Weight loss as a math problem, but which numbers are wrong?
Replies
-
First of all we do our best at being as close to accurate as possible but it will never be 100%, now first your logging:
Stay away from the Homemade entries in the database unless they are your recipes - you have no idea what someone else included
Stay away from Generic entries - again many are not accurate
You eat out a lot, and even if the nutritional information is given it's also not as accurate.
As for the fitbit, I love mine and it's actually pretty spot on. I also don't take it as an exact burn as I know nothing will be exact, but it's a nice way to look and see where I can tweak my calories up or down depending on the goal I'm after.
5 lbs in 28 days is damn good and you should be proud of that. The new exercise routine can be increasing water retention as has been stated already0 -
Ok, let me try to work my way through the responses and address them in order.
- Waiting another 4 weeks, check. Not like I was planning to change much at this point anyway
- Keep lifting and eating in a deficit, check
- I never said I expected to lose 10 pounds in 28 days. But at some point the math has to add up, or else one of my inputs is wrong. So the question is around either which input is wrong, or if I just need to wait longer for the bodily fluctuations to catch up.
- Regarding the question if I'm doing "TDEE or MFP method"... I've got myself set at a general daily calorie goal of 2000. I sometimes eat a little more, sometimes a little less. As you can see, the average for the month was just over 2100. Generally what happens is during the week I have no problem sticking to 2000 calories a day, and on the weekends I tend to go over due to social events, etc. So I wouldn't say I'm doing either method, per se. Just working out the details of what a reasonable deficit is going to be for me that allows me to make progress without inhibiting my eating too much.
- Regarding assuming a TDEE of 2740 based on 4 weeks of data, I think I'm going to hold steady for now, but it's a good idea that I will revisit as I accumulate more data. It totally makes sense, but I think I want to have more numbers before I start making assumptions.
- Regarding my weight training. This is new for me starting early January. I have done weight training in the past, but my wife and I just started SL 5x5 this month.
- Regarding increased muscle mass due to weight training, I've been tracking BF% using an Omron handheld that I've had for some time. I know, I know, they're not accurate, but it gives me consistent results from week to week, and I can see a trend line with it. For interests sake, January 9th was 261.6 35.9% BF (93.91lb of fat, 167.69 lean mass) and February 7th was 256.6 35.1% BF (90.07lb of fat, 166.53 lean mass), so both those numbers seem reasonable to me and it doesn't appear that I've increased muscle mass.
- I won't be ditching the fitbit. I like it, and as I said before, I don't think it's off by a large degree, given that the numbers it produces line up well within reason of any TDEE calculators I've played with online.
Thanks again for all the responses and appreciate the excellent (and terrible) suggestions!
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
You've got a great plan and have gotten some really good advice.
My advice is that you need to remember that your body is NOT a simple machine. It's a complex mechanism with many, many variables. So complex that we have several large institutions that are still studying it in depth with billions in research budgets. If it were as simple as "I ate X and exercised Y, so I should weigh Z" we wouldn't need all that research!
It is a science, but it's an incredibly complex one, far more complex than most people realize. Your best bet is to keep tracking and adjusting and having a LOT of patience, so that eventually you can see action->result (btw, you will need far more data than one month for this!), even if the mechanism is unknown. From there, if you drives you crazy (it does me), then do research in nutritional journals to see if a possible mechanism has been identified.0 -
thatstheticket wrote: »Again, now you also are not taking into consideration water retention.
If he had the same tendency for water retention when he began his weight loss journey as he does now, then this extra weight has already been incorporated and can be ignored.
For example:
Starting weight: 180lbs + 5lbs water retention = 185
Ending weight: 170lbs + 5lbs water retention = 175
Net loss is still 10lbs.
This would make sense if water retention was constant over time, which it is certainly not.
If I have something like hot and sour soup or a bunch of pickles (which aren't bad in terms of calories but can have tons of sodium) I will gain about 3-4 lbs.....for a few days. It's just water retention. If he doesn't eat the exact same amount of sodium each day his water retention will go up and down by at least a few lbs.
That's why I weigh myself daily and focus on the 7 day average weight. It will still have some random water weight fluctuations but averaging over a week smooths things out a lot.0 -
Maybe I will get jumped on here but you haven't taken into account any increase in muscle mass, have you always done that amount of excersize?
It's pretty rare to increase muscle mass all that much while eating at a deficit. The goal is to try to preserve as much of your existing muscle as you can while losing fat. But to build more muscle usually requires eating at a modest surplus.
But there could be some newbie gains, sure.
Even newbie gains wouldn't be that great over just a 4 week period.0 -
That part is not true. Fitbits are totally designed for NEAT. A HRM is designed for aerobic zone activities. Fitbits aren't HRMs.There is a pretty simple answer to your dilemma.
First, there will always be some sort of error is food logging. We are never 100% spot on. Our goal is to be as close to accurate as possible.
You just started out with weight training which will cause your body to retain water which will mask losses that should reflect on the scale. You need water retention, it will always be a factor.
Fitbit is not going to give you an accurate number of calories burnt because it's designed for aerobic activities not NEAT.
I say go with the plan of waiting another 4 weeks. Keep it up. Good start so far.
Though I agree that water issues in the first month throw a wrench in your calcs, often.
OP- I did the math over 6+ months and my Fitbit did a good job of predicting my weight loss, over 35 lbs. You could fit the averages less well though, or track food less well. Knowing how much you vary from the predicted is all you need, though. If you want to lose twice as fast as you are, you know how much to reduce your intake by, for example.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
WalkingAlong wrote: »OP- I did the math over 6+ months and my Fitbit did a good job of predicting my weight loss, over 35 lbs. You could fit the averages less well though, or track food less well. Knowing how much you vary from the predicted is all you need, though. If you want to lose twice as fast as you are, you know how much to reduce your intake by, for example.
Good stuff, thanks. Funny enough, since I posted this thread two days ago, I lost 1.5 pounds Sunday morning and another 2 pounds this morning. The body is a complicated machine all right...
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »Fitbits are totally designed for NEAT.
You know the Scooby TDEE calculator? And the one at IIFYM?
That's what is inside a FitBit.
All a FitBit does is use the motion sensor to guess where you are on the Sedentary -> Active scale, and then guess at your calorie burn based on the usual TDEE math you can find at any web site.
0 -
Not exactly, but it does use population averages. The accelerometer compares the motion pattern it detects with motions of various walking/running test databases of people of a similar profile (gender, height, size, etc.) Say it finds that at that moment you appear to be walking 3.8mph, based on your movement. It takes the METS value for that activity from the public compendium and multiplies it by your BMR estimate, for that moment, to get a calorie estimate for that moment. It does that all day and sums them up. So it's a little more sophisticated than saying "low step count = sedentary = 1.2 times BMR".WalkingAlong wrote: »Fitbits are totally designed for NEAT.
You know the Scooby TDEE calculator? And the one at IIFYM?
That's what is inside a FitBit.
All a FitBit does is use the motion sensor to guess where you are on the Sedentary -> Active scale, and then guess at your calorie burn based on the usual TDEE math you can find at any web site.
0 -
I assume trackers are off by 5-10%. They just can't be 100% accurate.
Personally I know now my Fitbit overestimates my burn. Why? Because I'm trying to maintain and have continued to lose weight while eating at/just below my Fitbit burned #. But that will vary by person. And even in our best efforts we can't be 100% accurate on food. So between calorie burn overestimation, consumed underestimation, and potential water weight - you're clearly moving in the right direction.
Continue to focus on the math/science if that's what you need to do. But in the end, if you're weight is less today and your fitness level higher now than 30 days ago: Good job!0 -
To answer the initial question of which number is wrong, they are all somewhat wrong. The TDEE formulas are estimates so they are definitely not 100% accurate. Fitness trackers are estimates so also not 100% accurate. Your estimation of calories consumed is just that, an estimate so also not 100% accurate. And your calculation of weight loss is affected by how hydrated you were at your initial and final weigh in.
It is fine to look at it as a math problem, but it really is more like a science experiment. Each month all of the errors are going to be different. Keep compiling the data and you'll get closer and closer to knowing your "true" TDEE, calorie burns, calories consumed, and relative hydration level. The other problem is that as you're compiling the data you should also be losing weight so the true value of everything will keep moving also.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
subversive99 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »OP- I did the math over 6+ months and my Fitbit did a good job of predicting my weight loss, over 35 lbs. You could fit the averages less well though, or track food less well. Knowing how much you vary from the predicted is all you need, though. If you want to lose twice as fast as you are, you know how much to reduce your intake by, for example.
Good stuff, thanks. Funny enough, since I posted this thread two days ago, I lost 1.5 pounds Sunday morning and another 2 pounds this morning. The body is a complicated machine all right...
This was what I was going to talk about. That "5 lb actual loss" - was it a weight that you weighed in at only one day? As in, do you weigh in once a week or once a day? Weight fluctuations can be pretty wild, especially if you eat more on the weekends, if what you eat contains alcohol or more sodium than normal.
Weight loss is not linear. When I was set to lose 1-2 lbs a week I could see fluctuations of up to 6 lbs in the same week. I entered my weight every day and saw the downward trend, so I didn't care about any single weigh in.0 -
britishbroccoli wrote: »This was what I was going to talk about. That "5 lb actual loss" - was it a weight that you weighed in at only one day? As in, do you weigh in once a week or once a day?.
I usually step on the scale every morning but I only record my weight and BF% once a week so I'm certainly familiar with fluctuations. The idea with weekly weigh in on the same day each week is to gradually eliminate the effect of them.
0 -
Since you use a Fitbit, consider also using Trendweight. Log your weight daily at Fitbit (or get a wifi scale) and watch your 'trend weight' on the Trendweight site. It removes the noise and lets you see a more refined actual trend.0
-
WalkingAlong wrote: »Since you use a Fitbit, consider also using Trendweight. Log your weight daily at Fitbit (or get a wifi scale) and watch your 'trend weight' on the Trendweight site. It removes the noise and lets you see a more refined actual trend.
This is a good idea. I have done that for two years, first with an Excel spreadsheet and now with TrendWeight.com, and it has been very helpful.
OP, you might be interested in the results of one study that showed that laypeople typically underestimated their calorie intake by over 400 calories a day, and even trained dietitians missed around 200 calories a day.
When I started, I was missing around 200 calories a day somewhere, probably a combination of inaccurate food logging and overestimating energy burn. I've now tweaked things so that my logging "works," in that the numbers I log are fairly close to my actual weight loss/maintenance, but that has involved setting my activity level to sedentary (despite a fair amount of time on my feet)—suggesting either that my BMR is near the low end of the range or that I'm still missing some calories. I'm not worried about it, though; as long as I continue to be consistent, I'll do fine.0 -
I only read the first page of comments so sorry if this has been asked/discussed already.... so my polar heart monitor says I burn about 3000 calories a day. Factoring in a 12% margin of error, that puts me at 2640. I usually eat between 1800-2000 calories a day. Let's add 200 calories to say margin of error for tracking to my higher calorie day. 2640-2200= a deficit of 440. That should be almost a pound a week weight loss. Based off of Slinfold tests, pictures, and scale my weight has not changed.... WTH?0
-
subversive99 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »OP- I did the math over 6+ months and my Fitbit did a good job of predicting my weight loss, over 35 lbs. You could fit the averages less well though, or track food less well. Knowing how much you vary from the predicted is all you need, though. If you want to lose twice as fast as you are, you know how much to reduce your intake by, for example.
Good stuff, thanks. Funny enough, since I posted this thread two days ago, I lost 1.5 pounds Sunday morning and another 2 pounds this morning. The body is a complicated machine all right...
I was gonna post - yes it takes 3500 calories to make a pound, but your body still has to process all of that food and turn it into energy and person, or vice versa. That isn't going to happen at the same exact rate 24/7.
0 -
Cheyenne_K_ wrote: »....so my polar heart monitor says I burn about 3000 calories a day. Factoring in a 12% margin of error...
Your margin of error is WAY higher than that, because you are using your HRM completely incorrectly.
0 -
mburgess458 wrote: »If he had the same tendency for water retention when he began his weight loss journey as he does now, then this extra weight has already been incorporated and can be ignored.
For example:
Starting weight: 180lbs + 5lbs water retention = 185
Ending weight: 170lbs + 5lbs water retention = 175
Net loss is still 10lbs.
This would make sense if water retention was constant over time, which it is certainly not.
If I have something like hot and sour soup or a bunch of pickles (which aren't bad in terms of calories but can have tons of sodium) I will gain about 3-4 lbs.....for a few days. It's just water retention. If he doesn't eat the exact same amount of sodium each day his water retention will go up and down by at least a few lbs.
That's why I weigh myself daily and focus on the 7 day average weight. It will still have some random water weight fluctuations but averaging over a week smooths things out a lot.
True! What you say makes sense.
In this case it is more of a simplified situation, similar to what happens with me. My "water weight" still fluctuates the same +/- 2lbs and this hasn't changed after losing weight.
I just ignore the gains and focus on the losses!! It does seem to average itself out like you say and has worked for me so far
0 -
So, thought I'd post my progress after 4 more weeks, so those following along can see the update. Also maybe this will help some analytically inclined folks to sort out their own numbers.
Second 4 weeks data (Feb 7 - Mar 6, 2015)
Eaten 68401
Burned 95106
Expected Loss -7.63
Actual Loss -4.1
Total Data for 8 Weeks (Jan 10 - Mar 6, 2015)
Eaten - 127656 (2279/day avg)
Burned - 190036 (3393/day avg)
Deficit - 62380 (1113/day avg)
Total Expected Loss - 17.82lb
Total Actual Loss - 9.10 lb
So, what am I taking from this? Well, if I play around with numbers I can see that if I assume my TDEE is being overestimated by 10% and my calorie counting is being underestimated by 10%, the numbers match up almost exactly to the actual loss.
In reality, I will try to focus on sticking to the 2000 calorie/day goal I have set for myself a bit more strictly. If I could bring that average down from 2279/day to 2000/day, that would result in an extra 3.2 pounds lost per 8 weeks, shortening my path to maintenance by a non-trivial amount.0 -
Just wanted to add, that I wear a Mifit Flash right now, no though for me it's more. Reminder to get up and do things.... Today my whole family has the flu, and I spent 1.5hours rocking my 11month old who is miserable and the Misfit tracked me doing 3000steps... I laughed when I saw that!
So as great as trackers can be, they don't know the difference between me walking and the motion from the chair. So I always assume my tracker will over estimate by about 15% each day. (Today obviously being more)0 -
subversive99 wrote: »Well, if I play around with numbers I can see that if I assume my TDEE is being overestimated by 10% and my calorie counting is being underestimated by 10%, the numbers match up almost exactly to the actual loss.
Sounds reasonable. In fact, I'd assume that, for most people outside of a laboratory setting, it would be near-impossible *not* to underestimate calorie counting by 10-15%.
The absolute numbers don't matter. As long as you're consistently off by about the same amount, it should work on the directional numbers.0 -
Little update here. Progress continues. Making it a math problem is still working for me. Been through 4 x 4 week spans now. Here are the total numbers.
Weeks 1-4
Eaten: 59255
Burned: 94930
Expected Loss: 10.19
Actual Loss: 5
Weeks 5-8
Eaten: 68401
Burned: 95106
Expected Loss: 7.63
Actual Loss: 4.1
Weeks 9-12 (nearly 3 week stall in here...)
Eaten: 75085
Burned: 97578
Expected Loss: 6.43
Actual Loss: 1.6
Weeks 13-16
Eaten: 72671
Burned: 96805
Expected Loss: 6.9
Actual Loss: 4.9
Total for 16 weeks:
Eaten: 275412
Burned: 384419
Expected: 31.14
Actual: 15.6
So, am I upset that my actual loss doesn't match my expected loss? Not at all. I now know that I can safely assume 10% under counting on my food tracking, and 10% over estimation on my burn rate from fitbit. I am sitting at almost exactly 1 pound per week of actual loss, which is a great and sustainable rate, while eating a lot of delicious food.
See below for my trendweight chart to date.
0 -
Very cool. Thanks for sharing your data
Another thing to keep in mind, not sure if this was mentioned, is that TDEE is always an estimate in the first place, so overtime if your logging is (relatively accurate) you will get a better idea of your actual TDEE.0 -
Cheyenne_K_ wrote: »I only read the first page of comments so sorry if this has been asked/discussed already.... so my polar heart monitor says I burn about 3000 calories a day. Factoring in a 12% margin of error, that puts me at 2640. I usually eat between 1800-2000 calories a day. Let's add 200 calories to say margin of error for tracking to my higher calorie day. 2640-2200= a deficit of 440. That should be almost a pound a week weight loss. Based off of Slinfold tests, pictures, and scale my weight has not changed.... WTH?
A HRM is not designed to be worn all day. You're eating too much.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »I've done this. Actually I've done this twice, over 8 weeks in the fall of 2013, shortly after starting MFP, and over 9 weeks in the fall of 2014. But I did it to calculate my NEET (the amount of exercise I get from week to week is way too variable to go with TDEE), and got a number more than 200 calories higher than MFP calculated in 2013, and a number about 400 calories higher than MFP calculated in 2014. It didn't send me down some rabbit hole trying to figure out what I was doing wrong. I did a mental happy dance -- more food if I want it, more weight loss if I don't. No need to try to stick to the miserable 1460 calories MFP originally suggested.
Instead of assuming the TDEE calculators are right, why not just assume your logging of calories consumed is correct, add the 59,255 calories you ate over four weeks, the calorie equivalent of the five pounds you lost (17,550), and divide by 28 to find your "real" TDEE of 2740. Even if the TDEE calculators are right and there's something wrong with your logging, isn't it a whole lot simpler to use the TDEE that reflects the way you log, rather than to try to figure out where the mysterious problem(s) is/are in your logging, and then try to find a way to correct them? Your TDEE is 2740 "OP calories," where "OP calories" are the units in which the OP measures the energy in food and the energy his body uses.
I went with 8 weeks of data because I'm a woman, and I wanted to smooth out the hormonal fluctuations. I would think 4 weeks of data would be enough for a man, but, hey, in another 4 weeks you can toss two months of data together and see what you get.
Best of luck. Embrace the numbers.
I'm pretty sure this is the best advice I've seen on MFP to date, and I'm kind of pissed I didn't come up with it.0 -
subversive99 wrote: »So, am I upset that my actual loss doesn't match my expected loss? Not at all. I now know that I can safely assume 10% under counting on my food tracking, and 10% over estimation on my burn rate from fitbit. I am sitting at almost exactly 1 pound per week of actual loss, which is a great and sustainable rate, while eating a lot of delicious food.
WINNING!0
This discussion has been closed.
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