic Rate, which is based on the person’s amount of lean body mass. Each pound of lean body mass, which includes skeletal muscle, burns a bit over 13 calories a day at rest.
There are many benefits to building more muscle. But, building muscle to burn more calories is not a very efficient way to shed excess pounds of body fat. Let’s illustrate this with a comparison between the calorie-burning effect of Method A, a muscle building program, and Method B, a program consisting only of reduced calorie intake and low-intensity aerobic activity.

Consider a man, 175 pounds and 10% body fat. This man has 157.5 pounds of lean body mass, and he has a resting metabolic rate of 2178 calories a day. Now, suppose this man wishes to lose one pound of body fat. Let’s compare how he does it using the two methods described above.

---

With Method A, the man begins his muscle-building program and manages to gain one pound of fat-free bodyweight in one week, increasing his lean body mass by one pound of extra muscle. He continues this for a total of 10 weeks, and he gains a total of 10 pounds of muscle. His body now burns about 130 additional calories a day. At this point, if this man does not increase his initial daily maintenance calorie intake by 130 calories, he will lose 910 calories from body fat in a week. At this rate of body fat loss, it will take him about 27 days to lose a pound of body fat. So, the grand total for the amount of time it takes him to lose one pound of body fat is 10 weeks plus 27 days, which equals about 3.5 months! And, this assumes he didn’t gain any extra body fat while gaining muscle.
With Method B, this man could lose the same amount of body fat in a few days simply by reducing his daily maintenance calorie intake by 500 calories, and increasing his daily calorie expenditures by 500 calories.

whalertly

To clear up confusion on what I was trying to say: Muscle weighs more than fat. Muscle burns calories while you are sitting on your butt. Fat does not burn calories when not active. When you plug your weight into an exercise online at various websites, the calories burned are for a normal (non-obese) individual.

Rather than get bogged down in science, figure out your own basal rate. Before dieting, I tracked all my food. I ate anywhere from 1800 to 2000 calories per day. This kept my weight at 242 for a 5'2" frame. If that were muscle, I would need to be eating at least 4,000 caloies per day (probably more) to support that weight. The amount I was eating would support about 120 pounds of a normal (non-obese) body. I eat at a 1,000 calorie per day deficit (800 to 1000) per day now to lose weight and it is working fine.

wouldn't this imply that a person who ways 200 and is 6'1" and a 250 6'1" burn the same calories just living? (assume their total lean is the same)

dgroulx

If their total lean body mass is the same, then yes, they will have the same basal metabolic rate. Think about it. While sleeping, your body makes cholesterol, hormones, proteins, etc. It makes the same amount of these regardless of how much extra fat you carry around. It does make sense.

When you lose 100 pounds or what ever it is you are trying to lose, you won't have to start eating even less calories then. This is a good thing!

SHBoss1673

wouldn't this imply that a person who ways 200 and is 6'1" and a 250 6'1" burn the same calories just living? (assume their total lean is the same)

No, that's incorrect. Because of specifics of how the human body carries fat, they would be different. Not as different as you'd think but even fat is slightly metabolically active.

there's a big difference between BMR and Resting Metabolic Rate. RMR is the amount of calories from muscles, organs, brain, and fat metabolism, PLUS the thermic affect of food (the energy it requires to digest and transport nutrients) which makes it somewhat higher.

So given the above statement, someone with an extra 50 lbs (assuming all 50 is fat) has needs that someone who is 200 lbs doesn't, the body needs to account for the fat when doing anything that requires activity, I.E. stabalizing the body fat while, walking, standing, sitting...etc. Which takes extra calories (granted, not a LOT of calories, but some, and the effect is cumulative) add to that that fat is slightly metabolically active (1 lb of fat burns about 1 calorie per day) and you can have a 300 or 400 calorie difference between the people even if the only difference is the amount of fat. Now if you were to make some or all of that extra weight as muscle, now your talking about 500 to 600 extra calories a day (muscle on average burns between 6 and 15 calories per pound per day just being there). That's an extra 2/3rds to over 1 lb per week extra food consumed just to remain at the same weight.

whalertly

so, the RMR stays the same, but moving (the added stuff that MFP adds to the rate) changes due to weight?

sorry if i sound so stupid, just trying to work this through my head.