No wonder why everyone is confused!!!

likitisplit

It'll be a great learning experience, no matter what happens.

First hand knowledge is always a good thing.

In the end, the only "calculator" that matters is the virtual one running in our own bodies. Assuming the OP is tracking accurately, she already has the answer she is looking for.

Exactly. I saw a quote on here earlier today... "Your body keeps a better journal than you ever will. "

bsenka

So I'm going to try eating more to see if I will lose closer to 1 lb. per week, which is what many of you have advised. Maybe upping my calories will speed up my weight loss?

That's very possible. It's very common for stalls to be caused by food intake being too low. That's the beauty of tracking everything -- you try it for a couple of weeks, study your data and judge the results.

verptwerp

thanks for sharing ........ figure out what works for you & stick to it .......

btw, congrats on the weight loss, that's outstanding :drinker:

wonderwoman234

If at 1250 you are only losing 1/2lb a week it is due to I suspect overestimating burns and/or under estimating intake. ie you don't use a kitchen scale.

Actually, I do use a food scale and measuring spoons/cups, so I think my counting is pretty accurate. I also do eat some of my exercise calories, probably half to be safe. I am working out hard and lifting HEAVY weights. My lifting routine is about an hour a day and then I do intervals either on the treadmill or Cybex for 30-45 minutes and I am sweating and my heart rate is about 155-165, so I'm not just hanging out.

I average about 1450-1600 with the exercise calories thrown in. The past few days I've been closer to 1700 because I went out twice.

likitisplit

All of those seem really high to me. I am in maintenance and eating around 1800/day with moderate exercise (4-5 x per week, various workouts- kickboxing, Zumba, C25k, and walking) and an active job and am maintaining within a pound, following my glycogen stores replenishment...yeah, confusing no doubt!!!!!!

In case anyone is interested- I am 5'4 1/2, 40 yo, F, 141 lbs

I'm 5'8" 165 pounds, F, 28 years old. I lose a pound a week (sometimes two) on 1900 calories with just lifting 4-5 days a week. It's not unreasonable for someone with a lot to lose to be able to eat 1800 calories and lose weight. I maintain at around 2400. When I cut my calories to 1400 I tend to be less accurate with logging and cheat more which ends in either gaining or maintaining.

I'm 5'9 175 pounds, F, 41. I was losing on 1800, maintain on 2050, running three days a week and doing resistance training at least another two (and eating back the exercise calories).

When I go below 1600, I eat everything in sight and gain lots of weight.

bcattoes

Surely everyone can understand that calculators on the internet will never give anything other than a result based on averages. What any particular site is using to get their average and how they choose to calculate the data to an average will also vary.

Information based on averages should be viewed as a starting point only. Often a little tweaking of the result will be necessary.

krazyforyou

Yes, I agree its very confusing especially for a beginner. You just have to figure out what will work best with your activity level. Good luck.

WBB55

For what it's worth, if you've lost an average of more than 1 lb per week since you started, I'm not too sure you should change anything.

wonderwoman234

All of those seem really high to me. I am in maintenance and eating around 1800/day with moderate exercise (4-5 x per week, various workouts- kickboxing, Zumba, C25k, and walking) and an active job and am maintaining within a pound, following my glycogen stores replenishment...yeah, confusing no doubt!!!!!!

In case anyone is interested- I am 5'4 1/2, 40 yo, F, 141 lbs

I'm 5'8" 165 pounds, F, 28 years old. I lose a pound a week (sometimes two) on 1900 calories with just lifting 4-5 days a week. It's not unreasonable for someone with a lot to lose to be able to eat 1800 calories and lose weight. I maintain at around 2400. When I cut my calories to 1400 I tend to be less accurate with logging and cheat more which ends in either gaining or maintaining.

That's interesting......this experiment will be fun to experience.

wonderwoman234

I guess my point is that with the exception of the first week of weight loss of 5 lbs, mostly water, my average has been closer to 1/2 pound.

I don't feel starving doing what I'm doing. I feel like I'm working out really hard, eating really well, etc. and the past month has been sluggish. That is why I'm thinking of tinkering.

likitisplit

I guess my point is that with the exception of the first week of weight loss of 5 lbs, mostly water, my average has been closer to 1/2 pound.

I don't feel starving doing what I'm doing. I feel like I'm working out really hard, eating really well, etc. and the past month has been sluggish. That is why I'm thinking of tinkering.

There are many reasons why weight loss has been sluggish for the past month. The most likely culprit is mis-measurement. After a period of time, the tendency is to start packing the cup measure. Or you are mis-estimating something that you do frequently. Take a look at your diary and see if there's something that you do/eat every day and double check it.

If you are doing everything right, then keep doing what you are doing. Sometimes the body just plateaus for a time. Your weight loss will start up again.

Experimentation is good, though. A lot of people who were really disciplined at getting the weight off end up with a lingering fear that less discipline will lead to it all returning. Doing different things and seeing the results, I think, leads to a more informed perspective on your ability to maintain a healthy weight.

oc1timoco

Billions of dollars are spent every year in the USA alone on dietary programs. 150,000 books on diets all guaranteed to work. All the online web sites to assist us. Social forums with varied opinions all based on one of the 150,000 books read, Chris Powell, Dr. Oz... OMG the list goes on and on. I agree, its confusing to find what works for you. TMI TMI TMI. I guess they all agree on one thing and that is eating in a deficit. Whatever that is :laugh:

Nerdycurls

I think it's good people are mentioning trial and error or experimentation. Often we try to insist cookie cutter strategies work for everyone and they don't. The basics work for everyone: healthy nutrition/diet, moderate to active activity/exercise and get enough sleep. Other than that you have to fine tune it for every individual.

Francl27

First, if you have 50 lbs to lose and select 'lose 1 lb a week' there is no way MFP tells you to eat as little as 1250 calories... unless you really don't have 50 lbs to lose.

Second, you're not logging properly if you even mention using measuring cups and spoons. Get rid of them. They're not accurate. Just use the scale.

Otherwise, yeah, there are a ton of formulas out there, just got to find what works for you.

ecw3780

My guess is you're calculating TDEE on each of those websites while MFP calculates your NEAT calories (meaning you should be eating exercise calories back each day). So, rather than eating 1300 and then eating back 600 calories from exercise, you'd just eat 1900 daily using TDEE and never eat back exercise calories. It's not that drastic of a difference when you actually look at what you're calculating with each site.

This. If you eat back your exercise calories according to the MFP estimation, I bet you will find things to be a lot closer.

aelphabawest

1923 calories is the average answer for these 15 websites. This is much higher than I've been eating. MFP suggested I eat 1250 and my dietician cousin suggested 1330 (but advised me not to eat any exercise calories).

This is interesting information - thank you.

I get twitchy when people say you shouldn't eat exercise calories. Try running 12 miles with only 1330 calories consumed - my net calories would be -200!! :noway:

erickirb

First, if you have 50 lbs to lose and select 'lose 1 lb a week' there is no way MFP tells you to eat as little as 1250 calories... unless you really don't have 50 lbs to lose.

Second, you're not logging properly if you even mention using measuring cups and spoons. Get rid of them. They're not accurate. Just use the scale.

Otherwise, yeah, there are a ton of formulas out there, just got to find what works for you.

Spoons and cups should be used for liquids

Cadaverous_Bones

My guess is you're calculating TDEE on each of those websites while MFP calculates your NEAT calories (meaning you should be eating exercise calories back each day). So, rather than eating 1300 and then eating back 600 calories from exercise, you'd just eat 1900 daily using TDEE and never eat back exercise calories. It's not that drastic of a difference when you actually look at what you're calculating with each site.

This seems accurate to me.

cebreisch

VERY interesting!!

ironanimal

There's 3 different calculations for metabolism - Mifflin - St Jeor, Katch Mcardle and I forget the other.

Add to that different places will use different methods of calculating exercise expenditure and different multipliers applied to estimated BMR, and yeah, you will get different results.