2360 calories really????

Options
2»

Replies

  • cindiva65
    cindiva65 Posts: 335 Member
    Options
    I agree with the suggestions to get a heart rate monitor. I noticed that MFP way overestimates what I actually seem to burn for activities. I wear my HRM walking, weight lifting, mowing the grass, etc. I bought the basic Polar model for under $100 and I find its a great investment. Good luck!!!
  • lporter229
    lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
    Options
    Yeah, 2360 sounds about right. We have incredibly skewed perceptions about how many calories "normal" people eat (for some reason, we've all heard 1200-1500 as "normal," either for dieting or for just everyday living, when in actuality that's a really, really low number).

    Just for comparison's sake, I'm 5'4" and 129lbs, and getting ready to cut a pound or two off. When I switch to cutting, I'm going to be eating 1900-2000 to lose.

    You'll see a lot of people who start trying to lose weight with this attitude: "I'm going to cut out all junk food and just eat 1200 calories of boiled chicken and spinach!" Those people have lost their d@mn minds, and they almost never stick with it for the long term. Who wants to eat that little every day? Your goal should be to eat as much as you can while still losing weight, not to try to live on as little food as possible. As you lose, you're going to have to drop your intake anyway. If you start at rock-bottom, what are you going to do when you've lost your first 50 pounds?

    Completely agree with this. So many people on this site under eat and then complain about how hard losing weight is or how they have these uncontrollable binges. I am not sure exactly what they expect to happen when they try to continually eat at that level. Do yourself a favor and make this as easy as possible on yourself. It is the best way to ensure success in the long run.
  • TJ_Rugger
    TJ_Rugger Posts: 164 Member
    Options
    700 calories burned in a 2 mile walk sounds a bit high. If you search in the cardio exercises for "Walking, 4.5 mph, very, very brisk pace" and enter in 40 minutes it gives you 403 calories. I assume that the number is not based on my weight or my numbers, I assume that if the person is 125lbs/200lbs/300lbs it would give the same number. I am not sure it is all THAT accurate, but gives you a rough estimate.

    Also, heartrate monitors are the way to go... and you can pick up a decent one for ~$80, of course if you spend more money for one that tracks elevation change with a GPS it might be more accurate, but I would start with a decent standard HRM.
  • MassiveDelta
    MassiveDelta Posts: 3,311 Member
    Options
    Honestly OP to get to be 387 pounds you were eating more than 3000 calories a day for quite some time. You can definitely lose weight on 2300 calories at your size. 2300 may sound like a lot but if you doubt then I suggest that you eat like you used to eat for a week and log that and see how many calories you have been eating, my guess is that that number will make 2300 look not so large anymore.

    I'm not sure if it is necessary for you to eat back 700 calories for a 2 mile walk though that seems excessive to me.

    Thank you! ANd I am sure you are right about how much I was eating before. I was a bad emotional eater and I have been conquering that beast! Thanks for your input!

    You have gotten ALOT of great advice and I just wanted to encourage you to Log Log Log all the time. Emotional eating addiction is hard to overcome because its emotional and we succumb to our emotions so easily. Dont let your emotions control what you want in your Heart and mind. As an emotional eater you really have to work extra hard to change that habit so you need to replace that habit with a new one. Failure in breaking habits is almost always caused by just trying to quit instead of replacing one bad action with a new good action. Replace your desire to emotionally eat something bad with either eating something good or doing something good.

    ALWAYS LOG BEFORE YOU TASTE! Go Get Healthy!
  • JTick
    JTick Posts: 2,131 Member
    Options
    2360 doesn't seem too high. I agree with the others about probably not eating back your exercise calories right now, or at most only 50% of them. If your not weighing and measuring your food yet, then I definitely wouldn't eat any of them to allow yourself room for error.

    If you want to adjust the exercise numbers, you can go into your diary and edit them. If you choose not to eat them back, enter 1 calorie (MFP doesn't like 0), or you can adjust them to 50% as needed.
  • dunnodunno
    dunnodunno Posts: 2,290 Member
    Options
    I am fairly new to MFP and I plugged in all my info and it said to consume 2360 calories. This seems so execessive, however I started at 387 pounds and 5 foot 5 inches tall. I was moderately active ( I am a home visitor so some days I am on the run all day some days I am in the office all day. Now I walk 4 to 5 days a week and have worked up to 2 miles in about 40 minutes. I always get about 700 calorie burn ( iguess because of my size) I am walking as fast as I can and am always breathing heavy and sweating profusely. My issue is that means I have to eat almost 3000 calories and that is crazy. I have been doing for the most part but some days I still end up with a 300-500 calorie deficit and then MFP gets on to me. So please help! I really want to make sure I am doing this right.

    That does sound about right. When you're heavier you can eat more calories & still lose weight. I also agree with buying a heart rate monitor to more accurately gauge what your calorie burn is. It's not 100% either but will be more accurate than MFP's estimation & machines at the gym.

    Also it might seem excessive to you now, but at your higher weight you may have been eating more than 2,360 before using MFP. I was over 300 pounds & estimate that I used to eat anywhere from 4,000-6,000 some days.
  • JenniferIsLosingIt
    JenniferIsLosingIt Posts: 595 Member
    Options
    Oh wow! I am sure I was doing the same! :bigsmile:
  • GBrady43068
    GBrady43068 Posts: 1,256 Member
    Options
    Honestly OP to get to be 387 pounds you were eating more than 3000 calories a day for quite some time. You can definitely lose weight on 2300 calories at your size. 2300 may sound like a lot but if you doubt then I suggest that you eat like you used to eat for a week and log that and see how many calories you have been eating, my guess is that that number will make 2300 look not so large anymore.

    I'm not sure if it is necessary for you to eat back 700 calories for a 2 mile walk though that seems excessive to me.
    ^ This

    I second the suggestion of the person who said you should list yourself as sedentary (since your activity level seems to vary so much) and then log the exercise you get.

    I also agree your burn is probably too high. I would multiply the MFP suggestion by either .50 or .66 and then manually enter THAT number as your calorie burn to avoid overestimation.

    And I would also say you should eat your 2360 most days until MFP asks if you want to readjust. It's definitely easier to "stick with the program" if you aren't perpetually starving and the calories will help keep your body consuming fat (YAY!) instead of lean muscle (BOO!)
  • kbeckley11
    kbeckley11 Posts: 203 Member
    Options
    700 calories burned in a 2 mile walk sounds a bit high. If you search in the cardio exercises for "Walking, 4.5 mph, very, very brisk pace" and enter in 40 minutes it gives you 403 calories. I assume that the number is not based on my weight or my numbers, I assume that if the person is 125lbs/200lbs/300lbs it would give the same number. I am not sure it is all THAT accurate, but gives you a rough estimate.

    Also, heartrate monitors are the way to go... and you can pick up a decent one for ~$80, of course if you spend more money for one that tracks elevation change with a GPS it might be more accurate, but I would start with a decent standard HRM.

    The number MFP gives is based on weight. If I put in 40 minutes for 4.5mph, very very brisk pace, I get 501 calories burned. That's not to say that I don't agree that 700 calories burned is a lot for a 40 minute walk, because I do think that seems high.
  • lrmall01
    lrmall01 Posts: 377 Member
    Options
    Keep in mind it is just a starting point. Try it for about a month and if you aren't losing weight, re-evaluate what you have been doing and adjust accordingly.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    700 calories burned in a 2 mile walk sounds a bit high. If you search in the cardio exercises for "Walking, 4.5 mph, very, very brisk pace" and enter in 40 minutes it gives you 403 calories. I assume that the number is not based on my weight or my numbers, I assume that if the person is 125lbs/200lbs/300lbs it would give the same number. I am not sure it is all THAT accurate, but gives you a rough estimate.

    Also, heartrate monitors are the way to go... and you can pick up a decent one for ~$80, of course if you spend more money for one that tracks elevation change with a GPS it might be more accurate, but I would start with a decent standard HRM.

    Actually weight very much matters in calculating calories burned. Think of it this way...If during that walk you put on a 150 pound backpack do you think you would burn the exact same number of calories had you gone without it?

    At 387 pounds this woman is wearing a 220 pound backpac know 24/7...that is definitely going to increase her calories burned and not just during intentional exercise.
  • 257_Lag
    257_Lag Posts: 1,249 Member
    Options
    700 calories burned in a 2 mile walk sounds a bit high. If you search in the cardio exercises for "Walking, 4.5 mph, very, very brisk pace" and enter in 40 minutes it gives you 403 calories. I assume that the number is not based on my weight or my numbers, I assume that if the person is 125lbs/200lbs/300lbs it would give the same number. I am not sure it is all THAT accurate, but gives you a rough estimate.

    Also, heartrate monitors are the way to go... and you can pick up a decent one for ~$80, of course if you spend more money for one that tracks elevation change with a GPS it might be more accurate, but I would start with a decent standard HRM.

    Actually weight very much matters in calculating calories burned. Think of it this way...If during that walk you put on a 150 pound backpack do you think you would burn the exact same number of calories had you gone without it?

    At 387 pounds this woman is wearing a 220 pound backpac know 24/7...that is definitely going to increase her calories burned and not just during intentional exercise.

    Agreed! The treadmill calculator that I have used since day one (right or wrong, but I've done ok) shows a burn of 688 for 387, 2 miles, 40 minutes

    Keep it up OP! And welcome!
  • Magdaloonie
    Magdaloonie Posts: 146 Member
    Options

    Yeah what Alice said (and the others)!

    I really just wanted to butt in and say your are awesome! Good luck to you and all the best on your journey! :flowerforyou:

    ^^^ What she said, too!
  • JenniferIsLosingIt
    JenniferIsLosingIt Posts: 595 Member
    Options
    Thanks you guys!! I appreciateit!
  • JenniferIsLosingIt
    JenniferIsLosingIt Posts: 595 Member
    Options
    700 calories burned in a 2 mile walk sounds a bit high. If you search in the cardio exercises for "Walking, 4.5 mph, very, very brisk pace" and enter in 40 minutes it gives you 403 calories. I assume that the number is not based on my weight or my numbers, I assume that if the person is 125lbs/200lbs/300lbs it would give the same number. I am not sure it is all THAT accurate, but gives you a rough estimate.

    Also, heartrate monitors are the way to go... and you can pick up a decent one for ~$80, of course if you spend more money for one that tracks elevation change with a GPS it might be more accurate, but I would start with a decent standard HRM.

    Actually weight very much matters in calculating calories burned. Think of it this way...If during that walk you put on a 150 pound backpack do you think you would burn the exact same number of calories had you gone without it?

    At 387 pounds this woman is wearing a 220 pound backpac know 24/7...that is definitely going to increase her calories burned and not just during intentional exercise.

    Thank you! I was dang do you mean I have been eating too much now! Because everyone was saying my burn was too high!
  • JenniferIsLosingIt
    JenniferIsLosingIt Posts: 595 Member
    Options
    Honestly OP to get to be 387 pounds you were eating more than 3000 calories a day for quite some time. You can definitely lose weight on 2300 calories at your size. 2300 may sound like a lot but if you doubt then I suggest that you eat like you used to eat for a week and log that and see how many calories you have been eating, my guess is that that number will make 2300 look not so large anymore.

    I'm not sure if it is necessary for you to eat back 700 calories for a 2 mile walk though that seems excessive to me.
    ^ This

    I second the suggestion of the person who said you should list yourself as sedentary (since your activity level seems to vary so much) and then log the exercise you get.

    I also agree your burn is probably too high. I would multiply the MFP suggestion by either .50 or .66 and then manually enter THAT number as your calorie burn to avoid overestimation.

    And I would also say you should eat your 2360 most days until MFP asks if you want to readjust. It's definitely easier to "stick with the program" if you aren't perpetually starving and the calories will help keep your body consuming fat (YAY!) instead of lean muscle (BOO!)

    Ok true. Thank you everyone for your imput! It has been so enlightening and helpful!
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    700 calories burned in a 2 mile walk sounds a bit high. If you search in the cardio exercises for "Walking, 4.5 mph, very, very brisk pace" and enter in 40 minutes it gives you 403 calories. I assume that the number is not based on my weight or my numbers, I assume that if the person is 125lbs/200lbs/300lbs it would give the same number. I am not sure it is all THAT accurate, but gives you a rough estimate.

    Also, heartrate monitors are the way to go... and you can pick up a decent one for ~$80, of course if you spend more money for one that tracks elevation change with a GPS it might be more accurate, but I would start with a decent standard HRM.

    Actually weight very much matters in calculating calories burned. Think of it this way...If during that walk you put on a 150 pound backpack do you think you would burn the exact same number of calories had you gone without it?

    At 387 pounds this woman is wearing a 220 pound backpac know 24/7...that is definitely going to increase her calories burned and not just during intentional exercise.

    Thank you! I was dang do you mean I have been eating too much now! Because everyone was saying my burn was too high!

    No I don't think you are eating to much and I think 2300 sounds reasonable actually. Also sounds like you are seeing results so no need to rock the boat there.
  • shrinkingshreya
    shrinkingshreya Posts: 118 Member
    Options
    Awesome! 2 miles in 40 minutes is a wonderful start! Don't be worried to eat more like the other's said for now-- try to fill those calories with healthy foods it will give you more endurance to work out longer and harder! Best of luck on your journey! :flowerforyou:
  • Awesomers
    Awesomers Posts: 144 Member
    Options
    Welcome! I keep my settings on sedentary. When I first started at 289 pounds, it said to eat more than 1600 calories, which I thought was crazy! When I exercise, I add it to my activity log and eat some of those calories back. For about every 5 pounds I have lost, my base calorie goal dropped by 10-20 calories. Make sure you're updating your goals so that you don't accidentally creep up to eating at a maintenance level. Feel free to send me a friend request. I've still got 100 pounds to go!
  • Nedra19455
    Nedra19455 Posts: 241 Member
    Options
    If your activity level varies from day to day depending on your job and your exercise is mostly step-based, it might be worth it to you to get a Fitbit and sync it with MFP. It takes the guesswork out of logging exercise and the fitbit itself is really motivating. Some days I get to 10,000 steps before lunch and other times I need to put more effort into it to reach my goal. Last night at the end of an active day, I realized I was at 45 flights of stairs -- you better believe I "forgot" things on the main floor of the house until I reached 50 flights.

Categories