BMR / Calories Burned / Am I getting this right?

2»

Replies

  • jen10001
    jen10001 Posts: 2 Member
    #1: Get a food scale and measure everything. The first one I got was less than $15 online. Measuring cups and spoons can often be off by 20% which adds up quickly
    #2: Get a heart rate monitor to better judge calories burned. Amazon and I think walmart have a basic HRM with chest strap for $22 that will give you a general idea. My treadmill always claims around 2x the burn of my HRM. Just an FYI, if I RUN (not jog) for an hour that burns around 500 calories, so 300 calories in 20 minutes seems rather high (but could be close as I am lighter weight)
    #3: I ate out *very*rarely when trying to lose (2x/month or less) and when I did, watched my intake (no fries/burgers/apps etc) and ordered fish with veggies/salad with lite dressing etc and still figured I'd quite easily consume ~800+ calories in a single meal which meant I tried to watch the rest of the day very closely.
    #4: Why do you find it suddenly so difficult to consume 1200 calories? Not trying to be a snot, but you seemed to maintain your previous weight by consuming many more calories, yet now it makes you physically sick to eat 1200? Not following you, but perhaps there is some medical/physical reason you just didn't explain.

    While it was somewhat difficult, I was able to lose pounds and not feel like I had to deprive myself by logging/weighing food religiously, cooking 95% of my meals at home, doing cardio to "earn" extra calories, and adding in some strength training to try and preserve as much muscle mass as I could.

    TLDR: I think you are overestimating your calories burned and underestimating your calories consumed.
  • Skinnyknow
    Skinnyknow Posts: 12
    I find sometimes weight loss for me was like getting a pay cheque. I'd do everything right and nothing. It took two weeks of logging and then two more weeks before the cheque arrived. So 4 weeks in all. My point is be patient. I would lose once a month in 5 pound chunks. I did want to lose 1 pound a week, makes it easier to maintain later.

    I'm also amazed at your lack of appetite, lucky you for being over satisfied at 1200. For me I'm starving at 1200.
  • atlantisak
    atlantisak Posts: 31
    Lynn_Glenmont:
    Regarding the 300-calorie treadmill workout in 20 minutes, that works out to 900 calorie per hour workout, which is really pretty darn intense. I'm a 5'4" moderately obese woman, and I walk/jog outside on hilly roads at 3 to 3.5 miles an hour (so roughly in the middle of your range), and I use database entries that are around 300 calories an hour. Obviously, over the Internet, none of us can guess how intense your workouts are, but it seems unlikely they're the equivalent of 900 calories an hour. If you feel like it's moderately intense, I would log it as 150 to 200 calories.

    Well, depending on your weight at 5'4, that could be the big difference between you and I. I'm at a constant incline on the treadmill with no downhill at all like you'd get with walking on hills (up and down, etc). I'm not sure what you'd consider moderately intense, but I am usually sweating A LOT by the end of the 20 minutes, red faced and tired (but feeling good, I enjoy it). I've always been the one to push myself, so I'm not taking a general stroll or leisurely pace. What site did you get the info on that it'd be 150-200 calories? All the ones I've seen so far match fairly close to what is on the treadmill read-out.
  • atlantisak
    atlantisak Posts: 31
    Burn 300 calories in 20 minutes? You do realize MFP heavily overestimates burns, right?
    Heybales:
    That is easily attainable, especially if moving a lot of mass.

    And MFP exercise calories for walking and jogging flat, if you really do that pace, is going to be more correct than a HRM without enough stats.

    Should match good treadmills where you can punch in your own weight.

    I'm using a treadmill that has a HRM reader on the handles as well as an option to input your weight info and age. The mass that I have to move is about 222lbs and I'm 5'9. I think I'm just going to invest in a calorie/HRM device and just use that to see how accurate things actually are and what I'm burning on average daily on top of my BMR. Mostly everyone seems to feel it's impossible for me to be getting even anywhere near those numbers of calories burnt. :( I don't leisurely stroll on the treadmill. I'm out to make myself sweat and push hard. Thanks for backing me up a little bit that this is possible.
  • atlantisak
    atlantisak Posts: 31
    Regarding the 300-calorie treadmill workout in 20 minutes, that works out to 900 calorie per hour workout, which is really pretty darn intense.
    Mr_Knight:
    At 220 pounds, it's basically 2 miles running, which is well within the realm of doable. The treadmill should be at 2% or so incline, too.

    For someone out of shape, that would be challenging, but it would only be a matter of weeks of C25k to work up to it.

    Hey, Mr. Knight....I set the incline at 15% and go at a speed of 2.8 to 4.5 miles an hour. I push myself to do this pace and really work up a sweat. I'm not sure what 'shape' or 'condition' I'm considered to be in (how is that even really determined?), but I know that I'm doing fairly well compared to others my size. I have a background where I grew up on a farm and was incredibly strong as a girl (still am...seeing as I can still take down my boyfriend who is my height/weight but mostly muscle when we wrestle.).
  • atlantisak
    atlantisak Posts: 31
    So, being 5'9, 222lbs and 27 year old female, my BMR is about 1818 calories. This is what I'd burn if I stayed in bed all day, correct?
    Mr_Knight:
    IMO, based on what you have shared, that's too high. Estimating your BF% at 50, I get a BMR in the 1400s.

    I haven't had my BF checked in a while, but last I knew it was somewhere around 38-43. I have a fair bit of muscle and a thick bone structure. I should get the BF checked again at some point.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I'm using a treadmill that has a HRM reader on the handles as well as an option to input your weight info and age. The mass that I have to move is about 222lbs and I'm 5'9. I think I'm just going to invest in a calorie/HRM device and just use that to see how accurate things actually are and what I'm burning on average daily on top of my BMR. Mostly everyone seems to feel it's impossible for me to be getting even anywhere near those numbers of calories burnt. :( I don't leisurely stroll on the treadmill. I'm out to make myself sweat and push hard. Thanks for backing me up a little bit that this is possible.

    The treadmill won't use the HR as any calcs for calories, purely body weight and slope and pace.
    HR is for display only, though it may use it in a HR program to speed up or slow down at certain times too.
    The age is so it can estimate HR zones, because it probably does 220-age as assumed HRmax.
    Calorie burn is truly a function of moving mass to escape gravity. Now, at certain speeds and inclines, personal efficiency doing it can greatly effect the accuracy. You've probably seen someone on treadmill walking very .... unusual, and wondered how in the world they were going so fast. They were burning more.

    Can't use a HRM to wear all day for purpose of calorie burn. The formula's that calculate calories from HR are only valid for the aerobic exercise range, about 90 to 150-170, and steady state, so same HR for about 2-4 min.
    So that leaves any anaerobic exercise out, anything not steady state where your HR is bouncing around, and below exercise.

    If treadmill is all you'll keep doing for now I'd suggest skip the HRM for now, not useful for your intended purpose. And as you've discovered you can make that incline steep enough you are getting an equivalent workout as running flat - without the joint impact with extra weight right now.
    Only a more expensive HRM will have the stats to have a chance at decent calorie estimate, and you have better available with your workout already with treadmill (maybe) and calculator.

    I gave link up above for you to confirm what the treadmill is using. They are well studied formula's, because walking and slow jogging on a treadmill are the most lab studied methods, and formula's are highly accurate as link above shows.

    Did you use Katch BMR with bodyfat %? It can be very different than the ones based on age, weight, height like MFP uses.

    Check the spreadsheet on my profile page to get some best estimates without actual tests, and then include test results when gotten.

    Plus it has a HRM tab, you can input your stats exactly like a nicer HRM would have, and it'll actually use a Polar funded study formula to calculate calorie burn if you tell it avgHR and time of a workout session. You can see just what it would tell you right now. But you'll need that avgHR for the whole session, or pretty much anyway.
  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    bump
  • AestheticStar
    AestheticStar Posts: 447 Member
    Burn 300 calories in 20 minutes? You do realize MFP heavily overestimates burns, right?

    It is possible. Depending on what workouts you're doing. If you do a HIIT workout, that gets your heart-rate up a lot, you can burn a lot of calories. And it all varies on your height/weight. Believe me. I've done it.
  • klinger6395
    klinger6395 Posts: 44 Member
    Lol what's wrong with that ...
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,342 Member
    loneafflictio:



    The biggest problem I'm going to run into is eating enough calories. I feel like I'm constantly stuffing my face at my current calorie count as it already is.


    I'd like to see your diary to see what 'stuffing your face' looks like on low calories, I do not stuff myself and I can hardly stick to my allotted 1600 calories, I would be happier if I could eat at 2000 every day but until I reach goal (just a few pounds away) then 1600 it has to be.
  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    I haven't read thru everything but... How long have you been at this, eating at the 1270 (or thereabouts) range and doing several weekly workouts? If less than a few weeks, it may simply be too soon to judge whether or not you're making progress.

    As to your weighins, were they consistent? As in same scale, in the same place, same state of dress, same time of day, etc.? If not - then your before and now are inconsistent and could be part of the problem.

    Some say you must eat at/above your BMR. I don't know that there is science to that - but you certainly want to eat enough to fuel your body. Its necessary for long term health & wellbeing. I have not looked at your food diary, but some ways to increase your calorie intake: snack on nuts, use olive oil while cooking, use reduced fat options instead of no-fat options.

    You do want to count your calories in as accurately as possible. When eating out, if at a place that does not provide nutritional info: ask questions. Such as 'how many ounces is the salmon'? Whether its 6 or 8 makes a difference, and is not something you can tell by looking at it on your plate. Leaving off butters, creamy sauces, etc. is a good start - as you've mentioned.

    Overall, I'm guessing you need to tighten up on your logging & give it more time. As to burn estimates - cardio machines tend to overestimate. Especially if you don't have the option of entering your info. Burning 300 calories in 20 minutes is unlikely but not impossible - but as you've stated if you're eating 1270 that should not matter. One thing though - it certainly sounds like you are NOT sedentary. So changing your setting to lightly active and 1.5 pounds per week would give you a more reasonable goal. From there, choose whether or not you feel the need to eat back your exercise calories since you'll already have a higher base calorie goal.

Categories