Overestimating your calories burned....

DavPul

A device that measures salinity, temperature, heart rate, and movement over time is going to be more accurate and give more immediate feedback, even though the end result of changing caloric intake is the same.

Don't be a wiseass.

And then you're going to adjust your calories by 200. So the money is spent on what, exactly?

BTW, I just checked, and I'm still not a woman, but my body weight fluctuates up to 8 pounds weekly depending on food intake and exercise variables. Yet somehow, I'm able to plot the general direction of my weight loss on a weekly basis. Some magical woman problems are just human issues, I guess.

BeachGingerOnTheRocks

A device that measures salinity, temperature, heart rate, and movement over time is going to be more accurate and give more immediate feedback, even though the end result of changing caloric intake is the same.

Don't be a wiseass.

And then you're going to adjust your calories by 200. So the money is spent on what, exactly?

BTW, I just checked, and I'm still not a woman, but my body weight fluctuates up to 8 pounds weekly depending on food intake and exercise variables. Yet somehow, I'm able to plot the general direction of my weight loss on a weekly basis. Some magical woman problems are just human issues, I guess.

Female here last I checked, and I have never once tested my salinity to determine an accurate calorie count. I've also never worn an electronic device to lose weight. I cut my calories 200 at a time until I get the weight loss I'm looking for. I did the whole TDEE thing for a while and quit when I realized I was just making things too complicated for myself.

cmcollins001

A device that measures salinity, temperature, heart rate, and movement over time is going to be more accurate and give more immediate feedback, even though the end result of changing caloric intake is the same.

Don't be a wiseass.

And then you're going to adjust your calories by 200. So the money is spent on what, exactly?

BTW, I just checked, and I'm still not a woman, but my body weight fluctuates up to 8 pounds weekly depending on food intake and exercise variables. Yet somehow, I'm able to plot the general direction of my weight loss on a weekly basis. Some magical woman problems are just human issues, I guess.

Female here last I checked, and I have never once tested my salinity to determine an accurate calorie count. I've also never worn an electronic device to lose weight. I cut my calories 200 at a time until I get the weight loss I'm looking for. I did the whole TDEE thing for a while and quit when I realized I was just making things too complicated for myself.

Hmmm...check again, I think you did it wrong.

WendyTerry420

I don't rely on calculators of any type. If, after a few weeks, I'm not progressing how I would like, I adjust my daily calories up or down by 150-250. Sometimes a bit more if I'm way off (like last month where I made a rookie mistake and was eating 800 cals too low per day and couldn't stay awake past 8pm).

Note: This only works if you start with a reasonable assumption about your daily calories. If you start with 1300 cals or something it's going to be impossible to make the right adjustments. It sounds like you did start with a reasonable 2000 cal for maintenance and assumed 1700 would be a decent deficit. That's what I would have figured too. Now, after not progressing for a while, I'd try lowering the calories 200 per day and seeing where I was after 3 weeks or so.

Unfortunately females are prone to monthly fluctuations in body weight and even waist/abdomen circumference and bioimpedance body composition measurements you see in handheld/scale BF% estimators. It is quite another world trying to adjust your calories from month to month when you are adding in these variables.

This is why I use a few weeks as a sample size and not just a single day's weigh in. I'm not a female, but I don't think TOM happens steadily over the course of 3-4 weeks. The weird thing is that my ultimate suggestion, adjust calories by a few hundred, is the exact same thing you're going to do after looking at the numbers on the calorie counting devices. So I'm not sure what part of my statement you're saying is off because we're going to do the exact same thing to lose weight, male or female.

But I digress. I'm going to assume that no female ever lost weight before the invention of HRMs and bodybuggs and other devices.

No, the actual menstruation obviously isn't continuous for 3-4 weeks, but the changes in estrogen, progesterone and GH change before the actual onset of menses, during the menses, and then again afterward. If a woman were to base her caloric intake on scale weight alone, she'd probably need to either have previous knowledge of exactly what trended from month to month or take 3 months to get an idea of the trend and adjust her calories from there.

A device that measures salinity, temperature, heart rate, and movement over time is going to be more accurate and give more immediate feedback, even though the end result of changing caloric intake is the same.

Don't be a wiseass.

This is why you would use a long timeframe. For me, I used 6 months as my timeframe to come up with my TDEE. Then at 9 months in, I calculated it again and came up with the same TDEE, within about 20 calories. Over time, it *does* work.

I have never considered purchasing one of those fancy machines, so I get his point. To me, it's like the idea of a "smart phone." Yeah, it might be a neat convenience item, but, meh, not something worth my money.

songbyrdsweet

A device that measures salinity, temperature, heart rate, and movement over time is going to be more accurate and give more immediate feedback, even though the end result of changing caloric intake is the same.

Don't be a wiseass.

And then you're going to adjust your calories by 200. So the money is spent on what, exactly?

BTW, I just checked, and I'm still not a woman, but my body weight fluctuates up to 8 pounds weekly depending on food intake and exercise variables. Yet somehow, I'm able to plot the general direction of my weight loss on a weekly basis. Some magical woman problems are just human issues, I guess.

Female here last I checked, and I have never once tested my salinity to determine an accurate calorie count. I've also never worn an electronic device to lose weight. I cut my calories 200 at a time until I get the weight loss I'm looking for. I did the whole TDEE thing for a while and quit when I realized I was just making things too complicated for myself.

Last time I checked, I never said you HAD to use one. I was simply pointing out that scale weight is not always a reliable or accurate assessment of your actual caloric balance.

Skin salinity is basically measuring how much you're sweating...in conjunction with heart rate, temp, and acceleration it's a handy estimate for METs.

songbyrdsweet

A device that measures salinity, temperature, heart rate, and movement over time is going to be more accurate and give more immediate feedback, even though the end result of changing caloric intake is the same.

Don't be a wiseass.

And then you're going to adjust your calories by 200. So the money is spent on what, exactly?

BTW, I just checked, and I'm still not a woman, but my body weight fluctuates up to 8 pounds weekly depending on food intake and exercise variables. Yet somehow, I'm able to plot the general direction of my weight loss on a weekly basis. Some magical woman problems are just human issues, I guess.

Oh for crying out loud. Sorry to bring up scary lady-issues like vaginas and uterine linings! Unbunch your panties and don't take it so personally.

tostes

I bought a BodyMedia almost 3 weeks ago and with its help have lost over 8 pounds in that time. That way there is no guessing and I love that it links with MFP so I still add my food on this site. The BodyMedia also adds the exercise to MFP. Well worth the money.

heybales

I bought a BodyMedia almost 3 weeks ago and with its help have lost over 8 pounds in that time. That way there is no guessing and I love that it links with MFP so I still add my food on this site. The BodyMedia also adds the exercise to MFP. Well worth the money.

You do realize what a large part of that is water weight, right?

Same water weight you'll gain right back when you try to go to maintenance eating and freak out.

Always keep the math in mind for any gain or loss - 3500 calories in 1lb of fat if it was fat gained or lost.

8 x 3500 = 28000 deficit calories from maintenance / 21 days = 1333 daily deficit calories.

Your eating goal plus 1333 - you think that is your normal maintenance level?

Good job on loss, but keep it real or your be disappointed massively at some point.

jtmisenh

Have you considered adding in strength training to give a boost to calories burned? I have found that along with counting calories, the most effective thing I've done is increase my strength training in addition to cardio. Personally I don't add my cardio workouts unless I am active for more than 45 minutes that day. My BMR is about 2400(average) according to various sites, so I aim for 2200 calories a day regardless of exercise. The only day that changes is Saturday as it is my long run day, and I only report a maximum of half the exercise.

StaciMarie1974

I think this is one of the reasons some people don't lose weight as they expect. They put in lightly active (or another activity level) but then don't move enough to 'earn' it, and/or log lots of activities that really are already counted in the activity level.

I use a Fitbit to measure my overall all-day activity. I know its not accurate 100% but to account for that I try to have an extra 50-100 deficit besides my 500 goal. I would like the Body Media, but don't want to pay the subscription fee.

EvgeniZyntx

1/2 lbs a week near goal isn't bad. Small adjustments win the race.

janatarnhem

Because I do not have a HRM or fit bit, I wonder about exercise calorie values.........I am not as fit as others I see in the gym / pool, so I go under on the burn for me. I have also dropped my TDEE by 100 food cals too, as I was maintaining and not losing!
I think you just need to play around till you find your numbers and always be open to go up and down with them.

3dogsrunning

I don't rely on calculators of any type. If, after a few weeks, I'm not progressing how I would like, I adjust my daily calories up or down by 150-250. Sometimes a bit more if I'm way off (like last month where I made a rookie mistake and was eating 800 cals too low per day and couldn't stay awake past 8pm).

Note: This only works if you start with a reasonable assumption about your daily calories. If you start with 1300 cals or something it's going to be impossible to make the right adjustments. It sounds like you did start with a reasonable 2000 cal for maintenance and assumed 1700 would be a decent deficit. That's what I would have figured too. Now, after not progressing for a while, I'd try lowering the calories 200 per day and seeing where I was after 3 weeks or so.

Unfortunately females are prone to monthly fluctuations in body weight and even waist/abdomen circumference and bioimpedance body composition measurements you see in handheld/scale BF% estimators. It is quite another world trying to adjust your calories from month to month when you are adding in these variables.

This is why I use a few weeks as a sample size and not just a single day's weigh in. I'm not a female, but I don't think TOM happens steadily over the course of 3-4 weeks. The weird thing is that my ultimate suggestion, adjust calories by a few hundred, is the exact same thing you're going to do after looking at the numbers on the calorie counting devices. So I'm not sure what part of my statement you're saying is off because we're going to do the exact same thing to lose weight, male or female.

But I digress. I'm going to assume that no female ever lost weight before the invention of HRMs and bodybuggs and other devices.

So, how goes your weight loss journey now?

DavPul

I don't rely on calculators of any type. If, after a few weeks, I'm not progressing how I would like, I adjust my daily calories up or down by 150-250. Sometimes a bit more if I'm way off (like last month where I made a rookie mistake and was eating 800 cals too low per day and couldn't stay awake past 8pm).

Note: This only works if you start with a reasonable assumption about your daily calories. If you start with 1300 cals or something it's going to be impossible to make the right adjustments. It sounds like you did start with a reasonable 2000 cal for maintenance and assumed 1700 would be a decent deficit. That's what I would have figured too. Now, after not progressing for a while, I'd try lowering the calories 200 per day and seeing where I was after 3 weeks or so.

Unfortunately females are prone to monthly fluctuations in body weight and even waist/abdomen circumference and bioimpedance body composition measurements you see in handheld/scale BF% estimators. It is quite another world trying to adjust your calories from month to month when you are adding in these variables.

This is why I use a few weeks as a sample size and not just a single day's weigh in. I'm not a female, but I don't think TOM happens steadily over the course of 3-4 weeks. The weird thing is that my ultimate suggestion, adjust calories by a few hundred, is the exact same thing you're going to do after looking at the numbers on the calorie counting devices. So I'm not sure what part of my statement you're saying is off because we're going to do the exact same thing to lose weight, male or female.

But I digress. I'm going to assume that no female ever lost weight before the invention of HRMs and bodybuggs and other devices.

So, how goes your weight loss journey now?

My TOM is very regular now, thanks for asking

spinnerdell

1/2 lbs a week near goal isn't bad. Small adjustments win the race.

I'm happy with slow weight loss. Yes, it's taking me years to lose what others lose in months, but I feel and look better with minimal stress.

Mr_Knight

So, here's my question. How many of you have ever realized that the calculators don't work for you?

The calculators are generally fairly good - the biggest problem is people use them wrong. Especially the TDEE calculators, where they aren't accounting for their high body fat percentage.