This is all driving me insane! (long)

alyusha2
alyusha2 Posts: 16 Member
edited November 23 in Health and Weight Loss
With all the apps and calculators out there giving me different results as to how much I should be eating, I am left very confused as to how much I should actually be eating in order to lose weight! I think the part that annoys me the most about it all is it asks me how active I am, and I put in a category of "not at all", "light", "Moderate" etc.. Well, I do not feel that accurately describes my daily activity level!

Some calculators I put in my info and it tells me to eat 1200 calories, some say 3700, some say 4400. How do I know what is right? This is a HUGE gap and the difference between 1200 and 4400 calories a day is almost a pound a day!

I am not sure if anyone can offer any assistance, and if so, I will list my details and rough daily exercise. I am also looking for friends! Thank you all in advance for any helpful information!

I am 27 years old, 69 inches tall and Male. Currently I weigh 251 pounds.
According to my favorite result from any calculator (i understand these are never exact)(this is also not my TDEE) my BMR is 2,112 calories a day.

I work from home, so it is rather hard to put this to exercise, because some days I sit on my butt for a few hours, others I walk over 15,000 steps.

Additionally

Monday - Friday, I try to log at least 10 miles on bicycle, and according to my HR monitor, I burn on average 1,200ish calories doing so. I also try to walk my dog each day averaging 2 miles and again according to my heart rate monitor, this burns 571 calories.

On Saturday or Sunday, I try to do about 20 miles ob bicycle, which burns about 2,400 calories.

So Based upon all this, My weekly burn is about 11,255 calories from activities that deviate from work, daily walking (that is not planned) and other things such as my BMR.

My goal is to loose 2 pounds per week ( I would rather more, but lets keep it safe). Now the way I take this is if my weekly calorie burn + my weekly BMR = 26,039 cal, and the goal is to have a deficit of 7,000 (for 2 LBs per week) that would put my daily caloric needs at 2,720 cal per day. Right?

(Math below)
11,255cal (from activites) + 14,784cal (from BMR) = 26,039cal
26,039 - 7,000cal = 19,039cal
19,039 / 7days = 2,720 calories a day.

Am I right in assuming that eating this along with my before mentioned daily activity, I will safely lose exactly 2 pounds per week? Or is there something that I am completely missing here?

I do this on a weekly basis, assuming I will need to recalculate weekly.

Very sorry for the long post! Thank you again.

Replies

  • davidmanfred
    davidmanfred Posts: 20 Member
    I'm not sure about the daily allowance but the bicycle calories you are getting seem way off. As a 230lbs male I was lucky if I could burn 1000cal per hour on a 17mph+ average speed ride. If you are getting 1200 cal per 10 miles either you are covering those miles at a staggering 20mph average or your HRM is calculating something incorrectly. I have been riding for 35 years and feel confident in these calorie numbers. Check out this calculator on Bicycling magazine for a good starting point for accurate cycling calorie burn: http://www.bicycling.com/training/weight-loss/cycling-calories-burned-calculator

    When I started, with an intermediate activity level and 245lbs of mass, MFP recommended ~1900cal per day to lose 2 lbs per week. I mostly stay within this and lose on average 1 lb per week, I eat a portion of my exercise calories. In my experience MFP gives a good base line as long as you can identify your activity level properly. I bike commute 125 miles per week and list myself as active and the results are as above. I have learned that if you trend towards these calculators as being optimistic it makes it easier to actually hit your goals.
  • codename_steve
    codename_steve Posts: 255 Member
    First off- you can't calculate "exactly 2 pounds" because weight loss isn't exact, even with perfect math. However, you math does look sound. Another issue I have with this is your activity calculations. A person of average weight burns about 100 calories per mile. So at your current weight, I can't imagine you'd burn more than 150 per mile (walking/running). Of course this adjusts based on intensity and your weight, but 571 for 2 miles, seems crazy high. I use the Garmin Vivosmart and when I have the heart rate chest strap on, my calories burned are around 3,000 for the day, but my calculations are around 2200. Try instead using an app on your phone. I like mapmyrun.com (you can track real time with GPS, or input after), it seems pretty on point and accounts for speed and elevation changes.
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    You have analysis paralysis.

    Fill out your MFP profile as sedentary with a goal of 2 lbs lost per week. Log your exercise calories. Compare your hrm results to a few online exercise calculators to see if the numbers are reasonable, keeping in mind that they may vary by 10% or so. Eat your exercise calories. Do this for four weeks. Then evaluate your results. Are you losing too quickly? Eat more. Are you losing too slowly? Eat less.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    edited August 2015
    I like http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/ myself. I'd put you as moderately active. That would put you at 2600 calories to lose 2 pounds a week, which seems overkill frankly with your stats, 2880 to lose 1.5 pound, and 3100 to lose 1 pound. Remember though, if you're losing too fast or not enough, you can always adjust your calories.

    MFP is nice because it takes into account your every day activity (job, errands etc) then you just have to add your exercise calories (ideally, you only want to eat back half because it overestimates a lot).

    I don't know what kind of heart rate monitor you're using but there is just no way your numbers are accurate. Does it have a chest strap? Did you enter your information properly? That just sounds way off.
  • soapsandropes
    soapsandropes Posts: 269 Member
    I think that your HR monitor is overestimating your burn, that is tremendous for a 2 mile walk with a dog. For example, yesterday I walked 2.59 miles at an under 16min/mile pace and burned 202 calories (based on the Runmeter app). Now I am female and lighter than you but that still a huge difference.

    I have my activity level set to sedentary and then add in my exercise, that ups my calories for the day. I assume that the calorie burns are high so I eat back some but not all of them. Extra walking as part of work is just bonus.
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    edited August 2015
    jemhh wrote: »
    You have analysis paralysis.

    Fill out your MFP profile as sedentary with a goal of 2 lbs lost per week. Log your exercise calories. Compare your hrm results to a few online exercise calculators to see if the numbers are reasonable, keeping in mind that they may vary by 10% or so. Eat your exercise calories. Do this for four weeks. Then evaluate your results. Are you losing too quickly? Eat more. Are you losing too slowly? Eat less.

    Alternately, if you'd rather just eat the same every day and not worry about logging exercise you could pick a number in the neighborhood of 2500-2700 to eat every day. And then do that for 4 weeks, logging as accurately as possible all intake, and then reassess the number at the end based on how hungry you were, how much energy you have for workouts, and the rate of loss.

    If you were my husband or someone I loved, I'd make sure you ate at least 2000-2200 every day and that you tried to stress out less about "exact" right or "perfect" numbers for your TDEE at the start. It's all just estimates until you have 4-6 weeks of good data. At that point, you don't need estimates and calculators anymore, since you'll have real results to base your next step on.

    Good luck, ok?
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    WBB55 wrote: »
    jemhh wrote: »
    You have analysis paralysis.

    Fill out your MFP profile as sedentary with a goal of 2 lbs lost per week. Log your exercise calories. Compare your hrm results to a few online exercise calculators to see if the numbers are reasonable, keeping in mind that they may vary by 10% or so. Eat your exercise calories. Do this for four weeks. Then evaluate your results. Are you losing too quickly? Eat more. Are you losing too slowly? Eat less.

    Alternately, if you'd rather just eat the same every day and not worry about logging exercise you could pick a number in the neighborhood of 2500-2700 to eat every day. And then do that for 4 weeks, logging as accurately as possible all intake, and then reassess the number at the end based on how hungry you were, how much energy you have for workouts, and the rate of loss.

    If you were my husband or someone I loved, I'd make sure you ate at least 2000-2200 every day and that you tried to stress out less about "exact" right or "perfect" numbers. It's all just estimates until you have 4-6 weeks of good data. At that point, you don't need estimates and calculators anymore, since you'll have real results to base your next step on.

    Good luck, ok?

    Agreed! On all of it.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    edited August 2015
    I think your math sounds correct. If it were me, I'd eat that amount for a month and see what progress I made, then adjust if necessary.
  • BurnWithBarn2015
    BurnWithBarn2015 Posts: 1,026 Member
    edited August 2015
    The huge differences is because some sites calculate with exercise others without. All depends what kinda calculator you have
    MFP does NEAT ( your deficit is build in btw)

    So without exercise...The meaning is that you add your exercise to it...and that you eat the amount MFP gives...around that total...But because of the over estimation of a lot of HRM/gadgets/devices/training's machines
    members tend to eat a part of those "given" extra calories

    So like MFP says you need to eat 1500 daily to lose 2 pounds a week. You exercise 250 calories extra that day.
    so MFP says eat around 1750 calories....but most members eat half back of those extra calories so 1625 calories that day.
  • alyusha2
    alyusha2 Posts: 16 Member
    Thanks everyone for the information. I will follow it and adjust if need be.

    Honestly, I have felt that something was with the monitor also. But I have cross checked it several times to make sure its accurate, and it always comes up pretty close to a self test (counting pulse for 10 seconds times by 6). I use a Polar Heart Rate chest strap with smart Bluetooth. I use either the polar beat app, or the MapMyRide app, and MapMyRide seems to say I burned more calories than the Polar app for the exact same activity.

    I will do as some suggested and cross check it with online data averages. But now my suspicions are worse about the monitor. I thought it would be a great idea, but maybe it is more hassle than it is worth. I for sure am not keeping a 20 MPH+ pace for 10 miles. I just did a quick cycling calorie counter, and 81 minutes for my weight at 10-12 MPH is about 970 calories, and walking 1.7 miles in 36 mins is about 278, so for some reason my monitor and or app app is recording about 200-300 over.
  • bwogilvie
    bwogilvie Posts: 2,130 Member
    davidmanfred wrote: »
    I'm not sure about the daily allowance but the bicycle calories you are getting seem way off. As a 230lbs male I was lucky if I could burn 1000cal per hour on a 17mph+ average speed ride. If you are getting 1200 cal per 10 miles either you are covering those miles at a staggering 20mph average or your HRM is calculating something incorrectly. I have been riding for 35 years and feel confident in these calorie numbers.

    I will second this point. At 225 lb. I was burning about 50 calories per mile on a spirited ride in the hills (14-16 mph). Now, at 150 lb., it's around 30-35 calories per mile at 15-18 mph, and more like 18-20 calories per mile when I'm on a leisurely ride at 10-12 mph. 120 calories per mile is a great exaggeration, unless you are riding uphill fast and your rear brake is stuck.

    Heart rate monitor calorie estimates are only reliable for moderate to intense, steady-state cardio. Unless you're out of shape, walking your dog isn't intense enough. Moreover, the heart rate formula that many HRMs use (following Keytel et al., Journal of Sports Sciences, 2005) accounts for only 73.4% of variance in energy expenditure, meaning that 26.6% of the variance in energy expenditure among the test subjects was due to something other than heart rate, sex, age, and weight.

    For cycling, a good reality check is Curt Austin's Bike Calculator. Choose your units, enter your weight, bicycle weight, riding position, slope, headwind, distance, and speed, and it will estimate the number of calories burned. It's usually lower than what HRMs and fitness databases report. On flat ground, rider weight doesn't make as much of a difference as you think; above 12 mph, energy is primarily expended in countering wind resistance, which depends on your frontal surface area, which increases, speaking very roughly, as the square root of body weight.
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    edited August 2015
    alyusha2 wrote: »
    and 81 minutes for my weight at 10-12 MPH is about 970 calories,

    That seems awfully high as well. Granted I'm smaller than you, but I usually figure about 400 calories/hour biking and I usually ride around 13-14 mph on average.

    A lot depends on how hilly your route is as well.
  • alyusha2
    alyusha2 Posts: 16 Member
    bwogilvie wrote: »
    davidmanfred wrote: »

    For cycling, a good reality check is Curt Austin's Bike Calculator. Choose your units, enter your weight, bicycle weight, riding position, slope, headwind, distance, and speed, and it will estimate the number of calories burned. It's usually lower than what HRMs and fitness databases report. On flat ground, rider weight doesn't make as much of a difference as you think; above 12 mph, energy is primarily expended in countering wind resistance, which depends on your frontal surface area, which increases, speaking very roughly, as the square root of body weight.

    I checked that out, but will have to look more into it later. There's a lot of technical details in there!

    Thank you
  • alyusha2
    alyusha2 Posts: 16 Member
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    alyusha2 wrote: »
    and 81 minutes for my weight at 10-12 MPH is about 970 calories,

    That seems awfully high as well. Granted I'm smaller than you, but I usually figure about 400 calories/hour biking and I usually ride around 13-14 mph on average.

    A lot depends on how hilly your route is as well.

    Not a very hilly area. A couple decent hills, and a few more noticeable climbs, but other than that, all flat.
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    jemhh wrote: »
    You have analysis paralysis.

    Fill out your MFP profile as sedentary with a goal of 2 lbs lost per week. Log your exercise calories. Compare your hrm results to a few online exercise calculators to see if the numbers are reasonable, keeping in mind that they may vary by 10% or so. Eat your exercise calories. Do this for four weeks. Then evaluate your results. Are you losing too quickly? Eat more. Are you losing too slowly? Eat less.

    This. ^
  • snowflakesav
    snowflakesav Posts: 649 Member
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    jemhh wrote: »
    You have analysis paralysis.

    Fill out your MFP profile as sedentary with a goal of 2 lbs lost per week. Log your exercise calories. Compare your hrm results to a few online exercise calculators to see if the numbers are reasonable, keeping in mind that they may vary by 10% or so. Eat your exercise calories. Do this for four weeks. Then evaluate your results. Are you losing too quickly? Eat more. Are you losing too slowly? Eat less.

    This. ^

    Simple...just this
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    You're overthinking this. Enter your stats into MFP and follow their recommendations. Activity level is normal, daily activity. Exercise will be logged separately.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories