Were the cals mfp gave you accurate?

2»

Replies

  • BurnWithBarn2015
    BurnWithBarn2015 Posts: 1,026 Member
    edited January 2016
    Francl27 wrote: »
    MFP calories will only be as accurate as your exercise calories are... I see people logging 1000+ calorie burns in 1.5 hour.. just no.

    I just use TDEE and adjust as needed.

    And your logging too...when you use cups and spoons and serving sizes you can be hundreds of calories wrong...But when you lose weight who cares lol

    For me it was/is wrong because i misjudged my activity level. I am not as sedentary as i thought i was ;)

    95069916.png
  • xKoalaBearx
    xKoalaBearx Posts: 181 Member
    I used "reverse dieting" to eventually figure out what my maintenance calorie level is.
  • spoonyspork
    spoonyspork Posts: 238 Member
    I've still not exactly figured that out - 6 months later! - because every time I've started really tracking there's some huge event with massive amounts of food. However, my weight hasn't fluctuated more than 3 lbs in either direction in those months (even after a week of all the free Disney food I could shove into my gullet... I was DOWN 3 lbs for two weeks after that week?!), so I have to say 'close enough' and just make sure I'm eating about my given limit most days.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    MFP calories will only be as accurate as your exercise calories are... I see people logging 1000+ calorie burns in 1.5 hour.. just no.

    I just use TDEE and adjust as needed.
    @Francl27
    1000 calories in 90 mins is perfectly possible if you are very fit and doing a suitable exercise at decent intensity. Not likely jumping around in front of the telly to a fitness DVD though. :smiley:

    It's really not that exceptional, I did it in 88 mins today (on a power meter equipped trainer) and that wasn't full out at all, more like my three hour ride pace. I'm a long way from being an exceptional cyclist.....

    The far bigger factor isn't exercise calories - it's intake logging inaccuracy.
  • BurnWithBarn2015
    BurnWithBarn2015 Posts: 1,026 Member
    edited January 2016
    Francl27 wrote: »
    MFP calories will only be as accurate as your exercise calories are... I see people logging 1000+ calorie burns in 1.5 hour.. just no.

    I just use TDEE and adjust as needed.

    Also dont forget, when i for example sync my Misfit it adjust sometimes over 1000 calories in one go....it is like i exercised a lot but it is just my daily burn plus exercise....
    I had some sending me an im about that...lol what i did for excercise that i burned so much.
    But it was just the whole adjustments plus the exercise...and that adds up.

    Looks cool btw B)


    95069916.png
  • Suhrah623
    Suhrah623 Posts: 65 Member
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,575 Member
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?

    Sounds low to me. Are you very sedentary?
  • CooCooPuff
    CooCooPuff Posts: 4,374 Member
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?
    Do you have it set to sedentary? I eat back the adjustments Fitbit gives me, so I keep MFP set to sedentary. At 24, 5'7", 140lbs, MFP gives me a base of 1,780.

  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?

    Remember it is actually saying 1680 + exercise calories remember if you compare against TDEE sites.
    Certainly doesn't sound high!
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,372 Member
    edited January 2016
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?

    Well it doesn't account for exercise calories. I'm 5'5" and 135 pounds and my maintenance is probably around 1800-1900 (lightly active - sitting quite a bit but also running errands, cooking, doing chores etc), but then there's exercise calories... Let's say I ate a lot the last two months and only gained 2 pounds, so my maintenance might be closer to 2300 when you account for everything.
  • Suhrah623
    Suhrah623 Posts: 65 Member
    arditarose wrote: »
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?

    Sounds low to me. Are you very sedentary?

    I do have it set to "sedentary", but I chase my little kids all day and I also work about 20-22 hours a week where I am fairly active. I would really like to get back into a regular workout routine here soon. I have a huge test I'm studying for, which I'm taking in March sometime I believe, so my plan is to get back into regular workouts then.
  • Suhrah623
    Suhrah623 Posts: 65 Member
    CooCooPuff wrote: »
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?
    Do you have it set to sedentary? I eat back the adjustments Fitbit gives me, so I keep MFP set to sedentary. At 24, 5'7", 140lbs, MFP gives me a base of 1,780.
    Yes I have it set to sedentary.

  • robingmurphy
    robingmurphy Posts: 349 Member
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    Right now I weigh about 139 lbs. I am a 5'5" female. Mfp is saying that at this very moment at 139 lbs that my maintenance cals are supposed to be 1,680.

    Does that sound about right to anybody else with similar stats as me?

    That's about right if you are totally sedentary. I'm 5'5" and 141 lbs. MFP gives me 1620 a day to maintain my weight if I am sedentary. I usually burn 400-500 calories extra through activity and exercise, and end up with a TDEE around 2100 a day. I am losing 1 lb. a week eating about 1600 calories.
  • nxd10
    nxd10 Posts: 4,571 Member
    Before I started counting steps, I used MFP, logged for a month, then adjusted my activity level downwards. When I got a pedometer, then fitbit, now apple watch, I realized I had overestimated calories burned through exercise.

    But yes, it was exactly accurate for losing until I got close to my goal weight and slowed way down. Then I maintained at what MFP estimated (including eating back all the exercise calories I was hungry before) for 3 years. I don't eat just to eat - I eat what I'm hungry for. But I don't hesitate to eat anything within my calorie budget and haven't had a problem.
  • sistrsprkl
    sistrsprkl Posts: 1,013 Member
    Congrats on just about making it to maintenence. Yes, I've found MFP to be pretty accurate. I'm pretty active and eat about 2000, I'm 5'8" 140.
  • galprincess
    galprincess Posts: 682 Member
    MFP spot on for me
  • starling01
    starling01 Posts: 81 Member
    MFP’s maintenance calories (1330) were too high for me. Within a week I’d gained 2 pounds. I dropped my calories back to 1200 and floated up and down the same 2 pounds for almost 6 weeks before suddenly dropping 3 pounds. At this point I don’t know what my maintenance level is – MFP is too high but I will eventually lose on 1200. (Lost 90 pounds on it) I’m 63, 5’5”, currently 111 pounds, sedentary but outside running and walking my dog for about an hour a day. (Mostly running – dog is fat and needs to run, and now that I’m no longer breathless, I enjoy running.) Fitbit HR usually gives me a couple hundred calories from that. Anyway, MFP’s maintenance calorie level is not too low for me but the difference between losing and maintaining is going to be small, so it's probably very close.
  • neohdiver
    neohdiver Posts: 738 Member
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    I'm going to be entering maintenance here soon... I have about 5 more pounds to go! (Yay!)
    Anyway, for those of you maintaining- were the calories mfp gave you for maintaining weight pretty accurate? Or did you calculate your cals somewhere else and manually enter them in instead?
    Thanks!

    I'm not there yet, but I can guarantee that they will be too high.

    Over the last 5 weeks, MFP predicted I would lose 13 lbs. I lost 9. It was off by 44% (and my consumption was accurately logged and below, rather than above, the calorie count on the day it made that prediction).

    No surprise, I've always known my body is a pretty efficient machine. Good for avoiding starvation. Not so good for losing or maintaining weight. Based on that, I expect to only be able to eat maintenance less 400 calories a day in unless I want to gain weight.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 31,404 Member
    neohdiver wrote: »
    Suhrah623 wrote: »
    I'm going to be entering maintenance here soon... I have about 5 more pounds to go! (Yay!)
    Anyway, for those of you maintaining- were the calories mfp gave you for maintaining weight pretty accurate? Or did you calculate your cals somewhere else and manually enter them in instead?
    Thanks!

    I'm not there yet, but I can guarantee that they will be too high.

    Over the last 5 weeks, MFP predicted I would lose 13 lbs. I lost 9. It was off by 44% (and my consumption was accurately logged and below, rather than above, the calorie count on the day it made that prediction).

    No surprise, I've always known my body is a pretty efficient machine. Good for avoiding starvation. Not so good for losing or maintaining weight. Based on that, I expect to only be able to eat maintenance less 400 calories a day in unless I want to gain weight.

    I wouldn't guarantee that at all. There really is individual variation - even if not over a huge range - so I think it's reasonable to plan on some experimentation & adjustment.

    I'm 60, hypothyroid (which I don't think makes a difference for me, but many find it does), and still losing roughly half a pound a week on a calorie level about 100 above what MFP says I should eat for maintenance. (I'm not actually trying to maintain yet, not quite there - but obviously, the MFP estimate for my age & activity level is too low by at least 300 or so, for me.)
  • starling01
    starling01 Posts: 81 Member

    I think you're confusing normal water weight gain (that you would expect when you increase your calories) with actual fat gain. You might find this post helpful. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/993576/why-you-gain-weight-if-you-eat-more-than-your-cut/p1
    Thank you! I read through it, and since I'm below my target weight now (not 5 pounds below but I'm too thin for comfort so 3 will have to do), I'll start eating at maintenance again and hopefully let the minimal gain stabilize. I eat back my exercise calories so between that and the MFP suggested calorie level, I'll increase close to 300 calories a day, and that will be a good thing. I'll see how it goes. Thank you again!