Logging accuracy, consistency, and you're probably eating more than you think.
Replies
-
Absolutely. When I'm logging accurately and not "forgetting" (ahem), I start to lose immediately, especially when I'm working out 4-5 times a week. And I like how you talked about well intentioned. I've been guilty of both avoiding the fact that I indulged and didn't log and also forgetting to log one fun size candy bar (or three - hee hee). If I logged precisely every day and watched my macros more diligently, my gains would be more substantial than they are now. But, I'm progressing. I'm getting better at it and becoming more accountable for my over eats.0
-
Strong brown nosing because I give kudos to an actual friend that wrote a good post. Hmmmmm. Interesting.WalkingAlong wrote: »
Strong brown-nosing, MrM, as always.Strong posts SS, as always.
Of course there are already a few that feel it doesn't apply to them because they are different.
Of course not every post applies to everyone. You know your logging is fine when your deficit over a long period equates to your observed weight change.
That's right, support your friends! It happens against our will sometimes. We DO actually make friends here.
0 -
So ... how inaccurate do people have to be exactly? Say you are eating 1200 calories every day, but in reality you are eating 1900 calories everyday, but you should be maintaining weight if you eat 2200 calories a day .... you should still be losing weight right? Can people really eat another 2-3 meals worth of calories and just .... not notice?0
-
So ... how inaccurate do people have to be exactly? Say you are eating 1200 calories every day, but in reality you are eating 1900 calories everyday, but you should be maintaining weight if you eat 2200 calories a day .... you should still be losing weight right? Can people really eat another 2-3 meals worth of calories and just .... not notice?
The point is, if you think you are eating 1,200 calories a day and your maintenance is 2,200, you would be expecting a 2lb a week loss - but if you are actually eating 1,900, it would be a 1/3rd of that.
However, those are extremes. Many people have a weight loss goal of much less than 2lb a week. For example, if someones maintenance is 2,000 and they are looking to lose about 2/3lb a week - that is only 333 calories - not 2 - 3 meals - in fact less than 2 servings of peanut butter or a serving of some ice creams.
0 -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12396160
The dietitians underreported their energy intake obtained from the food records by an average of 223 +/- 116 kcal/day, which was not different from their energy expenditure. Participants in the control group, as hypothesized, significantly underreported their energy intake (429 +/- 142 kcal/day, P < .05).
Amen to this. In my first few weeks on MFP I was missing about 200 calories a day, between overestimating exercise and underestimating food. I had a 750 calorie deficit set, so I was still losing weight at a reasonable rate, but it did open my eyes to how easy it was to make a mistake. That now serves me in good stead, as I approach my goal weight and have a much smaller daily deficit planned.
So if dietitians under report so must boxed foods in freezers. I just focus more on the use up the calories. Spend less time behind the computer and keep moving. What is TDEE? The web site suggested in post was well to complicated.
Thanks for the post it is a good read.
Patsy
Lutz Fl0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Not necessarily, because it depends on if that 1/2 cup actually weighs 35 grams.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Not necessarily, because it depends on if that 1/2 cup actually weighs 35 grams.
I gave the normal cup measurements but I use a scale, and it's 40g not 35g since we are being precise here.0 -
Nice to see that some of the voices of reason stuck around to help after the format change...0
-
I joined Weight Watchers and find I am again losing weight. WW seems to make me far more accountable with accuracy than any other program. Plus I have found I have upped my power foods greatly and that has made a huge difference in a higher energy level for me. Seems I am a believer that no one thing works for everyone, we each have to find what works for us as individuals. Just wish there was a way that MFP, Fitbit ONE and WW could all be linked to receive each others daily information on my windows phone.0
-
I bought a scale last week, so I've been weighing and logging accurately for the last five or six days. I was maintaining or gaining for the last few weeks, and now I am losing again. I learned I was WAY under calculating meat and pasta, and overcalculating veggies and fruits. Knowing how much I was really eating, and actually increasing a little bit my calorie goal and my protein intake, I am losing again.3
-
This has probably been said before, but electronic weighing scales are amazing and can be found relatively cheap these days. Definitely a great investment buy. You'll also probably be surprised how little some recommended serving sizes are, but equally surprised how they are still satisfying.1
-
Something which needs to be understood is the amount of calories burned with exercise.
Based on my own weight loss of Zero in 6 months.
My typical daily food intake:
Breakfast:
1 Muller rice original = 182 kcal
Mid Morning:
1 punnet Tesco Melon & Grapes 400g = 130 kcal
Lunch:
1 tin Heinz Vegetable Soup = 188 kcal
Dinner:
1 Jacket potato approx 200g = approx 220 kcal ( 1.1kcal per gram )
1/2 tin heinz beans = 164 kcal
Drinks:
Throughout the day I will consume approx 10 mugs de-caff coffee with semi skimmed milk = 20 kcal per mug = 200 kcal total
Approx 10 glasses of water = zero kcal
Exceptions:
Friday mid morning I have an english breakfast which replaces the fruit punnet
2 eggs
2 sausage
2 bacon
1/2 tin heinz beans
1 slice toast ( dry )
Total approx 1000 kcal
My Job is predominantly sat down ( office job ) but I still manage at least 6000 steps per day according to my pedometer.
Excersize:
3 times per week minimum includes at least 1 high intensity
Indoor Cycle trainer for 1 hour exercise burning from 300 to 700 calories per session depending on intensity ( according to my garmin edge 500 )
Outdoors exercise = variable amount of time from 30 mins to 5 hours outdoors depending on weather, 1/2 of calories burned are replaced with food during the ride ( usually carbs by way of bananas and a single energy drink ). Calorie Burn according to my Garmin 500 = approx 500 per hour
my BMR = 1720
according to www.bmi-calculator.net
Kcal count per week without the outdoor exercise:
In ( without weekend cycling ) = approx 8500
Out BMR only = 12040
Out with indoor excercise = between 1300 and 1700
That is a deficit of 4800 minimum per week yet no weight loss in 6 months.
I do NOT forget to log calories eaten regardless of how insignificant they seem to be.
I eat pretty much the same thing every day, there are some variations which are ALL logged.
My conclusion:
Either some or all of the below are true
Labels on food are not accurate
Fresh food calorie information is not accurate
BMR calculations are complete crap
Calories burned during exercise based on hear rate not accurate.0 -
I think that BMR estimators are just that, estimators. You might be different from the average BMR for someone of your inputs by hundreds of calories.andyarceye wrote: »My conclusion:
Either some or all of the below are true
Labels on food are not accurate
Fresh food calorie information is not accurate
BMR calculations are complete crap
Calories burned during exercise based on hear rate not accurate.
Same for heart rate monitors. They were designed to monitor heart rate, not provide calorie estimates, and they can be very wrong.
Calorie data is all just estimates, too. And the human element introduces even more error. We virtually all think we don't miss significant calories in our logging but studies suggest we all do. We also all think we don't run a stop sign now and then but how would we know when the definition of the problem is "something we missed"?
0 -
Im new on this site..I know this topic was written a lil ways back....I enjoyed this..I am trying to figure out all the weights and cups myself..I dont have a scale I am trusting that the pkg is correct...I will be shopping for one today..I also learned already that if I snoop thru the data base before I cook my meal I can get closer to target..Example today I wanted to lower my calories and up my sodium just a little due to cramping..So I looked up every single item..LOL It was YUMMY0
-
I clearly underestimating sense Im losing more than what I have set up to lose per week.1
-
A food scale is a must have.0
-
Do you guys ever go on 'diet' breaks, like I have around 2-3kg left to lose, and sometimes for a week I'll just eat maintenance calories and then go back to eating at a deficit the next week. (I'm going to also do this week beginning 22nd December so I can enjoy the holidays ^^) I know it slows down weight loss, but I find it quite easy and flexible to do, and it makes losing weight seem natural, I dunno haha2
-
draco25000 wrote: »Do you guys ever go on 'diet' breaks, like I have around 2-3kg left to lose, and sometimes for a week I'll just eat maintenance calories and then go back to eating at a deficit the next week. (I'm going to also do this week beginning 22nd December so I can enjoy the holidays ^^) I know it slows down weight loss, but I find it quite easy and flexible to do, and it makes losing weight seem natural, I dunno haha
I do for sure! Sometimes, it's just good for my sanity and others, it's because of things like holidays.2 -
draco25000 wrote: »Do you guys ever go on 'diet' breaks, like I have around 2-3kg left to lose, and sometimes for a week I'll just eat maintenance calories and then go back to eating at a deficit the next week. (I'm going to also do this week beginning 22nd December so I can enjoy the holidays ^^) I know it slows down weight loss, but I find it quite easy and flexible to do, and it makes losing weight seem natural, I dunno haha
When I first started and lost my weight over about a year, I had a couple of diet breaks (and there are some 'natural' times to take them - over the holidays, vacations etc). I found they were very useful to get my hormones back into whack and just give myself a mental break. It helped with adherence over the longer term. I took one every three to four months and did them for 2 weeks.
1 -
I don't know where I'd be without my food scale. It's not expensive or super fancy, but that dinky little terror gets the job done. That, my HRM, and MFP have been the most important tools for my weight loss. There's no way I could have done it with just measuring cups.0
-
I am curious about the credentials of those who insist that the ONLY reason someone is not losing weight is because they are "over" eating. There are plenty of hormonal issues - especially thyroid but there are others - that impact a person's ability to shed pounds. It is ridiculous to claim that X calorie deficit will equal X pounds lost for each and every person - and if you don't fit into that formula you are doing it wrong.
You may also note that in one of the original linked studies the author's conclusion was that "some" people are eating more than they think and therefore are unable to lose weight. That means some people who are struggling to lose are accurately recording their calorie intake.
I have no doubt that some people do under report their intake and that is the cause of their inability to lose. But to state unequivocally that under reporting is THE ONLY reason an individual is struggling to lose is frankly irresponsible - unless you are the person's doctor and you have performed a full medical work-up.0 -
LinetShore wrote: »I am curious about the credentials of those who insist that the ONLY reason someone is not losing weight is because they are "over" eating. There are plenty of hormonal issues - especially thyroid but there are others - that impact a person's ability to shed pounds. It is ridiculous to claim that X calorie deficit will equal X pounds lost for each and every person - and if you don't fit into that formula you are doing it wrong.
You may also note that in one of the original linked studies the author's conclusion was that "some" people are eating more than they think and therefore are unable to lose weight. That means some people who are struggling to lose are accurately recording their calorie intake.
I have no doubt that some people do under report their intake and that is the cause of their inability to lose. But to state unequivocally that under reporting is THE ONLY reason an individual is struggling to lose is frankly irresponsible - unless you are the person's doctor and you have performed a full medical work-up.
It doesn't matter. Energy is not created from nothing. If you aren't losing weight, regardless of medical issues, you are eating at your maintenance level. Eat less to lose.0 -
LinetShore wrote: »I am curious about the credentials of those who insist that the ONLY reason someone is not losing weight is because they are "over" eating. There are plenty of hormonal issues - especially thyroid but there are others - that impact a person's ability to shed pounds. It is ridiculous to claim that X calorie deficit will equal X pounds lost for each and every person - and if you don't fit into that formula you are doing it wrong.
You may also note that in one of the original linked studies the author's conclusion was that "some" people are eating more than they think and therefore are unable to lose weight. That means some people who are struggling to lose are accurately recording their calorie intake.
I have no doubt that some people do under report their intake and that is the cause of their inability to lose. But to state unequivocally that under reporting is THE ONLY reason an individual is struggling to lose is frankly irresponsible - unless you are the person's doctor and you have performed a full medical work-up.
1). Please present an example where long term calorie deficits do not result in weight loss.
2) I did not state unequivocally that the only reason for stalled weight loss is under reporting. Your last paragraph is a huge strawman.
0 -
LinetShore wrote: »I am curious about the credentials of those who insist that the ONLY reason someone is not losing weight is because they are "over" eating. There are plenty of hormonal issues - especially thyroid but there are others - that impact a person's ability to shed pounds. It is ridiculous to claim that X calorie deficit will equal X pounds lost for each and every person - and if you don't fit into that formula you are doing it wrong.
You may also note that in one of the original linked studies the author's conclusion was that "some" people are eating more than they think and therefore are unable to lose weight. That means some people who are struggling to lose are accurately recording their calorie intake.
I have no doubt that some people do under report their intake and that is the cause of their inability to lose. But to state unequivocally that under reporting is THE ONLY reason an individual is struggling to lose is frankly irresponsible - unless you are the person's doctor and you have performed a full medical work-up.
Where are the assertions that you are saying are being made? You are trying to make a point that is not even in line with the subject matter of the OP. So, before you talk about people being irresponsible, you may want to re-read the OP and use more critical and unbiased thinking.
0 -
I know I do not eat exactly the number of calories that my log shows. However, I think I am pretty close, especially on a weekly basis. Since logging regularly the past few months my weight loss has picked up significantly, so I am confident I am reasonably accurate.
I do not have or want a scale, so I weigh nothing. I do measure many foods. My veggies are frozen. If a bag of broccoli has 5 servings and I eat the entire thing in a week, whether I had 1.3 servings Monday and .7 servings on Tuesday, or exactly one serving each day, by the time the bag is empty it is exactly 5 servings. The frozen chicken breasts I buy come in a bag with 10 servings but only 5 or 6 breasts. Not all are exactly the same size, but I call each breast two servings. But I have chicken almost every day...in the course of a week or 10 days, I will have exactly 10 4-ounce servings...this is good enough for my purposes and doesn't take much time or effort on my part. Anything that is high calorie...olive oil or or peanut butter I measure by the spoonful. I count individual almonds. Usually I just eyeball the broccoli, because when something is 25 calories per serving, whether you have one serving or two doesn't mean much in the big scheme of things.
I do know that I record every single bite of food I take...so the only error in my case in not estimating quantity perfectly but I am not far off and this evens out over a week or two. So while it is nicer to lose 1.6 pounds in a week than 1.4 pounds, as long as I am consistently losing in that range I am not worried. Being off by 100 calories a day, or even two hundred, will not dramatically impact weight loss.4 -
Remember that you don't have to weigh everything all the time.
But a scale is essential to calibrate your judgment - I grossly underestimated how much peanut butter I was using
0 -
It's all a math game...well math and chemistry, which is really just physics.
When deficit goals are larger, you have more wiggle room for error while still losing. Generally speaking, I'd guess that people many people are ok with not losing X amount per week as long as they haven't stalled.
When deficit goals are smaller, that margin for error also decreases. Energy needs usually also decrease as weight is lost-unless activity is steadily increased to compensate. The closer your deficit target is to your maintenance, the easier it is to make a mistake and either hit maintenance or go over.
And from my own experience, I can say it makes sense with how I viewed tracking. When I was 80lbs over weight, I didn't track at all. I just kind of ate "better" (with no real thought or strategy on what that meant) and went to the gym. And I lost steadily.
As I've gotten closer to my goal weight, at 20 lbs from my goal weight, my energy needs have decreased along with my deficit (for various reasons), and I have to pay much more attention to the accuracy and precision of my tracking.0 -
MoiAussi93 wrote: »Being off by 100 calories a day, or even two hundred, will not dramatically impact weight loss.
If your goal is lose 0.5lbs a week, then being off by 100-200 calories/day would definitely impact weight loss.
Individual context and scope is important.
0 -
MoiAussi93 wrote: »I know I do not eat exactly the number of calories that my log shows. However, I think I am pretty close, especially on a weekly basis. Since logging regularly the past few months my weight loss has picked up significantly, so I am confident I am reasonably accurate.
I do not have or want a scale, so I weigh nothing. I do measure many foods. My veggies are frozen. If a bag of broccoli has 5 servings and I eat the entire thing in a week, whether I had 1.3 servings Monday and .7 servings on Tuesday, or exactly one serving each day, by the time the bag is empty it is exactly 5 servings. The frozen chicken breasts I buy come in a bag with 10 servings but only 5 or 6 breasts. Not all are exactly the same size, but I call each breast two servings. But I have chicken almost every day...in the course of a week or 10 days, I will have exactly 10 4-ounce servings...this is good enough for my purposes and doesn't take much time or effort on my part. Anything that is high calorie...olive oil or or peanut butter I measure by the spoonful. I count individual almonds. Usually I just eyeball the broccoli, because when something is 25 calories per serving, whether you have one serving or two doesn't mean much in the big scheme of things.
I do know that I record every single bite of food I take...so the only error in my case in not estimating quantity perfectly but I am not far off and this evens out over a week or two. So while it is nicer to lose 1.6 pounds in a week than 1.4 pounds, as long as I am consistently losing in that range I am not worried. Being off by 100 calories a day, or even two hundred, will not dramatically impact weight loss.
If your weight loss is ticking along at a nice rate, then there is no real reason to change what you are doing (unless you want more/more accurate data). To quote the OP..."when fat loss stalls' (or even is slower than you expect and you are not happy with that rate) it's something to consider looking at.
0 -
draco25000 wrote: »Do you guys ever go on 'diet' breaks, like I have around 2-3kg left to lose, and sometimes for a week I'll just eat maintenance calories and then go back to eating at a deficit the next week. (I'm going to also do this week beginning 22nd December so I can enjoy the holidays ^^) I know it slows down weight loss, but I find it quite easy and flexible to do, and it makes losing weight seem natural, I dunno haha
When I first started and lost my weight over about a year, I had a couple of diet breaks (and there are some 'natural' times to take them - over the holidays, vacations etc). I found they were very useful to get my hormones back into whack and just give myself a mental break. It helped with adherence over the longer term. I took one every three to four months and did them for 2 weeks.
You did a diet break 2 weeks?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions