Overestimating your calories burned....
Options
Replies
-
If all else fails I always underestimate my calories exerted and overestimate my calories consumed.
AMEN!! there is not such thing as accurate calorie estimation once you put in the confounding variable called the body.0 -
I think you need to lower your net calorie goal.
My TDEE is also around 1750-1800 not counting for exercise. I know this from logging and calculating actual results. On Scooby's site, he recommends doing this to calibrate a better TDEE estimate. The online calculators would have suggested 1900-2100 for me. I have a relatively low resting heart rate and low-ish blood pressure. Not sure if that contributes.
I set my net calorie goal to 1450 and then also do eat back my exercise calories. When I log my exercise, I always underestimate time spent to bring calories in line to a more realistic level. For example, MapMyRun might think I burned 700 calories on a run. MFP might think I burned 600. I estimate it was more like 500 based on my average heart rate. (i don't have a HRM, but I check my pulse occassionally using the stopwatch feature on my cell phone to make sure I am in the target zone.) Therefore, I tend to shave 15-20% off my times when entering them in MFP.0 -
I figured out about six months in that the calculators were way too low for me. This was just from logging consistently and doing the math. (SEE: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets ) If you are consistently logging, you can calculate your true TDEE using your food diary.0
-
Just like everything else. You have to fiddle around with it to find what is right for you. MFP and all those other devices give only an estimate for the 'average' person with similar statistics. That's why it is so important to adjust things manually as needed.
I use my FitBit for an estimate and normally hit around 2400 calories burned - I set my calorie goal to my 'estimated' BMR and have just recently lowered it by a little bit as I was not seeing any results with what I had been doing. It's a process and unfortunately as soon as you think you have it nailed down you drop another few pounds and have to play with it some more LOL0 -
I've always just used the calculators as a rough guide, and adjusted based on results. Trial and error.0
-
OP...nothing is set in stone...everything is an estimate. The calculators are designed to give you a starting point based on at least something that should be reasonably close to meeting your needs...from there, it's all about trial and error and making little tweaks here and there to dial it in.0
-
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.
LOL.
Your replies never fail to amuse me0 -
Get a HRM. I have the Polar FT4, about $70 on Amazon. It's worth it to know your actual calories burned. Very easy to use too.
I recently purchased this and when I first used it, I was amazed how little calories I actually burned when I was exercising my butt off. My wrist watch HRM (no chest band) estimated a lot higher than this one... I wouldn't trade the Polar FT4 for anything.. best investment!0 -
Here's what I've figured out after testing out many different methods of counting/subtracting/performing ridiculous math to lose weight. First of all, I try to keep my diet as consistent as possible. Personally, I think of what I eat as the control group in my weight loss experiment. It does not change (or at least... it shouldn't). If I'm keeping my diet consistent and working my *kitten* off in the gym only three things can happen: 1) I gain weight. 2) I lose weight. 3) I stay the same. Checking your weight every week will help you know which one is happening and here's what to do depending on which scenario you're in. If you see #1, cut back on calories from your daily intake and see how you feel. You'll probably need to cut back a substantial amount, like 250-300. Check again after 2 weeks to see if you've made process. If #2 is happening, you're on the right track! Keep going. If #3 is happening, it's time to look at your intake again and either cut back or add calories. Sometimes, believe it or not, cutting back calories is not the answer. Sometimes adding 50-100 calories to your daily intake (let's say only on days that you workout) will make a substantial difference in your progress. I have learned from trying to count/micromanage weight loss that the best thing you can do is remain consistent and leave the option open to tinker with how much you eat on workout days/non-workout days.
ETA: I wanted to add that checking the scale is only one way to gage progress and depending on the work you're doing, it might not be the best way to measure your success. If you're training, especially with weights, you'll see a lot of weight redistribution before actual weight loss. Use a measuring tape and measure key areas and track your progress that way. Doesn't hurt to take pictures either
Sometimes the scale is a little *kitten*. Don't live and die by it. How you LOOK and how you FEEL (stronger, sexier) are the true gages of success, in my opinion of course. 0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0
-
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.0 -
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.0
-
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.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions