Stats: 32 yo, 5'5'', SW: 142, CW: 144.7, BF% (as of Nov): 27%

I started EM2WL last March at 15% cut (1800ish) of my scooby calculated TDEE of 2150ish. Increased to TDEE around May. Nailed that everyday, consistently also hitting my macro goals (40c/30f/30p). Was a cardio fan, but gradually started adding heavy weights in. I tried a low carb diet (Primal Blueprint) in July...a mistake because I couldn't stick to it (carb binging became an issue). Went back to eating TDEE and added carbs back in. Sometime between May and Nov, I gained 2% bodyfat (measured by BodPod). From Mar-Dec, my weight fluctuated unpredictibly, sometimes trending down, sometimes trending up.

I bought a BMF in Nov. and immediately started increasing my cals to mirror daily burns. The first couple weeks I lost a couple lbs. After 4 weeks worth of data, my avg daily burn was 2800, so I increased cals again, trying to eat at least 2600. My weight started bouncing around. At this point, I seem to be on an inflation trend.

So now, I'm trying to figure out if my BMF numbers are inflated, or if my metabolism was/is more damaged that I thought.

Couple notes: a) I lift heavy 3x a week, do one HIIT session, and one long run (no more than 5 miles at 10 min/mile), b) I have a desk job, but am a busy body; according to my BMF, on avg, I'm active 4 hours a day, with almost 8000 steps per day, c) my HRM always registers a higher burn than any calcultor out there...when I run, I can still talk and carry on a conversation when my HR is above 80% of max. I have a Polar FT40; with Polar's version of the VO2max, I register "elite"...I don't know what that means, but I feel like it's important.

The scale is up, which I really don't care that much about, but I'd like to find my real TDEE so I can start burning some fat off, and I feel like using the scale is the only way to really see when weight stabilizes.

So, after all that rambling...anyone have an opinion on what's happening over here? Is my metabolism still trying to heal? Or is my BMF showing inflated numbers?

So first the HRM. Your HRmax is probably wrong.
They test for the VO2max stat, and pretty decently (what is it BTW, in settings somewhere?).
So your HRmax is probably higher than the HRM has set, so you are getting inflated burns.

So Katch BMR 1405, Harris BMR 1439, so close enough the BMF isn't using a hugely inflated BMR, though it does tweak that base figure based on heat.
Interestingly, 5% more accurate than Harris is Mifflin BMR - 1367.
That would imply you have better LBM to fat ratio of avg lady your age, weight, and height - congrats. Means you get to eat more too.

That 2% BF gain is within the possibly inaccuracies of the BodPod actually, and hydration levels could easily effect that. So I wouldn't worry about that.

Now, sounds like you did a lot of cardio. Upper end anaerobic, always as hard as you could, or decent amount of aerobic level too?

Because it is entirely possible to improve your aerobic system so well that your body becomes more efficient and you do burn less when at rest - which is usually a big part of people's day. Still good for the movement related burns on the BodyMedia, but the sitting/sleeping time could be inflated still.

For example, my own example. After months training for a triathlon, got a VO2max test done afterwards. They do a 5 min base level measurement. So not even a true RMR test, which is usually minimum 15 min laying down resting.
So for that level, my actual calorie burn was 200 below what the BMR was estimated to be based on Bodpod LBM. And during that training I had no problem eating more than enough. My diet was always based on the Katch BMR, so always eating enough, so it was no problem of suppressed metabolism giving me a low reading.

Just very aerobically efficient. If you think you reached that state, or genetically disposed to that well, then that could be the case too.

Or the BMF is overestimating a lot of exercise it's not good at measuring, and it does indeed lose it on intense running, or other stuff that doesn't translate well, usually underestimating. But good arm movement can fool it the other direction.

My OwnIndex (Polar's version of VO2max) number is showing currently as 50. I'm not sure how that translates (or if it does, at all) to actual VO2max numbers, though.

You make a good point about my HRmax being higher than the HRM is set, I looked at the settings and Polar has my HRmax as 188. I've seen 190 on my HRM before and wasn't even worried (based on how I felt). So, how does one go about calculating a more accurate HRmax?

Most of my past was spent doing moderate aerobic level activity, I think. Lots of time on the ellyptical or stationary bike and my HR (according to the machines) was rarely above 160. It wasn't until I started endurance running (Mar '12), that I started to feel like I was really "pushing" it. I bought the Polar FT40 at that point. Historically, I've been a short distance kinda girl (100m sprinter & short distance hurdles, etc. in High School).

All great information, thank you!!

Assuming my BMF and HRM have been giving me inflated readings, I'm left with completely unreliable devices? Perhaps then, it would be best to go back to using the Katch, Harris, or Mifflin, calorie calculators and give myself more credit for daily activities (up and down the stairs 20x at night, chasing toddler around, etc)? As long as I can feel confident that my metabolism is healed, I'm fine with playing with the numbers until I find the magic digits.

That is your estimated VO2max indeed. Now, test best done with real resting HR, so first thing in morning after good nights sleep, following a rest day. Their FAQ points this out.

And that is indeed a great stat for recreational athlete.

And you want your HRmax, age, height, weight with workout clothes on to be correct. And you'll have to retest when weight goes down. Because VO2max is mL per KG, so with no change in fitness, your VO2max goes up as weight goes down automatically.

HRmax is indeed wrong then. You are in shape enough for real test. In fact, this one may be too easy and you'll need the one in the link at the bottom.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/466973-i-want-to-test-for-my-max-heart-rate-vo2-max

So indeed the calorie use can be hard to figure now. So you can start with best estimates of BF, BMR, better Activity Calc, ect, try this. Logging progress too. Link near bottom. Gives a better place to start at to see where TDEE might really be.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/813720-spreadsheet-bmr-tdee-deficit-macro-calcs-hrm-zones

If really interested in doing some endurance improvements, might check out the HRM tab too for some common advice on scheduling training sessions.