Calculators and personal data don't match, need advice!
thordisintho
Posts: 48 Member
Hi everyone 
I was directed to this group on Monday and I used the Scooby calculator (used the Mifflin-St. Jeor formula) to calculate my cut value and got 2760, using -15%.
My stats are: 23,5 year old female, 5ft 6in (almost) and I currently weigh 290 lbs. I do have a large frame though and a bit of muscle mass underneath since I was (an overweight) athlete as a teenager. According to the military BF calculator on fat2fit I have about 48% BF.
BUT.. I'm a data junkie and I decided to figure out how much I've been netting for about 10 weeks, since March 25th when I upped my calorie goal to 2110 (rarely hitting it though).
The results are:
Average net calories consumed: 2545 (2740 when not subtracting exercise cals)
Average exercise hours weekly: 5
During these 10 weeks I've fluctuated in weight between 290.5lbs and 292 lbs. I'd call that maintaining, wouldn't you?
So my question! Since my TDEE seems to be about 2740 calories given these exercise values, shouldn't I calculate my cut value from my own numbers instead of a calculator? How do I figure out my BMR when I know my approx. TDEE? I tried all 4 formulas on Scooby's and only Katch-McArdle comes close to TDEE at 2867 calories.
Do I use my own TDEE (2740) -15% for cut value? (2329 cals)
best regards,
Disa
I was directed to this group on Monday and I used the Scooby calculator (used the Mifflin-St. Jeor formula) to calculate my cut value and got 2760, using -15%.
My stats are: 23,5 year old female, 5ft 6in (almost) and I currently weigh 290 lbs. I do have a large frame though and a bit of muscle mass underneath since I was (an overweight) athlete as a teenager. According to the military BF calculator on fat2fit I have about 48% BF.
BUT.. I'm a data junkie and I decided to figure out how much I've been netting for about 10 weeks, since March 25th when I upped my calorie goal to 2110 (rarely hitting it though).
The results are:
Average net calories consumed: 2545 (2740 when not subtracting exercise cals)
Average exercise hours weekly: 5
During these 10 weeks I've fluctuated in weight between 290.5lbs and 292 lbs. I'd call that maintaining, wouldn't you?
So my question! Since my TDEE seems to be about 2740 calories given these exercise values, shouldn't I calculate my cut value from my own numbers instead of a calculator? How do I figure out my BMR when I know my approx. TDEE? I tried all 4 formulas on Scooby's and only Katch-McArdle comes close to TDEE at 2867 calories.
Do I use my own TDEE (2740) -15% for cut value? (2329 cals)
best regards,
Disa
0
Replies
-
They're both estimations, and +/- 100 cals isn't a huge difference. Start with the higher value, and reduce cals a bit if you're not losing weight.0
-
I agree with UTR that a lot of this is estimation/speculation...
The size of your frame is of very little importance when you have a lot of weight to lose, so I would probably ignore this.
You say you have a lot of muscle mass, so that is going to throw off any estimation-based body fat "calculator".
Also, when you have a significant amount of weight to lose, your body fat percentage is not relevant... Well it is relevant, but it is overcomplicating your weight loss. You are going to be losing fat more than muscle, no matter what you do. So I would hold off on making BF% a significant part of your estimations.
Yes, I would call a fluctuation of +-2lbs for a female "maintenance"
Are you calculating your TDEE as your BMR + activity level + exercise calories? Because that would be why you're seeing a number that's too high...0 -
I'm new! But...... There is only one reason I would say use the lower number and that is because you have a lot of weight to lose like me (in fact we have similar stats). If you are losing too fast (like more than 1.5 a week average over 4 weeks) then up a little bit. At least, that's what I would do! Definitely looks like you've reset 0
-
I agree with UTR that a lot of this is estimation/speculation...
The size of your frame is of very little importance when you have a lot of weight to lose, so I would probably ignore this.
You say you have a lot of muscle mass, so that is going to throw off any estimation-based body fat "calculator".
Also, when you have a significant amount of weight to lose, your body fat percentage is not relevant... Well it is relevant, but it is overcomplicating your weight loss. You are going to be losing fat more than muscle, no matter what you do. So I would hold off on making BF% a significant part of your estimations.
Yes, I would call a fluctuation of +-2lbs for a female "maintenance"
Are you calculating your TDEE as your BMR + activity level + exercise calories? Because that would be why you're seeing a number that's too high...
Thanks for both your answers. I decided more info would be better than less, but I agree that frame size and BF don't really count here.
UTR, I agree that maybe 120 calories isn't a big difference after all. How much is "a bit" when reducing? 200?
secretlobster: My "TDEE" is basically an average based on my calorie intake, calorie burn (and exercise hours) and weigh-ins/measurements over the last 10 weeks. Maybe not mathematically perfect calculations, but I feel I should trust my own data a bit more than a calculator?
The "high TDEE" was from the calculator, no matter what activity level I used I always got over 3000. I hope I've explained everything 0 -
secretlobster: My "TDEE" is basically an average based on my calorie intake, calorie burn (and exercise hours) and weigh-ins/measurements over the last 10 weeks. Maybe not mathematically perfect calculations, but I feel I should trust my own data a bit more than a calculator?
The "high TDEE" was from the calculator, no matter what activity level I used I always got over 3000. I hope I've explained everything
Here's where I am confused... TDEE is a total of "calories out", it shouldn't include any intake. I'm also not sure why (or how) you calculate TDEE based on measurements... Your body measurements really don't have any bearing on the energy you expend during a day. And if your BF% is only speculation, then you should definitely not include it in your calculations.
I think your data may be fine, but using your own calculations increases the possibility for error. I'd go with scooby on this one0 -
secretlobster: My "TDEE" is basically an average based on my calorie intake, calorie burn (and exercise hours) and weigh-ins/measurements over the last 10 weeks. Maybe not mathematically perfect calculations, but I feel I should trust my own data a bit more than a calculator?
The "high TDEE" was from the calculator, no matter what activity level I used I always got over 3000. I hope I've explained everything
Here's where I am confused... TDEE is a total of "calories out", it shouldn't include any intake. I'm also not sure why (or how) you calculate TDEE based on measurements... Your body measurements really don't have any bearing on the energy you expend during a day. And if your BF% is only speculation, then you should definitely not include it in your calculations.
I think your data may be fine, but using your own calculations increases the possibility for error. I'd go with scooby on this one
ah I see where we misunderstand each other I didn't mean to include the measurements in the equations. My mistake, sorry! My "TDEE" is based on this: I calculated average calories in, week by week. That gave me 10 different daily values, so I took average of those 10 and that gives me 2740 calories consumed daily. During this period I weighed 290-292lbs, fluctuating up and down weekly. Since I didn't gain or lose any weight during these 10 weeks of eating an average of 2740 calories per day, I would assume my TDEE is close to those 2740? Am I getting this all backwards? 0 -
I'd have to say I'd try and go for what some of the calculators estimate for your TDEE/BMR unless you can get a fitbit or something like that to actually calculate your TDEE. I've been using the Fat2Fit calculator, which actually has higher numbers than Scooby and I have a significant amount of weight to lost (still 60-70lbs and I'm down 22) and I lose more when I eat more. I'm 5'5", 28yo and currently 205, was 227 when I started. At the beginning, I set my cals to 2500 as I was working out 1-1.5hr/day 6 days/wk. When I switched to the "New Rules" lifting program, and cut a little cardio, I set my cals to 2300, though I will eat up to 2500 on weight days.
Before I started lifting (read building muscle) I lost 17lbs in like 4-5wks, and that was at eating 2500 cals. When I started lifting, I changed my cals a little lower since Scooby and the New Rules book both said lower cal amts. I only changed them to 2150, but I kept bouncing back and forth for awhile, losing basically nothing for the first like 3-4wks of the program. I re-upped my cals again to 2300-2500 (my body tends to adjust very quickly to changes) and the scale moved downward again.
My point with this whole long winded explanation is that maybe you really do need more cals and that's why you're not losing. I know for me if I don't eat enough I don't lose. Strangely enough, if I go over my cals, I'll lose. This last weekend I went 700 cals over one day, part of that came from 4beers, and I dropped 2lbs on Monday, SO I'd try a true TDEE-15% cut based on a calculator for awhile and see how that goes:)0 -
Oh AND I'd like to say that consistency is KEY here! If you're "averaging" your cals over a period of time, but you're never eating the SAME number of cals day to day, then you're not giving your body the SAME amount of fuel each day, and you're body might still be holding on to stuff as it's confused.0
-
ah I see where we misunderstand each other I didn't mean to include the measurements in the equations. My mistake, sorry! My "TDEE" is based on this: I calculated average calories in, week by week.
Again, TDEE is not calories in. It's not how many calories you eat. TDEE is only the amount of calories you BURN (BMR + activity)
Edit: I'm willing to admit that I completely misunderstand your calculation, this is just how it appears to me...0 -
Oh AND I'd like to say that consistency is KEY here! If you're "averaging" your cals over a period of time, but you're never eating the SAME number of cals day to day, then you're not giving your body the SAME amount of fuel each day, and you're body might still be holding on to stuff as it's confused.
This is so incredibly false. Sorry0 -
Well, not in my experience, but ok. Most of the people on this board will say that you need to be consistent. In my personal experience, if I don't eat with consistency, not just in amt of cals but also in how frequently I eat I won't lose. And if you read the post on TDEE and BMR it says to eat the same number of cals every day.0
-
ah I see where we misunderstand each other I didn't mean to include the measurements in the equations. My mistake, sorry! My "TDEE" is based on this: I calculated average calories in, week by week.
Again, TDEE is not calories in. It's not how many calories you eat. TDEE is only the amount of calories you BURN (BMR + activity)
Thanks for your patience with me I'm a bit of a nerd and I have to know everything and hear logical explanations, I hope I'm not being hopelessly annoying.
I only thought that since I maintained my weight eating those calories for that period, my TDEE would surely be close to that number. Since equations work both ways, I thought I could take the amount of calories I was eating and what I weighed and average them and get an estimate for my TDEE the same way I can input my height, weight, age and activity levels into a calculator and get an estimated number based on a formula.
The point avalynsmom made about consistency is most definitely what I've been missing, eating the same (give or take) amount everyday regardless of exercise.
Again, thanks for taking the time to answer, I think I will take another look at Scobby's tonight and try eating the 15% cut value for some time.0 -
Well, not in my experience, but ok. Most of the people on this board will say that you need to be consistent. In my personal experience, if I don't eat with consistency, not just in amt of cals but also in how frequently I eat I won't lose. And if you read the post on TDEE and BMR it says to eat the same number of cals every day.
Your body isn't chained to a strict daily calorie allowance. If you average the same NET amount of calories, you'll see the same results. Why do you think people zig-zag their diet in order to overcome a plateau? If it helps to be consistent with the number of calories you eat, then it's for the sake of simplicity and I completely understand that. But that's why calculators that estimate your TDEE allow you to set an "activity level" - so you can get a better idea of how many calories you should eat per day, rather than factoring in the exact calories you burn which would cause your calorie allotment to vary quite a bit. Figuring out your exact TDEE every day is unnecessary for most people and kind of a PITA.
But no, your body does not need to eat the same amount of calories consistently.0 -
Well we all know that every body is different, I'm just saying if you're just starting out/changing your diet/trying to eat TDEE or a cut or whatever, that consistency, esp at the beginning, is important. If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do, even though the average of those cals is 2100. For me, personally anyway, I gain weight when I don't eat enough/enough times/consistently throughout the day. Before I started trying to get healthy again, I wouldn't eat until like lunch time, and would probably only eat about 3x/day and those were all after noon. And I'm certain that except at certain times, I never ate more than 2000-2500 cals and I was (am) obese. It wasn't until I started eating consistently that I started losing any weight. So zigzagging or whatever may work for some people, but it wouldn't necessarily work for all, and esp not at the beginning.0
-
Well we all know that every body is different, I'm just saying if you're just starting out/changing your diet/trying to eat TDEE or a cut or whatever, that consistency, esp at the beginning, is important. If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do, even though the average of those cals is 2100. For me, personally anyway, I gain weight when I don't eat enough/enough times/consistently throughout the day. Before I started trying to get healthy again, I wouldn't eat until like lunch time, and would probably only eat about 3x/day and those were all after noon. And I'm certain that except at certain times, I never ate more than 2000-2500 cals and I was (am) obese. It wasn't until I started eating consistently that I started losing any weight. So zigzagging or whatever may work for some people, but it wouldn't necessarily work for all, and esp not at the beginning.
I'm not suggesting she zigzag or attempt inconsistency on purpose (that is more like an advanced body-recomposition technique that's kind of unnecessary at this point). She said she is a numbers nerd so she wanted to figure out how to calculate her TDEE. TDEE changes every day and has nothing to do with how many calories you have already consumed - It's only a measure of how many calories you burn, and therefore an estimate of how many you SHOULD eat. I think it's a great idea to measure your "general" TDEE by taking an average, and then eating consistently at TDEE - some cut. It's simpler and easier to do. It doesn't require periodically recalculating the number of calories you need every single day, which is a good thing when you're starting on a new weight loss journey. I'm just saying that if you eat inconsistently, but average the same amount of calories overall, it shouldn't (by itself) cause your body to retain weight. You may have noticed otherwise, I'm not denying that. I just think that there are other factors involved and consistency is more an emotional/motivational aspect than a purely physical one.0 -
If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do,
Yes it would. You body stores energy for later use quite easily.0 -
Well we all know that every body is different, I'm just saying if you're just starting out/changing your diet/trying to eat TDEE or a cut or whatever, that consistency, esp at the beginning, is important. If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do, even though the average of those cals is 2100. For me, personally anyway, I gain weight when I don't eat enough/enough times/consistently throughout the day. Before I started trying to get healthy again, I wouldn't eat until like lunch time, and would probably only eat about 3x/day and those were all after noon. And I'm certain that except at certain times, I never ate more than 2000-2500 cals and I was (am) obese. It wasn't until I started eating consistently that I started losing any weight. So zigzagging or whatever may work for some people, but it wouldn't necessarily work for all, and esp not at the beginning.
I came in here to reply to this........but try as I might I can't come up with one that will 1) say what I need it to say and 2) not be offensive in any way.0 -
If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do,
Yes it would. You body stores energy for later use quite easily.
Ok well I 100% know that that's not how my body works, and I was talking from personal experience.0 -
Well we all know that every body is different, I'm just saying if you're just starting out/changing your diet/trying to eat TDEE or a cut or whatever, that consistency, esp at the beginning, is important. If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do, even though the average of those cals is 2100. For me, personally anyway, I gain weight when I don't eat enough/enough times/consistently throughout the day. Before I started trying to get healthy again, I wouldn't eat until like lunch time, and would probably only eat about 3x/day and those were all after noon. And I'm certain that except at certain times, I never ate more than 2000-2500 cals and I was (am) obese. It wasn't until I started eating consistently that I started losing any weight. So zigzagging or whatever may work for some people, but it wouldn't necessarily work for all, and esp not at the beginning.
I came in here to reply to this........but try as I might I can't come up with one that will 1) say what I need it to say and 2) not be offensive in any way.
Say whatever you want, I don't get offended easily, and esp not by people whom I don't know. THIS is what works FOR ME. Always has been, that's why I eat the way that I do.0 -
OK, I'm going to try
Surprisingly this is not true. We are more alike than we are different.....Well we all know that every body is different, I'm just saying if you're just starting out/changing your diet/trying to eat TDEE or a cut or whatever, that consistency, esp at the beginning, is important. If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do, even though the average of those cals is 2100.
That is irrelevant. The amount per day does not matter.For me, personally anyway, I gain weight when I don't eat enough/enough times/consistently throughout the day. Before I started trying to get healthy again, I wouldn't eat until like lunch time, and would probably only eat about 3x/day and those were all after noon. And I'm certain that except at certain times, I never ate more than 2000-2500 cals and I was (am) obese.
How often you eat has zero bearing on body composition/metabolic rate etc. You could eat one meal a day and if the composition/total is the same as 9 smaller meals you will have the same effect.It wasn't until I started eating consistently that I started losing any weight. So zigzagging or whatever may work for some people, but it wouldn't necessarily work for all, and esp not at the beginning.
I think you should think about what other changes were made at the same time because the timing of meals or "consistency" of meals has nothing to do with body weight/composition.0 -
Why not use the MFP for your goals? This is a pet peeve of mine but why not try it this way for a while? If it doesn't work for you can try something else, but try it for a while and see...0
-
Hi everyone
I was directed to this group on Monday and I used the Scooby calculator (used the Mifflin-St. Jeor formula) to calculate my cut value and got 2760, using -15%.
My stats are: 23,5 year old female, 5ft 6in (almost) and I currently weigh 290 lbs. I do have a large frame though and a bit of muscle mass underneath since I was (an overweight) athlete as a teenager. According to the military BF calculator on fat2fit I have about 48% BF.
BUT.. I'm a data junkie and I decided to figure out how much I've been netting for about 10 weeks, since March 25th when I upped my calorie goal to 2110 (rarely hitting it though).
The results are:
Average net calories consumed: 2545 (2740 when not subtracting exercise cals)
Average exercise hours weekly: 5
During these 10 weeks I've fluctuated in weight between 290.5lbs and 292 lbs. I'd call that maintaining, wouldn't you?
So my question! Since my TDEE seems to be about 2740 calories given these exercise values, shouldn't I calculate my cut value from my own numbers instead of a calculator? How do I figure out my BMR when I know my approx. TDEE? I tried all 4 formulas on Scooby's and only Katch-McArdle comes close to TDEE at 2867 calories.
Do I use my own TDEE (2740) -15% for cut value? (2329 cals)
best regards,
Disa
Yes., You have personal data over time. That is better than any BMR/TDEE estimator. Assuming you keep everything else the same set your target at 2329 to lose about .75lb / week.0 -
If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do,
Yes it would. You body stores energy for later use quite easily.
Ok well I 100% know that that's not how my body works, and I was talking from personal experience.
So what does your body do with extra calories?0 -
I started using MFP's goals in July 2011, used until November and lost 10kg. Gained 5 of those back during November/December and just can't eat so few calories anymoreWhy not use the MFP for your goals? This is a pet peeve of mine but why not try it this way for a while? If it doesn't work for you can try something else, but try it for a while and see... I was always tired and didn't have much energy for exercising, so I think I need more fuel. I've been eating 500-1000 over the "lose 1 pound a week" MFP gives me and I have maintained for 10 weeks. I feel like it's time that I educate myself. 0 -
Yes., You have personal data over time. That is better than any BMR/TDEE estimator. Assuming you keep everything else the same set your target at 2329 to lose about .75lb / week.
thank you! Do I worry about BMR at all? Do I use a calculator to figure that out?0 -
Yes., You have personal data over time. That is better than any BMR/TDEE estimator. Assuming you keep everything else the same set your target at 2329 to lose about .75lb / week.
thank you! Do I worry about BMR at all? Do I use a calculator to figure that out?
No. BMR is really irrelevant on it's own but can be helpful in estimating TDEE.0 -
OK, I'm going to try
Surprisingly this is not true. We are more alike than we are different.....Well we all know that every body is different, I'm just saying if you're just starting out/changing your diet/trying to eat TDEE or a cut or whatever, that consistency, esp at the beginning, is important. If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do, even though the average of those cals is 2100.
That is irrelevant. The amount per day does not matter.For me, personally anyway, I gain weight when I don't eat enough/enough times/consistently throughout the day. Before I started trying to get healthy again, I wouldn't eat until like lunch time, and would probably only eat about 3x/day and those were all after noon. And I'm certain that except at certain times, I never ate more than 2000-2500 cals and I was (am) obese.
How often you eat has zero bearing on body composition/metabolic rate etc. You could eat one meal a day and if the composition/total is the same as 9 smaller meals you will have the same effect.It wasn't until I started eating consistently that I started losing any weight. So zigzagging or whatever may work for some people, but it wouldn't necessarily work for all, and esp not at the beginning.
I think you should think about what other changes were made at the same time because the timing of meals or "consistency" of meals has nothing to do with body weight/composition.
Once again, I'll say it, I know my body and what I do and eating 2000 cals at one meal does not do for me what eating 2000 cals over 6-7 meals does, it never has. I'm 28yrs old, and I know my body. FOR ME it is not strictly and solely what I eat but HOW I eat. Period. Having some random person online tell me otherwise wouldn't change my mind.
EVERY single time I stop having several small meals a day I gain weight. EVERY time, so that's not a coincidence in my opinion.0 -
If I ate 1200cals one day and 3000 the next, my body wouldn't know what to do,
Yes it would. You body stores energy for later use quite easily.
Ok well I 100% know that that's not how my body works, and I was talking from personal experience.
So what does your body do with extra calories?
My body likes to store fat if I don't eat with consistency, seeing as how being INCONSISTENT with my eating is how I got to 227lbs0 -
If you consistently eat between 2300-2700 calories a day (2300 for a very large cut and 2700 for a smaller more manageable one), and continue exercise as usual, you should lose weight. and not be hungry.
It's tempting to turn into a science project (I admit I'm a victim to this mentality) but once you have your "magic number", resist the urge to keep calculating or figuring more numbers in. If you are consistently losing weight, then you will probably need to steadily decrease your calories-in, but for now I think you should focus on 2300-2700. Reevaluate when you lose 10lbs or so 0 -
If you consistently eat 2300 calories a day, and continue exercise as usual, you should lose weight.
It's tempting to turn into a science project (I admit I'm a victim to this mentality) but once you have your "magic number", resist the urge to keep calculating or figuring more numbers in. If you are consistently losing weight, then you will probably need to steadily decrease your calories-in, but for now I think you should focus on 2300. Reevaluate when you lose 10lbs or so
thank you, I will re-evaluate after 10lbs 0
This discussion has been closed.