So....question

mrsfyredude

I have been faithfully wearing my fitbit flex for the last 30 days. Today I went in and added up all the "burned calories" totals for the past month and divided it by 30. I came up with 2031, would that be considered my TDEE? And if so, if I've been eating at 1500 for that same past month, why no weight loss?

:huh:

annnnndddddd go!

I_Will_End_You

For one, Fitbits are not 100% accurate. It's an estimate, and depending on what kind of activity you do, it can be pretty off.

How sure are you that you're eating 1500 calories a day? Do you ever eyeball your portions and do any guesswork?

mrsfyredude

For one, Fitbits are not 100% accurate. It's an estimate, and depending on what kind of activity you do, it can be pretty off.

How sure are you that you're eating 1500 calories a day? Do you ever eyeball your portions and do any guesswork?

Right I know they're not 100% but I'm going to assume it's pretty close. As for food....except for the odd cheat day, although I may be a little more than 1500, definitely not by much, 100+/- either way

Capt_Apollo

you are most likely not fully accurate in your food logging.

AJ_G

For one, Fitbits are not 100% accurate. It's an estimate, and depending on what kind of activity you do, it can be pretty off.

How sure are you that you're eating 1500 calories a day? Do you ever eyeball your portions and do any guesswork?

Right I know they're not 100% but I'm going to assume it's pretty close. As for food....except for the odd cheat day, although I may be a little more than 1500, definitely not by much, 100+/- either way

Do you weigh and measure everything you eat?

mrsfyredude

For one, Fitbits are not 100% accurate. It's an estimate, and depending on what kind of activity you do, it can be pretty off.

How sure are you that you're eating 1500 calories a day? Do you ever eyeball your portions and do any guesswork?

Right I know they're not 100% but I'm going to assume it's pretty close. As for food....except for the odd cheat day, although I may be a little more than 1500, definitely not by much, 100+/- either way

Do you weigh and measure everything you eat?

If I'm making myself something to eat, yes. If hubby is cooking, he think's it's ridiculous.

heybales

Did you manually enter workouts the Fitbit is no good at estimating, all non-step based stuff they mention in their FAQ - cycling, rowing, lifting, swimming, ect?

Depending on your exercise, it actually has a better chance of under-estimating exercise calories, but really good at daily life stuff.

If you do a fair amount of steps though, like over 10K daily, the need for stride length to be correct is more important, since stride length and time becomes pace, and your weight with it becomes calories burned.

Now their defaults based on height are usually decent, but you could have longer or shorter legs than normal, or just walk with shorter stride for instance.

Also, Fitbit is using your BMR for all non-moving time, close to Mifflin that MFP uses, base on age, weight, height.
If for instance you have a lot more bodyfat than average person your age, weight, height - then your BMR they are using is inflated. Or other way around.

And then the big one mentioned which could be part of it - sloppy logging is wiping out the other side of the deficit.

You could do a 2 week test that will prove out either one of those directions.
Eat 250 calories more daily for 2 weeks.
If you truly were eating at potential maintenance - guess how much you'll gain slowly? 1 pound.
If you gain faster or more water weight, you are not at potential maintenance and likely have more deficit than you think.

From those results, you can then figure out better TDEE, and take a deficit off that.

mrsfyredude

Did you manually enter workouts the Fitbit is no good at estimating, all non-step based stuff they mention in their FAQ - cycling, rowing, lifting, swimming, ect?

Depending on your exercise, it actually has a better chance of under-estimating exercise calories, but really good at daily life stuff.

If you do a fair amount of steps though, like over 10K daily, the need for stride length to be correct is more important, since stride length and time becomes pace, and your weight with it becomes calories burned.

Now their defaults based on height are usually decent, but you could have longer or shorter legs than normal, or just walk with shorter stride for instance.

Also, Fitbit is using your BMR for all non-moving time, close to Mifflin that MFP uses, base on age, weight, height.
If for instance you have a lot more bodyfat than average person your age, weight, height - then your BMR they are using is inflated. Or other way around.

And then the big one mentioned which could be part of it - sloppy logging is wiping out the other side of the deficit.

You could do a 2 week test that will prove out either one of those directions.
Eat 250 calories more daily for 2 weeks.
If you truly were eating at potential maintenance - guess how much you'll gain slowly? 1 pound.
If you gain faster or more water weight, you are not at potential maintenance and likely have more deficit than you think.

From those results, you can then figure out better TDEE, and take a deficit off that.

Actually when I manually enter my exercise it negates what fitbit wants to add. I get most of my walking done after work/at the gym or at home on the treadmill or dealing with the kids. I'm fairly deskbound at work.

I've actually had my fitbit program up on my phone on some occasions while walking on the treadmill and have noticed it may be counting a few too many strides, I'll look into if there is a way to calibrate it.

I'll try the two week experiment. I have been REALLY, stomach growling hungry lately so adding in a few extra for a while should be No problemo!

Thanks.

ETA: I use a HRM at the gym while doing cardio.

heybales

Did you manually enter workouts the Fitbit is no good at estimating, all non-step based stuff they mention in their FAQ - cycling, rowing, lifting, swimming, ect?

Depending on your exercise, it actually has a better chance of under-estimating exercise calories, but really good at daily life stuff.

If you do a fair amount of steps though, like over 10K daily, the need for stride length to be correct is more important, since stride length and time becomes pace, and your weight with it becomes calories burned.

Now their defaults based on height are usually decent, but you could have longer or shorter legs than normal, or just walk with shorter stride for instance.

Also, Fitbit is using your BMR for all non-moving time, close to Mifflin that MFP uses, base on age, weight, height.
If for instance you have a lot more bodyfat than average person your age, weight, height - then your BMR they are using is inflated. Or other way around.

And then the big one mentioned which could be part of it - sloppy logging is wiping out the other side of the deficit.

You could do a 2 week test that will prove out either one of those directions.
Eat 250 calories more daily for 2 weeks.
If you truly were eating at potential maintenance - guess how much you'll gain slowly? 1 pound.
If you gain faster or more water weight, you are not at potential maintenance and likely have more deficit than you think.

From those results, you can then figure out better TDEE, and take a deficit off that.

Actually when I manually enter my exercise it negates what fitbit wants to add. I get most of my walking done after work/at the gym or at home on the treadmill or dealing with the kids. I'm fairly deskbound at work.

I've actually had my fitbit program up on my phone on some occasions while walking on the treadmill and have noticed it may be counting a few too many strides, I'll look into if there is a way to calibrate it.

I'll try the two week experiment. I have been REALLY, stomach growling hungry lately so adding in a few extra for a while should be No problemo!

Thanks.

ETA: I use a HRM at the gym while doing cardio.

That is correct, your manually entered calorie burn overwrites what Fitbit estimates. Which is exactly needed for things it was going to underestimate. Do you still do that, or you did it and decided against it, can't tell from your comment.
So do you do lifting or cycling it is under-estimating, and correct that?

So the walking is just fine for Fitbit, likely a better estimate than your HRM since it's using more accurate formulas.
But it must be getting the pace correct, so indeed test that out.
Walk like 0.1 mile and count your steps at normal daily walking pace. Then test normal jogging pace for same. Just count 1 foot landing and workout the math later.
And yes it's corrected in your Fitbit profile under Settings, where your weight and height is. 0 is default.

While you are testing on treadmill, might as well see how close your HRM is to accurate too.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

If you do lifting and replace those manually as you should, I hope you aren't using inflated calorie burn from the HRM, just use MFP exercise for Strength Training, it may seem lower in comparison, but that's true.

With about 25 lbs to lose, you did mention only doing the recommended 1 lb weekly, right?

Aaron_K123

Honestly I don't think a month of tracking your weight when you are aiming at a 1 pound per week weight loss is sufficient to confirm whether or not you are losing weight.

Your body is going to fluctuate in weight due to water retention based on factors like muscle-water retention from exercise, amount of glycogen or carbs in your system, sodium intake and your monthly cycle if you are female.

My advice would be to stick with it for another month at least. Can take 2 months before you see a clear change in scale weight even if you are losing a pound of fat a week.

mrsfyredude

Honestly I don't think a month of tracking your weight when you are aiming at a 1 pound per week weight loss is sufficient to confirm whether or not you are losing weight.

Your body is going to fluctuate in weight due to water retention based on factors like muscle-water retention from exercise, amount of glycogen or carbs in your system, sodium intake and your monthly cycle if you are female.

My advice would be to stick with it for another month at least. Can take 2 months before you see a clear change in scale weight even if you are losing a pound of fat a week.

Actually I've been at this since January

Aaron_K123

Honestly I don't think a month of tracking your weight when you are aiming at a 1 pound per week weight loss is sufficient to confirm whether or not you are losing weight.

Your body is going to fluctuate in weight due to water retention based on factors like muscle-water retention from exercise, amount of glycogen or carbs in your system, sodium intake and your monthly cycle if you are female.

My advice would be to stick with it for another month at least. Can take 2 months before you see a clear change in scale weight even if you are losing a pound of fat a week.

Actually I've been at this since January

Ah, well then it is hard to say. I must admit if you were accurate in your logging and your TDEE estimate you should have lost a noticeable amount of weight in a 3 month period.

mrsfyredude

Did you manually enter workouts the Fitbit is no good at estimating, all non-step based stuff they mention in their FAQ - cycling, rowing, lifting, swimming, ect?

Depending on your exercise, it actually has a better chance of under-estimating exercise calories, but really good at daily life stuff.

If you do a fair amount of steps though, like over 10K daily, the need for stride length to be correct is more important, since stride length and time becomes pace, and your weight with it becomes calories burned.

Now their defaults based on height are usually decent, but you could have longer or shorter legs than normal, or just walk with shorter stride for instance.

Also, Fitbit is using your BMR for all non-moving time, close to Mifflin that MFP uses, base on age, weight, height.
If for instance you have a lot more bodyfat than average person your age, weight, height - then your BMR they are using is inflated. Or other way around.

And then the big one mentioned which could be part of it - sloppy logging is wiping out the other side of the deficit.

You could do a 2 week test that will prove out either one of those directions.
Eat 250 calories more daily for 2 weeks.
If you truly were eating at potential maintenance - guess how much you'll gain slowly? 1 pound.
If you gain faster or more water weight, you are not at potential maintenance and likely have more deficit than you think.

From those results, you can then figure out better TDEE, and take a deficit off that.

Actually when I manually enter my exercise it negates what fitbit wants to add. I get most of my walking done after work/at the gym or at home on the treadmill or dealing with the kids. I'm fairly deskbound at work.

I've actually had my fitbit program up on my phone on some occasions while walking on the treadmill and have noticed it may be counting a few too many strides, I'll look into if there is a way to calibrate it.

I'll try the two week experiment. I have been REALLY, stomach growling hungry lately so adding in a few extra for a while should be No problemo!

Thanks.

ETA: I use a HRM at the gym while doing cardio.

That is correct, your manually entered calorie burn overwrites what Fitbit estimates. Which is exactly needed for things it was going to underestimate. Do you still do that, or you did it and decided against it, can't tell from your comment.
So do you do lifting or cycling it is under-estimating, and correct that?

So the walking is just fine for Fitbit, likely a better estimate than your HRM since it's using more accurate formulas.
But it must be getting the pace correct, so indeed test that out.
Walk like 0.1 mile and count your steps at normal daily walking pace. Then test normal jogging pace for same. Just count 1 foot landing and workout the math later.
And yes it's corrected in your Fitbit profile under Settings, where your weight and height is. 0 is default.

While you are testing on treadmill, might as well see how close your HRM is to accurate too.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

If you do lifting and replace those manually as you should, I hope you aren't using inflated calorie burn from the HRM, just use MFP exercise for Strength Training, it may seem lower in comparison, but that's true.

With about 25 lbs to lose, you did mention only doing the recommended 1 lb weekly, right?

I do still, or did (i've developed PF in my right foot, painfull to walk, but will still do eliptical or whatever I can for cardio), manually enter just my cardio days, I did not enter any of my lifting days to help offset whatever I've messed up for the week. Actually, I've got my MFP set to lose .8 lbs. a week.

Aaron_K123

Keep in mind with estimating calorie burn from exercise that heart rate monitors provide you with a gross calorie burn not a net calorie burn. What that means is the number they give you is not just the calories you burn from exercise but on top of that the calories you burn to maintain your basic body function (your BMR). So if you just take that gross number and add it on top of your BMR to get to your TDEE you are actually double-counting some of that.

WakkoW

It sounds like you aren't accurately logging calories. A cheat day can easily wipe out any calorie deficits created during the week. Do you log your cheat days?

mrsfyredude

Keep in mind with estimating calorie burn from exercise that heart rate monitors provide you with a gross calorie burn not a net calorie burn. What that means is the number they give you is not just the calories you burn from exercise but on top of that the calories you burn to maintain your basic body function (your BMR). So if you just take that gross number and add it on top of your BMR to get to your TDEE you are actually double-counting some of that.

Even when the HRM has been set by the trainers at the gym after doing one of those "strap your face in this mask and then walk on this treadmill at varying degrees of speed/incline" tests?

mrsfyredude

It sounds like you aren't accurately logging calories. A cheat day can easily wipe out any calorie deficits created during the week. Do you log your cheat days?

LOL,,,,,YES, I log my cheat days as painful as that is. Last friday I was so over that when I got home I got on the treadmill so instead of an overage of 1000+ it was only over like 800.

Capt_Apollo

Keep in mind with estimating calorie burn from exercise that heart rate monitors provide you with a gross calorie burn not a net calorie burn. What that means is the number they give you is not just the calories you burn from exercise but on top of that the calories you burn to maintain your basic body function (your BMR). So if you just take that gross number and add it on top of your BMR to get to your TDEE you are actually double-counting some of that.

Even when the HRM has been set by the trainers at the gym after doing one of those "strap your face in this mask and then walk on this treadmill at varying degrees of speed/incline" tests?

obviously you think that the fitbit is as accurately calibrated as possible. i'll concede that it is.

so the only other area where accuracy is dependent entirely on you, is your food. in my experience, it is usually the most simplest solution to solve the problem.

Aaron_K123

Keep in mind with estimating calorie burn from exercise that heart rate monitors provide you with a gross calorie burn not a net calorie burn. What that means is the number they give you is not just the calories you burn from exercise but on top of that the calories you burn to maintain your basic body function (your BMR). So if you just take that gross number and add it on top of your BMR to get to your TDEE you are actually double-counting some of that.

Even when the HRM has been set by the trainers at the gym after doing one of those "strap your face in this mask and then walk on this treadmill at varying degrees of speed/incline" tests?

I'll admit I have no experience with that. I just mean if you buy a heart rate monitor and tell it to tell you how many calories you burn and then you sit in your chair for an hour it will tell you you've burned something like 100 calories because you have. If you then instead go for a run it will tell you in that hour you have burned 600 calories but 100 of those calories you would have burned anyways just sitting on your butt so actually by running you burned 500 not 600. I'm not sure how fitbits work nor about this calibration you underwent so I cannot comment past that.

All that said if your BMR is 1500 and your TDEE is 2000 then you probably aren't exercising enough for that sort of discrepancy to make much of a difference anyways.

Aaron_K123

Actually I just noticed you never said what your BMR was, just how much you tried to eat each day (1500) and your estimated TDEE (2000). What are your stats?

lemurcat12

I don't think the Fitbit is supposed to have any particular insight into your TDEE. What it does is based on whatever it estimates your BMR to be--based on the same basic inputs that any other calculate uses--plus your steps and other exercise. You may have it calibrated to measure steps better, but I don't know if that means that it's any better at measuring the actual burn from the steps or other exercise than it otherwise would be, and I know mine is absurdly high sometimes. Also, it assumes the estimate for the BMR is right, and who knows.

mrsfyredude

Actually I just noticed you never said what your BMR was, just how much you tried to eat each day (1500) and your estimated TDEE (2000). What are your stats?

I'm 45, 5'4", desk job but I work out 3-5 days a week alternating cardio and barbell class (both 60+ mins a piece).

According to IIFYM.com, my BMR is 1380 with a TDEE of 1898

According to Scooby my BMR is 1383 (pretty close to IIFYM) with a TDEE of 2143 and the 20% deficit would be 1715

When I average them it comes out to approx. 1800.

I've got my MFP set for a loss of .8 lb/week or 1500.

Aaron_K123

Actually I just noticed you never said what your BMR was, just how much you tried to eat each day (1500) and your estimated TDEE (2000). What are your stats?

I'm 45, 5'4", desk job but I work out 3-5 days a week alternating cardio and barbell class (both 60+ mins a piece).

According to IIFYM.com, my BMR is 1380 with a TDEE of 1898

According to Scooby my BMR is 1383 (pretty close to IIFYM) with a TDEE of 2143 and the 20% deficit would be 1715

When I average them it comes out to approx. 1800.

I've got my MFP set for a loss of .8 lb/week or 1500.

Yeah that all sounds reasonable to me. When it comes down to it though everyone is different and these are estimates based on averages in the population. Ultimately what you need to do is log accurately for a good amount of time (3 months you have logged is good) see where you are at, see where you want to be and adjust accordingly. 1500 calories seems like a good number to me so I am reluctant to tell you to eat less but if you are truly accurate with your logging then that would be the implication, eating less.

That said couldn't help notice the mention of 1000+ calorie overeat cheat days and that can definitely have an impact. I think a cheat meal can be a good thing but an entire cheat day might be more than you need.

mrsfyredude

That said couldn't help notice the mention of 1000+ calorie overeat cheat days and that can definitely have an impact. I think a cheat meal can be a good thing but an entire cheat day might be more than you need.

Agreed, but the burger at Red Robin was soooooo good! :blushing: I'll avoid that place for a while.

heybales

I do still, or did (i've developed PF in my right foot, painfull to walk, but will still do eliptical or whatever I can for cardio), manually enter just my cardio days, I did not enter any of my lifting days to help offset whatever I've messed up for the week. Actually, I've got my MFP set to lose .8 lbs. a week.

Even when the HRM has been set by the trainers at the gym after doing one of those "strap your face in this mask and then walk on this treadmill at varying degrees of speed/incline" tests?

So you do have an under-reported TDEE then.

So go back to whatever weeks you want to use for TDEE estimate, and manually log that lifting time in MFP, if you can remember the times decently. Again, if you look at your steps and calorie burn while lifting, it's almost BMR level, which is badly underestimated.
You may not burn the same as a cardio workout - but it is part of TDEE, and since you want to be accurate (why else use the device, right?) you have add it.

Even that VO2 test that you did was not extra calories on top of normal resting, it was total, everything.
Even if you had a HRM dead on correct with calorie burn, it would still be including that.

Now - none of that matters since using the Fitbit actually.
Because when you manually log those calories in MFP, it syncs over and replaces that same time and total calorie burn with yours - and that time on Fitbit includes the normal resting calorie burn too.

So to that point using a Fitbit - doesn't matter, and it's correct way of doing it.

If you followed the normal advice of only eating back the NET calorie burn by logging that - you'd again be under-reporting your TDEE.

So does your HRM actually have a VO2max stat and HRmax stat you can change?

heybales

I'm 45, 5'4", desk job but I work out 3-5 days a week alternating cardio and barbell class (both 60+ mins a piece).

According to IIFYM.com, my BMR is 1380 with a TDEE of 1898

According to Scooby my BMR is 1383 (pretty close to IIFYM) with a TDEE of 2143 and the 20% deficit would be 1715

When I average them it comes out to approx. 1800.

I've got my MFP set for a loss of .8 lb/week or 1500.

So you picking from 5 rough TDEE levels.

Or wearing a device that was designed for estimating infinite TDEE amounts.

There was a thread the other day in the Fitbit group about all those that just followed the whole program with both tools correctly, and while it was more than they thought, they either started losing weight again or have been the whole time. Only those using the tool wrong saw little to no benefit.

Don't waste time hoping you are guessing a correct TDEE level from 5, use the tool correctly, it'll work so much better.
I know that's what you are attempting, but it doesn't know your TDEE correctly.
Oh, and HRM for those barbell classes that are probably closer to circuit training, will be off too, but not as bad since it's cardio focus with strength benefit.
The MFP entry for circuit training would likely be close too. But Strength Training would be too low.

Then tweak from there.

mrsfyredude

Probably?

heybales

Probably?

Just assuming, I've never seen a lifting class where they actually had the time to change weights and everyone actually do a lifting amount of reps at correct weight.

There are usually a few weight selections and the rests are kept 60 sec or below, meaning you can't push as hard on next lift. And the lifts are done circuit style, one to the next, not one lift with several sets.

If my assumption was wrong, sorry. It wasn't a comment on the validity of the workout, but rather the potential accuracy of the HRM for calorie burn on it.

The more you go from steady-state aerobic to lifting which is non-steady-state anaerobic, the more inflated the calories becomes.

qtgonewild

if my fitbit were accurate i would already be at my goal weight. LMAO.

mrsfyredude

Probably?

Just assuming, I've never seen a lifting class where they actually had the time to change weights and everyone actually do a lifting amount of reps at correct weight.

There are usually a few weight selections and the rests are kept 60 sec or below, meaning you can't push as hard on next lift. And the lifts are done circuit style, one to the next, not one lift with several sets.

If my assumption was wrong, sorry. It wasn't a comment on the validity of the workout, but rather the potential accuracy of the HRM for calorie burn on it.

The more you go from steady-state aerobic to lifting which is non-steady-state anaerobic, the more inflated the calories becomes.

Sorry, my "probably" was to your question about my HrM settings....to which I responded "probably?" 'cause I don't know really.

SalemBoSox88

Your probably building muscle. Also we all Plato.