BMR / Calories Burned / Am I getting this right?

RoyBeck: I know guys burn more calories than women in general...and it does depend on your weight too. I'll knock 30% off for calories next time I exercise and just stick to that number until I can get a HRM.

Also...how do you 'quote' people?

You quote people by clicking on "quote" below the comment you want to quote (below their ticker, if they have one.

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.

Burn 300 calories in 20 minutes? You do realize MFP heavily overestimates burns, right?

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.

RoyBeck: I know guys burn more calories than women in general...and it does depend on your weight too. I'll knock 30% off for calories next time I exercise and just stick to that number until I can get a HRM.

Also...how do you 'quote' people?

You quote people by clicking on "quote" below the comment you want to quote (below their ticker, if they have one.

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.

200 lb person, 4 mph, 8 % grade for 60 min.

887 calories.

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html

Of course that is gross, what a HRM and MFP database would give you.
For purpose of eatback, it would only be net 791.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

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?

If this is the case, then right off the bat I'm burning 1818 calories.

MPF has my goal set at 1,270 calories a day in order to lose the 2 lbs a week that I want to lose. Some days I have to force myself to eat that many calories, but I eat as close to 1,270 as I can.

We started working out almost a month ago and I did gain weight, but it went away after 2 weeks. I work out every other day and make it a goal to burn a MINIMUM of 300 calories with cardio (often it's more, but that's my lowest I'll permit myself to walk out of the gym with. We're usually there only an hour because of my bf's physically demanding job. I burn 300cals in 20 minutes average) and I am doing about 1/2 hour weight training at the gym. I know it's not a lot of working out, but I go out often with my boyfriend and we walk...around the mall, downtown, etc. I keep active and do a lot of cleaning each and every day. All these things burn calories.

My defect has to be at least 800 calories on the days that I'm working out and living life outside of bed at least. On the days that we don't work out, it's likely around 500 calories minimum.

So....why am I stuck? Why is the scale now refusing to budge? The only time I really lost weight in the past was when I was under so much emotional stress that I just basically stopped eating. I lost a total of 65lbs that way. I know it wasn't healthy and that's why I'm following this above mentioned plan of eating and exercising.

I'm kind of frustrated. My goal is to reach 180-200lbs. It's just not really happening. Tips? Advice?

So MFP has your maintenance at 2270 calories, which means you selected Sedentary activity level for non-exercise daily life.

Is that really true, 45 hr desk job sitting with commute time, not active on weekends, ect? Except for exercise sessions?

And then doing MFP, any exercise day you'd eat more than that as it's been mentioned and you say you do, so you are actually eating more than 1270, right?

Treadmill is accurate enough, though it starts to lose accuracy over 4-5 % grade.

But are you correctly eating all that back to keep a reasonable 1000 cal deficit?
Or do you think making it 2000 deficit on most days is better?

Do you weigh your foods (not measure for volume, weigh for mass)?

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?

IMO, based on what you have shared, that's too high. Estimating your BF% at 50, I get a BMR in the 1400s.

#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.

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.

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.