Garmin steps calorie adjustment

LRW_84

Hi

Apologies if this has been posted before.

I've connected my garmin instinct to my fitness pal, however I've noticed that the Garmin calorie adjustment regularly takes away several hundred calories for x amount of steps I've made, I don't understand why.

Shouldn't it be the other way round? Is it because my heart rate isn't high enough to go into calories gained? If that's the case then surely it should just stay at 0 rather than go into negative calories?

I know I gain calories (to eat/increased goal) from exercise so I think I'm right about my heart rate but because I'm new to all this I'd appreciate your help please.

I've turned off negative calories adjustment in the short term (I'm not sure if that helps me)

I've posted a pic too.

Thanks all

Lietchi

What activity level have you chosen on MFP? Can you take a printscreen of what you see when you tap on "Garmin Connect Calorie Adjustment"?

LRW_84

Lietchi wrote: »

What activity level have you chosen on MFP? Can you take a printscreen of what you see when you tap on "Garmin Connect Calorie Adjustment"?

Thanks for replying 👍🏻

I've chosen 'active' as I'm always on my feet at work and go to gym regularly, (yesterday I wasn't as active as normal as I didn't get chance to go to the gym)

This is a screenshot from yesterday (same as above)

Lietchi

The way the sync works is: MFP compares the calorie burn it calculates for you based on your chosen activity level and the calorie burn sent over by Garmin.

If you've been less active than your chosen level, MFP will detract calories (if negative calorie adjustments are turned on). If you have been more active than the chosen level, you'll get extra calories.
The example you posted shows 5500 steps, which is somewhere between sedentary and lightly active, so it's perfectly normal (and appropriate) to have a lower calorie allowance that day.
By the way: going to the gym isn't suposed to be included in your activity level (MFP bases it's calorie goal on non-exercise activity, exercise calories get added separately and give you extra calories to consume)

Personally, I prefer to set my activity level at sedentary and see calories get added when I'm more active, rather than seeing calories subtracted when I'm less active than usual. Just psychological
As for exercise: on days that you do exercise, that will also be sent over (the work-out itself and the calories burned as included in your total calorie burn) which will then give you more calories to consume.

LRW_84

Lietchi wrote: »

The way the sync works is: MFP compares the calorie burn it calculates for you based on your chosen activity level and the calorie burn sent over by Garmin.

If you've been less active than your chosen level, MFP will detract calories (if negative calorie adjustments are turned on). If you have been more active than the chosen level, you'll get extra calories.
The example you posted shows 5500 steps, which is somewhere between sedentary and lightly active, so it's perfectly normal (and appropriate) to have a lower calorie allowance that day.
By the way: going to the gym isn't suposed to be included in your activity level (MFP bases it's calorie goal on non-exercise activity, exercise calories get added separately and give you extra calories to consume)

Personally, I prefer to set my activity level at sedentary and see calories get added when I'm more active, rather than seeing calories subtracted when I'm less active than usual. Just psychological
As for exercise: on days that you do exercise, that will also be sent over (the work-out itself and the calories burned as included in your total calorie burn) which will then give you more calories to consume.

Ok thanks, so should I change my activity level to sedentary (lightly active in MFP) and turn negative calories back on?

Normally I do 10,000 plus steps each day and if I have have time gym too, I've finished work till next year so I'm not as active but try to go to the gym daily to make up for it.

There has been occasions where I've gained calories from less steps (and no exercise) then the example I posted which confuses me, is that due to a increased heart rate from resting rate or light walking rate?

Lietchi

In any case, whatever activity level you choose, I would personally turn negative calorie adjustments back on. Choosing your activity level is just a choice based on preference, with negative calorie adjustments active it won't make any difference to how many calories you can eat since the sync corrects either way. I just prefer positive calorie adjustments to negative ones, psychologically

As for sometimes having higher calorie burns for less steps: I think it's a flaw of HR trackers. I get more calories for steps taken with a higher heart rate, even if the speed is similar. Reasons for elevated heart rate: stress, digesting a meal, just having done a heavy workout... All these things will give me more calories for the same number of steps (but it doesn't mean I'm actually burning more calories, my tracker just thinks so).
For me it all evens out in the end, I lost weight at the expected rate. If you monitor your weight over a month and you're losing slower than expected, you can always adjust your strategy and eat a bit less than the calorie goal given by MFP synced with Garmin. (Or eat more if you're losing faster than expected).

LRW_84

Ah ok, thanks for your help, I appreciate it.

I've had MFP for about a month now, I'm still trying to figure it out, but I have however reached my goal of 81kg, albeit at a slower rate than I thought, as my net calories (weekly) seem to be over by quite a bit, rarely are they under or around 0.

I plan on concentrating on increasing muscle mass now.

So if you have any tips I'd appreciate it.

Thanks again 👍🏻 😀

Lietchi

Maybe it's a vocabulary issue, but your net calorie intake isn't supposed to be zero?
Net calorie intake = calories consumed minus activity/exercise calories.

As for muscle mass, I'm not sure I'm the right person to comment (5ft5 woman previously at a BMI of 34, now 25.4, still working on getting to an acceptable bodyfat level while 'dabbling' in strength training ) but two general possibilities, I think:
- recomposition: eating at maintenant while doing progressive strength training (a slow process of building muscle while losing fat mass) most appropriate for relative beginners/people who don't have a low bodyfat level already
- bulk and cut cycles: eating at a (small) surplus for a certain period while building muscle (and also gaining some fat) and then eating at a deficit for a period to lower the bodyfat percentage back down

AnnPT77

Lietchi wrote: »

Maybe it's a vocabulary issue, but your net calorie intake isn't supposed to be zero?
Net calorie intake = calories consumed minus activity/exercise calories.

As for muscle mass, I'm not sure I'm the right person to comment (5ft5 woman previously at a BMI of 34, now 25.4, still working on getting to an acceptable bodyfat level while 'dabbling' in strength training ) but two general possibilities, I think:
- recomposition: eating at maintenant while doing progressive strength training (a slow process of building muscle while losing fat mass) most appropriate for relative beginners/people who don't have a low bodyfat level already
- bulk and cut cycles: eating at a (small) surplus for a certain period while building muscle (and also gaining some fat) and then eating at a deficit for a period to lower the bodyfat percentage back down

Good advice, regarding the alternatives. More about the recomp idea/process here:

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10177803/recomposition-maintaining-weight-while-losing-fat

To the question (bolded): Yeah, terminology issue. Context of the term is relevant. In the app, on the Nutrition page, Calories Tab, there are buttons to switch between Total and Net. Total is gross intake, Net is gross intake minus logged exercise (or synched activity). I think that might be what OP is referring to.

OP, the MFP estimate is not gospel. I eat whoppingly over my MFP guided-setup maintenance goal (with accurate settings) every day, by hundreds of calories, and still maintain my weight. Not all of us are average, and the MFP-estimated goal is a sort of statistical average for people similar to us. It can be high or low: Usually, for most people, it's close. After you've been calorie counting with reasonable care for a while, you may find that you need to tweak your goal to accurately dial in loss or maintenance calories, based on your personal experience. Once you have a few weeks of decent-quality personal experience data, trust that more than the statistical estimate.

LRW_84

Ok, thanks for the input, it's good of you both to help.

I'm at the weight I want now so as you say maintain that whilst working on strength.

I'll attach a week screenshot from December 2-8 of my net and total calories, if you could give me your thoughts on that it'd be great, so if I understand you correctly I should be avoiding getting a net of zero, so if I'm working on muscle mass should I be aiming for calories over or under weekly goal?

Great work on the reduction of your BMI btw, that's impressive well done, must feel pretty good.

It's one of the reasons I've got into all this is not so much the physical benefits but more the mental aspect as it feels good to be making progress, I've certainly lost weight, but still trying to find that balance between increasing muscle mass whilst maintaining low fat percentage.

Lietchi

LRW_84 wrote: »

I'm at the weight I want now so as you say maintain that whilst working on strength.

I'll attach a week screenshot from December 2-8 of my net and total calories, if you could give me your thoughts on that it'd be great, so if I understand you correctly I should be avoiding getting a net of zero, so if I'm working on muscle mass should I be aiming for calories over or under weekly goal?

Great work on the reduction of your BMI btw, that's impressive well done, must feel pretty good.

It's one of the reasons I've got into all this is not so much the physical benefits but more the mental aspect as it feels good to be making progress, I've certainly lost weight, but still trying to find that balance between increasing muscle mass whilst maintaining low fat percentage.

Losing more than 50lbs does feel pretty good, can't deny that

The balance between increasing muscle mass and maintaining a low fat percentage is a tricky one for many people, I think. But the leaner you are, the harder it will be to gain muscle mass at maintenance. Time will tell how well it works for, it can't hurt to give it a try.

So if you want to try recomp, the goal is to stay as close to zero as possible when looking at "Net calories over/under weekly goal", after having set your goal in MFP at maintenance of course.
With this caveat: as AnnPT77 has said, MFP's calculations (and Garmin calorie burn) are based on statistical averages, etc. So it's important to monitor your weight for, for example, a month after eating at maintenance. If you're still losing weight, eat more - if you're gaining back weight, eat less. We're all different

LRW_84

Great, I'll give that a try.

Thank you 👍🏻