MFP Lowballs your calories?

erickirb

I appreciate all this dialogue - the whole calorie/exercise calculation is confusing the hell out of me!
MFP says I should be eating 1200 calories a day - Im 5'8 and want to lose about 20lbs.... I've been sticking to 1200 (net) or slightly under since the first of January and i have lost 1lb
Im also exercising about 5x a week -
Been pretty frustrated so far with these results...
I have always just accepted the basic math that if you eat less, you'll lose weight - right? but apparently, the more I read, the less that approach seems to hold water... Im so confused. HA

I would suggest with only 20lbs to lose that you goal be no more than losing 1lb/week. MFP may give you more than 1200 if you change your goal to that, and on top of that you should be eating back what you burn, so at the very least if you burn 400 cals from exercise, eat 1600 (1200+400).

Having too large of a deficit may cause your body to burn a large % of lean muscle instead of the fat you are looking at losing.

Verity1111

I see it as the opposite.. I am pregnant 34 weeks tomorrow and I can't put that in the calculator, so for weight maintenance MFP lets me have 2210 calories per day. Most calories I use tell me 1900 is my goal for maintenance when basing it just on my weight of course and not that I am pregnant. I used a pregnancy calculator for the third trimester and it says somewhere between 2066 and 2384 is my daily goal for calories. So, I would say MFP actually gives me a higher goal than normal. I actually eat an average of around 1800-1900 calories per day now. I was eating a little less a couple weeks past, but as the baby grows so does my intake. :]

ElizabethRoad

I've been to a couple of other calculators online and am getting some completely different "daily recommended" intake of calories. Not by just a couple hundred, but generally they're off by about a thousand! MPF puts me at approx 2100 cal/day to lose weight to my desired goal but other research says I should be closer to 2800 cal/day to reach my goal. Has anyone else run across similar findings? Any tips on which to go with? I've been hitting MFP goals with relative ease but still eating healthy and going to bed satisfied but if my body is in starvation mode it's gonna slow down the burn.

Help!

I guarantee you will not go into starvation mode on 2100 calories a day.

Just1forMe

MFP does not take exercise into consideration until you actually record it in your tracker. So if you set up your goals and said you're going to exercise 5 days per week for an hour per day, MFP ignores that when setting up your calorie target. Only when you actually do the exercise and add it to your tracker does it count toward your calorie goal, increasing it for that day.

Yep. And THIS is why we say to eat your exercise calories!

MaximalLife

I've been to a couple of other calculators online and am getting some completely different "daily recommended" intake of calories. Not by just a couple hundred, but generally they're off by about a thousand! MPF puts me at approx 2100 cal/day to lose weight to my desired goal but other research says I should be closer to 2800 cal/day to reach my goal. Has anyone else run across similar findings? Any tips on which to go with? I've been hitting MFP goals with relative ease but still eating healthy and going to bed satisfied but if my body is in starvation mode it's gonna slow down the burn.

Help!

Yes, and these do not have you eating back your exercise calories.
MFP does.

junyr

I appreciate all this dialogue - the whole calorie/exercise calculation is confusing the hell out of me!
MFP says I should be eating 1200 calories a day - Im 5'8 and want to lose about 20lbs.... I've been sticking to 1200 (net) or slightly under since the first of January and i have lost 1lb
Im also exercising about 5x a week -
Been pretty frustrated so far with these results...
I have always just accepted the basic math that if you eat less, you'll lose weight - right? but apparently, the more I read, the less that approach seems to hold water... Im so confused. HA

Eat back your exercise calories for a week or two and see how it turns out.

It truely is that easy.

natacha305

MFP does not take exercise into consideration until you actually record it in your tracker. So if you set up your goals and said you're going to exercise 5 days per week for an hour per day, MFP ignores that when setting up your calorie target. Only when you actually do the exercise and add it to your tracker does it count toward your calorie goal, increasing it for that day.

wow i coudnt have put it any better

natacha305

I dont know. I kinda like MFP.

yes and i like that its lower calories, when i feel like giving my self an excuse to eat a donut I will go to another web site, but for now this is the best support, cal calculator, therapist, friend network, where I can get true and not so true information from fellow fitness pals!

also at least once a day i read a funny *kitten* post that makes me laugh out loud

wftiger

Since women 23-50 should only get between 1700-2200 I really don't think 2100 is going to put you in "starvation" mode. Also, "starvation" mode is a joke. Your body does not stop burning calories...ever.

Sheila1968

I love that MFP calculates and adds back your exercise calories. Before, when I was strictly counting calories and not really taking into account how much exercising I do, I was seriously undereating. No wonder I was always exhausted and starving! I was only taking in 1350 or whatever but burning hundreds through exercise, leaving me at a crazy deficit. MFP helps me see the "balance" and adjust day to day accordingly. (Not that I have lost any weight, but at least I'm not gaining, and I feel better overall.)

DoreenDC

I understand....thank you!

MaximalLife

Yep - MFP had my calories at 1350/day, and when I did some research, every other website was telling me to be eating around 1800 for weight loss. (I have a desk job, which all the sites factored in.)

I changed my calories to 1700 last week and I'm going to see how that works out.

MFP had you at 1350 NET cals. NET. That means if you burn 400 thorugh exercise, you have to eat it. Getting you to your 1700.

These threads are killing me. I gotta get off them.

It's maddening....

Pandorian

MFP gives me a caloric goal to lose weight at the rate I want before exercise. 1900 calories. If I exercise 500 calories and eat them back as intended with the program here I'm at 2400 for the day.

My nutritionist/ dietitian (had both was a family health clinic setting) had me at 2400 calories and expected me to burn 500 calories a day to build my deficit... exact same calorie count, math applied differently. I'm at 1900 calories after exercise here same as the first line.

MFP's way is more realistic for me, because I sure don't exercise every day.

committomittxoxo

The bottom line is that different calculators/methods use different assumptions, different formulas, etc as the basis for their recommendations.

You have to pick ONE and stick with that ONE. If you try to take aspects of one method and mix them with pieces of another you're bound to run into problems.

Use MFP or don't... but don't mix it with pieces of other methods.

Good point. noted.

Joy_ofwtloss50

I like MFP and I'm doing well and like have friended some great people. I haven't been too concerned about my total calories, what I am concerned about is the food data base. Has anyone else noted it needs to be "cleaned up?" I've seen some brand name foods with multiple entries....and sometimes the nutrition info is different. And I have to scroll thru them so many more to find what I'm looking for. Other sites I've used in the past did not have as large a data base, but were more flexible so could change from oz to grams to 1/2 cup etc for the same food. I also don't like scrolling thru multiple brand name foods to find, say "orange"

That said, I still love MFP.

Pandorian

you can "clean up" your search results for your "orange" to avoid getting the tropicana OJ, or Terry's chocolate orange etc by searching instead for 'orange raw' it will at least cut down the unnecessary results.

I agree though in that I just added ham for dinner, which is straight from the butcher not retail but searching for ham gives you a ham and cheese sandwich or ham and eggs or... I just want the dang ham to log it

bhalter

Yep - MFP had my calories at 1350/day, and when I did some research, every other website was telling me to be eating around 1800 for weight loss. (I have a desk job, which all the sites factored in.)

I changed my calories to 1700 last week and I'm going to see how that works out.

MFP had you at 1350 NET cals. NET. That means if you burn 400 thorugh exercise, you have to eat it. Getting you to your 1700.

These threads are killing me. I gotta get off them.

I'm not a noob. I understand what "NET!!!!!!" calories are. So when I wasn't working out regularly, I was at a plateau for a month when I was religiously eating 1350-1390 NET!!!!! calories a day...which ya know, should have still made me lose since "MFP creates a deficit already."

And um, I understand I have to eat my exercise calories. I DO. So when I did exercise, I was eating anywhere from 1700-2000 NET!!!!! calories a day.

Please do get off, because apparently you take one thing and go off on a tangent without knowing the full story. Funny how when I increased my calories, I started losing again. Every body is different and functions differently. My body will not continually lose weight with only 1350-1390 NET!!!!! calories a day.