We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

Weight loss simulator

christabel6
christabel6 Posts: 173 Member
edited January 21 in Health and Weight Loss
I saw something about this on MSN just now. They're trialling a new online weight loss simulator which you can use to try out different combinations of exercise and diet.

http://bwsimulator.niddk.nih.gov/

It is supposed to help stop weight loss plateaus (not sure how). It's fun to try - the only thing that bothers me is that it gives me a TDEE about 150 calories a day higher than MFP does. Quite a difference over a week.

Anyone done this? Any thoughts?

Replies

  • nurseangelamomof5boys
    nurseangelamomof5boys Posts: 61 Member
    i tried it and it tells me to eat 2650 cal
    mfp i eat 1200 cals a day
    thats a big differance
  • lacharp
    lacharp Posts: 66
    It gave me a baseline of 2727. I set it to a loss of 30lbs over the default 180 and it says if I don't change my current activity level I should eat 1848 cals/day. That's about the same rate of loss I have MFP set at (approx 1lb/week) and that, and my nutrionist, have me set at 1500 cals/day. That's a big daily difference!

    But I have been at a plateau these past few weeks... I wonder if I go up to 1800 that'll break the plateau?
  • christabel6
    christabel6 Posts: 173 Member
    I've no idea how these things work but have been looking round for ways to break a 6 week plateau so it's worth a try :-)
  • langurmonkey
    langurmonkey Posts: 92
    I had a look at that simulator. When I fiddled around with the activity levels, it wasn't hugely different to what MFP gives me. Recently I upped my calories from 1280 to 1700 and the weight has started coming off again. I think it's because I am able to be a bit more active, the big deficit definitely made me very tired. So I guess my suggestion is eat a bit more and run a lot more.
  • tricksee
    tricksee Posts: 835 Member
    I upped my calories from 1280 to 1700 and the weight has started coming off again. I think it's because I am able to be a bit more active

    That's a sure as heck-fire case of metabolic damage, right there! Don't drop that low again. Ever. Trust me, I'm a doctor.
  • langurmonkey
    langurmonkey Posts: 92
    I am not planning on it. Googling for the phrase "metabolic damage" produces a lot of dodgy looking diet sites, so I am still not quite sure what it means. If it's related to "starvation mode" I don't think I had much to worry about (as that's a myth that's pretty much been busted, unless you are literally starving).

    That was 1280 net I was talking about by the way, I was eating around 2000 - 2200 most days and doing a lot of running. Rather like now, but I think my average net now is around 1500 - 1700.
  • langurmonkey
    langurmonkey Posts: 92
    Here is a non scam looking site about it http://www.muscleandstrength.com/articles/prevent-slowing-metabolism
  • Zomoniac
    Zomoniac Posts: 1,169 Member
    If I increase my activity level by 400% I can reach my goal in 60 days by eating 6,256 calories a day. Good to know.
  • christabel6
    christabel6 Posts: 173 Member
    If I increase my activity level by 400% I can reach my goal in 60 days by eating 6,256 calories a day. Good to know.

    Hmmm... perhaps their parameters need some work...
This discussion has been closed.

Categories