NET CALORIES???HELP ME!!!!!!!
Replies
-
This is my bet.
I'm also extremely skeptical of burning 1000 calories per day.
you knw what I noticed the other day? the treadmill has this thing where you can add your weight in and it tells you how many calories you burned and it' s more if you're heavier...could that explain it?
To some extent.
If the OP was losing weight too quickly I'd say that she needs to eat more. But since she's not losing weight over a 2 month period it's more likely that she's both overestimating her burns and underestimating how many calories she's taking in, especially since she said she doesn't always measure.
Just for the sake of discussion...
She's 29 years old, 237 lbs, not sure how tall but let's say 5'5". Using an exercise level of 6 days a week on IIFYM.com TDEE calculator, her TDEE is around 3000.
She's eating 1500, which is a large deficit, and hasn't lost in 2 months. It seems to me more likley she has reached a plateau and that by increasing cals to 2000 she could 1. Break out of it and 2. Achieve a better lean mass to fat ratio in her weight loss.
Of course misestimation is always a possibility but in this case the estimation of her calorie burns isn't a factor because she hasn't been eating anything back. It just seems unlikely to me that she is underestimating her calorie intake by 1500 calories a day.0 -
This is my bet.
I'm also extremely skeptical of burning 1000 calories per day.
you knw what I noticed the other day? the treadmill has this thing where you can add your weight in and it tells you how many calories you burned and it' s more if you're heavier...could that explain it?
To some extent.
If the OP was losing weight too quickly I'd say that she needs to eat more. But since she's not losing weight over a 2 month period it's more likely that she's both overestimating her burns and underestimating how many calories she's taking in, especially since she said she doesn't always measure.
Just for the sake of discussion...
She's 29 years old, 237 lbs, not sure how tall but let's say 5'5". Using an exercise level of 6 days a week on IIFYM.com TDEE calculator, her TDEE is around 3000.
She's eating 1500, which is a large deficit, and hasn't lost in 2 months. It seems to me more likley she has reached a plateau and that by increasing cals to 2000 she could 1. Break out of it and 2. Achieve a better lean mass to fat ratio in her weight loss.
Of course misestimation is always a possibility but in this case the estimation of her calorie burns isn't a factor because she hasn't been eating anything back. It just seems unlikely to me that she is underestimating her calorie intake by 1500 calories a day.
Bwahahaha. "Plateau". "Eat more calories to break out of it". :laugh:
Wait...you were serious? :huh:0 -
okay yes, a 6'4 265-lb young male could burn 1000 calories in a workout. But it takes a lot for a woman who isn't severely obese to burn 1000 cals in a workout. Rule of thumb is running one mile = 100 calories burned for women. So that would be 10 miles of running. The ellipticals -- depends on resistance level, but even at one of the higher settings, it would take probably 90 minutes to burn 1000 calories for a woman of average size. And to do that EVERY day? Not likely.
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)0 -
I did it everyday for 5 months. I worked out 2wice a day as well 90% of time. Go ahead and doubt.Or I will do an hour or 1.5 hrs of stairs at the gym-high resistance .
I do 20 min .. and I am drained. And I am considerably lighter than you are. I somehow doubt that you can do this on a regular basis ?
This would be like climbing 333 stories. If you can actually do this .. you are way more fit than me.
0 -
Amen! Thanks for responding to this. You are a fit 171 lb female and you burn over 400..can you imagine a 237 person doing an hour to an hour and a half of high intensity workout? I think it would be easy right to get 1000 cals.okay yes, a 6'4 265-lb young male could burn 1000 calories in a workout. But it takes a lot for a woman who isn't severely obese to burn 1000 cals in a workout. Rule of thumb is running one mile = 100 calories burned for women. So that would be 10 miles of running. The ellipticals -- depends on resistance level, but even at one of the higher settings, it would take probably 90 minutes to burn 1000 calories for a woman of average size. And to do that EVERY day? Not likely.
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
Some people are just rude huh? Thanks for backing me up though!0 -
To those of you who took the time to give me positive criticism I totally appreciate it.
I asked out of curiosity if I could learn something new that would help me. Also to those that "doubt" I workout a lot, I do. I am a person that will fully commit to whatever I do..whatever that means. I am definitely not all "fat". I have strength, I can drop a person twice my size in a few seconds. I say this to add to the fact that yes, even though im 237 Im not all fat. I do have muscle.0 -
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
No, you don't. Net burn for you is a little over 300 calories.0 -
If the OP came here saying she needed to gain weight, the universal advice would be "eat more!" And here you are suggesting she eat more to lose weight.She's eating 1500, which is a large deficit, and hasn't lost in 2 months. It seems to me more likley she has reached a plateau and that by increasing cals to 2000 she could 1. Break out of it and 2. Achieve a better lean mass to fat ratio in her weight loss.
The same advice cannot be correct for both gaining weight and losing weight.
Study after study after study has shown that not only is it possible, it is quite common.It just seems unlikely to me that she is underestimating her calorie intake by 1500 calories a day.0 -
Hmm.....well I wouldnt be lying about my activity. Im very active. I work 15 hours a day Half of that is standing and walking non stop, I work out at 5 am, then again after work. I dont have the energy or time to cook but simple fast items. So yeah I am active.....but thanks for your help........I guess...lol
How on earth did you come to that conclusion from what was posted?I guess Im not eating enough compared to the activity I do.
The correct conclusion is that you aren't as active as you think you are, and you eat more than you think you do - so move more, eat less.
I burn 1000 calories or more a day too. I have a bodymedia armband that tells me what I burn, and even allowing for the possible inaccuracy of the readings (its usually only off by about 3%, but in some people it can be off by around 10%) I am still burning 900-1000 most days. People constantly doubt that I could be... but I know how hard I work out, and for how long... 90 minutes minimum. Plus all my usual daily activity.0 -
You clearly do not understand how the body burns calories. How "hard" it feels to you has little relation to how much energy is actually burned. Bottom line: if you cannot run your 237 pounds a solid 8 miles at a go, multiple times a week, you are not burning what you believe you are burning in your "high intensity workout".Amen! Thanks for responding to this. You are a fit 171 lb female and you burn over 400..can you imagine a 237 person doing an hour to an hour and a half of high intensity workout? I think it would be easy right to get 1000 cals.
Anyway, you are clearly hell bent on believing what you want to believe, so I'll leave you to it.
Cheers, and good luck.0 -
If the OP came here saying she needed to gain weight, the universal advice would be "eat more!" And here you are suggesting she eat more to lose weight.She's eating 1500, which is a large deficit, and hasn't lost in 2 months. It seems to me more likley she has reached a plateau and that by increasing cals to 2000 she could 1. Break out of it and 2. Achieve a better lean mass to fat ratio in her weight loss.
The same advice cannot be correct for both gaining weight and losing weight.
Study after study after study has shown that not only is it possible, it is quite common.It just seems unlikely to me that she is underestimating her calorie intake by 1500 calories a day.
OP, in case this is what is happening, double check all your measurements of your food, make sure you log everything and that it is accurately measured.0 -
Amen! Thanks for responding to this. You are a fit 171 lb female and you burn over 400..can you imagine a 237 person doing an hour to an hour and a half of high intensity workout? I think it would be easy right to get 1000 cals.okay yes, a 6'4 265-lb young male could burn 1000 calories in a workout. But it takes a lot for a woman who isn't severely obese to burn 1000 cals in a workout. Rule of thumb is running one mile = 100 calories burned for women. So that would be 10 miles of running. The ellipticals -- depends on resistance level, but even at one of the higher settings, it would take probably 90 minutes to burn 1000 calories for a woman of average size. And to do that EVERY day? Not likely.
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
Some people are just rude huh? Thanks for backing me up though!
My weight is almost the same as yours. My workouts as long. I know how much I burn... and it is at least 1000. But the person telling you that you aren't burning that much also told me the same thing before. Just nod and smile and go about your business... LOL
It is more likely, if you are off with anything, that it would be your food measurements. You may not be, but if there is any possibility, start measuring everything very carefully and log every bite.0 -
My weight is almost the same as yours. My workouts as long. I know how much I burn... and it is at least 1000.
Nope, you're not burning that, either. The device you are using does not measure calorie burn, it estimates it with math similar to that used by MFP's exercise database. The idea that it is "3%" accurate is marketing BS.0 -
My weight is almost the same as yours. My workouts as long. I know how much I burn... and it is at least 1000.
Nope, you're not burning that, either. The device you are using does not measure calorie burn, it estimates it with math similar to that used by MFP's exercise database. The idea that it is "3%" accurate is marketing BS.
I've had my HRM give me 600-850cal burns and although I wish this was true...it's not. I end up subtracting 40-60% off that number.0 -
My weight is almost the same as yours. My workouts as long. I know how much I burn... and it is at least 1000.
Nope, you're not burning that, either. The device you are using does not measure calorie burn, it estimates it with math similar to that used by MFP's exercise database. The idea that it is "3%" accurate is marketing BS.
I've had my HRM give me 600-850cal burns and although I wish this was true...it's not. I end up subtracting 40-60% off that number.
What's so frustrating is that the calorie burn side of the story is very well understood - but so many people just don't want to deal with the reality. You can't compare your burn to that of someone running 10k unless you yourself can run 10k!
It's depressing to see people going astray on such basic stuff...0 -
My weight is almost the same as yours. My workouts as long. I know how much I burn... and it is at least 1000.
Nope, you're not burning that, either. The device you are using does not measure calorie burn, it estimates it with math similar to that used by MFP's exercise database. The idea that it is "3%" accurate is marketing BS.
My weight loss shows that it is accurate. Yes it uses math... and motion... and body temperature... and how fast heat leaves the body (heat flux) and perspiration to accurately measure how much activity you are getting and how intense that activity is. I've kept records, and it gets my TDEE within 3% accuracy. So I figure my true TDEE is 3% less than it says it it is, and have a very accurate measurement. And when I exercise for 90 minutes minimum each day, I burn 1000 calories or more.
My results line up with this... I couldn't lose 2 pounds a week if I wasn't actually getting a 1000 calorie deficit. Now I don't always lose a steady 2 pounds a week, but when I average it out over several months and look at my loss, it matches my reported deficits VERY closely.0 -
what happened in here?0
-
If I jog/walk my 5 miles a day. I burn close to 710 calories. I have a HRM and Bodymedia armband I use LOL, so I am double knowing I have it correct. So I could see by looking at her picture with her weight, of her burning 1,000 in a workout.
Add: blah Blah BLAH, yes I know it is not ever 100% accurate, its working for me in my weight loss and well *shrugs* "if it's not broke, don't fix it!"0 -
My suggestion is just based on something that works for me (although there is a tiny bit of science behind it). Have one day a week at maintenance calories for your current weight. See if that helps shake the plateau.
I would eat something back for your workouts, but probably just a snickers bar or so
If you have felt fine doing what you are doing, I'd be scared of changing it up too much in calories all at once.
Like I said, all I have to do is eat well (no deficit) one day a week and that fixes my weird stalls. I get them all the time otherwise. Dunno why exactly, but that really is how weight loss is for very many folks. We don't know everything about it by far! And of course, make sure your data is good, so watch your measurements, etc. I always figure that goes without saying 0 -
I can comment on saying I eat 1510 calorie and was plateaued for 3 weeks. I rode my horse on Thursday and tried what everyone was screaming at me...I ate more! I went from my 1510 to 2,134. ( riding was 910 calories burned, was all trot class for 1hr 15min) so ate into my workout calories and I dropped 2.4lbs. -_- little frustrated that all I had to do was listen and could have been on my way losing more weight. So never underestimate the eating back the calories. it works!!
FYI was 2 days later that the 2.4lbs showed LOL not immediately!0 -
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
No, you don't. Net burn for you is a little over 300 calories.
And you know this because you use my heart rate monitor or my BodyMedia device? Get off your high horse, every time I read one of your posts I want to smack you.0 -
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
No, you don't. Net burn for you is a little over 300 calories.
And you know this because you use my heart rate monitor or my BodyMedia device? Get off your high horse, every time I read one of your posts I want to smack you.
BAHAHAH!!0 -
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
No, you don't. Net burn for you is a little over 300 calories.
And you know this because you use my heart rate monitor or my BodyMedia device? Get off your high horse, every time I read one of your posts I want to smack you.
BAHAHAH!!
I mean clearly my burn rate MUST be wrong, it's not like I've lost much weight...0 -
Amen! Thanks for responding to this. You are a fit 171 lb female and you burn over 400..can you imagine a 237 person doing an hour to an hour and a half of high intensity workout? I think it would be easy right to get 1000 cals.okay yes, a 6'4 265-lb young male could burn 1000 calories in a workout. But it takes a lot for a woman who isn't severely obese to burn 1000 cals in a workout. Rule of thumb is running one mile = 100 calories burned for women. So that would be 10 miles of running. The ellipticals -- depends on resistance level, but even at one of the higher settings, it would take probably 90 minutes to burn 1000 calories for a woman of average size. And to do that EVERY day? Not likely.
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
Some people are just rude huh? Thanks for backing me up though!
Although I think you are referring to the peeking cartoon guy about being rude (I know he's blunt and opinionated but in this case probably right), I hope you read my post and realize I'm trying to show you the high probability that you are eating more than you think and burning less and you asked for help. Why do I say this? I'm not trying to be rude at all OK? So, lets get specific, you are VERY close to my weight. I can burn about 1300 calories according to MFP, with a 20lb pack on my back in 100 minutes on a hike, while climbing a small mountain for 5++miles with 1650ft elevation gain. Lets compare. 100 mins is 10 more than yours, so thats 10% off, lets call it 1150 calories.
Now, thats almost the same burn as yours. BUT, there are several large factors here that would tend to say this hike is more exercise than a gym workout. First off, your workouts that are "zumba and walking" and "Taibo and walking" you probably know yourself that the above described hike up a mountain is probably more strenuous? Even if you don't think so, lets continue, there are several other factors: 1) I'm carrying 20lbs, and guiding dogs (they pull back and forth, make it unstable sometimes). 2) its outdoors, unstable terrain, rocky, and elevation gain is relatively steep in some places. 3) Again, I'm not trying to be rude but I dont think that you could keep up with me by your size and height. All three of these factors tend to show the effort of the workouts above you describe, although they are great workouts, it indicates you are probably not burning as high a rate as you think. And then we come to 4) I think its slightly high of a rate even for me... 5) at 6' and similar weight, I have more muscle mass than you (I'm a pretty decent weightlifter), meaning my basal burn is higher.
You did say one day you do 1.5hrs stair master on high resistance, that workout may be at or above 1,000 calories depending on the level you have it on, but that's 1/3 of your days.
Hope you can take this as trying to help and realize what I'm saying is for comparison only to show my burn rate is probably higher, and yet I don't really record more and I think its too high for me. If I were in your shoes and there was some guy out there who was the same weight and a lot more muscle than me and he found that he burned less I'd love to hear that too, its good information
So back to the question....best advice is weigh your food portions with a scale+measuring cup and eat back part of your workout calories, maybe 50% and see how that does for a few weeks.0 -
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
No, you don't. Net burn for you is a little over 300 calories.
And you know this because you use my heart rate monitor or my BodyMedia device? Get off your high horse, every time I read one of your posts I want to smack you.
BAHAHAH!!
I mean clearly my burn rate MUST be wrong, it's not like I've lost much weight...
Yours sounds in the ballpark, running uses more energy too and your LBM is higher than hers too.0 -
Thanks. I run a 5k a minimum of 3 days a week and my burns are always just over 400 and I am full on running the whole time.I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
No, you don't. Net burn for you is a little over 300 calories.
And you know this because you use my heart rate monitor or my BodyMedia device? Get off your high horse, every time I read one of your posts I want to smack you.
BAHAHAH!!
I mean clearly my burn rate MUST be wrong, it's not like I've lost much weight...
Yours sounds in the ballpark, running uses more energy too and your LBM is higher than hers too.0 -
I burn over 400 running a 5k every single time I run it. I'm a female, 5'7", 171 lbs (not severely obese, 12 lbs overweight.)
No, you don't. Net burn for you is a little over 300 calories.
And you know this because you use my heart rate monitor or my BodyMedia device? Get off your high horse, every time I read one of your posts I want to smack you.
Out of interest I put your stats in a running site calorie estimator and it comes up with 402 calories.0 -
Whats the problem, if you're losing inches you must look better and have lost some body fat?
more and more I find it easier to clean up your diet, then stop worrying about all the rubbish on here about TDEE and all the rest, just clean eating and then cut your carbs and protein down to small servings - if you're not losing cut them down some more until you start losing again.
this stuff about eating more to lose more is utter bollocks and I've never seen it before until I got to this site - go on bodybuilding.com and they'll just tell you if you're not losing you need to eat less . period. its really not rocket science.0 -
Here's what I'd do, OP.
First, start weighing everything you eat. Make absolutely sure your logging is accurate. Don't use generics from the database, enter your own recipes, choose the database entries with no asterisk. Also make sure you've readjusted your calorie goal to reflect the weight you've already lost.
If after a few weeks of that you're still not losing, then try increasing your calories gradually and see what happens.
I do like this article and I have a lot of respect for Lyle, but it is a little light on science and is mostly speculation. Still, it's worth a read.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html
Another thing you could try is a full diet break. I did one when I got to the 20 lbs lost mark and I found it helpful.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-full-diet-break.html
Bottom line, assuming your intake is spot on and there aren't any errors, you've got two options: raise calories or lower them (or raise them a bit then drop them again, like with the full diet break or maintenance day approach). Since your goal is reasonable I'd try raising them first. Calculators are all well and good but the real test is how your body responds to what you're doing over time. So just keep re-evaluating and adjust as needed.
Finally, people here are trying to be helpful. You may not like what we have to say, but name-calling is not a good way to behave toward people who are trying to help you solve your problem.0 -
Worked for me. I was on 1200, exercising, eating back, losing steady, then I didn't lose for a month. I did 2 week with increased calories up to maintenance and started again, bingo, started losing again!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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