BMR or MFP? Conflicting numbers
Replies
-
I definitely misunderstood you. I believe now you meant literal kitchen cups and spoons and I didn't get that...I meant MEASURING cups and MEASURING spoons. I have been weighing/measuring everything for the last couple weeks using MEASURING cups and spoons, NOT just regular spoons/cups. I have a food scale (although it doesn't measure down to grams, it measures oz. very accurately) and I weigh whatever I can and use measuring cups/measuring spoons for the rest.
I do have one other question though...so how do you account for package variations when looking at a nutrition label. For example. If I'm eating something that says it's one serving and should weigh 7 oz. and the calories are 120, but it only weighs 6 oz. I guess I would just figure out the math to get the correct calories then right? Is that what you mean by the nutrition label could be off?
not quite - the problem is that MEASURING CUPS are not as equal as we think, and the volume of water (for example) that they contain varies both with manufacturing variation, and by definition by country as US cups are not the same as AU cups or CA cups there is no definition for 'cups' in hte uk at all - as entries in the database are not always identifiable by country there is a problem with using MEASURING CUPS and using a calibrated measuring jug and making the entry in fl.oz or ml is more accurate
same with measuring spoons - though a tsp is nominally 5ml - this is only when it is 'level' and these are also subject to manufacturing and other variations, by weighing, all solids and using a calibrated jug for all liquids you can avoid all the uncertainty - which i love - if you don't want to that's a choice and that's fine it's your choice
using measuring cups or measuring spoons for solids and granular ingredients like sugar is even less accurate than for liquids - definetly best to weigh these
as for label variation, (i'm in the UK) our labels have data per 100g or per 'serving' (definitions vary by food)
I weight what i eat and enter it as a weight using the values per 100g x weight consumed in grams /100
if I had a us label that had nutiotional value for a serving of say 20g and i weighed the food i ate to be 23g then i would enter 23/20 th of the 20g serving value - if often use decimals in my diary entries so for today you will see that i ate for lunch
152g of potato, this was entered as 152 servings of 1g
i also ate 27g of lettuce which i entered as 0.27 servings of 100g
what i meant by the label being wrong was that if you bought the same product (brand+item) from the same shop, every week for a year, and tested each of them in a lag to determine the calorific content of it - they would not all be the same, even if the manufacturer used the same supplier and the same factory and recipe, even if the product was skinless chicken breast i'm not referring to the weight of product in the packet (though this would also vary) i man the nutritional content per g or oz. this is becasue two chickens reared at hte same farm and fedding from the same trough will be slighly diffeerent in their makeup and at different times of year free range hens get different amounts of exercise - there's nothing you can do about these variations
i hope this helps
i honestly wasn't trying to make your life more difficult0 -
It doesn't matter how precise you are with weight vs volume if every other aspect of your diary is a rough estimate. There aren't many foods where the weight vs volume issue is going to be significant enough to be more than background noise compared to the accuracy of figuring out exercise calories, BMR, etc.
BMR is irrelevant. TDEE is the number to be mindful of.
OP states that she only eats half her exercise calories, though her diary doesn't seem to bear that out. The accuracy of logging her food intake has to be fixed first. If she is overestimating on her foods, she is wiping out any calorie deficit, with or without exercise cals. If she is not losing weight, she is not eating at a deficit.
Sorry, but I find it patently ridiculous to assume that using measuring cups instead of a food scale is such a big problem that the wild inaccuracies of MFP on exercise are completely wiped out.0 -
It doesn't matter how precise you are with weight vs volume if every other aspect of your diary is a rough estimate. There aren't many foods where the weight vs volume issue is going to be significant enough to be more than background noise compared to the accuracy of figuring out exercise calories, BMR, etc.
BMR is irrelevant. TDEE is the number to be mindful of.
OP states that she only eats half her exercise calories, though her diary doesn't seem to bear that out. The accuracy of logging her food intake has to be fixed first. If she is overestimating on her foods, she is wiping out any calorie deficit, with or without exercise cals. If she is not losing weight, she is not eating at a deficit.
Sorry, but I find it patently ridiculous to assume that using measuring cups instead of a food scale is such a big problem that the wild inaccuracies of MFP on exercise are completely wiped out.
I understand what you are saying, in theory. But this OP has such inaccurate logging going on, the exercise is not the main thing to fix first. She has nearly the same stats as I do, except she is nearly 20 years younger. Her TDEE should be in the range of 2200 calories, which she would be losing weight if she were eating anything less than that. If she were truly eating 1200-1400, she would be losing weight. Therefore she cannot be truly eating 1200-1400.
On a recent day she exercised, her total daily goal for the day was 1825. But she logged food at 1327. If she had truly eaten 1825, she still would be at enough of a deficit to lose weight.0 -
It doesn't matter how precise you are with weight vs volume if every other aspect of your diary is a rough estimate. There aren't many foods where the weight vs volume issue is going to be significant enough to be more than background noise compared to the accuracy of figuring out exercise calories, BMR, etc.
BMR is irrelevant. TDEE is the number to be mindful of.
OP states that she only eats half her exercise calories, though her diary doesn't seem to bear that out. The accuracy of logging her food intake has to be fixed first. If she is overestimating on her foods, she is wiping out any calorie deficit, with or without exercise cals. If she is not losing weight, she is not eating at a deficit.
Sorry, but I find it patently ridiculous to assume that using measuring cups instead of a food scale is such a big problem that the wild inaccuracies of MFP on exercise are completely wiped out.
K that's fine..but I know that when I didn't weigh my food I lost 1/2lb a week when my deficet was for 1lb a week...so over a week my failure to be accurate accounted for 1700 calories...so about 225 a day...which was equal to my exercise calories burned.
As for measuring cups and spoons there are set sizes for those...1cup = 8 fl oz = 250ml in Canada, and measuring spoons follow a similar method.
But that being said for example 1tbsp of peanut butter does not weigh 15g...it's more...1/2 cup of cottage cheese does not weigh 125g it's less...it goes both ways. As well 1 can of crab is 120 grams undrained...it says it's 100g drained and the nutrional values are for that 100g...it's 80g drained for me...
And it's not just about weighing vs measuring it's about entries...
There are entries in this database that are so wrong it's not funny...on one diary I saw they had logged 300g of chicken @ 149 calories...that is just so not right...
Is it complicated? sort of but it doesn't have to be...if you want to lose the weight you do what you know you have to do to lose it, even if it takes an extra 10mins a day.0 -
It doesn't matter how precise you are with weight vs volume if every other aspect of your diary is a rough estimate. There aren't many foods where the weight vs volume issue is going to be significant enough to be more than background noise compared to the accuracy of figuring out exercise calories, BMR, etc.
BMR is irrelevant. TDEE is the number to be mindful of.
OP states that she only eats half her exercise calories, though her diary doesn't seem to bear that out. The accuracy of logging her food intake has to be fixed first. If she is overestimating on her foods, she is wiping out any calorie deficit, with or without exercise cals. If she is not losing weight, she is not eating at a deficit.
Sorry, but I find it patently ridiculous to assume that using measuring cups instead of a food scale is such a big problem that the wild inaccuracies of MFP on exercise are completely wiped out.
I understand what you are saying, in theory. But this OP has such inaccurate logging going on, the exercise is not the main thing to fix first. She has nearly the same stats as I do, except she is nearly 20 years younger. Her TDEE should be in the range of 2200 calories, which she would be losing weight if she were eating anything less than that. If she were truly eating 1200-1400, she would be losing weight. Therefore she cannot be truly eating 1200-1400.
On a recent day she exercised, her total daily goal for the day was 1825. But she logged food at 1327. If she had truly eaten 1825, she still would be at enough of a deficit to lose weight.
So your supposition is that she ate at least 400 more calories (more if you assume that her exercise burned ANY calories) than she logged because her measuring spoons were so far off? On that day, please tell me which measurements by volume could be that far off, because I just don't see it. A measuring cup isn't going to be off by more than 15% or so otherwise it would ruin recipes reliably. So that makes it unlikely that it was liquid volume that is the issue. So perhaps that 1/4 cup of nuts was finely ground nuts in order to be that far off?0 -
It doesn't matter how precise you are with weight vs volume if every other aspect of your diary is a rough estimate. There aren't many foods where the weight vs volume issue is going to be significant enough to be more than background noise compared to the accuracy of figuring out exercise calories, BMR, etc.
BMR is irrelevant. TDEE is the number to be mindful of.
OP states that she only eats half her exercise calories, though her diary doesn't seem to bear that out. The accuracy of logging her food intake has to be fixed first. If she is overestimating on her foods, she is wiping out any calorie deficit, with or without exercise cals. If she is not losing weight, she is not eating at a deficit.
Sorry, but I find it patently ridiculous to assume that using measuring cups instead of a food scale is such a big problem that the wild inaccuracies of MFP on exercise are completely wiped out.
I totally agree with you and that's exactly the point I was trying to make.0 -
"Her TDEE should be in the range of 2200 calories, which she would be losing weight if she were eating anything less than that. If she were truly eating 1200-1400, she would be losing weight. Therefore she cannot be truly eating 1200-1400. "
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I'M POSTING! This day you mentioned (which is this past Monday) is the perfect example. All of this food was logged as completely accurately as I could. Even the angel food cake which was a recipe I created myself by measuring everything myself! My TDEE without any exercise is 1766, with exercise 5 days a week is 2152. As I mentioned though, I've been following MFP though which allots me 1200 calories and adds in my exercise, of which I only eat back about half of those calories (JUST LIKE I DID ON MONDAY). You can't honestly tell me that by looking at my diary my weights/measurements are so far off that that is the only logical explanation here. Even if they were off...as you said yourself, I'm still eating way under my TDEE of 2152 by hitting the 1800ish mark and should be losing something. This, (along with family history and other symptoms) is what's making me believe I may have an issue with my thyroid. I can't believe my measurements are off so much, especially with all the exercising I've been doing that I shouldn't be losing something.It doesn't matter how precise you are with weight vs volume if every other aspect of your diary is a rough estimate. There aren't many foods where the weight vs volume issue is going to be significant enough to be more than background noise compared to the accuracy of figuring out exercise calories, BMR, etc.
BMR is irrelevant. TDEE is the number to be mindful of.
OP states that she only eats half her exercise calories, though her diary doesn't seem to bear that out. The accuracy of logging her food intake has to be fixed first. If she is overestimating on her foods, she is wiping out any calorie deficit, with or without exercise cals. If she is not losing weight, she is not eating at a deficit.
Sorry, but I find it patently ridiculous to assume that using measuring cups instead of a food scale is such a big problem that the wild inaccuracies of MFP on exercise are completely wiped out.
I understand what you are saying, in theory. But this OP has such inaccurate logging going on, the exercise is not the main thing to fix first. She has nearly the same stats as I do, except she is nearly 20 years younger. Her TDEE should be in the range of 2200 calories, which she would be losing weight if she were eating anything less than that. If she were truly eating 1200-1400, she would be losing weight. Therefore she cannot be truly eating 1200-1400.
On a recent day she exercised, her total daily goal for the day was 1825. But she logged food at 1327. If she had truly eaten 1825, she still would be at enough of a deficit to lose weight.0 -
It doesn't matter how precise you are with weight vs volume if every other aspect of your diary is a rough estimate. There aren't many foods where the weight vs volume issue is going to be significant enough to be more than background noise compared to the accuracy of figuring out exercise calories, BMR, etc.
BMR is irrelevant. TDEE is the number to be mindful of.
OP states that she only eats half her exercise calories, though her diary doesn't seem to bear that out. The accuracy of logging her food intake has to be fixed first. If she is overestimating on her foods, she is wiping out any calorie deficit, with or without exercise cals. If she is not losing weight, she is not eating at a deficit.
Sorry, but I find it patently ridiculous to assume that using measuring cups instead of a food scale is such a big problem that the wild inaccuracies of MFP on exercise are completely wiped out.
I understand what you are saying, in theory. But this OP has such inaccurate logging going on, the exercise is not the main thing to fix first. She has nearly the same stats as I do, except she is nearly 20 years younger. Her TDEE should be in the range of 2200 calories, which she would be losing weight if she were eating anything less than that. If she were truly eating 1200-1400, she would be losing weight. Therefore she cannot be truly eating 1200-1400.
On a recent day she exercised, her total daily goal for the day was 1825. But she logged food at 1327. If she had truly eaten 1825, she still would be at enough of a deficit to lose weight.
So your supposition is that she ate at least 400 more calories (more if you assume that her exercise burned ANY calories) than she logged because her measuring spoons were so far off? On that day, please tell me which measurements by volume could be that far off, because I just don't see it. A measuring cup isn't going to be off by more than 15% or so otherwise it would ruin recipes reliably. So that makes it unlikely that it was liquid volume that is the issue. So perhaps that 1/4 cup of nuts was finely ground nuts in order to be that far off?
It's the combination of measuring wrong and choosing inaccurate database entries. Also probably not logging everything like cooking oils, condiments, etc.
Example, .25 of a stuffed green pepper. Well was that a recipe entry she made herself with the exact ingredients, amounts, etc? Or just pulled out of the database from somewhere as a guess on ingredients and amounts? Half a cup of cheesy potatoes, again, her own recipe, or someone elses which might or might not be even close on calories? Half a cup in a measuring cup? Not the same as by weight. Pan fried items, but no oil or cooking spray indicated. No condiments logged. If oil is being used, then this easily adds up to hundreds of calories.0 -
"Her TDEE should be in the range of 2200 calories, which she would be losing weight if she were eating anything less than that. If she were truly eating 1200-1400, she would be losing weight. Therefore she cannot be truly eating 1200-1400. "
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I'M POSTING! This day you mentioned (which is this past Monday) is the perfect example. All of this food was logged as completely accurately as I could. Even the angel food cake which was a recipe I created myself by measuring everything myself! My TDEE without any exercise is 1766, with exercise 5 days a week is 2152. As I mentioned though, I've been following MFP though which allots me 1200 calories and adds in my exercise, of which I only eat back about half of those calories (JUST LIKE I DID ON MONDAY). You can't honestly tell me that by looking at my diary my weights/measurements are so far off that that is the only logical explanation here. Even if they were off...as you said yourself, I'm still eating way under my TDEE of 2152 by hitting the 1800ish mark and should be losing something. This, (along with family history and other symptoms) is what's making me believe I may have an issue with my thyroid. I can't believe my measurements are off so much, especially with all the exercising I've been doing that I shouldn't be losing something.
It may be your thyroid, but everyone else is saying just be sure you are as accurate as possible on the logging, and WEIGHING it and choosing appropriate database entries to get the actual calories is necessary to know really what is going on.0 -
It's the combination of measuring wrong and choosing inaccurate database entries. Also probably not logging everything like cooking oils, condiments, etc.
Example, .25 of a stuffed green pepper. Well was that a recipe entry she made herself with the exact ingredients, amounts, etc? Or just pulled out of the database from somewhere as a guess on ingredients and amounts? Half a cup of cheesy potatoes, again, her own recipe, or someone elses which might or might not be even close on calories? Half a cup in a measuring cup? Not the same as by weight. Pan fried items, but no oil or cooking spray indicated. No condiments logged. If oil is being used, then this easily adds up to hundreds of calories.
That day was Easter and all of those entries were complete guesses and a total binge day. Pick another day. I don't use any cooking oils (only non stick cooking spray which has 0 calories). I do log condiments when I eat them. Anything else?0 -
How long have you been at this, supergirl9801? Is this your first month or so (your join date is listed as march)?0
-
"Her TDEE should be in the range of 2200 calories, which she would be losing weight if she were eating anything less than that. If she were truly eating 1200-1400, she would be losing weight. Therefore she cannot be truly eating 1200-1400. "
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I'M POSTING! This day you mentioned (which is this past Monday) is the perfect example. All of this food was logged as completely accurately as I could. Even the angel food cake which was a recipe I created myself by measuring everything myself! My TDEE without any exercise is 1766, with exercise 5 days a week is 2152. As I mentioned though, I've been following MFP though which allots me 1200 calories and adds in my exercise, of which I only eat back about half of those calories (JUST LIKE I DID ON MONDAY). You can't honestly tell me that by looking at my diary my weights/measurements are so far off that that is the only logical explanation here. Even if they were off...as you said yourself, I'm still eating way under my TDEE of 2152 by hitting the 1800ish mark and should be losing something. This, (along with family history and other symptoms) is what's making me believe I may have an issue with my thyroid. I can't believe my measurements are off so much, especially with all the exercising I've been doing that I shouldn't be losing something.
It may be your thyroid, but everyone else is saying just be sure you are as accurate as possible on the logging, and WEIGHING it and choosing appropriate database entries to get the actual calories is necessary to know really what is going on.
I agree it could be thyroid...I actually hope it's not because that would be terrible...for the OP to have to deal with all the visits and getting the meds right..if it is in fact then getting it sorted out is important.
The thing with the logging is the OP has admitted to only measuring/being accurate in the last two weeks...
The two weeks prior to that exercise burns of 818 and eating back 600 of them without being accurate is not good
Logging Pizza 2 slices large pepperoni and cheese at 500 calories...yah probably not unless a recipe she built, pizza hut pepperoni is 440 a slice for a large piece...and that itself would negate most of hte exercise done that day.
Then there are days that are over by at least 700 calories with inaccurate logging so it's probably more...
I won't go further as the OP has said she is getting her thyroid checked...
All I know is that barring medical conditions weighing and logging accurately can make a tonne of difference regardless of what anyone says about measuring cups and spoons and yes it can undo hard work from exercise...0 -
I don't use any cooking oils (only non stick cooking spray which has 0 calories).
you may want to look into that ...
labels can list 0 cal with a margin of error
they can list fat accurate to 0.5g (ie. if there is 0.5g fat they're allowed to list is as zero)
many labels do so when the serving size is small because each spray is within the margin of error so they can show 0g fat and therefore 0cal
check what a serving is, on many of these a serving is 1/4s or 1/3s i don't know about you, but my reflexes aren't that good !
for most of these - using the bulk nutritional values you'll have 7-15cals in a 1 s spray
but when they declare the per serving, and the serving is less than 0.5g they're allowed to say that it's zero
it might still add up
if the recommended serving is 1/4s (approximately 1/4g) and the main ingredient is an oil (fat at 9cal/g) then you will still be getting about 9cal per gram, but the spray *may* enable you to use a lot less than pouring
so, sprays are brilliant to reduce fat use but they do not eliminate it, if you are trying to log accurately it may be more reasonable to count your spray in seconds at 1g/sec ie 9cal/sec than at zero - these soon add up
in the UK they aren't allowed to say these are 0 calorie - they have to say 1 calorie per serving (but they still declare ridiculously low serving sizes)0 -
I've been working out like mad since the middle of march. Really only accurately logging food for the last two weeks though. Still learning.How long have you been at this, supergirl9801? Is this your first month or so (your join date is listed as march)?0 -
it's a long road, and you're doing well
improving your logging accuracy of activity and consumption will probably help you stick with it in the longer run
it has for me
good luck with your journey0 -
Thoughts??
They're all guesses. Just pick one - any one - and stick to it.
Monitor results, adjust as necessary.0 -
I've been working out like mad since the middle of march. Really only accurately logging food for the last two weeks though. Still learning.How long have you been at this, supergirl9801? Is this your first month or so (your join date is listed as march)?
Ohhhhh. Well:
A) working out like mad may be leading to water retention due to sore muscles and other related things that come with increasing workout
In my experience it can take up to two weeks before a good week shows on the scale
Keep at it for a month or so. By then you should see changes one way or another.0 -
No, no, there is no "gaining muscle" when eating in a calorie deficit.0
-
No, no, there is no "gaining muscle" when eating in a calorie deficit.
almost a bingo thread now.0 -
*house*No, no, there is no "gaining muscle" when eating in a calorie deficit.
almost a bingo thread now.0 -
I need a bingo card.0
-
No, no, there is no "gaining muscle" when eating in a calorie deficit.
Then what's the point of working out? Just to earn more calories to eat?0 -
No, no, there is no "gaining muscle" when eating in a calorie deficit.
Then what's the point of working out? Just to earn more calories to eat?
Your muscles are getting stronger, but not more bulky.0 -
No, no, there is no "gaining muscle" when eating in a calorie deficit.
Then what's the point of working out? Just to earn more calories to eat?
Fitness, endurance, strength gains (not to be confused with muscle gains), muscle retention, etc.0 -
I have not read all the replies. Most likely you just need to give it a little more time. Only 2 weeks of logging and increased exercise - might just all work out in another week or two.
If you ask for a 2lb loss you'll get 1200 calories regardless of your other stats. I'm 6' tall and that is what it gave me. I actually did eat pretty close to that at first and of course I lost a lot which was nice but I got freaked out about loosing muscle (which I don't have enough to start, lol) and so upped them - twice!. I was also really crabby
My margin of error is much smaller now and I have weeks of actually gaining and I know this is logging. I don't notice much difference from when I measured to starting to weigh (easier to weigh IMO but I don't weigh egg, oranges, etc. ) but I guess a lot on supper and use someone else's recipe in the system that sounds about right calorie-wise or try as best I can to enter individual ingredients. The recipe feature does me in, when I have done it figuring out the portion has proven a major PITA. I just don't do it. I've tried and use it occasionally but it doesn't work with my life :P More importantly though is the hidden calories I consume from tasting what I'm cooking, licking spoons, grabbing a bite of something when I open the fridge door, swiping from my kids' plates, they share their treats, etc. Apparently Juicy Fruit gum has 10 calories a stick which I can fly through those suckers when I'm hungry or driving. Those things are generally not even reflected in my logging or sometimes I'll do a quick add which is a total guess. When I was eating so far below my TDEE I had a huge margin of error but not anymore.
I do it more when I'm stressed and overwhelmed and April is a stressful month for me and there is Easter and 4 family birthday meals and so it has been rough.
Long story short. my experience/share is to take a look at your day and see if you have any of those hidden calories because for me - they really add up.0 -
No, no, there is no "gaining muscle" when eating in a calorie deficit.
Then what's the point of working out? Just to earn more calories to eat?
To actually gain muscle, you need to eat at a calorie surplus and work really hard. You will strengthen the muscles you have by working out, and that is good for health & fitness. You will begin to see your muscles more when the fat comes off, which many people confuse with "gaining muscle". And yes, working out can help create calorie deficit to lose weight. The "earning more calories to eat" is basically just an MFP thing, since MFP numbers do not include exercise. Most other weight loss programs give you a calorie goal which includes the exercise so it isn't a matter of thinking about "earning" them.0 -
calorie deficit <> weight loss
excercise (while in deficit) <> health, fitness and increasing the calorie deficit0 -
This just sounds ridiculous. Seriously...as I said before there is NO way to be completely accurate in your logging. Especially taking into consideration all your "nitpicking" above. This is why I said I only eat back HALF of my exercise calories. To alot for mis-measurements and overcalculations on burns. I mean according to what your saying it would be impossible for anyone to input anything completely accurately into MFP. Might as well just give up.I'm not sure why weighing vs. measuring would make a difference as long as I'm logging it with the correct method used. So if I measure it with a measuring cup I should log that it was measured that way...which is what I'm doing. The two eggs from today are logged by their size (large eggs). Clementines are again all roughly the same size. I also only eat back half my exercise calories for this very reason. It is utterly impossible to completely log everything EXACTLY correctly.
it can make a huge difference
first entries in the database by "cup" do you know in which country the member lived when it was entered > cos different countries use different cup sizes
also was the food compacted into the cup or was it "loose"?
was the cup full to the brim (levelled) or "heaped"
most of these also apply to spoon sizes
even if you reliably use the same style of cup and spoon how do you know what the user had when they entered it in the database: you don't
the only things that make sense working by volume are liquids in a measuring jug - but even these can work better weighed
i tend to go through phases - of logging more or less accurately, and when i'm not seeing hte losses that i want is exactly the time to be more picky about measuring
ps large eggs are different in different countries - also these are defined as a band of weights in the uk large is 63-73g while in the US large is greater than 2oz
there is a lot of scope for discreppancies here
but the common things that people forget to log are cooking fats and things that they consider either minor (the odd nut) or healthy life fruit
Here is the potential problem with this system:
If you're only eating back half your exercise calories to make up for inaccurate calorie counting…
...what happens if you're calculating your exercise burn incorrectly?
Are you using a chest strap heart rate monitor?0 -
Just for information, you may be interested in this study of dietitians and "other" similar adults:
It found that even dietitians (who should know better - right?) underestimated their calorie intake. This study (refs below) (small sample alert) of 10 dietitians and 10 other similar adults over a week. The under-reporting was 223 and 429 kcal/day respectively, implying that those who take care and are knowledgeable can significantly increase the accuracy of their calorie tracking compared to those who are less careful/knowledgeable.
Consider that in this study they were all told that the target was accuracy - so we can assume that they were trying to do their best to be accurate. So i consider myself moderately knowledgeable - but i'm not a professional dietitian, so looking at these figures, I might assume *reasonably* that I under-estimate calories by about 300-350 cals per day! My target deficit is 275 cal/day for a 0.25kg/week loss. For me the difference between being quite accurate and very accurate is the difference between weight loss and weight gain.
If someone was not targetting accuracy, they might quite reasonably be under-reporting well over 400 cal/day. Esting back only half their excercise if they were doing 300 cal/day, just wouldn't make up for hte under-reporting. Now if they were over-reporting excercise too....
(1) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12396160
(2) http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=3790 -
What exercise are you planning to do that will burn 700-800 calories per day? If you were a runner that would mean running > 40 miles per week. Whatever the exercise, it's going to have to be at least 2 hours per day, I would guess.
A person is able to burn up to 1100 calories in one hour boxing.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
- 426 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