Does MFP Overestimate calories needed?

sarahrunnergirl

If I use the Harris Benedict formula, Katch McArdle formula, or Mifflin St Jeor equations to calculate how many calories I need before I factor in calories burned during excersise, I calculate that I need 1400, or 1540 calories to maintain my weight. However, MFP has my calorie goal before excersise at more than 1800 calories to maintain my weight. This seems way too high compared to other resources. Is there a reason MFP calculates more calories than other formulas?

bunchesonothing

If I use the Harris Benedict formula, Katch McArdle formula, or Mifflin St Jeor equations to calculate how many calories I need before I factor in calories burned during excersise, I calculate that I need 1400, or 1540 calories to maintain my weight. However, MFP has my calorie goal before excersise at more than 1800 calories to maintain my weight. This seems way too high compared to other resources. Is there a reason MFP calculates more calories than other formulas?

It's funny. But, for me, it calculates it at about 100 calories less than others.

schaapj2

split the difference?

crisanderson27

Everyone I know...it calculates substantially less than other sites?

Panda86

Is that other formula taking into account your activity level like MFP does??

Julijulz

I used the Harris Benedict and it says my calorie intake should be 1929 calories a day. MFP actually has my calorie intake at 1849 calories. I think they do a pretty good job. Either way, I can't seem to eat that many calories if I burn 800+ a day. It just doesn't happen for me. I try, but I can't do it.

Lleldiranne

I've always thought it calculated calories a bit low, just from my previous experiences.

Of course, if you want a more accurate number, you can invest in a BodyBugg or other similar metabolism doohickey

kmtetour

Mine is pretty spot on, too.

yatooka

A good thing to try is to find a local hospital that has a weight management center to see if they offer a base metabolism test as a walk-in. It gives you an excellent personal baseline to work from based on YOUR metabolism. You then can use that information to compare/contrast with what you find on MFP and make even more informed choices regarding what might work best for you regarding exercise and diet.

Ssbischoff

Is that other formula taking into account your activity level like MFP does??

This is probably where it is messing up. If you change your activity level to the lowest level, it should be pretty close to the same.

lizzys

i think it less to

jbucci1186

if i compare it to my bodymedia, on the days i don't work it is pretty close (usually within 10-80 cals under what i actually burned). however, when i do work, it's WAY under (sometimes up to 1500 calories), and i have it set to the highest activity level.

whispiri

I also use fatsecret.com as I have a better idea of exercise on it......I guess I just got used to the way was set up. But I find this site consistently comes up lower with the calories that fatsecret. Which is right, I don't know. I like this site because it breaks the nutrition down further for me that the other site and so far I am having better support here too.

rat70

Is that your BMR or is that mutliplied by 1.2 to give you your sedentary maintenance amount? If I wanted to maintain my current weight (with a sedentary lifestyle) MFP it is pretty close to my Harris-Benedict BMR x 1.2.

However, I find that MFP sets my weight loss amount below my BMR and I'm thinkiing that is too low.

Cam_

It's really just a guideline. I think everybody will be different and have different metabolisms and stuff. I'm on maintenance now and I have had to up my calories twice from what MFP suggested in an attempt to maintain my weight (and not lose). I'm 400 calories above what they recommend per day. What I am doing now is eating the exact same number of calories every day and I will see if I go up or down in a week.

sarahrunnergirl

I multiplied by the 1.2 for the sedentary amount. Thank you all for posting your replies!