Conflicting Info on How Many Calories I Need

thursdaystgiles · February 2014

This is my first time actually counting calories. In the past I used Weight Watchers, which uses the point system, of course. They sort of hide it in their formula, but if you do some math, you can figure out what your caloric intake should be. At my age, height, and weight (30 years old, 5'7", 254lb), and activity level, I should have 38 points, which is roughly 1800 calories a day. According to My Fitness Pal, I should be using about 1400 calories a day, and I usually earn about 550-700 more in exercise per day. Meanwhile, if I'm counting my macros, I've been told I should be consuming around 2400 calories a day, given how active I am. I'm doing Jillian Michael's 30-Day Shred, and she has a thing on her site that asks you to put in your info and gives you a diet plan, and that said I should be consuming about 3000 calories a day!!!

I'm pulling my hair out here. I have no idea what to do. I know from my history in exercise and weight loss that my primary problem is that I don't eat enough. When I'm not tracking and paying attention, I tend to eat about 500-700 calories a day. So when I first joined WW I was shocked to find that eating more made me drop weight like made. It's difficult because I don't have the hunger sensation any more, and I end up eating a lot of junk (cookies, alcohol, ice cream, etc) because I get to the end of the day and need to eat 500 calories before bed. When doing WW I would earn over 42 extra points a week in exercise, and I found the weeks that I used at least half of those were the weeks I lost the most weight. It seems counter-intuitive that not only should I use my daily calories, but my workout calories too, in order to lose. And I'm concerned now that I'm using MFP as my main calorie counter, that I'm using way too few calories.

I've only been tracking 11 days, and I've lost 6lb and 8 inches, but I think that's a lot of water weight. Basically I've got a lot of conflicting information, I KNOW I'm not getting the Macros I need (especially protein. I should have over 200 and MFP only allows for 102). What should I do??

dtmtti6 · February 2014

Just wanted to let you know that you are not alone! I too have this same issue. When I first started mfp I did 1500 and lost for two weeks then just completely stalled no matter what I did. I gave up for 6 months and now I am back. The same thing happened again! Currently I upped my calories to 1800 and low and behold I lost again.

Not much, but at least I am moving slowly toward the right direction. Not sure if this is a factor but I also way under eat calories if I don't pay attention and then kind of do this binge eating thing but I can go for days on very few calories.

But I feel your pain because it is driving me crazy too!!

dtmtti6 · February 2014

You can also go in and change your settings to what you want them for your macros

fast_eddie_72 · February 2014

It can be confusing. Here's how I do it, and it seems to be how MFP does it too.

At 30, 5'7" and 254 your BMR is 1933. That's the calories you burn being alive. I always use a "sedentary" multiplier and add from there when I exercise. So with a Harris Benedict multiplier of 1.2, you're burning about 2,319 calories with very little exercise. From there you can add any exercise you feel is significant. So, if you want to lose, say, 2 lbs. per week (an aggressive, but doable goal) you need to find 7,000 calories. To do that with diet alone, it'll knock you down 1,000 calories a day (500 calories x 7 days = 3,500 or one lb. So double that for two).

So 1,319 calories a day will lose you two lbs. a week. Or 1,819 will lose you one. I'm pretty sure 3,000 is just plain old wrong. If you look on here, you can see a LOT of threads talking about how many calories people *think* they burn vs. what they really burn. A lot of similar threads about how many calories people are actually eating vs. what they *think* they're eating. I know for me, a food scale was a HUGE eye opener. Wow. My estimates were no where near right. I'd be surprised if you were really eating only 550 to 700 calories. That's REALLY low. I had 600 in two very small meals today.

I've also been doing a lot of reading lately about this whole idea of eating more to lose weight. I'll let you make up your own mind, but just google "starvation mode myth". You can kind of guess where that's going. Bottom line is, if you're not losing weight, you're eating more than you're burning. Adding more food will never make you lose more. It seem counter intuitive because that's just not how it works.

I'd guess you're not getting some of your numbers right. I know I didn't when I started with this. Not even close. And it seems like that's a pretty common theme around here. Takes a bit of work to get good at it. If you don't have a food scale, I'd really encourage you to get one. You will be amazed at the difference.

Good luck and hope you get to all your goals!

thursdaystgiles · February 2014

I'm not having trouble currently losing weight, nor was I when I was doing Weight Watchers, only when I don't track. Regardless of whether or not the starvation mode thing is a myth, it is absolute fact for ME that I lost more weight on the weeks when I ate more food. For example, if I was allowed 36 points per day, then 42 "free" points a week to use as I pleased, then 42+ exercise points I earned, and I consumed about 36-40 points a day, I'd lose about .5-1.5lb a week. If I consumed about 45-48 points a day, I'd lose 2-4lb a week. I lost 60lb over the course of 7 months, so I definitely learned what worked for my body. It's not like I can lie to myself about it when I'm being weighed on the WW scale every week.

My current dilemma is the fact that MFP recommends so many fewer calories than WW would in my same situation, and I know from my own experience, that eating more points = higher weight loss. So I'm trying to figure out what sort of calorie intake I should have. So far I've been following what MFP said, and have lost a 6lb and 8 inches in 11 days. But that could be water weight, for the most part. I don't have enough time or data to know if this caloric intake will be good for me over time.

thursdaystgiles · February 2014

Oh, also, I use a heart rate monitor + my VO3max to get an accurate idea of calories burnt in exercise. And while I don't currently have a scale, I've used them in the past, and I'm very strict about my measurements. I don't do "heaping" or level scoops. I actually generally round down with the food, whilst still logging the full amount. For example, if a serving size is an 8th, I'll cut it into 10ths instead, but leave the info the same as if it were an 8th, just to err on the side of caution, until we get another scale.

kimosabe1 · February 2014

easy-up the protein...

2spamagnet · February 2014

FACT - eating less calories than your burn will tell your body to use stored fat (stored calories) as fuel, and you will lose fat.

3500 calories is about 1 lb of fat. Eat 3500 calories per week more than your body burns and you will store it as 1 lb of new fat. Eat 3500 calories less per week (500 cal/day) and your body will convert 1 lb of stored fat to the energy that it needs (and you will drop weight).

Eating less always works. If you are not losing weight, you are eating too much.

fast_eddie_72 · February 2014

My current dilemma is the fact that MFP recommends so many fewer calories than WW would in my same situation, and I know from my own experience, that eating more points = higher weight loss.

Starting to understand the people who are reluctant to offer help.

You have it all figured out then. Great for you!

heybales · February 2014

This is my first time actually counting calories. In the past I used Weight Watchers, which uses the point system, of course. They sort of hide it in their formula, but if you do some math, you can figure out what your caloric intake should be. At my age, height, and weight (30 years old, 5'7", 254lb), and activity level, I should have 38 points, which is roughly 1800 calories a day. According to My Fitness Pal, I should be using about 1400 calories a day, and I usually earn about 550-700 more in exercise per day. Meanwhile, if I'm counting my macros, I've been told I should be consuming around 2400 calories a day, given how active I am. I'm doing Jillian Michael's 30-Day Shred, and she has a thing on her site that asks you to put in your info and gives you a diet plan, and that said I should be consuming about 3000 calories a day!!!

I'm pulling my hair out here. I have no idea what to do. I know from my history in exercise and weight loss that my primary problem is that I don't eat enough. When I'm not tracking and paying attention, I tend to eat about 500-700 calories a day. So when I first joined WW I was shocked to find that eating more made me drop weight like made. It's difficult because I don't have the hunger sensation any more, and I end up eating a lot of junk (cookies, alcohol, ice cream, etc) because I get to the end of the day and need to eat 500 calories before bed. When doing WW I would earn over 42 extra points a week in exercise, and I found the weeks that I used at least half of those were the weeks I lost the most weight. It seems counter-intuitive that not only should I use my daily calories, but my workout calories too, in order to lose. And I'm concerned now that I'm using MFP as my main calorie counter, that I'm using way too few calories.

I've only been tracking 11 days, and I've lost 6lb and 8 inches, but I think that's a lot of water weight. Basically I've got a lot of conflicting information, I KNOW I'm not getting the Macros I need (especially protein. I should have over 200 and MFP only allows for 102). What should I do??

If you like the reward system of extra food when you do the exercise - use the tool correctly.
A tool used incorrectly usually causes harm, eventually.

All 3 tools would likely end up very close calorie-goal wise, if totally added up.

But since using MFP and you need to learn to eat correctly for your level of exercise (and you didn't gain weight eating too little, right?)

Be honest with activity level. Sedentary is 45 hr desk job & commute, and outside exercise a bump on a log besides weekly shopping, cleaning, cooking.
If you have kids or active standing up hobbies or indeed work is more active - you are not sedentary, but Lightly Active or more depending on those factors.
Be honest - no need shooting your body in the metabolism and making it fight you for this hopeful fat-only loss.

At this weight you can select 2 lb weekly loss goal - it's reasonable for now.

Get best estimates for exercise calories, so your better HRM that uses VO2max stat - great. Confirm when you change the weight you rerun the test if that's how you got it.
Log and eat that back.

While the non-exercise days may indeed seem low with a 1000 cal deficit, you are balancing it out with much better days. Same 1000 cal deficit in place if using the tool correctly (eating back exercise calories), but indeed eating more. So balance within 48 hrs it sounds like.

Indeed, increase your protein goal on MFP, it's rather smallish, though they recently did increase it better.
0.8 x current weight = grams protein, or if you have a body fat % estimate, then 1 gram per lb of LBM, or fat-free mass (FFM).
0.35 x current weight = grams fat.
Rest is carbs.

So in MFP Goals - customize, just change the protein % until you hit those grams at minimum, and then change fat around, let carbs fall where they may.

And don't purposely underestimate food eaten, unless you really mean that is temp until you get a scale back, but be honest then.

thursdaystgiles · February 2014

Be honest with activity level. Sedentary is 45 hr desk job & commute, and outside exercise a bump on a log besides weekly shopping, cleaning, cooking.
If you have kids or active standing up hobbies or indeed work is more active - you are not sedentary, but Lightly Active or more depending on those factors.
Be honest - no need shooting your body in the metabolism and making it fight you for this hopeful fat-only loss.

At this weight you can select 2 lb weekly loss goal - it's reasonable for now.

Get best estimates for exercise calories, so your better HRM that uses VO2max stat - great. Confirm when you change the weight you rerun the test if that's how you got it.
Log and eat that back.

While the non-exercise days may indeed seem low with a 1000 cal deficit, you are balancing it out with much better days. Same 1000 cal deficit in place if using the tool correctly (eating back exercise calories), but indeed eating more. So balance within 48 hrs it sounds like.

Indeed, increase your protein goal on MFP, it's rather smallish, though they recently did increase it better.
0.8 x current weight = grams protein, or if you have a body fat % estimate, then 1 gram per lb of LBM, or fat-free mass (FFM).
0.35 x current weight = grams fat.
Rest is carbs.

So in MFP Goals - customize, just change the protein % until you hit those grams at minimum, and then change fat around, let carbs fall where they may.

And don't purposely underestimate food eaten, unless you really mean that is temp until you get a scale back, but be honest then.

Okay, so you're saying I should eat back all the calories I exercise? And if I'm lightly active (SAHM with 18 month old, so I chase him around/hold him a lot), but I work out at high intensity for an hour every day, should I still put it as lightly active?
*edit: and is it really so bad to overestimate calorie intake? I figured that was better than risking eating more than I'm recording in the diary.

thursdaystgiles · February 2014

Starting to understand the people who are reluctant to offer help.

You have it all figured out then. Great for you!

Nice of you to edit your snarky post. While there was helpful information in your first response, it was ignoring MY original post. I'm not having trouble losing weight right now at the start, but weight loss is always fast at the start. I'm trying to figure out what is going to be best for me long term, and I'm giving information on how weight loss has worked for me in the past. You can be mean if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that I lost weight doing exactly what I described. Currently, what I'm trying to figure out is if eating the amount of calories MFP recommends will cause similar weight loss, more weight loss, or less. I can experiment with it, but insight of others has helped. Regardless of what you might think, I've actually taken a lot from what's been said here, and have decided to stay with the lower calories, at least for a couple months, to see how it goes. But your first post was responding to me as if I weren't losing weight/seeing results, when I am, so don't pretend like you were being super helpful if you didn't pay enough attention to what I originally posted, and were just giving me your stock answer.

heybales · February 2014

Okay, so you're saying I should eat back all the calories I exercise? And if I'm lightly active (SAHM with 18 month old, so I chase him around/hold him a lot), but I work out at high intensity for an hour every day, should I still put it as lightly active?
*edit: and is it really so bad to overestimate calorie intake? I figured that was better than risking eating more than I'm recording in the diary.

Not me, that's the way the tool works. And yes, you are Lightly active easily.

That MFP activity level has absolutely nothing to do with exercise, notice the descriptions when selecting.
The Fitness goal you also fill out concerning minutes of exercise and calorie burn - that's fitness goal, not diet goal. Has no bearing on diet goal math.

That is exactly why you log your exercise when actually done, and eat back those exercise calories.
You can look on your Exercise Diary to see how you are meeting those goals during the week too. Most never see them.

It keeps the deficit at 1000 calories daily, exercise or not.

You could easily create an extra 500 cal deficit by doing a whole bunch of separate things "to be on the safe side" -- and that extra deficit could be the difference between this being easy, or a fight you lose - and not in weight.
Many think that's better, long term it's not, as it seems you've commented on recognizing.
Like always undercutting your eating goal by say 100-200 calories. 50 over is better than 100 under.
It's a goal to reach after all. You willing to miss your goal weight by say 15% and say that's good enough?

This is how MFP works.

BMR 1800 x 1.40 Lightly active = 2520 non-exercise maintenance calories for just daily life burned.
2520 - 1000 deficit = 1520 daily net eating goal when no exercise done.

You exercise and burn 600 calories.
2520 non-exercise maintenance + 600 exercise calories = 3120 daily burn.
3120 - 1000 deficit = 2120 daily goal now with exercise being done.

Same deficit. And in fact if your deficit is too much, you will not get as much out of your exercise as far as body improvement.
Oh, at the start, you can get some no matter how much you do wrong, but not as much as you could doing it right.

After all the hard work making sure you get the workout in, and hard work doing it - you really don't want to miss out on any improvement you could gain from it. Why waste some of your effort?

heybales · February 2014

Thank you MFP for hiccup and double-post. The info wasn't that good.

fast_eddie_72 · February 2014

But your first post was responding to me as if I weren't losing weight/seeing results, when I am, so don't pretend like you were being super helpful if you didn't pay enough attention to what I originally posted, and were just giving me your stock answer.

I took about 15 minutes running the numbers YOU posted about YOU and putting them together into an answer to your question. And you're calling it a "stock answer". Stock answer would have been "MFP is right". This was anything but a stock answer. I went to great lengths to explain where that number comes from and how you can discover it for yourself. I took time out of my busy day to try to help you in a detailed, accurate, and informative way with information you could use to answer your question.

What I was trying to do was explain in a very nice way that you are simply wrong. And I did so with detailed information about YOU. More calories will not make you or anyone else lose more weight. It just won't.

Regardless of whether or not the starvation mode thing is a myth, it is absolute fact for ME that I lost more weight on the weeks when I ate more food.

You are simply mistaken. There's no interpretation, no special cases, no misunderstanding. I did read your post and responded to it factually with accurate CUSTOMIZED information. Sorry, this "stock answer" thing after I took the time to do all that really does make me kind of mad. But yes, I did edit my post to try to continue to be nice.

I'll say it again, in as nice and understanding a way as possible. The MFP calculations are correct. And eating more than they suggest will not make you lose more weight. It just won't. But feel free to experiment a little and see what happens. Just make sure, if you're doing that, to accurately record everything. It's much more difficult than it sounds. And if you're not using a food scale, you're not being accurate.

And I'm out of this thread. I've never been so angry about a post on a forum in my life. STOCK ANSWER?! Good luck. Hope you get all the help you need. But you won't get any more from me.

Currently, what I'm trying to figure out is if eating the amount of calories MFP recommends will cause similar weight loss, more weight loss, or less.

I calculated for YOU EXACTLY how many calories will achieve EXACTLY how much weight loss. I did the math and showed my work. Grrrr. Stock answer. Un-flippin-real. I got your stock answer right here...

Mr_Knight · February 2014

At my age, height, and weight (30 years old, 5'7", 254lb), and activity level, I should have 38 points, which is roughly 1800 calories a day. According to My Fitness Pal, I should be using about 1400 calories a day, and I usually earn about 550-700 more in exercise per day.

That weight with that height is going to be somewhere around 55% body fat. That puts your BMR somewhere in the 1400s and your "somewhat active" TDEE somewhere around 2000 calories/day.

A pound a week is a 500 calorie/day deficit, so you're looking at something like 1500 calories/day to lose a pound a week, once you're out of the water-weight phase.

fast_eddie_72 · February 2014

Mr. Knight, I was just thinking about you. I owe you an apology from another thread. I get it now. lol Oh well. Try to be helpful and what do you get? Seriously, sorry for my lack of experience with this forum and not understanding where you were coming from. Totally see it now.

jmagnes · February 2014

Hi,

I too am 5'7" and thought maybe my caloric intake might be helpful since you and I are the same height. I weigh 131 pounds, and have weighed this much for years. My BMI is 19.5%. I eat in between 1600-1800 daily of healthy food usually around 1683. I am not starving at all at this level and do not put on weight this way.

I too find all of the caloric information really crazy-the Jillian Michaels website told me to eat 1087, which is below the 1200 daily minimum for women that most doctors recommend! Anyway, I hope this helps. My activity level is a lot of sitting at the job and lifting heavy weights at the gym with moderate cardio 30 minutes about 5 times a week.

Conflicting Info on How Many Calories I Need

Replies

Categories