Average Weight Lost Per Week
Kimegatron
Posts: 772 Member
So, for the last 90 days from today, I have burned 704,881 calories, consumed around 591,802 calories. That would give me a 90 day deficit of 113,079, right? Just wondering what the weekly average weight loss would work out to be... I guessed at 1.6/wk. I'm trying to refresh my mathing
0
Replies
-
It is about 2.5 lb/week.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
How did you get to that? I have only lost 25-26, but I don't think I logged everything correctly. I'm getting more diligent and tight with my logging.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Ah, see, I learn something every day! I had no idea how many calories were in a pound, and didn't even think to look something like that up! Thanks a lot!0
-
That deficit seems too high, honestly. Maybe I missed something in the 90 days. Would you look at the calories option in the reports tab, or the net?0
-
Your exercise/burn calories might be overestimated, but it looks like you still are doing a great job! How much have you actually lost during these 90 days?0
-
I have lost 25-26 total, so maybe a few under that in 90 days. My calculations are all off, I need to try to add this up while I'm not at work, ha ha!0
-
that's still 2 lbs per week which is awesome!0
-
Kimegatron wrote: »How did you get to that? I have only lost 25-26, but I don't think I logged everything correctly. I'm getting more diligent and tight with my logging.
((113,000calorie deficit/3500 calories/pound)/90days)*7 days per week
To break it down;
You have a deficit of 113,079. Divide that by 3500 which is the calories per pound to get the number of expected pounds loss.
Take that number and divide by 90 days which is that expected loss per day
Take that number and multiply by 7 which is the number of days in a week. This gets you the pounds loss per week
The result is 2.5 pounds per week.0 -
2lbs a week sounds blardy good to me, well done.
Do you have microsoft office? Maybe look at the myfitnesspal data export tool. If you enjoy numbers it is pretty fun.0 -
You actual loss is never going to exactly match the math, due to tons of variables. But bottom line, you are doing great!
0 -
I divided 113k by 90
Times that by 7
Divided that by 3500
Got 2.51 pounds per week
You may not have matched the maths but sounds like you did a good job anyway.
Keep it up.0 -
The equations stated above are correct. However, weight is never quite that simple. Gained muscle? If so, your weight loss might be less than expected. Lost muscle? Maybe your weight loss would be more than expected. Was water weight loss included in the period? Changes in water weight are not always based on net calorie change and if you switched to a sodium low or sodium rich diet, the amount of water weight you have might change. Let's not also forget things like when you weigh yourself. Things as minor as using the restroom before or after could effect weight.
If your calculations are off by 5 lbs or so out of 25ish lbs, the error is not due to your lack of diligence. The weight loss equations based on net calorie deficits are 100% accurate on paper, but never 100% accurate in practice. On paper, we can control for every single variance. But in reality, we cannot control everything. Did you walk up the stairs more to gain calorie loss? Chances are you gained a little muscle that might offset part of the weight loss. And this is not taking into account the inherent inaccuracies in even the most accurate devices for tracking calorie burn.
Keep doing what you are doing. Don't worry about minor logging errors or slightly slower/faster weight loss than you expect.0 -
random5483 wrote: »The equations stated above are correct. However, weight is never quite that simple. Gained muscle? If so, your weight loss might be less than expected. Lost muscle? Maybe your weight loss would be more than expected. Was water weight loss included in the period? Changes in water weight are not always based on net calorie change and if you switched to a sodium low or sodium rich diet, the amount of water weight you have might change. Let's not also forget things like when you weigh yourself. Things as minor as using the restroom before or after could effect weight.
If your calculations are off by 5 lbs or so out of 25ish lbs, the error is not due to your lack of diligence. The weight loss equations based on net calorie deficits are 100% accurate on paper, but never 100% accurate in practice. On paper, we can control for every single variance. But in reality, we cannot control everything. Did you walk up the stairs more to gain calorie loss? Chances are you gained a little muscle that might offset part of the weight loss. And this is not taking into account the inherent inaccuracies in even the most accurate devices for tracking calorie burn.
Keep doing what you are doing. Don't worry about minor logging errors or slightly slower/faster weight loss than you expect.
I'm not so much as basing the end result, mathematically, to what my actual loss is. I think I added up a few things wrong with the calorie burn, ha ha! I get bored sometimes and just wonder what the difference is.0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »
I'm not so much as basing the end result, mathematically, to what my actual loss is. I think I added up a few things wrong with the calorie burn, ha ha! I get bored sometimes and just wonder what the difference is.
I am so with you there. I have a spreadsheet on my computer that I update daily. Weight, how much I ate, how much fitbit says I burned. I even put the useless 5-week estimate in there, and compare it to where I am at 5 weeks after. Data is fun to play around with
0 -
Oh wow, yeah I was way off! I was using the report on Fitbit, and since they don't have a 90 day option, I did it for the whole year... thinking that I didn't get my Fitbit since June, not thinking that it gives you a calorie burn for all of the days that I didn't have one. So it is actually:
237,598 burned(as of right now)
+143,737 consumed(including today)
=93,861 deficit???
Divide by 3,500
=26.82
Divide by 90 days
=.31
x 7 days
x 12 weeks
=2.09lbs lost/wk, so roughly 25.08 pounds. Does that sound about right? I have no idea what makes me want to figure this stuff out sometimes...0 -
ColinsMommaOC wrote: »Kimegatron wrote: »
I'm not so much as basing the end result, mathematically, to what my actual loss is. I think I added up a few things wrong with the calorie burn, ha ha! I get bored sometimes and just wonder what the difference is.
I am so with you there. I have a spreadsheet on my computer that I update daily. Weight, how much I ate, how much fitbit says I burned. I even put the useless 5-week estimate in there, and compare it to where I am at 5 weeks after. Data is fun to play around with
omg that is beautiful! Is that Excel? I will have to see if I have that on my laptop at home 0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »
omg that is beautiful! Is that Excel? I will have to see if I have that on my laptop at home
It is. If you do not have excel on your computer, Google Sheets works just as well.
0 -
Where do you find your calories burned?
0 -
-
ColinsMommaOC wrote: »
I have a question for your "actual," because I just set this up.... Do you go back after the 5wk mark to enter the actual weight, then? So I am starting this sheet today, which means I will have to wait 5 weeks to finish a line, right? Is that how you did it?0 -
And yes, I do have a Fitbit, I am obsessed0
-
Kimegatron wrote: »
I have a question for your "actual," because I just set this up.... Do you go back after the 5wk mark to enter the actual weight, then? So I am starting this sheet today, which means I will have to wait 5 weeks to finish a line, right? Is that how you did it?
Yep. See below. I have the last 28 days waiting for their 5 week actual weight and I have started my next 28 day log too.
ETA: I find the daily reminder of where I have been to be very helpful to keep me motivated. Though not so much this week, but I think that is just sheer laziness on my part.
0 -
This is so awesome! And a great way for me to use Excel! I haven't used it in so long, I forget how to factor in it's equations.0
-
I have nothing to add, but I love this level of data-geekery. Go, ladies!
(I spend my data geek energies more on my sport than my weight loss.
.) 0 -
mostly just your basic SUM equations honestly. I tried to keep it as simple as possible.
B32 =Sum(b2:b8)
B33 =Sum(b9:b15)
B34 =Sum(b16:b22)
b35 =sum(b23:b29)
B37 =sum(b32:b35)
B38 =B37/28
same with columns C D and E
F32 =D32/3500
etc
0 -
How do you do the conditional formatting for colors? I'm so rusty at spreadsheets0
-
I think it would be a IF formula... Let me look it up. I just change the color manually on mine
ETA: I found this link https://www.ablebits.com/office-addins-blog/2013/10/18/change-background-color-excel-based-on-cell-value/
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions