Body media band for TDEE
hamheather
Posts: 10 Member
I have recently started wearing the Body media Link band and it is giving me a higher TDEE then the scooby calculator. Has anyone on here noticed that too? Also did you use the body media band for your reset?
0
Replies
-
Considering the TDEE table is 5 levels only and you estimating which exact one you fit, not unheard of at all that better estimator is higher.
Now, if the sensors work well on you, it will also adjust the base BMR depending on your night time temp readings.
How do you know if the sensors are working well for you?
Take a chunk of night time and see what the average cal/min is, then x 1440 = adjusted BMR it's using.
If that matches well to your Katch BMR based on decent bodyfat estimate, then it's adjusted.
Then take a chunk of day time use where you know you were just sitting not doing much, like at a movie or watching TV.
Same avg cal/min x 1440 = RMR, should be higher than BMR by 150-200 calories daily.
If night time BMR is the same as Mifflin or close, or daytime cal/min is the same as BMR - the sensors aren't working very good for you, or you really just started and it's not done adjusting yet.
And no matter on that, some exercise it will be worse at estimating, like lifting usually under-reported. So it could even be higher yet!
And if it appears it has adjusted well to you, that would be great for reset, which is eating at maintenance, and it'll have chance of being more accurate on telling you that TDEE figure than picking from 5 levels.0 -
Mine seems to give me the same cal/min (~1.2) while I'm sleeping as when I am sitting during the day. I find it quite suspicious, because I have been wearing it for a month. That comes out to 1,728 BMR, and my Katch calculated is more like 1,550. I wonder how this reflects the overall measurements, and what should I do about it?
(~5' 5", 184 lbs, 34-35% BF)0 -
Mine seems to give me the same cal/min (~1.2) while I'm sleeping as when I am sitting during the day. I find it quite suspicious, because I have been wearing it for a month. That comes out to 1,728 BMR, and my Katch calculated is more like 1,550. I wonder how this reflects the overall measurements, and what should I do about it?
(~5' 5", 184 lbs, 34-35% BF)
So the sensors aren't working well for you then. They didn't for me or from random poll on MFP about half the users that commented.
So it has your BMR as higher, and it uses it for time that should be RMR.
So that means your are getting inflated reading during sleeping time, and slightly deflated readings during awake non-moving time. I doubt they balance out nicely.
Your moving time is based on weight, so that's fine.
If you want to help the device use your better estimated BMR values, use this spreadsheet.
Fill in your details on Simple Setup tab, down to but not including the Activity Calc.
Go to the FitBit_BodyMedia tab.
If you have no tested RMR, delete the value.
It will show you what height BodyMedia needs to be set to for it to calculate and use the same BMR as Katch.
The problem here could be that RMR time that should be slightly higher, will be lower, but the calculation actually balances that out in giving you the height adjustment.
You can also take a look at the 3 methods of using the device with MFP, depending on your workout type and how much variance you want daily.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/961054-spreadsheet-for-bodyfat-bmr-tdee-progress-tracker
Track progress too with inches.0 -
I wrote them to question the accuracy since my sitting and sleeping have the same values. My goal was to lower my sleeping cal/min to reflect a value closer to Katch. This was the response:
"What you need to do is adjust you MET's scale, so that your activity, during your non sleep hours, will better reflect your body and your body parameters.
The difference between moderate and vigorous activity is the METS of the activity. "METS" is a handy way to talk about the intensity of an activity. Activity Manager standard settings: Moderate activity is 3-6 METS, Vigorous is 6+ METS.
If you are exercising at the high end of the Moderate MET level (e.g. in the 5 to 6 range), you may feel like you are really working hard, but the Activity Manager will only count the time in which you actually cross the 6+ threshold as "vigorous" activity.
Some people choose to adjust the MET definitions downward slightly. You can adjust these activity level thresholds by setting your personal preferences. Under the Setting tab at the top right of the Activity Manager page, select Preferences and then use the slider under the Physical Activity Level section.
After making that adjustment, please continue to monitor your data and please let me know if you continue to have any further issues with your data."
It seems like this may boost my sitting cal/min, but I don't think it will decrease my sleeping cal/min. they said they looked over my numbers and that it looked accurate but who knows. I'll try this method, but I understand what you're saying in that reducing my height will lower their calculated BMR.0 -
I wrote them to question the accuracy since my sitting and sleeping have the same values. My goal was to lower my sleeping cal/min to reflect a value closer to Katch. This was the response:
"What you need to do is adjust you MET's scale, so that your activity, during your non sleep hours, will better reflect your body and your body parameters.
The difference between moderate and vigorous activity is the METS of the activity. "METS" is a handy way to talk about the intensity of an activity. Activity Manager standard settings: Moderate activity is 3-6 METS, Vigorous is 6+ METS.
If you are exercising at the high end of the Moderate MET level (e.g. in the 5 to 6 range), you may feel like you are really working hard, but the Activity Manager will only count the time in which you actually cross the 6+ threshold as "vigorous" activity.
Some people choose to adjust the MET definitions downward slightly. You can adjust these activity level thresholds by setting your personal preferences. Under the Setting tab at the top right of the Activity Manager page, select Preferences and then use the slider under the Physical Activity Level section.
After making that adjustment, please continue to monitor your data and please let me know if you continue to have any further issues with your data."
It seems like this may boost my sitting cal/min, but I don't think it will decrease my sleeping cal/min. they said they looked over my numbers and that it looked accurate but who knows. I'll try this method, but I understand what you're saying in that reducing my height will lower their calculated BMR.
That doesn't make sense as to calorie calcs, but merely where they display the time went.
So you say Moderate is now a lower range. A MET is still a standard calorie burn based on 1 MET being your body at rest.
But that's the rub, it appears their calc of body at rest is wrong. So 5 MET is 5 x your energy burn at rest, which if that is wrong, 5x is wrong too.
Confusing answer, I don't they understood, or they understood all too well and want to avoid it.
So you lower the range and more activity is tagged as Moderate or Vigorous because it is now 3 MET but consired Moderate rather than low. So what, still 3 MET, or 3 x your resting burn rate.
I think a strange comment, and look forward to your discovery in a week. Shoot, I may just get it back out now and test. But I really fail to see how that will change cal/min estimates.0 -
Bump for later0
-
I wore a Body Media for almost a year and found that it was overestimating by about 300 cals a day. The Scooby calc, as well as heybales's super awesome spreadsheet, was much, much closer and so was my Fitbit (when any activity over more than a stroll was logged here on MFP).0
-
Scooby and body media both give me almost the same average calories a day, less with body media. It works for me!0
-
Heybales- looking at my BMF readings I see that when I'm sleeping I burn around 1 calorie a minute. And that is close to my katch BMR. But during the day when I'm just sitting there it's 1.3 calories per minute. Does that seem like too big a discrepancy? Thank u.0
-
Heybales- looking at my BMF readings I see that when I'm sleeping I burn around 1 calorie a minute. And that is close to my katch BMR. But during the day when I'm just sitting there it's 1.3 calories per minute. Does that seem like too big a discrepancy? Thank u.
That's about right, RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate, awake but not moving) is higher than BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate, asleep not moving).
Sensors work well for you - congrats.0 -
Awesome. Thanks. So my average daily burn is 2600. I'd be scared to death to eat 2100. My body is not losing at 1800!! But I guess I need to shut up and do it for awhile. What would u recommend ?!! Thanks heybales!0
-
Heybales- looking at my BMF readings I see that when I'm sleeping I burn around 1 calorie a minute. And that is close to my katch BMR. But during the day when I'm just sitting there it's 1.3 calories per minute. Does that seem like too big a discrepancy? Thank u.
This is about the same differential I see between sleeping and sitting around. I always assumed the sensors were accurate and working for me; mainly because eating by my BodyMedia numbers has allowed me to easily maintain my weight for almost a year and a half now!
In the beginning, I worried when I saw calorie burns of 2700-3000 on my more active days. I was afraid to eat anywhere near that much, but I've tested it out over the past 16 months... and I'm still 135 lbs.
I really like my BodyMedia - keeps me on track!0 -
UpEarly- thanks! That's encouraging... When you were losing did you eat 500 cals below your BMF numbers?0
-
bump...0
-
Awesome. Thanks. So my average daily burn is 2600. I'd be scared to death to eat 2100. My body is not losing at 1800!! But I guess I need to shut up and do it for awhile. What would u recommend ?!! Thanks heybales!
So that means your sleeping and non-moving awake time has great chance of accuracy.
Your calorie burn for moving should be great for walking and jogging and other foot step movement exercise.
But exercise where your arms move a whole lot more than your body and therefore have nothing to do with moving your whole mass, will be inflated.
In studies, the hand cycles were the worst inflated. Sitting, but arms moving around.
So if that 2600 with exercise is good exercise type to estimate, then indeed, that would be it.
So your body doesn't lose at 1800, which would appear to be a 800 cal deficit on avg, probably moving up to that level with already suppressed metabolism.
So that is current TDEE if really no inches lost. Now, what concerns me is that should be reflected in body temp (as lower metabolism is literally less heat generated) and should show less cal/min.
So increase by 100 cal daily for about a week at a time, figure out where it'll go.
Next week another 100.
Eventually get up to your daily BMF estimate daily. You can either adjust that daily, or eat avg same amount daily.
If you start losing weight on way up, keep going, you could still have suppressed metabolism, but not enough to prevent a deficit, but you could get more if you went all the way up and unstressed the body fully for a bit.
Then drop back down.0 -
Heybales- how long would U recommend I stay at my full TDEE? All my workouts are feet movement. Dance, treadmill, stairclimber. So that number should be accurate. So if my metabolism is speeding up my cals/min will go up also? For when I'm asleep or still?0
-
Heybales- how long would U recommend I stay at my full TDEE? All my workouts are feet movement. Dance, treadmill, stairclimber. So that number should be accurate. So if my metabolism is speeding up my cals/min will go up also? For when I'm asleep or still?
Depends on you and stress in your life. if on your way up you do indeed lose some when very close, a week.
If nothing, then several weeks. With a 2 week test at some point.
Eat 250 more daily over estimated TDEE (or reported from device) for 2 weeks. That should lead to a gain of 1 whole lb. If exercise, not just fat either, but 1 lb only.
If fast gain of couple lbs, you just topped off glucose stores with water attached, and were not eating at TDEE or there would have been nothing to top off.
If slow gain over 2 weeks, then TDEE estimate is right, then take cut from it.0 -
Thanks heybales. I'm gonna try this as nothing else has worked. Looking over the last year I've done anywhere from 1600-1900 (gross not net) calories with about a two lb difference in weight. Nothing has worked. So I can see now I have to do something drastic to get my weight loss moving again. Just scared to death to gain. But I'm not losing this way anyhow!!!0
-
Does anyone ever have activity measure less than 1 MET?0
-
UpEarly- thanks! That's encouraging... When you were losing did you eat 500 cals below your BMF numbers?
My deficit was typically anywhere from 250-750 a day... just depending on how hungry I felt!0 -
Does anyone ever have activity measure less than 1 MET?
When I'm in deep sleep, sometimes I'm at .8 METs, but typically that lasts 5 minutes here, 5 minutes there.0 -
INTERESTING! my METs are always 0.7-0.9 while I'm sitting or sleeping. Something is not right. I guess it's not working for me... :-(0
-
Mine seems to give me the same cal/min (~1.2) while I'm sleeping as when I am sitting during the day. I find it quite suspicious, because I have been wearing it for a month. That comes out to 1,728 BMR, and my Katch calculated is more like 1,550. I wonder how this reflects the overall measurements, and what should I do about it?
(~5' 5", 184 lbs, 34-35% BF)
So the sensors aren't working well for you then. They didn't for me or from random poll on MFP about half the users that commented.
So it has your BMR as higher, and it uses it for time that should be RMR.
So that means your are getting inflated reading during sleeping time, and slightly deflated readings during awake non-moving time. I doubt they balance out nicely.
Your moving time is based on weight, so that's fine.
If you want to help the device use your better estimated BMR values, use this spreadsheet.
Fill in your details on Simple Setup tab, down to but not including the Activity Calc.
Go to the FitBit_BodyMedia tab.
If you have no tested RMR, delete the value.
It will show you what height BodyMedia needs to be set to for it to calculate and use the same BMR as Katch.
The problem here could be that RMR time that should be slightly higher, will be lower, but the calculation actually balances that out in giving you the height adjustment.
You can also take a look at the 3 methods of using the device with MFP, depending on your workout type and how much variance you want daily.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/961054-spreadsheet-for-bodyfat-bmr-tdee-progress-tracker
Track progress too with inches.
So this has me upping my height by 4", but wouldn't that make my RMR per BMF increase....? I was assuming that it was OVER estimating my cals while sleeping, so this seems opposite of what I was thinking to do- decrease my height so it doesn't over estimate my sleeping cals. HMMM... As my last post says, it has my METs between 0.7-0.9 while sleeping or sitting, so everything keeps pointing to this thing not really working well for me. However, when I plug in my numbers over the last month into the spreadsheet, it's within 100 cals of each other (BMF: 2200, spreadsheet: 2100)0 -
So this has me upping my height by 4", but wouldn't that make my RMR per BMF increase....? I was assuming that it was OVER estimating my cals while sleeping, so this seems opposite of what I was thinking to do- decrease my height so it doesn't over estimate my sleeping cals. HMMM... As my last post says, it has my METs between 0.7-0.9 while sleeping or sitting, so everything keeps pointing to this thing not really working well for me. However, when I plug in my numbers over the last month into the spreadsheet, it's within 100 cals of each other (BMF: 2200, spreadsheet: 2100)
1st, 1 MET is resting awake energy burn, so that would be 1, and sleeping should be below that.
If awake is below that, indeed heat sensors not working well.
It's over-estimating cal's sleeping, under other non-moving time. Which is greater?
The height adjustment is actually taken on an avg of BMR and RMR (tested or Cunningham formula). Figure that will help the most. Sleep then will be inflated for 8 hrs, non-moving awake time will be deflated for how many hrs?
If your weekly routine is pretty regular, I'd just go for the spreadsheet, unsync the BMF, and just keep it for motivation to walk more, and confirm the TDEE is still close, in case it changes steadily for some reason. And with that height adjustment, it should actually.0 -
This is my second week wearing my BMB and it is averaging around 2,700 calories per day. Some days 2,400 on non work out day and 2900 on work out days. I am getting .8-1 Met/ minute when I sleep and .9-1 Met/ minute when I am sitting. I do a lot of strength training and it reads that as moderate activity. My question is do you eat all of your TDEE with the body media band for body recomposition?0
-
This is my second week wearing my BMB and it is averaging around 2,700 calories per day. Some days 2,400 on non work out day and 2900 on work out days. I am getting .8-1 Met/ minute when I sleep and .9-1 Met/ minute when I am sitting. I do a lot of strength training and it reads that as moderate activity. My question is do you eat all of your TDEE with the body media band for body recomposition?
That would indeed be the idea. Because it'll probably underestimate on lifting calories, so you'll still have a slight deficit. Then again, some have reported seeing the cal/min increase in the 24 hrs post lifting workout, so if the sensors really work for you, that may even things out a bit, though still a deficit.
To confirm if the sensors are working well, look at the actual cal/min for sleep and sitting awake. Should be 150-250 if you look at the 24 hr difference, that's about the difference from BMR to RMR.0 -
I wore a Body Media for almost a year and found that it was overestimating by about 300 cals a day. The Scooby calc, as well as heybales's super awesome spreadsheet, was much, much closer and so was my Fitbit (when any activity over more than a stroll was logged here on MFP).
How do you know that it was overestimating? Just curious because I have one.0 -
So glad I found this thread! I calculated what BMF has for my RMR and BMR and came up with 1.33 cals for BMR and 1.15 for RMR. It sounds like it needs adjusting then but when I did the steps on the spreadsheet that you listed out, including deleting my tested RMR (unknown), the spreadsheet says that I should change the height on the device to 32.3 inches. Surely that cannot be right, correct? BMF won't even let me enter that low of a height.0
-
I just got a bodymedia (well the gowear) and it seems accurate. I've had it about two weeks. Most days I burn about 2160 calories, which is about my calculated TDEE. On more active days, it's closer to 2600 calories. I'm 5'5.5", currently 131 lbs and approximately 20% BF. There doesn't seem to be a huge difference between my BMR and RMR. BMR is about 0.95 calories/miin and RMR is closer to 1.05. However, that's ~1360 for BMR and ~1500 for RMR, which actually does make sense.
I'm getting my RMR tested today, so I can report here how close that 1500 is to actual. I do love this thing. I wish it were smaller and could be worn somewhere else, but I love it. And I love the idea of eating 2000 calories to get to my goal of 18% BF. I've been eating closer to 1800 most days, but now that I realize that's probably too big a deficit for what I want, I'm trying to get closer to 2000.0 -
So glad I found this thread! I calculated what BMF has for my RMR and BMR and came up with 1.33 cals for BMR and 1.15 for RMR. It sounds like it needs adjusting then but when I did the steps on the spreadsheet that you listed out, including deleting my tested RMR (unknown), the spreadsheet says that I should change the height on the device to 32.3 inches. Surely that cannot be right, correct? BMF won't even let me enter that low of a height.
So the RMR and BMR calcs are based on LBM, which of course come from the entered bodyfat % stat.
On the Simple Setup tab, how close were the 2 calculations for BF%?
And what was the calculated Cunningham RMR compared to the BMF 1656?
Also, sounds like the BMF readings for BMR and RMR are reversed. Could be possible, you could sleep real cold and so it measures body temp as being high to stay warm, but during the day it's more normal.0
