These figures can't be right!
Options
heybales
Posts: 18,842 Member
Place to confirm what you are getting.
For anyone to duplicate, need the basics.
Gender, Age, GW, CW for comparison, height.
Activity levels. Either tell the story of your normal weekly stuff, or estimate it out. Use decimal values for greater accuracy.
Easiest in this order.
Rest -
Heavy -
Moderate -
Light -
Very Light - the balance of the week probably
Hence the reason to be honest with a weekly activity / 7. Underestimating is just as bad, as you'll end up constantly eating under your BMR possibly, defeating one of the major reasons for this safer method.
And read those descriptions well.
What does that site use as multipliers for the different levels?
Take your future or current BMR / 24 (to get a 1 hr figure).
Take that value times the multiplier the calculator uses to see the hour burn.
rest is BMR x 1
very light is BMR x 1.5
light is BMR x 2.5
moderate is BMR x 5
heavy is BMR x 7
For anyone to duplicate, need the basics.
Gender, Age, GW, CW for comparison, height.
Activity levels. Either tell the story of your normal weekly stuff, or estimate it out. Use decimal values for greater accuracy.
Easiest in this order.
Rest -
Heavy -
Moderate -
Light -
Very Light - the balance of the week probably
Hence the reason to be honest with a weekly activity / 7. Underestimating is just as bad, as you'll end up constantly eating under your BMR possibly, defeating one of the major reasons for this safer method.
And read those descriptions well.
What does that site use as multipliers for the different levels?
Take your future or current BMR / 24 (to get a 1 hr figure).
Take that value times the multiplier the calculator uses to see the hour burn.
rest is BMR x 1
very light is BMR x 1.5
light is BMR x 2.5
moderate is BMR x 5
heavy is BMR x 7
0
Replies
-
Thanks for starting this group! This theory makes a lot of sense to me and I was actually thinking about doing this even before I saw the topic started - very timely!
I'm getting 2 different set of numbers so I'm hoping you can help me figure out which I should use.
CW: 148
GW: 125
Activity level - I work a desk job but walk my dog about 30 mins a day and take a 30 min walk at lunch time. I typically run an average of 25 miles a week, spin for about 60 mins and do a circuit style strength program 2x week (Nike Training Club).
If I put MFP to maintain 125# at "very active" it's only telling me 1810 cals per day. If I use the ExRx site you posted, I'm getting about 2000 - 2100.
Any ideas?0 -
I'm getting 2 different set of numbers so I'm hoping you can help me figure out which I should use.
CW: 148
GW: 125
Activity level - I work a desk job but walk my dog about 30 mins a day and take a 30 min walk at lunch time. I typically run an average of 25 miles a week, spin for about 60 mins and do a circuit style strength program 2x week (Nike Training Club).
If I put MFP to maintain 125# at "very active" it's only telling me 1810 cals per day. If I use the ExRx site you posted, I'm getting about 2000 - 2100.
You'll have to skip the MFP activity level setting, at least for it trying to automatically set a daily calorie goal.
First, you'd have to enter your goal weight, and then the tracker doesn't work. May not be a big deal to you.
Second, those activity levels are very broad levels. I'm right smack in the middle of that selection using this method.
Third, they don't include exercise and you'd still need to enter that.
(now in theory, you could try to select an MFP activity level at current weight that causes the maintenance calories to match what the calculator came out with for maintenance calories at current weight too. And select maintenance goal, no loss. Doing that, MFP would comment on each day's diary and how much could be lost. You would still setup the Daily net calorie goal yourself for the future goal method, which should undercut it. And still no exercise calories entered of course).
Well, you don't really give enough data to figure out all levels or the calculations, but it sounds like you got the concept down, so just have to be honest with the other stuff like sleep and TV time, ect. But I'll show what I see for what is provided. The full blown example in the topic how to use the calculator would help greatly on this effort.
Rest - sleep and sitting around like bump on log, TV, movies, no movement mostly.
Heavy - Spin 1 hr week / 7 = 0.1 daily. Running time weekly / 7 = ? daily. Circuit time x 2 / 7 = ? daily. Total = ?
Moderate - (circuit may belong here, but usually circuit is more intense than weight lifting, depends on how you make it)
Light - Dog 0.5 daily. Lunch walk 0.5 x 5 = 2.5 / 7 = 0.4 daily. Cleaning, shopping weekly / 7 = ? daily. Total = ?
Very Light - the rest that honestly doesn't belong above. Work, computer, games, driving, ect.
I'd trust the ExRx calculator. Because actually, for the exercise calories, it is underestimating anyway. Besides the fact it is based on goal weight BMR, not current weight BMR.
I'll bet if you spot checked one of your workout days, that the 2100 future maintenance, minus a typical workout calorie burn, would end up right around your calculated BMR. It has for every calc I've done for someone so far.
So if one workout takes it down around, other daily activity takes it under of course.
But it is the non-workout days, and the lighter workout days, that keeps it from being constantly under the BMR. So idea being no lowering to compensate.
I'd just confirm some of my unknowns in the chart above, use the ExRx calculator again, and confirm that future maintenance calories.0 -
Yup, you're right. Most workout days would have me netting right around BMR. The exception being on long run days where I burn 1000+ cals. On workout days, I have no problem eating 2000...I'm just going to have to get over the mental hurdle of eating that much on rest days. Just gotta keep the big picture in mind.
I'm going to go with my ExRx numbers to start. They also align with what these sites said: http://www.cordianet.com/calculator.htm
http://calorieline.com/tools/tdee
Thanks again for your help and all the useful information you posted.
The funny thing is, I pretty much did this for 2+ years and successfully lost 70 pounds. I didn't track calories, but from memory, I believe it averaged about 2000 a day. I ran into trouble when I began training for a marathon and cut my calories really low, like 1200-1400. Dumb idea. Just trying to get back on track now!
Fingers crossed.0 -
Yup, you're right. Most workout days would have me netting right around BMR. The exception being on long run days where I burn 1000+ cals. On workout days, I have no problem eating 2000...I'm just going to have to get over the mental hurdle of eating that much on rest days. Just gotta keep the big picture in mind.
There wouldn't be anything off for having an extra 200 cal on the big day, and dropping 200 on the off day.
I'll do long bike rides in the summer of 3-4 hrs, and I'd have to get some big quantities back that day into the next, so I know I'll be balancing about 400 easy between those 2 days.
But then it's easy, in the daily goal total in the Food diary, you show green 200 or 300 one day, you show red the rest day. The week turns out the same.0 -
Gender-F
Age-33
GW-140#
CW-162
Height-69"
Activity levels-Work 40hpw computer programming, minimal movement. Sleep 8 hr/d on weekdays, 12hr/d weekends (camp every other weekend). Do belly dancing, but not part of every week. Exercise for 7 hrs a week (70 min/day, 1 rest day) at a slow 'fat burning' pace (avg ~3300 cal/week, per HRM). Do MMORPG on most nights, unless have meetings.
Rest - 11
Heavy - 0.25
Moderate - 0.75
Light - 1
Very Light - 11
GW
CW
BMR
1427
1522
TOTAL
2111
2251
Due to my thyroid issue (goiter) and slowly increasing calories...have current goal daily calories set to 2000 per day. Entering exercise as 1 calorie for documentation purposes only. With daily goal - avg daily burn, will not drop below BMR. This will increase my average total cal consumed from 1684 to 2000 (my avg net was 1283).
Since adding 316 cal to my daily average, it will increase my avg net to 1599, which is over the predicted BMR for current weight. Will play at this calorie range for a couple of weeks and see how it goes, then may increase calories another 100 for 2 weeks, which will put me at the goal weight total calorie mark.
Please let me know if you think this looks good, thanks again for the group!
edit to add...since my workouts and days are typically very cookie cutter, I am going to go ahead and continue with my zig zagging as well...it also helps me not ruin my average weekly calorie intake. That is the main reason that I like it (I got on it to help get me over the plateau...it didn't do that, but I think it allows me more freedoms to stick to my goals)0 -
I'm starting to wonder if this might be the right method for me or not. I averaged everything I did for January and this is how it played out:
Jan 1st - 31st:
Average eaten per day = 1867
Average exercise per day = 300-350 (depending on whether I give myself 80 cals per mile or 100 cals per mile...the jury is still out on that one)
Average NET (eaten minus exercise) = roughly 1500 - which is my BMR and right where I was aiming.
I've lost no weight.
My plan was to start eating at maintenance for a 125# very active person which would put me at 2000-2100 per day. But since I didn't lose weight at 1867, I am seriously doubting that upping by 130 calories is going to make a difference in a good way.
Heybales, what do you think?0 -
Jan 1st - 31st:
Average eaten per day = 1867
Average exercise per day = 300-350 (depending on whether I give myself 80 cals per mile or 100 cals per mile...the jury is still out on that one)
Average NET (eaten minus exercise) = roughly 1500 - which is my BMR and right where I was aiming.
I've lost no weight.
My plan was to start eating at maintenance for a 125# very active person which would put me at 2000-2100 per day. But since I didn't lose weight at 1867, I am seriously doubting that upping by 130 calories is going to make a difference in a good way.
Heybales, what do you think?
So on avg, just your exercise by itself brings the net to the BMR level.
And your normal daily non-exercise activities was how many calories estimated (I didn't have enough data to finish)? Maybe 500-600?
That is how much below your BMR you have in reality been netting. With that dog walking every day and walk at work weekdays, you have a high activity level, that has always been undercutting your BMR easy.
The missing data I didn't have to confirm the results:
How long does the running take each week?
How long does the circuit training take each week?
How much time weekly for cleaning, shopping, ect, that should be included in Light level?
Do you have a rest day?
I'd suggest it should probably be higher calories actually - I know, I know.
Generally what I've found doing a bunch of folks calc's, on workout schedules a whole lot less than yours, is the few big workout days the net calories dips under BMR a bit, 100-200. Easy workout days right at or slightly above BMR. And non-workout day, recovery. The more days of the same exercise, the more the BMR line is held.
But I'm not sure you have any easy/hard workout days, sounds all hard. So yours is going to be more a program of almost nailing the BMR on the head, and I'm not sure the slight increase on just one rest day would make up for the real deficit to BMR that happens 6 days a week when you factor in daily activity.
I'm picturing that rest day has daily activity of 500-600 too, so your net just dipped to or below BMR just from that anyway - not a recovery balancing day after all.
Hence the reason I could see you being stalled right now.0 -
F, 33, GW-140#, CW-162 Height-69"
Activity levels-Work 40hpw computer programming, minimal movement. Sleep 8 hr/d on weekdays, 12hr/d weekends (camp every other weekend). Do belly dancing, but not part of every week. Exercise for 7 hrs a week (70 min/day, 1 rest day) at a slow 'fat burning' pace (avg ~3300 cal/week, per HRM). Do MMORPG on most nights, unless have meetings.
Rest - 11
Heavy - 0.25
Moderate - 0.75
Light - 1
Very Light - 11
GW
CW
BMR
1427
1522
TOTAL
2111
2251
Due to my thyroid issue (goiter) and slowly increasing calories...have current goal daily calories set to 2000 per day. Entering exercise as 1 calorie for documentation purposes only. With daily goal - avg daily burn, will not drop below BMR. This will increase my average total cal consumed from 1684 to 2000 (my avg net was 1283).
Since adding 316 cal to my daily average, it will increase my avg net to 1599, which is over the predicted BMR for current weight. Will play at this calorie range for a couple of weeks and see how it goes, then may increase calories another 100 for 2 weeks, which will put me at the goal weight total calorie mark.
Please let me know if you think this looks good, thanks again for the group!
edit to add...since my workouts and days are typically very cookie cutter, I am going to go ahead and continue with my zig zagging as well...it also helps me not ruin my average weekly calorie intake. That is the main reason that I like it (I got on it to help get me over the plateau...it didn't do that, but I think it allows me more freedoms to stick to my goals)
So if you have some workout days heavy, some light, and some not, then this actually causes a zig zag as the number of net calories changes every day, and a spike day if you only have 1 rest day! Well, not really a spike, more a spud.
You have done an excellent job already on your loss, that's for sure.
Anyway, to the figures.
Rest - 11 (are you adding in TV time perhaps? 64 / 7 = 9.1)
Heavy - 1.0 (that 550 cal per hr avg only gets 357 cal out of the calculator, underestimated already, it belongs here on Heavy)
Moderate - (the .75 was probably trying to split up the exercise, it all belongs above)
Light - 1.0 (do you really have a good hour everyday of walking 2.5-3mph, or cooking, cleaning, shopping?)
Very Light - 11 balance left.
So that workout that avgs 471 cal per day, only gets credit in the calculator for 357 cal at goal weight in Heavy, so it belongs there for sure.
Just confirm the Light setting, may go under Very Light actually.
Belly dancing and MMORPG, and camping activity are extras then, not accounted for. (oh wait, that's part of the light activity, right?)
So indeed, BMR - 1427
Activity - 773
Maintenance - are you ready for this! - 2200
See, moving that workout all to Heavy didn't really change too much, so you are right on.
You nailed the idea dead on, which I guess means it made sense to you. Couple have commented privately their BMR seems to be bouncing back already, besides the nice comment from becjarami.0 -
Jan 1st - 31st:
Average eaten per day = 1867
Average exercise per day = 300-350 (depending on whether I give myself 80 cals per mile or 100 cals per mile...the jury is still out on that one)
Average NET (eaten minus exercise) = roughly 1500 - which is my BMR and right where I was aiming.
I've lost no weight.
My plan was to start eating at maintenance for a 125# very active person which would put me at 2000-2100 per day. But since I didn't lose weight at 1867, I am seriously doubting that upping by 130 calories is going to make a difference in a good way.
Heybales, what do you think?
So on avg, just your exercise by itself brings the net to the BMR level.
And your normal daily non-exercise activities was how many calories estimated (I didn't have enough data to finish)? Maybe 500-600?
That is how much below your BMR you have in reality been netting. With that dog walking every day and walk at work weekdays, you have a high activity level, that has always been undercutting your BMR easy.
The missing data I didn't have to confirm the results:
How long does the running take each week?
How long does the circuit training take each week?
How much time weekly for cleaning, shopping, ect, that should be included in Light level?
Do you have a rest day?
I'd suggest it should probably be higher calories actually - I know, I know.
Generally what I've found doing a bunch of folks calc's, on workout schedules a whole lot less than yours, is the few big workout days the net calories dips under BMR a bit, 100-200. Easy workout days right at or slightly above BMR. And non-workout day, recovery. The more days of the same exercise, the more the BMR line is held.
But I'm not sure you have any easy/hard workout days, sounds all hard. So yours is going to be more a program of almost nailing the BMR on the head, and I'm not sure the slight increase on just one rest day would make up for the real deficit to BMR that happens 6 days a week when you factor in daily activity.
I'm picturing that rest day has daily activity of 500-600 too, so your net just dipped to or below BMR just from that anyway - not a recovery balancing day after all.
Hence the reason I could see you being stalled right now.
No, it's not all hard and I do have rest days, I'm averaging things. If i divide up all my exercise it comes out to 45 minutes per day.The light walking which is barely an hour a day. My running and / or biking is not done at a super high heart rate unless it's a race. But I haven't raced since December. I wouldn't estimate my TDEE from other daily activities to be more than 500. I sit A LOT.
Going back to October, when I first started MFP, my weight was consistently lower when I was averaging about 1400 per day. Maybe I just need to go back to that.0 -
Going back to October, when I first started MFP, my weight was consistently lower when I was averaging about 1400 per day. Maybe I just need to go back to that.
Just from experience, I think most of us had 'consistently lower' weights when we first started. Partly due to our bodies being more willing to give up the excess (water/fat/muscle), but our bodies have been fighting us now to keep it all for itself.
Don't look at my last 3 days of my diary...it has been intentionally unhealthy (kinda a kick start into the new format...have a few free days to relax, but still kept calories in check). I have done almost everything (excluding drugs) to try to get over the plateau of the last 3 months and I do remember when I first lost weight that if I dropped below a certain calorie net, my body would gain weight...but everyone is different (but that was going around 1000-1150 calories or less...which I have been doing a lot).
Definately at least try it for 2 weeks to see if you will start losing. 2 weeks will seem like nothing, especially when you compare to a long, super slow loss (my "plateau' was losing 1/2 pound-1 pound a month...staying under calories, good food, high water, 7 hrs exercise a week...yeah, it was frustrating to say the least)0 -
I was thinking about that (that cycling is kinda built in), but I was also thinking that since my daily calorie burn is pretty similar every day, that it may not work as well (except for my 1 free day). I didn't do zig zag the last 2 days because I realized that if I did zigzag low days, it will cause my net to be below my BMR...so I will delete all of these, at least until I get my daily total of calories up higher.F, 33, GW-140#, CW-162 Height-69"
Activity levels-Work 40hpw computer programming, minimal movement. Sleep 8 hr/d on weekdays, 12hr/d weekends (camp every other weekend). Do belly dancing, but not part of every week. Exercise for 7 hrs a week (70 min/day, 1 rest day) at a slow 'fat burning' pace (avg ~3300 cal/week, per HRM). Do MMORPG on most nights, unless have meetings.
Rest - 11
Heavy - 0.25
Moderate - 0.75
Light - 1
Very Light - 11
GW
CW
BMR
1427
1522
TOTAL
2111
2251So if you have some workout days heavy, some light, and some not, then this actually causes a zig zag as the number of net calories changes every day, and a spike day if you only have 1 rest day! Well, not really a spike, more a spud.
Rest-I only watch TV about an hour a week (at least, until True Blood or Game of Thrones comes back on). I figured avg 9 hr sleep + 2 hours of staring into spaceRest - 11 (are you adding in TV time perhaps? 64 / 7 = 9.1)
Heavy - 1.0 (that 550 cal per hr avg only gets 357 cal out of the calculator, underestimated already, it belongs here on Heavy)
Moderate - (the .75 was probably trying to split up the exercise, it all belongs above)
Light - 1.0 (do you really have a good hour everyday of walking 2.5-3mph, or cooking, cleaning, shopping?)
Very Light - 11 balance left.
So that workout that avgs 471 cal per day, only gets credit in the calculator for 357 cal at goal weight in Heavy, so it belongs there for sure.
Just confirm the Light setting, may go under Very Light actually.
Belly dancing and MMORPG, and camping activity are extras then, not accounted for. (oh wait, that's part of the light activity, right?)
Light-oh definately...it takes me 8 minutes to walk from my car to my office...plus walking to all of the meetings (I got 'nurse walk', so it is a speed walk)
Thanks for the verification and the pointer of the exercise going to heavy
Yeah, all that extra stuff I put under light. When we get into heavy camping and dancing season, will bop up my cal intake some to offset
Yeah, I like logic type things...and numbersSo indeed, BMR - 1427
Activity - 773
Maintenance - are you ready for this! - 2200
See, moving that workout all to Heavy didn't really change too much, so you are right on.
You nailed the idea dead on, which I guess means it made sense to you. Couple have commented privately their BMR seems to be bouncing back already, besides the nice comment from becjarami.
Thanks again for all of your time with this, it is very giving of you.0 -
I was thinking about that (that cycling is kinda built in), but I was also thinking that since my daily calorie burn is pretty similar every day, that it may not work as well (except for my 1 free day). I didn't do zig zag the last 2 days because I realized that if I did zigzag low days, it will cause my net to be below my BMR...so I will delete all of these, at least until I get my daily total of calories up higher.
Yeah, I like logic type things...and numbers
Thanks again for all of your time with this, it is very giving of you.
You could still zig zag, perhaps even easier, because you do have such a constant routine and not adding in exercise calories seperately.
One day you let your Diary Remaining show green 200, next red 200.
Hope to hear back after your fun days!0 -
I like the idea of not looking at my net. But when I checked on the website it said 2400 calories! I know I cant eat that much and maintain my weight. Right now though I have no clue what I am really netting since I dont have a HRM. I am eating about 1800-1900 calories a day. Do you really think I should try upping them? I am very happy with my weight and how I look I am just having a hard time maintaining.0
-
I like the idea of not looking at my net. But when I checked on the website it said 2400 calories! I know I cant eat that much and maintain my weight. Right now though I have no clue what I am really netting since I dont have a HRM. I am eating about 1800-1900 calories a day. Do you really think I should try upping them? I am very happy with my weight and how I look I am just having a hard time maintaining.
Yeah, this method is for maximizing weight loss without suppressing your metabolism.
You are already there.
Now, you could use the weekly balance theory that this is doing.
Weekly total eaten minus weekly total activity / 7 should be your maintenance calories.
Try to share the load around better perhaps. I wouldn't be surprised though if your activity level really could be up there higher, allowing for more food if the metabolism sped up.
You can use that ExRx site with the Katch-McArdle formula by entering your bodyfat % instead of height, if you know a decent estimate of it.
You may have much more muscle than avg person in the BMR studies, and do indeed need more to eat! especially with excellent routines.
For getting good estimates of calories, compare your other workouts to walking on flat ground at different speeds, as far as breathing rate and heart rate.
Walking calculations are very accurate, since treadmill testing is so used in the lab.
So if you use a exercise calculator for walking speeds, and one of your workouts has your heart beating and breathing the same way as walking 5 mph, then that is going to be pretty good.
As soon as you start jogging though, estimates can lose it, unless your effort at that speed is close to the statistical avg.0 -
which calorie number from the worksheet are you supposed to put into MFP? the BMR calories, or the TOTAL calories?
thanks!!!0 -
which calorie number from the worksheet are you supposed to put into MFP? the BMR calories, or the TOTAL calories?
Total calories for the goal weight calculations.0 -
which calorie number from the worksheet are you supposed to put into MFP? the BMR calories, or the TOTAL calories?
Total calories for the goal weight calculations.
THIS IS A LOT OF CALORIES!!!! I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT I WILL LOSE!!!!
I'm beginning this from today. As I wrote to another thread where I find the method. I'm stucked at 148 lbs for 4 weeks now. I found out that the last months I'm eating net calories under my BMR every day! Hope it works for me too.0 -
THIS IS A LOT OF CALORIES!!!! I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT I WILL LOSE!!!!
I'm beginning this from today. As I wrote to another thread where I find the method. I'm stucked at 148 lbs for 4 weeks now. I found out that the last months I'm eating net calories under my BMR every day! Hope it works for me too.
It does seem like it perhaps.
If you want a spot check, private or here for others to see how it can be done, just let me know the info the first posting in this topic mentions.0 -
Still please read the principle behind what is being done under the method.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/477666-eating-for-future-you-method
Understand how to do your hours under the activity calculator.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/477753-how-do-i-do-activity-level-and-calculator
But now I made a spreadsheet that includes the ExRx BMR and activity calculator.
It does both the current weight and goal weight together, plus conversion from metric.
It uses a more recent and estimated about 5% more accurate BMR estimate for your goal weight.
It also uses it for current weight, or allows using the bodyfat% stat for Katch-McArdle estimate.
It splits the activity calculator up much easier to enter separate workout days and such to get weekly total and daily average.
It shows the goal weight and current weight total calories.
It shows exactly what to change in MFP to see the most encouragement and manual goal change.
It gives a week of food and exercise calories to see what happens through the whole week.
It gives a day for confirming what happens on heavy, or light, or no workout days.
http://home.everestkc.net/mbales/
Only link there is the Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet.
Here is an online Google Spreadsheet version. Just be careful of the fields with formulas, stick to the yellow boxes.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Amt7QBR9-c6MdGZlcmNCNmhJWFhtUGl0ZEk1RFd1c0E
It is filled with sample data so you can see what it is doing.0 -
I am 29, 5'4 and weigh 163 and consider myself extremely sedentary. I workout from a half hour to an hour a day 6x's a week but the other part of the day is spent mostly sitting with cooking meals and housework thrown in there for an hour or so a day.
So, I went to this website : http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.html and I did what it told me. These are my numbers at Current weight and goal weight.
Current weight(163) maintenance calories:2171
BMR:1521
Goal weight(135):1999
Here's how I broke it down:
Resting:9 hours
Very light:13.5
Light:1
Moderate: .5
Heavy:0
But mfp shows me that my maintenance calories for goal is 1790 and current was 1950. Why is there such a big gap in numbers...it's so confusing!
Can you explain what these numbers mean,if ya have the time!
Thanks so much 0
