exercise calories explained

Thank you so much for this post! I'd been aiming to eat around 1200 calories a day (allowing up to 1300-1400) and then thinking brilliant if my net was below the 1200. I didn't actually realise you could lose lean muscle by eating under your net calories... So I'm now going to aim to eat back the majority of my calories!
I also changed my goals from 1.5lb a week to 1, increasing my net goal to 1350, thanks to someones earlier post that you should reduce your goal once you only have 15lb or less to lose

BUMP

Bump. I wish I had seen this on my first day here! This should be required reading, along with the Road Map, for week one of MFP. Thanks, OP.

bump

Good post.

Another thing to add about setting your weekly goal, most MFP users set their weekly loss goal much to aggressively say 2 lbs/week when it should really only be 1lb.

Not to hijack the thread, but to add to it, the following pertains to goal setting based on how much you have to lose:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

That's strange - MFP recommends for me to lose 1 lb/week, when it "should" be recommending more. I presume that's because I can't increase the speed without manually altering my goal to below 1200 (MFP gives me 1200 regardless). I think MFP calculates my calorie burn based on my activity level as around 1600. To lose 1 1/2 lb a week (as this chart says I should be doing), I'd have to net 850 calories a day. It's just too low for me. In fact I prefer to eat closer to 1/2 lb a week loss.

while the explanation is great...I'm still confused lol~ my husband insists 1200 cal is too low.(his prefered sight for calculations suggests I need 1577) I eat with the 1200cal as my goal and eat some of the earned cals back.(?)...lifestyle is set at moderately active (changed from lightly~cal goal did not change) Going to get him to read your post and make sure I am doing this right. Thanks for the information

if you have anything other than sedentary set on MFP, you should not eat any of the exercise cals back, they are already included in the Calorie goal MPF is setting for you.

while the explanation is great...I'm still confused lol~ my husband insists 1200 cal is too low.(his prefered sight for calculations suggests I need 1577) I eat with the 1200cal as my goal and eat some of the earned cals back.(?)...lifestyle is set at moderately active (changed from lightly~cal goal did not change) Going to get him to read your post and make sure I am doing this right. Thanks for the information

if you have anything other than sedentary set on MFP, you should not eat any of the exercise cals back, they are already included in the Calorie goal MPF is setting for you.

I don't think they are. When you set up your activity level with MFP it's about your normal day to day activity without exercise. It gives recommendations of occupations for different levels of exercise. For instance, a carpenter who exercised for 10 minutes a day would be "highly active" and a waitress would be "active" because of their jobs. They would then log their exercise and eat back exercise calories. A bank teller who went to the gym for 2 hours a day would be "sedentary" but would also log and eat their exercise calories.

That seems to be the way MFP is designed to work (although you can use it in different ways).

while the explanation is great...I'm still confused lol~ my husband insists 1200 cal is too low.(his prefered sight for calculations suggests I need 1577) I eat with the 1200cal as my goal and eat some of the earned cals back.(?)...lifestyle is set at moderately active (changed from lightly~cal goal did not change) Going to get him to read your post and make sure I am doing this right. Thanks for the information

if you have anything other than sedentary set on MFP, you should not eat any of the exercise cals back, they are already included in the Calorie goal MPF is setting for you.

I don't think they are. When you set up your activity level with MFP it's about your normal day to day activity without exercise. It gives recommendations of occupations for different levels of exercise. For instance, a carpenter who exercised for 10 minutes a day would be "highly active" and a waitress would be "active" because of their jobs. They would then log their exercise and eat back exercise calories. A bank teller who went to the gym for 2 hours a day would be "sedentary" but would also log and eat their exercise calories.

That seems to be the way MFP is designed to work (although you can use it in different ways).

This make no sense to me. I will have to disagree, but whatever. I think it makes the most sense to set it to sedentary no matter what, unless you exercise or do HEAVY physical activity for a living.

It does make a sort of sense when you think that MFP wants you to eat your exercise calories, but that some people are more active than others before they even start exercising. If I change category it tells me that I need 140 more calories if I was a waitress than I would if I was a teacher, which seems likely to me (a waitress would do a lot of walking). Obviously, not everybody works full-time or fits neatly into the job categories, but I suppose you're then supposed to go by which description best suits your day to day activity without exercise (do you spend most of your day sitting, or on your feet, etc.). However, I think it's clear in the descriptions that the activity level is your normal day to day activity through work, etc., and not your actual workouts.

If there weren't different activity levels, then a waiter/waitress would have an extra 280 calorie deficit (the difference between lightly active and sedentary for me). Either that, or they'd have to manually enter their work calories as exercise and eat it back.

What MFP is doing is giving a set deficit for everybody, depending on how much they want to lose (250 for 1/2 lb, 500 for 1 lb, etc.). If two people have exactly the same stats and exercise levels, but one is sedentary day to day and one is active day to day, then the active one will need more calories to have the same deficit. If that make sense!

Thank you. i appreciate your clear explanation

Maybe an odd question...but what does "bump" mean?

Maybe this makes it clearer (from the MFP goals section):

"How would you describe your normal daily activities?

Sedentary: Spend most of the day sitting (e.g. bank teller, desk job)

Lightly Active: Spend a good part of the day on your feet (e.g. teacher, salesman)

Active: Spend a good part of the day doing some physical activity (e.g. waitress, mailman)

Very Active: Spend most of the day doing heavy physical activity (e.g. bike messenger, carpenter)"

I understand, but these are SO broad and vague. I just don't think it could possibly be accurate enough.
Ok, let's say I'm a teacher and I select "lightly active" because I think I'm "on my feet for a good part of the day". But that is totally up to interpretation, isn't it? Maybe I'm really only on my feet for 3 hours, but just standing? Maybe another teacher is on her feet 6 hours and constantly walking - it makes a difference.
Again, unless it is clear that you are burning a lot of calories during your regular activity (not exercise), I don't see why you'd set this for anything other than sedentary or MAYBE lightly active. I'd rather wear something to determine how many calories I'm actually burning during the day and then log it as exercise, rather than using this vague interpreation of what Lightly active, active, etc really are.

Yes, it's up to interpretation. Everything is... all any of this is is an estimate. You pick a reasonable number and go from there, tweaking along the way based on your experience.

Doesn't it make more sense to set for sedentary, and then wear something to determine how many calories you are actually burning during your daily activity? Verses, letting MFP decide that for you randomly?

THANK YOU!! I'm new to MFP and still learning the ropes...after reading your post I've discovered that I had my activity level set in my profile and was still logging my exercise. Make no wonder I haven't been shedding the pounds!!! Hoping this helps to get the scale moving.

Yes, it's up to interpretation. Everything is... all any of this is is an estimate. You pick a reasonable number and go from there, tweaking along the way based on your experience.

Doesn't it make more sense to set for sedentary, and then wear something to determine how many calories you are actually burning during your daily activity? Verses, letting MFP decide that for you randomly?

What makes you think MFP is more "random" than any other site or some device? For a lot of people, MFP is pretty much dead on.

How would you know MFP is dead on accurate unless you had a way of calculating the actual calories you are burning in your daily activity? Everybody burns calories at a different rate. I don't see how MFP could possibly determine how many calories a "waitress" burns on her feet during the day.

And here is another question. Let's say you have it set to 'highly active' for daily activity. But you take a few days off work and end up not being as active as normal. So now you aren't burning as many calories as you normally would during the day. If you still eat those calories, you will be eating too many calories for those days.
Or, if you are usually hightly active at work - and let's say you usually burn 400 calories per day just at work (not exercise). But one day a week, you have a meeting and don't do any physical activity. So if you eat at your goal calories, you will be eating 400 calories too many. So again, wouldn't it make more sense to have it set to sendentary and then calculate how many calories you are actually burning each day (because each day can be very different). It just seems to be that method would be a lot easier and probably more accurate.