Net vs Consumed calories. still confused.

tiwing
tiwing Posts: 10 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Hi all, I've been reading for months. Months. I've searched and read a lot on this forum and many other reputable sources. I've thought several times that I understood, but there doesn't seem to be anything 100% clear out there and nothing sticks in my brain.

I use MFP for all my food tracking, and a Garmin watch for all my exercise activities that I wear 24/7. First, I recognize that calories consumed is directional and not exact, and only as good as what you input. I try to be very honest but portions sometimes is hard. I also recognize that the Garmin device is "pretty good", but not a perfect representation of calories burned.

Based on my current height & weight (5'9" 180 lbs) my BMI is still over the magic 25 i'm aiming for. I'm quite active, both running and cycling with intensity for between 45 minutes and 2 hours a day, 5 to 6 days a week, with a calories "burned" according to Garmin of an average around 800 cal per day - this is real activity, not the regular living stuff, and Garmin subtracts out their estimation of BMR from activity calories.

My goal set in MFP is 1600 cal. So on a normal day, GOAL + EXERCISE = 2400. My normal consumed averages 1800. So net calories per day remaining comes out to 600. Over the past 6 months I've dropped 50 lbs and gained (back) noticeable muscle in my legs especially, but overall a bit.

My question is, if my target calories in MFP is 1600, should I be shooting for 1600 regardless of exercise, or should I be "eating back" my exercise calories for a target of 2400? So far I've accomplished what I wanted (lose weight, gain health), but as I move into more of a slow loss / maintenance mode, I'm confused what number I should be aiming for as my starting point. Can anyone out there add some clarity please??!!

cheers.

Replies

  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,454 Member
    You have six months of your own valuable data. Use it. Myfitnesspal is meant to be a starting point as far as calories. No two people (even those with Garmins) are alike. Use your own data and extrapolate your own calorie goal.

    Well done so far!
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,454 Member
    edited December 2020
    I would add, at this point you should be aiming to lose NO MORE than 1/2 pound per week.

    One pound loss is approximately equal to 3500 calories (deficit.) 3500/7(days)=500 calorie daily deficit for a one pound per week loss.

    So calculate your past loss rate, your calories, and give yourself a 250 calorie per day deficit off your total daily calorie needs (TDEE.) Just use your Garmin numbers, that's the easier way. Then set your MFP calorie Goals manually based on your past results.
  • tiwing
    tiwing Posts: 10 Member
    thanks :) I actually just saw another thread posted about 4 hours ago on here that asks a really similar question - so far the comments point to eat back at least some of the exercise calories which makes sense. My concern really is that if I "did it wrong" for the first part of my journey that my metabolism has slowed and now I need less overall. But your point is well made - I'll make small changes here and there, monitor, see results (or not), and adjust. thanks.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,454 Member
    Well, you should absolutely be eating back exercise calories. Garmin is transferring all your activity calories over, so either use MFP (which says "add exercise manually") OR use your Garmin. Exercise calories are a necessary part, regardless of which calculation you use.

    If you know your intake and loss rate, you can back-calculate so that you are losing at 1/2 pound per week.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    tiwing wrote: »
    thanks :) I actually just saw another thread posted about 4 hours ago on here that asks a really similar question - so far the comments point to eat back at least some of the exercise calories which makes sense. My concern really is that if I "did it wrong" for the first part of my journey that my metabolism has slowed and now I need less overall. But your point is well made - I'll make small changes here and there, monitor, see results (or not), and adjust. thanks.

    I would hope that the advice was to try eat ALL of your ACTUAL exercise calories.
    "Eat some of them" is usually given on the assumption that people's exercise calories are both inccurate and exaggerated. Which may be common but isn't universal.
    You should have an idea how reasonable your estimates have been based on your weight loss.

    If you think you have adapted due to a prolonged and large deficit you should maintain and you need to eat appropriately to do that. I had a small adaptation which corrected itself after a couple of months of maintaining.
  • Lietchi
    Lietchi Posts: 6,881 Member
    edited December 2020
    tiwing wrote: »
    Hi all, I've been reading for months. Months. I've searched and read a lot on this forum and many other reputable sources. I've thought several times that I understood, but there doesn't seem to be anything 100% clear out there and nothing sticks in my brain.

    I use MFP for all my food tracking, and a Garmin watch for all my exercise activities that I wear 24/7. First, I recognize that calories consumed is directional and not exact, and only as good as what you input. I try to be very honest but portions sometimes is hard. I also recognize that the Garmin device is "pretty good", but not a perfect representation of calories burned.

    Based on my current height & weight (5'9" 180 lbs) my BMI is still over the magic 25 i'm aiming for. I'm quite active, both running and cycling with intensity for between 45 minutes and 2 hours a day, 5 to 6 days a week, with a calories "burned" according to Garmin of an average around 800 cal per day - this is real activity, not the regular living stuff, and Garmin subtracts out their estimation of BMR from activity calories.

    My goal set in MFP is 1600 cal. So on a normal day, GOAL + EXERCISE = 2400. My normal consumed averages 1800. So net calories per day remaining comes out to 600. Over the past 6 months I've dropped 50 lbs and gained (back) noticeable muscle in my legs especially, but overall a bit.

    My question is, if my target calories in MFP is 1600, should I be shooting for 1600 regardless of exercise, or should I be "eating back" my exercise calories for a target of 2400? So far I've accomplished what I wanted (lose weight, gain health), but as I move into more of a slow loss / maintenance mode, I'm confused what number I should be aiming for as my starting point. Can anyone out there add some clarity please??!!

    cheers.

    I'm wondering a bit about your math. Where did this 1600 calorie goal from MFP come from? Did you set it manually, or is it the result of choosing your goals? If it's the latter, what weight loss rate did you select?
    And has this calorie goal changed, was it higher when you started your weight loss journey?
    - you say your net calories remaining are 600, but that's not taking into account the deficit you chose (chosen weight loss rate) if you're using MFP as intended, so your deficit is larger than 600 per day
    - You've lost at a rate of nearly 2lbs per week, proving that your deficit is indeed bigger than 600kcal a day. Slowing down is definitely a good idea btw.
    - A smaller body burns less calories, so if that 1600 calorie goal hasn't changed since you started your weight loss, it's time to update your settings, since MFP hasn't updated your calorie goal as you lost weight (a well known glitch)
    - you know how much you've eaten, you know how much you've lost and you know how many calories Garmin estimates for total calories burned. Math time!:smile: as has been said above: 1lb loss = 3500 calories approximately. Using your Garmin numbers (adding up all your calories burned over the last month, for example) and comparing those to your calorie intake over that same period, you can calculate your theoretical deficit and compare it to your actual deficit (based on your actual weight loss over the same period).
    I have a Garmin too and for me it's pretty accurate (I eat back all of my exercise calories (minus the small deficit I'm aiming for). I have an Excel sheet that has shown me I can trust it, but you'll have to do the same for yourself :smile:
  • tiwing
    tiwing Posts: 10 Member
    Thanks for all the thoughtful replies!

    @lietchi: I set it manually back in April, but not without some thought... I had lost a little bit before I started tracking stuff, but not much. tracking started at 226lbs, I'm essentially sedentary in my job so I had used the mayo clinic calorie calculator, then factored out 1 lb per week (3500 cal as you mentioned) food loss to arrive at 1550 cals. So I set it to 1600 right at the start, and never looked back since I remember reading men shouldn't eat less than that. I figured any additional loss would come from purposeful activity. Apparently it has...

    I also keep an excel file that I think has what I need to do the theoretical vs actual loss, but I'm lost how to actually do it. (BMR column here is based on mifflin-st Jeor) - food deficit is compared to that number and not related to MFP. each column is the monthly average.

    I also just realized I wrote 6 months... it's actually been 9 months now but I have 6 months on MFP and 6 months with my Garmin. Time passes fast.

    hki02orp3bc6.png

    @cmriverside I've never manually added an activity to MFP - it's always sync'd from Garmin, I read about that pitfall early on about double counting! Thanks for the reminder though! Your comment "I would add, at this point you should be aiming to lose NO MORE than 1/2 pound per week." is exactly why I'm now thinking about this. Ideally I only want to lose weight at this point by eating back the "right" amount of my exercise, not by having an actual food deficit overall. Maybe I'm trying to be too surgical.

    "So calculate your past loss rate, your calories, and give yourself a 250 calorie per day deficit off your total daily calorie needs (TDEE.) Just use your Garmin numbers, that's the easier way. Then set your MFP calorie Goals manually based on your past results." I'll try. I'm normally good at math. This one I have a mental block on... !!

    @springlering62 "Mind games. It’s allllll mind games.". It is. There was an add on the radio here for a mens weight loss clinic that said "If you could do it alone you would have done it already." .... Part of my motivation do to it myself actually came from that ad.

    Thank you everyone for your thoughts!!
  • Lietchi
    Lietchi Posts: 6,881 Member
    edited December 2020
    tiwing wrote: »
    Thanks for all the thoughtful replies!

    @lietchi: I set it manually back in April, but not without some thought... I had lost a little bit before I started tracking stuff, but not much. tracking started at 226lbs, I'm essentially sedentary in my job so I had used the mayo clinic calorie calculator, then factored out 1 lb per week (3500 cal as you mentioned) food loss to arrive at 1550 cals. So I set it to 1600 right at the start, and never looked back since I remember reading men shouldn't eat less than that. I figured any additional loss would come from purposeful activity. Apparently it has...

    I also keep an excel file that I think has what I need to do the theoretical vs actual loss, but I'm lost how to actually do it. (BMR column here is based on mifflin-st Jeor) - food deficit is compared to that number and not related to MFP. each column is the monthly average.

    I also just realized I wrote 6 months... it's actually been 9 months now but I have 6 months on MFP and 6 months with my Garmin. Time passes fast.

    hki02orp3bc6.png

    I'd start by checking the data for the last month, copying all the necessary info into an Excel-file for 6 months is quite time consuming :smile: You have some info there which isn't relevant and info that is missing. What you need:
    - total calorie burn according to your Garmin
    - total calories consumed (which you have)
    - weight lost between beginning of the period you're looking at and the end (preferably based on weight trennd for example 7-day average, but use the weigh-ins if you don't calculate your weight trend.)

    Several ways to do this I think, but I've created a column with my (theoretical) deficit per day: total calories burned according to Garmin minus total calories eaten per day. Add up the deficit accumulated over the time period you want to study (for example the last month).
    On the other hand, multiply the number of lbs you've lost over that period by 3500. And compare it to the number above.
    That will tell you if Garmin overestimates your calorie burn or understimates it or if it's just about right.

  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,454 Member
    edited December 2020
    Why are you taking a deficit off the Mifflin St Jeor BMR calculation???????? That's the calculation MFP uses as baseline and it is SUPPOSED to be used in conjunction with an Activity Level multiplier and ADDING exercise calories. Are you sure you're using "BMR" correctly?

    https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-

    Your deficit needs to come from your BMR+Activity+Exercise (which is known as your Total Daily Energy Expenditure.) On MFP that is calculated with its Goal Wizard.

    If you're calculating from a synced number, that number is going to be your TDEE. The deficit comes from TDEE, regardless of your calculation method, but how you get there is different. Garmin and MFP don't use the same multipliers. Read that link, understand the difference.

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10300319/most-helpful-posts-general-health-fitness-and-diet-must-reads#latest




    Take the number of calories you actually ate over that 9 month period. Divide it by the number of days (or months or weeks, whichever) then take your rate of loss and divide that up (use the 3500 calories per pound.) That will tell you your calories in relation to your weight loss.

  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    edited December 2020
    Just FYI in case you talk to others.

    There is no pitfall of double counting when syncing in trackers to MFP.
    Unless you manually log workouts and screw up the time so bad you have 2 distinct activities that end up logged on Garmin.

    And from what you've said the concern you should also have is how much muscle mass did you lose from such an aggressive diet.

    ETA:
    Ditto to eating them all back, and more since I too am underestimated for calorie burn.
    Or I'm the magical person actually overestimating their logged food.

    ETA:
    Apple actually screws up info they send, and couple other watch devices don't do true sync like Fitbit/Garmin/Polar, ect. So Apple isn't double counting but not counting.
  • shirazum2023
    shirazum2023 Posts: 54 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    springlering62 wrote: »
    Many people here factor the inaccuracy of fitness devices in. For example, if they earn 800 via exercise, they might eat back 400 of them.

    Just for contrast.....

    I eat back all the 175,559 yearly calories via my Garmin cycling computer becasue it's an accurate estimate (probably slightly low but not to a significant degree) and I'd be wasting away if I didn't!

    I am a complete noob in all this. Very new to fitness. But this, I was losing drastically and then two weeks back I bought a Garmin and I am eating back all my exercise calories (not half) and I am actually hovering between a weight range I am comfortable in. I know two weeks is not enough time to give it a sure go but at least I am not losing anymore. That's some win.
  • spiriteagle99
    spiriteagle99 Posts: 3,748 Member
    Looking at what that you show for net calories, I wonder if you are actually weighing and logging every bite you eat. Per your spreadsheet, you are eating an average of 600 calories under your goal and yet not losing in the past month or more. That's unlikely if your entries are accurate.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I didn't see it mentioned.

    Garmin estimate of calories burned on cycling can be pretty inflated depending on what it's based on.

    I have an older FR310XT and the power meter while read and kJ obtained does not use that info for calorie burn.
    Can't recall if it's using total HR-based figure (which during cooler weather is mighty close) or % of that and calculated based on ride stats. But it's way over reality.

    sijomial has mentioned newer Garmin head units intended for just bike handle the power meter aspect correctly for calories, but absent that I'm betting same mix of HR and cycling stats.

    The running on Garmin is probably just fine, I believe they use mix of HR and distance based with bigger % to the distance stats.

    Since you do so much cardio, that potentially inflated nature of calorie burn could be saving you from the negative impact of unreasonable amount of deficit.

    Considering I have many 1.5-2 hr rides that have 200-250 cal inflated burn initially logged until I correct - I could see a mostly wipe out of a smaller deficit.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Your column in Excel for BMR seems to assume it's your maintenance calories and it's not. BMR is your estimated burn rate at total rest and in a fasted state, There's nothing in that estimate for your eating and normal daily activity.

    That column would work if you changed it to MFP's BMR X activity multiplier (maintenance calories before exercise) and then you will also see your deficit is a lot bigger than shown.

    For me as an example and with an Active setting elevates my number from BMR of 1,562 to 2,500 for a day with no exercise.

  • tiwing
    tiwing Posts: 10 Member
    cmriverside wrote: »
    Why are you taking a deficit off the Mifflin St Jeor BMR calculation???????? That's the calculation MFP uses as baseline and it is SUPPOSED to be used in conjunction with an Activity Level multiplier and ADDING exercise calories. Are you sure you're using "BMR" correctly?

    https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-

    thank you for the links. I'll come back to those a few times over the next while.

    "Are you sure you're using "BMR" correctly" - No i'm not sure, especially after this conversation! ... Based on multiplier I was using (1.0 not 1.2 as I just researched some more), I am not using it right. I need to adjust my thinking and tell my wife she's starving me. :neutral:
    heybales wrote:
    And from what you've said the concern you should also have is how much muscle mass did you lose from such an aggressive diet.
    I honestly never thought my food intake was aggressive - I was only ever "somewhat hungry" between meals for the first month or so, have never felt tired, and have had no issues going for multi-hour hard bike rides or runs. Pulse resting is good and blood pressure is perfectly normal ... I guess when I initially tried to figure out I just didn't understand.

    ____________________________________

    You all are too quick at responding!! Not something I'm used to on any forums, wow!

    @Lietchi brought all my total burn into my spreadsheet from day 1 of having my garmin. Using your calc since July 1 to Nov 30 I lost 20 lbs (+/- 70,000 cals) and my deficit total burn in garm minus food is 170,000 cal. So something is WAY off. I do try very hard to be honest in what I input for food but I don't weigh anything - @spiriteagle99 is prob correct that it's not totally right, but there's no way it's that wrong..!! I could see an error of 100-200 a day (153 days = 30,000 cal) maybe as I know we all tend to underestimate food.
    heybales wrote:
    Considering I have many 1.5-2 hr rides that have 200-250 cal inflated burn initially logged until I correct - I could see a mostly wipe out of a smaller deficit.
    I didn't know that about garmin & cardio. It's a vivoactive3 watch, so it could be subject to the same issue. I'll do some research on that. How do you know it's over-inflated and how do you correct it??
  • Lietchi
    Lietchi Posts: 6,881 Member
    edited December 2020
    That difference between Garmin and your actual weight loss: could be due to Garmin overestimating, or your food logging underestimating your intake, or a combination. But the fact that you don't weigh your food certainly rings alarm bells for me :smile: So easy to understimate your intake if you're not weighing anything!
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    edited December 2020
    My manual correction for biking calorie burn is from power meter that my Garmin does have the stats for in it's logging.
    So after it's uploaded to Connect, there's my activity, there's the calories Garmin calculated, and there's the kiloJoules reported via power meter.
    Basically edit and copy kJ to calories, though I do add back in the RMR calories because I know what's going to happen with that figure in Connect and MFP once saved.
    And 2 hr ride is over 160 calories that would go missing I need. And want.

    I'm sure someone has dug into the info on the Activity trackers for how they do it, but since I don't use my VF3 for that purpose I don't care what it comes up with for exercise that is going to be overwritten.

    I know he has:
    https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2017/10/garmin-vivoactive-3-in-depth-review.html


    Oh yeah - that 1.2 multiplier is from a 1919 study by Harris, of the BMR formula that has also been improved on.
    MFP uses a 1.25 from much more recent WHO study.
    And even that is really a bump on a log outside of exercise, less than about 4K steps a day.
  • tiwing
    tiwing Posts: 10 Member
    edited December 2020
    I normally try to estimate based on portion sizes and find a match in imperial measure in MFP ... I can visualize what 1/2 a cup or a cup is, but don't ask me what 100g looks like... I prob mess up the ones I only see in grams a bit. "food" for thought! I'll have to dig out the digital kitchen scale and see how bad I am at guestimating!
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    tiwing wrote: »
    I normally try to estimate based on portion sizes and find a match in imperial measure in MFP ... I can visualize what 1/2 a cup or a cup is, but don't ask me what 100g looks like... I prob mess up the ones I only see in grams a bit. "food" for thought! I'll have to dig out the digital kitchen scale and see how bad I am at guestimating!

    If you're basing your calories in estimate on visual estimates, I wouldn't be surprised if you're actually eating more than you think you are. It's not that I think you're particularly bad at estimating, it's that multiple studies have proven that MOST of us are bad at this, at least when it comes to the degree of accuracy that is helpful for weight management.
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    edited December 2020
    Wait, you've got a device telling you you're burning 800 calories a day with exercise (2400-1600)? It isn't impossible that that's a correct number, but thats a lottttttta exercise. At least two hours of VIGOROUS exercise. In all likelihood, the number is far lower.

    Almost all machines and apps provide comically high calorie estimates for exercise. Take a look at my machine's readout from today:

    81mfux6hdybn.jpg

    Nifty little workout summary, right? Notice anything funny about the numbers, though? This otherwise fine piece of gear thinks I burned 663 calories doing an hour of light cardio. LOL. So what really took place with my fat cells today? Here's the actual formula:

    3.6 * watts/hr = net calories burned.

    Or, in this case, 270.

    So I burned 270 net calories on a machine that tells me I burned 663. The machine's estimate is 2 1/2 times actual.

    So,beware devices that tell you you are burning 800 calories per day in exercise. It could easily be less than half of that.
  • tiwing
    tiwing Posts: 10 Member
    edited December 2020
    I appreciate all the feedback, - and yes now looking back at the past 7 days (where I can actually remember what I ate), I think I'm underestimating a lot. the main meals I think is OK. It's the snacking in between that I'm pretty sure is off. Yesterday I had a package of my guilty pleasure, peanut butter M&Ms. I had misread the package/portion and was way way under-representing what I ate. Plus I had a bowl of cheerios but instead of guessing it was one cup, I measured it. 1.5 cups. go figure. So time for a reset.

    As far as exercise, It seems like it might be a bit high, but not as crazy high as yours is reporting! I use garmin vivoactive watch .... Yesterday, for example, I was on the bike (indoor mag trainer) for 1h48m, avg 126 beats per minute, avg power 151 watts, reports 790 cal. Based on your calc, that would be 3.6*151*1.75hours = 950 watts. Wattage is reported on the mag trainer itself. It was a lighter ride that Saturday which was 2h10m average wattage 172w, avg HR 141 bpm. device shows 1144 cal. For reference my max HR is 180. Not tested mind you, but based on a maximum effort hill climb I hit 178 in the fall.

    Followed the ride on Sunday was a 45 min run avg 132 bpm for the entire run, but more in 150-155 for the 30 minutes I was actually running, 7.5km/h for the running portion but the trainer was sloped up a bit, reporting 450 cal. I'm typically an hour of exercise, mostly cardio, per day during the week, and up to 3-4 hours on the weekend days if the weather is good for a nice long ride outdoors.

    Really want to thank you all for your thoughts and feedback. It's opened my eyes a bit and caused me to rethink my approach. Like - cut back on the M&Ms :), and how to double check theoretical vs actual. If it's out of whack, something(s) are wrong and will make it easier to figure that out over time. Cheers!
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Ya, I was getting the sense for some of your workouts 800 was not out of question at all.

    I'll mention for the watts to calories conversion which is great to do, if you are to manually correct the workout info in Connect, add back the BMR calories for that chunk of time, since you have a healthy chunk of time, hour is probably 80 cal abouts.

    Because on Garmin's side and reporting - they take it back out anyway. So you'd be using a very accurate number and then incorrectly having BMR removed by Garmin.

    As to what comes over to MFP it makes it correct too - since GC sends the daily burn and the workouts both.
    Especially now that it sounds like you'll be tightening up your food logging.

    Hmmm, cut back on M&M's, especially the peanut butter? or find a way to make them fit! Oh yes.
  • tiwing
    tiwing Posts: 10 Member
    Wanted to circle back on this and say thanks to all those who commented and helped. I went back through all my numbers and (assuming Garmin Vivoactive is "correct" for exercise calories), I was under-estimating my food by a whopping 25%. So I worked an "adjustment factor" into my spreadsheet and for Dec and Jan so far it seems to be working out. I guess a combination of the sauces and portions being a little larger than I thought make a lot of difference!

    Anyhow, thank you.

Categories