MFP calorie burns from strength training way too low?
Options
Replies
-
Good to know; was following the thread. Was experiencing flucutations my first month as well and then upping a little every day until I was seeing results.
You know what's weird? I went through all that a few months ago when I started. I never thought I'd be going through it again! I didn't even think of it...I just blindly trusted what MFP told me I was burning like I had done all along...even though my lifting increased in intensity (but not duration...it was the intensity thing that really threw me. I actually started to think my body was getting funky...then I was like, wait a second...what's the most logical explanation here likely to be?)
So I posted this thread. And got some awesome responses that confirmed what was actually happening. Apparently this thread is helping out a lot of other people, too!0 -
Get a heart rate monitor ... end of story?
heh
DoYouEvenLiftBro0 -
I just don't bother with MFP exercise logging.. It's far too inaccurate for my liking.. I find I get a more accurate estimation from iifym.com when trying to identify how much I should eat with regards to my activity levels..0
-
But since I started 4 weeks ago, I have not gained any weight. In fact, that 1 lb or so of fat I gained around my middle a few months ago from bulking is actually disappearing. So apparently I'm recomping instead of bulking...on a 500-cal surplus.
I don't think we agree on what a caloric surplus is.0 -
I had been eating a 400-cal surplus for several months and had gained weight on it.
But in the past month, I started a much more intense lifting program (stronglifts). I increased to a 500 cal surplus most days once I started.
But since I started 4 weeks ago, I have not gained any weight. In fact, that 1 lb or so of fat I gained around my middle a few months ago from bulking is actually disappearing. So apparently I'm recomping instead of bulking...on a 500-cal surplus.
The guy who compiled the stronglifts program said to make certain (for a guy) that you eat around 3000 calories a day because it will burn off a lot. Apparently he is right...
MFP says I burn around 200 calories after an hour of stronglifts (using the "weight training" entry in the exercise diary). So I had been eating back those 200 plus the extra 500 on workout days, putting me at around 3250 cal total intake (with properly balanced macros) on workout days. And just the 400-500 calorie surplus alone on non-workout days (putting me at around 3000 on those days).
So is MFP likely to severely underestimate burns from *intense* weight training? Back when my lifting wasn't as intense, the MFP formula (including eating back exercise calories) + additional 400-cal surplus was plenty to make gains off of. It's just not happening anymore though!
I've decided to add another hundred calories on only weight-lifting days, and see what happens. (So, 600-cal surplus on lifting days and 500-cal on non-lifting days).
Please tell me I'm not the only one who went through this...it's so confusing to estimate how much I burn from weight training on this new program.
Get a heart rate monitor ... end of story?
Sorry...irresistible
DoYouEvenReadBro???
This thread is one of my top ten reads now....it's also inspired me to do more homework so thanks guys.
Good luck OP please keep us regularly posted here to keep thread alive. As one of my FL buddies I know how scrupulous this guy is on numbers and research so it will be interesting.
I wish MFP had better burn and food counts. I wish someone would go through it all and triple check everything and get a more sophisticated exercise burn calculator!
Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!0 -
I know, right? Why are we even paying for membership to this site if they don't. . . oh.I had been eating a 400-cal surplus for several months and had gained weight on it.
But in the past month, I started a much more intense lifting program (stronglifts). I increased to a 500 cal surplus most days once I started.
But since I started 4 weeks ago, I have not gained any weight. In fact, that 1 lb or so of fat I gained around my middle a few months ago from bulking is actually disappearing. So apparently I'm recomping instead of bulking...on a 500-cal surplus.
The guy who compiled the stronglifts program said to make certain (for a guy) that you eat around 3000 calories a day because it will burn off a lot. Apparently he is right...
MFP says I burn around 200 calories after an hour of stronglifts (using the "weight training" entry in the exercise diary). So I had been eating back those 200 plus the extra 500 on workout days, putting me at around 3250 cal total intake (with properly balanced macros) on workout days. And just the 400-500 calorie surplus alone on non-workout days (putting me at around 3000 on those days).
So is MFP likely to severely underestimate burns from *intense* weight training? Back when my lifting wasn't as intense, the MFP formula (including eating back exercise calories) + additional 400-cal surplus was plenty to make gains off of. It's just not happening anymore though!
I've decided to add another hundred calories on only weight-lifting days, and see what happens. (So, 600-cal surplus on lifting days and 500-cal on non-lifting days).
Please tell me I'm not the only one who went through this...it's so confusing to estimate how much I burn from weight training on this new program.
Get a heart rate monitor ... end of story?
Sorry...irresistible
DoYouEvenReadBro???
This thread is one of my top ten reads now....it's also inspired me to do more homework so thanks guys.
Good luck OP please keep us regularly posted here to keep thread alive. As one of my FL buddies I know how scrupulous this guy is on numbers and research so it will be interesting.
I wish MFP had better burn and food counts. I wish someone would go through it all and triple check everything and get a more sophisticated exercise burn calculator!
Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!0 -
Look to the human body for making it so difficult to calculate - or his holiness, our god; the FSM, who created us all.Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!
And yes, I hope the person suggesting you get a HRM is trolling
. 0 -
Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!
I don't get why people think it is so difficult.
Eat less that you need: you lose weight; Eat more than you need: you gain weight.
The style of training you do and the macronutrient composition of your diet helps determine what proportion of that weight is muscle and what proportion is fat (along with age, gender, training experience and genetics).
That's pretty much it.
(Oh, add in time, patience and consistency of course. But those things go without saying...)0 -
I have found that in general the exercise calories, no matter the exercise, are generally off. Strength training cals are definitely off. Elliptical calories are definitely way too high.
I've been trying to log less minutes doing each exercise in order to compensate for the elliptical, and log more minutes in strength training to compensate for the too few calories on that end. It has pretty much evened out as I'm on a 1 lb a week loss track, and I've been going down .85 lb per week.0 -
I have found that in general the exercise calories, no matter the exercise, are generally off. Strength training cals are definitely off. Elliptical calories are definitely way too high.
I've been trying to log less minutes doing each exercise in order to compensate for the elliptical, and log more minutes in strength training to compensate for the too few calories on that end. It has pretty much evened out as I'm on a 1 lb a week loss track, and I've been going down .85 lb per week.
That may shed some light on why I was gaining so well while doing steady-start cardio.
Let me explain...
During the growing season (not now), I do a lot of lawn mowing. It's low to moderate intensity steady-state cardio with some interval-like peaks and troughs depending on the terrain. MFP gives me a 600+ cal burn number for 2 hours, and I eat it all back, despite feeling like I want to hurl. Now we know the stronglifts I've been doing for about 5 weeks is under-estimated. If the mowing is over-inflated, it'd be the opposite effect. Caveat: I wasn't doing stronglifts last growing season. Just lower intensity weight training.
Btw, I'm up 1 to 1.5 lbs since posting this thread and making the adjustments. We'll see how it goes over the next week.0 -
Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!
I don't get why people think it is so difficult.
Eat less that you need: you lose weight; Eat more than you need: you gain weight.
The style of training you do and the macronutrient composition of your diet helps determine what proportion of that weight is muscle and what proportion is fat (along with age, gender, training experience and genetics).
That's pretty much it.
(Oh, add in time, patience and consistency of course. But those things go without saying...)
Haha how easy! I don't call tracking everything I eat and trying to get a 10% deficit on a cut or a 10% excess on a bulk while using inaccurate numbers easy. I've worked really hard getting it right and have dropped 10% body fat over two years while being an athlete and not injuring myself, yet reaching awesome fitness and strength. I've had to change so many things on this site to make it work. Using it as it was designed would have ended in a lot of failure for me.
I know 99% of my burns now and track like a mutha. I've also triple checked my food calorie counts to weed out the inaccuracies there.
The last mystery is this strength training one. It seems for a lot of us too. MFP exercise numbers are wrong, and lead a lot of new members down the wrong path. I can't count the times I've read people screwing up their numbers, even experienced ones.
How frustrating to think you're on a bulk only to find you've been at maintenance for a month! That's because the numbers are wrong here, and we can't find them on our HRM.
That's why I love this thread. So we can compare our estimated strength training burns, and find a solution.
MFP should finish their job and get a sophisticated counting system that isn't full of rubbish food counts that randomly have been added and exercise burns that are inaccurate, overestimated and generic. Surely considering the reputation of the site and the caliber of fitness fanatic here justifies it. It kind of defies the point of the whole site if we all have to play with the numbers so much.
Oh it works for me now, but other people here aren't so smart or lucky. I'd run this website very differently if it was me. It's a little neglected to say the least.0 -
I know, right? Why are we even paying for membership to this site if they don't. . . oh.I had been eating a 400-cal surplus for several months and had gained weight on it.
But in the past month, I started a much more intense lifting program (stronglifts). I increased to a 500 cal surplus most days once I started.
But since I started 4 weeks ago, I have not gained any weight. In fact, that 1 lb or so of fat I gained around my middle a few months ago from bulking is actually disappearing. So apparently I'm recomping instead of bulking...on a 500-cal surplus.
The guy who compiled the stronglifts program said to make certain (for a guy) that you eat around 3000 calories a day because it will burn off a lot. Apparently he is right...
MFP says I burn around 200 calories after an hour of stronglifts (using the "weight training" entry in the exercise diary). So I had been eating back those 200 plus the extra 500 on workout days, putting me at around 3250 cal total intake (with properly balanced macros) on workout days. And just the 400-500 calorie surplus alone on non-workout days (putting me at around 3000 on those days).
So is MFP likely to severely underestimate burns from *intense* weight training? Back when my lifting wasn't as intense, the MFP formula (including eating back exercise calories) + additional 400-cal surplus was plenty to make gains off of. It's just not happening anymore though!
I've decided to add another hundred calories on only weight-lifting days, and see what happens. (So, 600-cal surplus on lifting days and 500-cal on non-lifting days).
Please tell me I'm not the only one who went through this...it's so confusing to estimate how much I burn from weight training on this new program.
Get a heart rate monitor ... end of story?
Sorry...irresistible
DoYouEvenReadBro???
This thread is one of my top ten reads now....it's also inspired me to do more homework so thanks guys.
Good luck OP please keep us regularly posted here to keep thread alive. As one of my FL buddies I know how scrupulous this guy is on numbers and research so it will be interesting.
I wish MFP had better burn and food counts. I wish someone would go through it all and triple check everything and get a more sophisticated exercise burn calculator!
Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!
I don't care that I'm not paying a subscription while my mind is being littered with a load of bull advertising on nutrition advice that goes against anything we've learnt here. I mean.....bananas ffs....since when have they done any harm, and every website I've been on to browse just sits at the top of the page taunting me, even items I've looked at are there every bloody day going buy me buy me buy me.
I'm on a media blackout and don't have tv so these things are big deals to me. I'd rather pay a sub and get accurate numbers and be able to yes the site properly without all the bugs It's a mess.
Phew rant over. Sorry about derail OP.0 -
Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!
I don't get why people think it is so difficult.
Eat less that you need: you lose weight; Eat more than you need: you gain weight.
The style of training you do and the macronutrient composition of your diet helps determine what proportion of that weight is muscle and what proportion is fat (along with age, gender, training experience and genetics).
That's pretty much it.
(Oh, add in time, patience and consistency of course. But those things go without saying...)
Haha how easy! I don't call tracking everything I eat and trying to get a 10% deficit on a cut or a 10% excess on a bulk while using inaccurate numbers easy. I've worked really hard getting it right and have dropped 10% body fat over two years while being an athlete and not injuring myself, yet reaching awesome fitness and strength. I've had to change so many things on this site to make it work. Using it as it was designed would have ended in a lot of failure for me.
[.....]
How frustrating to think you're on a bulk only to find you've been at maintenance for a month! That's because the numbers are wrong here, and we can't find them on our HRM.
That's why I love this thread. So we can compare our estimated strength training burns, and find a solution.
Well, easy is perhaps the wrong word. Simple. Straight-forward might be a better way to put it. It's not a difficult intellectual exercise, it just requires commitment (time, energy, patience). Einsteinian levels of "figuring it out" are not required.
Just take your best guess for bulking (say an estimated TDEE + 10%) and run with that number for a fortnight. Don't worry about "burns" or anything else. If you're on a consistent routine (and you should be), by the end of the second week, you'll have enough data to rejig and then just keep going with that number (and occasionally rejig as your NEAT ramps up and down, depending, as the weeks go by).
In the context of a long-term training program and long term training goals, spending 1 month and figuring out that you were eating at maintenance is nothing. In fact, you've just nailed maintenance, which is a pretty big thing. Now you know what you need to eat to successfully start your bulk/cut (you'll still need to make adjustments as you go). You should actually spend some time at maintenance after a cut before you plunge into a bulk anyway.
In the context of a long term bulking or cutting phase, the way MFP is set up (i.e. eating back your exercise cals) is not the right way to go about things. Stick with the TDEE method. If you're a casual kinda, sorta whenever exerciser, then MFP's system makes perfect sense. For the aims stated in this thread, it does not.0 -
In the context of a long term bulking or cutting phase, the way MFP is set up (i.e. eating back your exercise cals) is not the right way to go about things. Stick with the TDEE method. If you're a casual kinda, sorta whenever exerciser, then MFP's system makes perfect sense. For the aims stated in this thread, it does not.
We're all entitled to our own opinions and methods. But personally for me, I disagree with this, and don't use TDEE. I actually prefer more of a guided trial and error method because my activity level varies a lot (other than the lifting). But it was the increased strength training intensity that threw me for a loop. 2950 calories isn't my normal maintenance amount. I do see what you're saying though...TDEE eliminates the idea of maintenance and any skew...but it only works if you do the same thing over and over activity-wise for an extended period of time.
If I had thought of the exercise burns being the culprit originally, I would have figured it out 2 weeks ago. The TDEE method would have had the same issue, btw...depending on which calculation one uses and which database is being referenced for those exercise burns.
That said, I feel like I'm closing in on my correct intake for my present level of activity. It's not TDEE, per se, but in effect that's what I'm doing. I'm actually making educated guesses at my strength-training burns now, and then adding them into the mix. In effect, hybrid TDEE and MFP method...just not using a scientific TDEE calculation formula.
The numbers I used for landscaping/cardio seemed to work in the past. So when I start doing that stuff again in another few weeks, I'll just add those calories back in...in addition to my present ones for the stronglifts strength training program.0 -
Come on MFP!!!!! Stop making it so difficult!
I don't get why people think it is so difficult.
Eat less that you need: you lose weight; Eat more than you need: you gain weight.
The style of training you do and the macronutrient composition of your diet helps determine what proportion of that weight is muscle and what proportion is fat (along with age, gender, training experience and genetics).
That's pretty much it.
(Oh, add in time, patience and consistency of course. But those things go without saying...)
Haha how easy! I don't call tracking everything I eat and trying to get a 10% deficit on a cut or a 10% excess on a bulk while using inaccurate numbers easy. I've worked really hard getting it right and have dropped 10% body fat over two years while being an athlete and not injuring myself, yet reaching awesome fitness and strength. I've had to change so many things on this site to make it work. Using it as it was designed would have ended in a lot of failure for me.
[.....]
How frustrating to think you're on a bulk only to find you've been at maintenance for a month! That's because the numbers are wrong here, and we can't find them on our HRM.
That's why I love this thread. So we can compare our estimated strength training burns, and find a solution.
Well, easy is perhaps the wrong word. Simple. Straight-forward might be a better way to put it. It's not a difficult intellectual exercise, it just requires commitment (time, energy, patience). Einsteinian levels of "figuring it out" are not required.
Just take your best guess for bulking (say an estimated TDEE + 10%) and run with that number for a fortnight. Don't worry about "burns" or anything else. If you're on a consistent routine (and you should be), by the end of the second week, you'll have enough data to rejig and then just keep going with that number (and occasionally rejig as your NEAT ramps up and down, depending, as the weeks go by).
In the context of a long-term training program and long term training goals, spending 1 month and figuring out that you were eating at maintenance is nothing. In fact, you've just nailed maintenance, which is a pretty big thing. Now you know what you need to eat to successfully start your bulk/cut (you'll still need to make adjustments as you go). You should actually spend some time at maintenance after a cut before you plunge into a bulk anyway.
In the context of a long term bulking or cutting phase, the way MFP is set up (i.e. eating back your exercise cals) is not the right way to go about things. Stick with the TDEE method. If you're a casual kinda, sorta whenever exerciser, then MFP's system makes perfect sense. For the aims stated in this thread, it does not.
You're assuming people follow a consistent routine in training. A lot of people don't. For example, triathletes follow a system called periodization where the peak weeks can end end up being double the amount of hours of rest and recovery weeks. I'm trying to cut ever so carefully through this. Luckily my HRM is pretty close.
You would think bulking would be more consistent. Not so, not if you're on a progressive programme and your sessions are getting more and more intense like in the OPs case.
I've done the graphing and counting and measuring, so have a lot of people. It's a moving target, and very difficult. Then there are all the unknown and unreasearched factors to add in too. I'd say it's extremely difficult to get right.0 -
In the context of a long term bulking or cutting phase, the way MFP is set up (i.e. eating back your exercise cals) is not the right way to go about things. Stick with the TDEE method. If you're a casual kinda, sorta whenever exerciser, then MFP's system makes perfect sense. For the aims stated in this thread, it does not.
We're all entitled to our own opinions and methods. But personally for me, I disagree with this, and don't use TDEE. I actually prefer more of a guided trial and error method because my activity level varies a lot (other than the lifting). But it was the increased strength training intensity that threw me for a loop. 2950 calories isn't my normal maintenance amount. I do see what you're saying though...TDEE eliminates the idea of maintenance and any skew...but it only works if you do the same thing over and over activity-wise for an extended period of time.
That said, I feel like I'm closing in on my correct intake for my present level of activity. It's not TDEE, per se, but in effect that's what I'm doing. I'm actually making educated guesses at my strength-training burns now, and then adding them into the mix. In effect, hybrid TDEE and MFP method...just not using a scientific TDEE calculation formula.
And I agree with you 100%. That's why I'm trying to contrast long-term training goals with exercising. If your training towards something (i.e. faster mile, higher vertical jump, bigger bench, more explosive sprint start) then you'll need a non-sporadic training program (and you'll most likely forgo activity that doesn't contribute to - or may even detract from - your goal)
So if you're getting some activity in to burn some cals to drop some weight, then you can do less or more as and when you feel like it and because you're only ever eating back stuff you've actually done, when you've done it, then it's perfect. You'll still lose weight. This is the reason MFP is set up this way. It's practically fool-proof for the majority of people as long as they accurately gauge their food intake and don't overestimate their exercise.0 -
In the context of a long term bulking or cutting phase, the way MFP is set up (i.e. eating back your exercise cals) is not the right way to go about things. Stick with the TDEE method. If you're a casual kinda, sorta whenever exerciser, then MFP's system makes perfect sense. For the aims stated in this thread, it does not.
We're all entitled to our own opinions and methods. But personally for me, I disagree with this, and don't use TDEE. I actually prefer more of a guided trial and error method because my activity level varies a lot (other than the lifting). But it was the increased strength training intensity that threw me for a loop. 2950 calories isn't my normal maintenance amount. I do see what you're saying though...TDEE eliminates the idea of maintenance and any skew...but it only works if you do the same thing over and over activity-wise for an extended period of time.
That said, I feel like I'm closing in on my correct intake for my present level of activity. It's not TDEE, per se, but in effect that's what I'm doing. I'm actually making educated guesses at my strength-training burns now, and then adding them into the mix. In effect, hybrid TDEE and MFP method...just not using a scientific TDEE calculation formula.
And I agree with you 100%. That's why I'm trying to contrast long-term training goals with exercising. If your training towards something (i.e. faster mile, higher vertical jump, bigger bench, more explosive sprint start) then you'll need a non-sporadic training program (and you'll most likely forgo activity that doesn't contribute to - or may even detract from - your goal)
So if you're getting some activity in to burn some cals to drop some weight, then you can do less or more as and when you feel like it and because you're only ever eating back stuff you've actually done, when you've done it, then it's perfect. You'll still lose weight. This is the reason MFP is set up this way. It's practically fool-proof for the majority of people as long as they accurately gauge their food intake and don't overestimate their exercise.
Correct. MFP is a bit more weight-loss friendly than weight gain friendly. I'm not complaining though. I know how to use the system in reverse. And it makes sense to be set up that way...far more people want to lose weight than gain it.0 -
Well, easy is perhaps the wrong word. Simple. Straight-forward might be a better way to put it. It's not a difficult intellectual exercise, it just requires commitment (time, energy, patience). Einsteinian levels of "figuring it out" are not required.
truth.
nothign about it is complex.
1.) and 2.) Eat more or Eat less
3.) do the work
4.) do the time.
Most people don't want to do Steps 3 and 4 though.0 -
I look at it from a practical standpoint, and ask myself, what would I do if MFP were to shut down or I lost my HRM? If you're not gaining add calories, if your not losing, subtract calories. You're body is the only accurate journal you'll have, ever.0
-
Well, easy is perhaps the wrong word. Simple. Straight-forward might be a better way to put it. It's not a difficult intellectual exercise, it just requires commitment (time, energy, patience). Einsteinian levels of "figuring it out" are not required.
truth.
nothign about it is complex.
1.) and 2.) Eat more or Eat less
3.) do the work
4.) do the time.
Most people don't want to do Steps 3 and 4 though.
Shhh... there's a whole multi-million pound industry you're ruining there...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 991 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions