Why does MFP suggest 1680 when Shapefit.com says 2192 cal.

Serithin

That's a 500 cal difference. Which is accurate?

jaimejean478

I've had another application give me a higher goal for 2 lbs/wk loss too. I'd love to hear feedback on this!

Mindful_Trent

My guess? Shapefit is including the extra calories you need to eat because of exercise, while MFP gives you a base amount (no exercise) and only increases your calories for exercise when you log the exercise calories you've burned.

MFP is rather unique in it's approach of using a set deficit and varying what you eat each day based on a base calorie goal + exercise calories.

korygilliam

does Shapefit.com already take out the calories needed to lose weight? i.e. MFP's target calories includes the deficit needed to lose the goal pounds per week. (just an opposite way of what they stated above)

jhardenbergh

One might be factoring in activity when one is not. One is probably just your BMR. Also MFP might be set for you to lose one pound per week when shapefit is just BMR. 500 calories a day is equal to 3500 a week or one pound

baisleac

MFP builds in your caloric deficit and adds back any calories you burn while exercising. You will have a caloric deficit whether you exercise or not.

Shapefit, and most other sites, add the calories you plan to burn on exercise and then create the deficit. You will have the intended caloric deficit only if you exercise as much as you originally stated you would.

chrisfnet

There are different equations used to calculate basal metabolic rate (BMR). This could account for a significant difference. Also, the idea of how much less to eat, with regards to BMR, is up to debate.

Serithin

I see, thanks alot I prefer this method . Well im off to the gym.

Lyadeia

As mentioned above, I believe it has to do with all this "eating back exercise calories" stuff. Other websites already factor in your activity level and an estimate for your calories burned. MFP doesn't, so it's lower...but then you eat back exercise cals which brings it back up to the other websites.

I might be a loner here, but I prefer the other websites way of doing it. The way we calculate exercise calories and activity levels is so general and 9 times out of 10 wrong, that it's pretty much unreliable. And of those days when I don't exercise, I feel like I am starving eating that low 1200 calories MFP suggests. I prefer just to eat an average of 1500 a day which is lower than maintenance, and not worrying about calculating my exercise calories. Too much to worry about, IMHO.