Does the MFP maintenance calculation work for you?

nxd10
nxd10 Posts: 4,570 Member
in Goal: Maintaining Weight
I hit my goal 'zone' back in May and am now at the bottom of that five pound range. I hadn't really been trying, but with more exercise and lighter summer eating, I took off another five pounds. Slow, but still down.

I am comfortable with my current calories. I am comfortable with how I look, though I'd like a bit more muscle (which is coming). I am exercising more so am eating more, even though my net calories are the same. I'm older so my metabolism is slower than it was. I measure my steps with a Fitbit (which I love) to push me to get out of my chair. It also ups the calories it says I do more than if I logged my exercise manually.

I just entered my new lower weight and am still pondering my settings. They are still set to a pound a week. I am very comfortable eating that much - it's never been a problem for me. I always hit those numbers on a weekly basis. I am losing a pound a month now at those settings.

Is there anything wrong with sticking with this calorie level given that my body seems comfortable with it and I do plan to up it when the cold weather hits and I know I'll be hungrier?

I know some of you (many?) seem to be eating 2000 calories a day. I am at 1200 net and am usually eating 1500-1700 because I simply don't exercise enough to warrant more. I ALWAYS eat when I'm hungry - just not that much. It's amazing how much good, delicious, healthy food you can eat when you choose carefully.

Replies

  • lornathommo
    lornathommo Posts: 16
    I think if you're happy where you are and you don't continue to lose then do what works for you. If you continue o lose you may just have to find a way of increasing your calorie intake, even just by 100, to stabilise it :)
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    if you are still losing weight then you're not maintaining...

    and you're not building any muscle on net 1200 cals

    but as the other post says, if you're happy, why change it?

    for me, i LOVE being able to eat more... i hated 1200 cals!!! i love being able to net 1800 and still lose bodyfat!
  • RosyBest
    RosyBest Posts: 303 Member
    MFP calculations are not the say all end all...at the end of the day, you know your body way better than a computer does. I read what MFP says then I make an informed decision about what goals I need to set for optimal weight loss. MFP suggests that I eat 2500 a day, I set my goal at 1650. It's up to you.
  • lauren3101
    lauren3101 Posts: 1,853 Member
    If you are happy with the way you look, then you should be eating at maintenance.

    If you are losing 1lb a month, then you only need to eat another 100 cals a day to make up that deficit. A tablespoon of oil when you cook will sort that out. A handful of nuts. A cube of cheese. You don't need to stuff yourself.

    By the way, you can't gain muscle while eating at a deficit. You may in the beginning, but it will be minimal. To build muscle you need to eat at a surplus and lift heavy.
  • Wildflower0106
    Wildflower0106 Posts: 247 Member
    You won't build muscle if you are in a deficit (unless maybe small newbie gains). You are also not in maintenance if you are eating at a deficit. Sounds like your eating plan doesn't match your goals. If you want to build muscle you need to eat more.
  • ovhenderson
    ovhenderson Posts: 13 Member
    MFP is probably using the Mifflin formula. Mifflin is the best formula to use if you do not know what your body fat is. If you do know what your body fat is, Katch-McArdle is the best formula to use. I personally do not use MFP. I use the custom tab and calculate via the Katch-McArdle and use my own macro ratio which suits my body type.
  • Doone33
    Doone33 Posts: 171 Member
    Its working for me.... I am loosing weight.... getting stronger and eating up to 2000 calories a day on my exercise days!
  • Doone33
    Doone33 Posts: 171 Member
    MFP is probably using the Mifflin formula. Mifflin is the best formula to use if you do not know what your body fat is. If you do know what your body fat is, Katch-McArdle is the best formula to use. I personally do not use MFP. I use the custom tab and calculate via the Katch-McArdle and use my own macro ratio which suits my body type.

    Actually the Katch one is much closer to what I learned to eat mine is almost 1700 calories a day BMR.... MFp put me around 1500... But I eat 1600 as a BMR intake.... Thanks... Just learned more about body fat and how to calculate individual needs... cause I can see how the Katch one would be ALOT more accurate!
  • nxd10
    nxd10 Posts: 4,570 Member
    Dropped another half pound so upped by 250 calories a day. Let's see how this goes. It's funny how many calories that looks like. How our perspectives change!
  • Seesawboomerang
    Seesawboomerang Posts: 296 Member
    It's more or less accurate. Perhaps a little on the low side.
  • jlahorn
    jlahorn Posts: 377 Member
    It's not accurate for me. As a 5'6" 40 YO female working out 5 hours per week, it thinks I should be eating 1700 to maintain. I ate at about 1700 for 6 weeks and was gaining.

    My FitBit allotment is even worse - it thinks I should eat 1800-2100 per day.

    1500 seems to be my true maintenance amount. I've been averaging 1500-1600 for about 8 weeks and am staying steady.
  • xilka
    xilka Posts: 308 Member
    It depends on what your relationship to food is, IMO.
    I'm working on building muscle so I can eat MORE, because I LOVE to eat great food.
    But I'm willing to work really hard for it, and my job is physical, so that helps.

    In the end, I see it as a lifestyle choice.

    Do you want to spend less time, money, and energy on food?

    If yes, then train your metabolism to eat very little (which I think is anything under 1800).

    Or do you love food (and muscle) so much that you want to train your metabolism to eat as much as you like of the good stuff (like in the 2000-3000 calorie range)?

    If yes, keep tracking your calories and your weight and keep upping your NET gradually and see how far you can go before gaining INCHES or feeling like your jeans are getting a bit snug. Then you'll know where your true maintenance/muscle-building NET is. I'm 5'0 and I NET1880, eating 2,200 on average. MFP gives me 1740 NET. So not too far off.
  • jchadden42
    jchadden42 Posts: 189
    I joined MFP with the intent to watch nutrients. I'm a graphs and charts kind of gal (you know, the kind who would accidentally major in math because "that math class looks fun!"). I have lost 5 pounds since I joined because I'm trying really hard to stay at my net calories (I'm also a rules follower). I think you need to look at what works for you, but if you continue to lose weight, you could adjust how active you said you are. That may help.
  • FrankiesSaysRelax
    FrankiesSaysRelax Posts: 403 Member
    I changed my calories to maintenance and it gave me around 1700-1800. I was still losing weight on that so I had to up it again to about 1950. 1200 net calories is not maintaining weight and you certainly won't be able to put on muscle. If you aren't trying to lose.. up the calories. You aren't going to put it all back on by doing so (which was my fear for a long time)
  • nxd10
    nxd10 Posts: 4,570 Member
    It's not accurate for me. As a 5'6" 40 YO female working out 5 hours per week, it thinks I should be eating 1700 to maintain. I ate at about 1700 for 6 weeks and was gaining.

    My FitBit allotment is even worse - it thinks I should eat 1800-2100 per day.

    1500 seems to be my true maintenance amount. I've been averaging 1500-1600 for about 8 weeks and am staying steady.

    That's helpful. Thank you. I'm 54 and all the estimates seem too high for me unless I set myself at sedentary. (And I use fitbit too, although I've been losing since I started with it, not gaining).
  • nxd10
    nxd10 Posts: 4,570 Member
    I joined MFP with the intent to watch nutrients. I'm a graphs and charts kind of gal (you know, the kind who would accidentally major in math because "that math class looks fun!"). I have lost 5 pounds since I joined because I'm trying really hard to stay at my net calories (I'm also a rules follower). I think you need to look at what works for you, but if you continue to lose weight, you could adjust how active you said you are. That may help.

    I am also a data geek (I'm a psychologist and teach statistics). I LOVE food and love to cook. Fortunately, I get a huge amount of pleasure out of those first few bites, so quality, not quantity is important to me. Maybe that's why it wasn't and isn't hard for me to keep my calories low - I dropped out all the food I didn't care about and kept the food I really love. And I don't like things that have a lot of fat or are too sweet any more. A bite or two - if they're great quality. After that, it tastes gross.

    I am set at sedentary and it doesn't make sense to me to lower my exercise - I am upping it. I think, though, now that I've lost weight, my body seems to be back to it's old self and is working very efficiently to shed calories it doesn't need. So it is responding very well to even the 4.5 mph walking I'm doing.
  • whitebalance
    whitebalance Posts: 1,654 Member
    I seemed to be inching up by about a pound a month on MFP's sedentary "maintenance" number, so I adjusted my net calorie target manually to 80 calories below... or roughly a "loss" of 12 pounds a year. It seems to be working so far, but it's kind of early to tell. I should also note that I let Fitbit and Digifit do all the cardio logging (hence the sedentary setting), and I don't log my strength training as cardio.
  • kirstyfairhead
    kirstyfairhead Posts: 220 Member
    I think at this stage you listen to your body and what it is doing. Real life is the real test.

    If you do not want to lose more weight then you will need to establish your real maintenance level. In order to find your maintenance I would suggest you just increase cals by 100 per day for a couple of weeks at a time and keep doing this until you see your weight stabilise.

    To gain muscle you would need to eat over your maintenance level as well as lifting heavy. Bear in mind that you aren't going to be gaining huge amounts of muscle so you don't need to be eating way over. For example at 10% over you could be looking at only 150 cals per day over maintenance which you should be able to add just be eating more calorie dense food rather than by increasing quantity.
  • Butinox
    Butinox Posts: 43 Member
    Yes, it does work for me. I eat 1700 kcal pr day, as MFP suggested, and maintaine weight. I am 38 years, and small (51 kg, 159 cm), moderatly active.
  • Crawflowr
    Crawflowr Posts: 106 Member
    It works for me. 48 years old, 5'8" 140lb (maintenance) with 1650 calorie goal.

    I reached goal a year and a half ago and have since maintained well, with only slight fluctuations. I have continued to log everything over this time. If I hit my target exactly each week I will still lose ever so slightly. I did try at one stage to up the target by 100 calories but found I began to gain slightly, so I dropped it back down and just don't sweat it if I go over now and again.

    Over the last few months however with holidays and a period of illness I have gained a couple of pounds so at the moment I am trying to eat under my goal for a few weeks to see if I can drop it down again. It's so much easier doing this now when I'm only a couple of lbs over rather than letting it slip further and having a much bigger problem in future.

    I walk at least 30-60 mins a day and go to the gym a couple of times a week where I mostly run on the treadmill. I always log this and eat my exercise calories. My heart rate is very high and I've checked my calorie use while exercising with an HRM and have found the MFP values about right (low if anything).
  • fitandgeeky
    fitandgeeky Posts: 232 Member
    Doesn't work for me. According to MFP, I should be gaining and I'm not. I'm actually down a bit this week and I eat 2000 calories a day.
  • TwoPointZero
    TwoPointZero Posts: 187 Member
    It's not terrible, but it seems that, for a lot of the people here, it needs tweaking, maybe +-5% . . .
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    It's set way too low for me (even at the highest activity level). It may work better with exercise calories, but that would mean I would be under eating on rest days. I stick with TDEE calculations (even those are often low for me).
  • kaseysospacey
    kaseysospacey Posts: 499 Member
    NO I gain at the recommendation,but I have hypothyroid so I don't count like normal humans.

Categories