Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Trying out a new info-graphic: How fast can I safely lose weight?
Replies
-
frankwbrown wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »frankwbrown wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »frankwbrown wrote: »Could we say that TDEE is your maintenance calories, i.e. the calories you should eat if you want to neither gain nor lose weight? "Total Daily Energy Expenditure" probably makes some peoples' eyes glaze over.
Won't any infographic need additional explanation? Aren't the primary questions for beginners:
1. How much weight can I safely/realistically lose per week? Alternatively, how much weight should I try to lose each week?
2. How do I configure MFP so it tells me how many calories I can have?
3. When I select activity level (totally sedentary to full blown Olympic athlete), should I include my level of exercise, or not? Should I add exercise calories to what MFP gives me?
4. Isn't there some silver bullet that let's me avoid all this?
edit: I obviously overlooked probably the number one question:
5. I'm trying so hard, but I'm not losing weight? Why, what am I doing wrong?
But "maintenance calories" on MFP is different than TDEE, unless you do zero exercise.cmriverside wrote: »frankwbrown wrote: »Could we say that TDEE is your maintenance calories, i.e. the calories you should eat if you want to neither gain nor lose weight? "Total Daily Energy Expenditure" probably makes some peoples' eyes glaze over.
Won't any infographic need additional explanation? Aren't the primary questions for beginners:
1. How much weight can I safely/realistically lose per week? Alternatively, how much weight should I try to lose each week?
2. How do I configure MFP so it tells me how many calories I can have?
3. When I select activity level (totally sedentary to full blown Olympic athlete), should I include my level of exercise, or not? Should I add exercise calories to what MFP gives me?
4. Isn't there some silver bullet that let's me avoid all this?
edit: I obviously overlooked probably the number one question:
5. I'm trying so hard, but I'm not losing weight? Why, what am I doing wrong?
But "maintenance calories" on MFP is different than TDEE, unless you do zero exercise.
I guess I've never seen the point in distinguishing between activity done as part of your daily life vs activity done as exercise. I mean, activity is activity. But then, after rereading the following, I understand why. I guess it would help if newbies would read (and fully comprehend) the following article (including myself, apparently more than once or twice):excerpt from How Does MyFitnessPal Calculate My Initial GoalsWe also ask you for your weekly exercise goals (which should not be included in your initial activity level), in order to provide an incentive for you to reach. However, we do not account for additional exercise outside of your reported daily activity level, until you actually perform and log exercise to your diary under the "Cardiovascular" section. Please see this article to understand why we do not currently calculate calories via strength exercises.
So you're saying "maintenance calories" is what MFP calculates above, and fits between RMR and TDEE?
Is there an acronym for it? BMR -> RMR -> (maintenance calories)? -> TDEE
Yes.
Non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12468415/
Thank you!
That article's extract says:
"Non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) is the energy expended for everything we do that is not sleeping, eating or sports-like exercise."
So, as I understand it, there's a slight difference:
Where BMR is subsumed by RMR, NEAT is in addition to RMR, and...
I'm assuming then that TDEE = RMR + NEAT + EAT...
and MFP tries to calculate RMR + NEAT, and expects you to account for EAT.
Pedantic quibble: It tries to *estimate* RMR + NEAT. Yeah, it calculates the estimate. But it's IMO important that it's an estimate of the thing, and not a calculation of the thing.
Another common confusion around here is seen when people post things like "I'm eating at maintenance and still losing weight: How can that be?" Even apart from incorrect logging, it can be from the person not being average, so the estimate is off for them.
Estimates. It's all estimates. Unfortunately.
Yes, it would have been better had I said "Estimates" rather than "calculates". I do appreciate the difference.
MFP's If every day were like today... always gives me an extremely optimistic/unrealistic estimate of what I'd weight in 5 weeks. Perhaps this is due to my having hypothyroidism, a low average HR and very little stress, I don't know. I do log food honestly (for the most part). So I'm convinced that, for whatever reason:
1. MFP overestimates my RMR + NEAT (even though I selected sedentary), and
2. Garmin overestimates the calories I burn during exercise activities.
Yes, "It's all estimates. Unfortunately."3 -
Just something that occurred to me regarding OP's dislike of the term "TDEE Method".....
You do have a point OP and I believe it could be helpful in term of clarity for people (including me!) calling it "the average TDEE method".
That would perhaps make it clearer that the MFP method and average TDEE method do attempt get to the same point over an extended period of time, both accounting for exercise but in different ways.5 -
I always wondered about this. Due to an injury I have been less active than usual the past year or so. I have a good amount to lose, 40 lbs currently, yet struggle a lot to even lose close to 1/2 lb a week. My maintenance is very low, close to 1450 when lightly active with about 7000 steps a day. Previously I would get about 10,000 steps a day and could usually eat a little more. I would expect to lose at a faster rate but that hasn’t proven to be the case.1
-
@sijomial
That's the phrase I like using, sometimes weekly avg TDEE method.
@AnnPT77
non-exercise TDEE?
Ya, never heard a good term or acronym. Some days TDEE is non-exercise because you had none.
No coffee yet so can't think of any other common examples in life we use where the term excludes something from an inclusive concept.
But probably best to leave Total meaning Total.3 -
I've read that RMR is also referred to as REE (Resting Energy Expenditure).@sijomial
That's the phrase I like using, sometimes weekly avg TDEE method.
@AnnPT77
non-exercise TDEE?
Ya, never heard a good term or acronym. Some days TDEE is non-exercise because you had none.
No coffee yet so can't think of any other common examples in life we use where the term excludes something from an inclusive concept.
But probably best to leave Total meaning Total.
So how about NEEE (Non-Exercise Energy Expenditure)?
"This acronym has been approved by the Knights Who Say Ni."6 -
-
I've been away just for a couple of days, and the discussion is really good. So, with this little group, it seems that the idea of not tracking workouts and calories thereof is unpopular. But, from many other posts I think it is done quite often. It seems a good approach for people who either don't do workouts or who do regular modest workouts.
Anyway, It's been interesting.2 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I've been away just for a couple of days, and the discussion is really good. So, with this little group, it seems that the idea of not tracking workouts and calories thereof is unpopular. But, from many other posts I think it is done quite often. It seems a good approach for people who either don't do workouts or who do regular modest workouts.
Anyway, It's been interesting.
I find the de-emphasis of workouts to be freeing.
Don’t get me wrong. Workouts are great and have a definite purpose in improving health.
But it is nice to remember that working out is not needed for weight loss or management.
1 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I've been away just for a couple of days, and the discussion is really good. So, with this little group, it seems that the idea of not tracking workouts and calories thereof is unpopular. But, from many other posts I think it is done quite often. It seems a good approach for people who either don't do workouts or who do regular modest workouts.
Anyway, It's been interesting.
I'm not sure what you mean. I always track workouts and calories thereof...via MFP's method of adding exercise in as I do it.0 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I've been away just for a couple of days, and the discussion is really good. So, with this little group, it seems that the idea of not tracking workouts and calories thereof is unpopular. But, from many other posts I think it is done quite often. It seems a good approach for people who either don't do workouts or who do regular modest workouts.
Anyway, It's been interesting.
The bolded is true.
And it is true it's done very often - many times by people that said they came from a site doing avg TDEE method, they never realized exercise was actually in the math, they thought exercise was needed for weight lost.
For people that don't do workouts - MFP method becomes avg TDEE method.
Except vast majority of TDEE sites would make someone think they are Sedentary (and lower multiplier at that), whereas MFP helps them see that could easily be far from the truth with daily life.
Some people do appreciate the planning that comes with same calories daily - as long as they realize to adjust as changes occur.
And actually it is easier to adjust eating goal and apparent TDEE based on observed changes.
MFP you can make those changes too - but was the inaccuracy in exercise, daily level, food logging?
My activity level changes rather radically with the seasons, daily and exercise - if I waited a month to see effects to make adjustments I'd be in trouble. Because my first month with cardio basically stopped is loss of stored glycogen and water and likely blood volume. If my weight stays the same, my belly has gone up.
If plans went well, my lifting is back to true working weight and I'm taking advantage of that month - that rarely seems to happen.1 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I've been away just for a couple of days, and the discussion is really good. So, with this little group, it seems that the idea of not tracking workouts and calories thereof is unpopular. But, from many other posts I think it is done quite often. It seems a good approach for people who either don't do workouts or who do regular modest workouts.
Anyway, It's been interesting.
Average TDEE method, properly applied as strictly intended, accounts for exercise, if a person does exercise. MFP's method, properly applied as strictly intended, accounts for exercise, if person does exercise.
The former averages exercise calories in based on planned exercise, the latter adds exercise calories on when the exercise is actually performed.
If a person chooses not to account for exercise, using either method, they're choosing to increase their deficit by doing that non-accounted-for exercise. That can be a sensible or a very bad choice (IMO) depending on the specific circumstances.
What isn't popular with me is either (1) suggesting to people (possibly merely by omitting saying otherwise) that it's always a good idea to ignore the exercise when planning calorie intake for weight loss; or (2) putting up a standard advice infographic - without a lot of background explanation/clarification - that's based on an approach to weight loss that is *not* the one the site we're on is designed for, and with which the site's built-in documentation conflicts. (2) is confusing.
Either average TDEE method or MFP's method can work. I personally do think there are pitfalls in ignoring exercise - pitfalls that won't be obvious to quite a few average MFP users, especially beginners. I think ignoring exercise in explanations is a bad idea, even when explaining to people who aren't doing exercise at that time. (I agree with others who've commented that - bizarrely - way too many people already think that there's no way to lose weight without exercise.)
The world of "dieting literature" is messed up and confusing enough, without our making that worse by playing mix and match with parts of different methods, and not explaining that mix & match really, really well and precisely.2 -
I see a couple of posts saying that not accounting for individual workouts is tantamount to "ignoring exercise." That's not necessarily the case. You are ANTICIPATING your exercise calories with your activity level setting and then eating at a fixed calorie budget. Lots of people use MFP that way. It works well when you are not doing big calorie-burning workouts (like the 1.5hr bike ride I just did, for example).
The reason I bring this up is that my wife does it that way. And, it works for her!0 -
As long as you account for exercise in your average TDEE, it can work doing it that way even when you exercise a lot (I switched to average TDEE method after a few months and preferred it). I think the pushback is just bc people often get confused when first setting up MFP and assume exercise is included (since it asks you what exercise you plan) and are told from other sources not to add exercise in. So they follow what they think are the instructions, pick a sedentary activity setting, and then don't log exercise, which is I think what people mean by ignoring exercise.
Although I prefer average TDEE method most of the time for myself, I think it is confusing as an initial approach for MFP since it's not the standard method explained with the MFP set-up. It's a great alternative, though, and should result in the same weekly cals.3 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I see a couple of posts saying that not accounting for individual workouts is tantamount to "ignoring exercise." That's not necessarily the case. You are ANTICIPATING your exercise calories with your activity level setting and then eating at a fixed calorie budget. Lots of people use MFP that way. It works well when you are not doing big calorie-burning workouts (like the 1.5hr bike ride I just did, for example).
The reason I bring this up is that my wife does it that way. And, it works for her!
Yeah, this is what I thought you were talking about - and I posted about that in a previous post. Your wife is manipulating the Activity Level because she understands that each bump up in Activity Level accounts for 250 additional calories and that her regular exercise is consistent enough to just change her Activity Level to include it.
BUT
Technically, that's not the way MFP is set up. That's an off-label (if you will) use of it, and there is no "official" descriptor/description of that hack anywhere in the MFP instructions or How-To posts.
So, what we're saying is, yeah you can manipulate MFP's numbers in a lot of different ways, but don't confuse new people with this unless you're willing to do a much longer explanation than you have (yet) to come up with.
6 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I see a couple of posts saying that not accounting for individual workouts is tantamount to "ignoring exercise." That's not necessarily the case. You are ANTICIPATING your exercise calories with your activity level setting and then eating at a fixed calorie budget. Lots of people use MFP that way. It works well when you are not doing big calorie-burning workouts (like the 1.5hr bike ride I just did, for example).
The reason I bring this up is that my wife does it that way. And, it works for her!
To be fair, I think people are talking about it in the context of a proposed infographic that claims MFP gives you a number that is a TDEE number, meaning you shouldn't have to account for exercise calories, because TDEE includes exercise. But if someone actually uses the MFP calorie calculator the way it is designed to be used, the number they are given does not include exercise, even though the MFP set-up asks about your weekly exercise goals.
If people don't understand this, and read the graphic, they're going to be "ignoring exercise." Because the infographic would pile misinformation on top of MFP's lack of clarity.4 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I see a couple of posts saying that not accounting for individual workouts is tantamount to "ignoring exercise." That's not necessarily the case. You are ANTICIPATING your exercise calories with your activity level setting and then eating at a fixed calorie budget. Lots of people use MFP that way. It works well when you are not doing big calorie-burning workouts (like the 1.5hr bike ride I just did, for example).
The reason I bring this up is that my wife does it that way. And, it works for her!
Setting aside the confusion over how MFP's method actually works, I can see the benefit of your approach for some people. If the activity level one selects properly accounts for all exercise activity as well as non-exercise activity, then MFP will estimate a calorie requirement appropriate for one's TDEE. It will then add a calorie deficit/surplus based on how much one has told it one wants to lose/gain.
This approach can work for people for whom:
1. their exercise routine is very consistent
2. they don't want the extra burden of logging that exercise.
MFP's proposed approach works particularly well for those whom:
1. their exercise routine can vary widely
2. they have an activity tracker that syncs with MFP, making exercise logging easy peasy.
I'm in the second camp. I told MFP my activity level is sedentary and my Garmin watch syncs my activity for me.
The challenge is how to create an infographic that can clearly communicate the difference between your TDEE method and MFP's method. Good luck with that.
2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIV4poUZAQo
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K 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
- 427 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
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions