(Long post!) Understanding calorie counters
marty_smith
Posts: 102 Member
Okay so, im a postman - meaning im walking around 6-7miles extra then a sedentary person every day. My fitness pal logs the steps i take so to begin with i was set to "sedentary" and then adding the steps i take at work each day as exercise.
However, i decided to calculate my TDEE based on my job occupation and it showed i should be consuming alot less calories, which is fine, but i wondered whats more accurate?
To compare, the app says 1500 per day for sedentary plus 1000 calories on average my step counter says i burned. This means the app tells me i can get away with 2500 to still lose 2 pounds a week.
The calculator however worked out that my TDEE is 2685, and to lose 2 pounds a week means i should be aiming at 1685 which i pretty much can do, but the difference is huge? Im burning 1000 calories at work, but i can understand i would be burning a certain amount of calories if i wasnt at work anyway.
Does it underestimate the amount of calories we postmen burn? Or does it take into account the fact that my body is accustomed to this regular daily exercise already despite the fact im overweight.
Lastly, do these calculators also consider the fact that on sundays when im not working i dont do any walking at all? As it still says obviously for me to eat 1685 calories. Im guessing it averages out the calories i burn over the week over 7 days so i should be safe? Or should i look to eat a sedentary style day calories wise?
Sorry for the long post!
However, i decided to calculate my TDEE based on my job occupation and it showed i should be consuming alot less calories, which is fine, but i wondered whats more accurate?
To compare, the app says 1500 per day for sedentary plus 1000 calories on average my step counter says i burned. This means the app tells me i can get away with 2500 to still lose 2 pounds a week.
The calculator however worked out that my TDEE is 2685, and to lose 2 pounds a week means i should be aiming at 1685 which i pretty much can do, but the difference is huge? Im burning 1000 calories at work, but i can understand i would be burning a certain amount of calories if i wasnt at work anyway.
Does it underestimate the amount of calories we postmen burn? Or does it take into account the fact that my body is accustomed to this regular daily exercise already despite the fact im overweight.
Lastly, do these calculators also consider the fact that on sundays when im not working i dont do any walking at all? As it still says obviously for me to eat 1685 calories. Im guessing it averages out the calories i burn over the week over 7 days so i should be safe? Or should i look to eat a sedentary style day calories wise?
Sorry for the long post!
0
Replies
-
I'd take all numbers thrown from calculators, pedometers, heart rate monitors, exercise machines and anything else you can think of with a pinch of salt, and as a starting point for your own observations and calculations.
Pick a calorie goal and go with it, log accurately, monitor and observe trends in weight over a sustained period. You can then adjust when and where necessary.0 -
I would suggest changing your MFP setting from sedentary to active and then don't eat additional calories from steps.0
-
What is your activity level for TDEE calculation?0
-
I'd take all numbers thrown from calculators, pedometers, heart rate monitors, exercise machines and anything else you can think of with a pinch of salt, and as a starting point for your own observations and calculations.
Pick a calorie goal and go with it, log accurately, monitor and observe trends in weight over a sustained period. You can then adjust when and where necessary.
This is what I have been finding.0 -
How has your weight loss been on the 'eat the extra calories from walking' each day? Are you losing 2lbs a week? Then keep at it. If your not losing, and its been 3 weeks plus, try eating half the calories back from walking. Do that for 3 weeks and see what you lose.
All calculators can be very wrong for some people....its all a guess.
Also, make sure your counts are accurate. Weigh all solids. Measure all liquids and log accurately.0 -
I'd take all numbers thrown from calculators, pedometers, heart rate monitors, exercise machines and anything else you can think of with a pinch of salt, and as a starting point for your own observations and calculations.
Pick a calorie goal and go with it, log accurately, monitor and observe trends in weight over a sustained period. You can then adjust when and where necessary.
This.
Every calculator out there gives estimates. There is only a teeny tiny chance that you are going to find one that is right on the nose. Pick one, use its numbers, and then evaluate your progress over a month or so. Adjust up/down from there.0 -
We don't know if the two methods of estimating your calorie goal are using the same information. Since the results were SO different I'm willing to bed they're not. So the question becomes which is right? If you have no other way to judge, my first instinct would be to go in the middle for 6-8 weeks and then judge by results.
But what are your stats? Height, weight, age. I'm going on assumption a) you're a guy and b) you need to lose 30-40 pounds or more if you're selecting 2 pounds per week. And you're very active in your job. Based on those assumptions the ~2700 daily TDEE seems oddly low.marty_smith wrote: »Okay so, im a postman - meaning im walking around 6-7miles extra then a sedentary person every day. My fitness pal logs the steps i take so to begin with i was set to "sedentary" and then adding the steps i take at work each day as exercise.
However, i decided to calculate my TDEE based on my job occupation and it showed i should be consuming alot less calories, which is fine, but i wondered whats more accurate?
To compare, the app says 1500 per day for sedentary plus 1000 calories on average my step counter says i burned. This means the app tells me i can get away with 2500 to still lose 2 pounds a week.
The calculator however worked out that my TDEE is 2685, and to lose 2 pounds a week means i should be aiming at 1685 which i pretty much can do, but the difference is huge? Im burning 1000 calories at work, but i can understand i would be burning a certain amount of calories if i wasnt at work anyway.
Does it underestimate the amount of calories we postmen burn? Or does it take into account the fact that my body is accustomed to this regular daily exercise already despite the fact im overweight.
Lastly, do these calculators also consider the fact that on sundays when im not working i dont do any walking at all? As it still says obviously for me to eat 1685 calories. Im guessing it averages out the calories i burn over the week over 7 days so i should be safe? Or should i look to eat a sedentary style day calories wise?
Sorry for the long post!
0 -
I'd take all numbers thrown from calculators, pedometers, heart rate monitors, exercise machines and anything else you can think of with a pinch of salt, and as a starting point for your own observations and calculations.
Pick a calorie goal and go with it, log accurately, monitor and observe trends in weight over a sustained period. You can then adjust when and where necessary.
This.
Every calculator out there gives estimates. There is only a teeny tiny chance that you are going to find one that is right on the nose. Pick one, use its numbers, and then evaluate your progress over a month or so. Adjust up/down from there.
^This. Adjusting based on your real world results will always be the best way to go. I fiddled around with so many different calculators when I was losing. I didn't get consistent results until I learned to trust my own numbers and adjust from there.0 -
I would suggest not counting as exercise, but put your activity level as very active in MFP, how much does that give you?0
-
lemonychild wrote: »What is your activity level for TDEE calculation?
I used one site (that I've forgotten) to calculate my TDEE and it said i use 2685 calories a day for highly active lifestyle - it even lists my job as an example next to the option. Im 29 years old, weight 15.5 stone, 6ft tall and active because of work (today i walked 11 miles in total, including in the office and walking round tescos and home etc).
Im gonna stick to the 2685 minus 1000 calories (2 pounds of fat loss a week) and see how that does me. I have survived on that so far this week with little trouble, it just would be nice to have an extra 300 calories for example to treat myself abit better each day! This is without doing any exercise on top of my job aswell.
Should i cut down on days im not at work aswell?
Thanks for the help guys.
0 -
marty_smith wrote: »lemonychild wrote: »What is your activity level for TDEE calculation?
I used one site (that I've forgotten) to calculate my TDEE and it said i use 2685 calories a day. Im 29 years old, weight 15.5 stone, 6ft tall and active because of work (today i walked 11 miles in total, including in the office and walking round tescos and home etc).
Im gonna stick to the 2685 minus 1000 calories (2 pounds of fat loss a week) and see how that does me. I have survived on that so far this week with little trouble, it just would be nice to have an extra 300 calories for example to treat myself abit better each day! This is without doing any exercise on top of my job aswell.
Should i cut down on days im not at work aswell?
Thanks for the help guys.
If you want to eat more than change your goal to 1.5 lbs/week (which is probably more appropriate for the amount you have to lose anyway. This will give you an additional 250 cals/day.
And if using TDEE you eat the same everyday, as it averages out your exercise across the full week:
As an example say MFP gives you 1450 calories to lose 1 lb/week, and you plan on exercising 5x/week for an average of 400 cals per workout. well MFP will tell you to eat 1450 on the days you don't workout and 1850 on the days you do whereas a "professional" or TDEE calculator may tell you to eat 1700 everyday regardless if you workout.
So for the week MFP will have you eat 12,150 (1450*2+1850*5) whereas doing it the other way will have you eat 11,900 (1700*7) almost the same number of cals for the week (250 dif). The issue in not following MFP is if you don't workout the full 5 days or burn more or less than planned. If that is the case you may lose more or less than your goal, whereas MFP will have you lose your goal amount regardless how much you actually workout.
What many MFPers do is take the low 1450 and not eat back exercise calories which is wrong, if you are not eating them back then your daily activity level should reflect the higher burn with would be covered in the 1700/day above.
0 -
The minimum intake level for males is 1500-1800 to get sufficient nutritional content. Its not recommended to go below that.
Walking 5-10 miles per day in your job is very active. Your BMR is about 2000 based on 217 pounds, 29 years, 6'. Its assumed that a sedentary person burns an extra 20% of BMR thru daily activity. The multipliers go up from there. No one here can say with accuracy what you burn in a work day. But clearly you're not sedentary so more than the 20%. From here its trial and error. Start with assuming your activity (which means more than just your work day, as it factors in all waking hour motion) burns an extra 40% which would be 800 so 2800 per day. The 40% multiplier is more than lightly active but less than moderately active. That puts you at eating 1800 per day for a 2 pound loss (which is fairly aggressive as you don't have much to lose) and eat at that level 7 day a week. Your deficit on your off-day will be lower, but its still a safe level for getting in enough nutrition.
0 -
Yeah im aiming for 2 pounds a week, but I'm also expecting the progress to slow at some point. It will be hard to maintain 2 pound a week even if i am sticking to the goal set. I just assume this will happen once my body gets used to what I'm doing. Similar to when you go to the gym and you have to increase your workout as the weeks go on to see progress?0
-
marty_smith wrote: »Yeah im aiming for 2 pounds a week, but I'm also expecting the progress to slow at some point. It will be hard to maintain 2 pound a week even if i am sticking to the goal set. I just assume this will happen once my body gets used to what I'm doing. Similar to when you go to the gym and you have to increase your workout as the weeks go on to see progress?
It doesn't work like that, the less you have to lose the smaller your deficit should be so a larger % of your loss will be from fat and less from muscle. at your stats that goal should be 1-1.5 lbs/week, not 2.
and again I ask what does MFP give you as TDEE if you set as very active?0 -
It doesn't work like that, the less you have to lose the smaller your deficit should be so a larger % of your loss will be from fat and less from muscle. at your stats that goal should be 1-1.5 lbs/week, not 2.
and again I ask what does MFP give you as TDEE if you set as very active?
My fitness pal - active, 2 pounds a week = 2180 calories. I work six day weeks, so sunday is the only day I wouldn't be classed as active i guess.
TDEE - 1685
And what do you mean by "the smaller your deficit should be"? If i can continue on a low calorie diet aiming for 2 pounds a week, even after adjusting my goals after weight loss, isn't it worth doing it? How can i make sure its fat that i lose and not muscle?HappyCampr1 wrote: »If you never change your calorie goal, then yes...your weight loss would slow down as you lost weight. On MFP, each time you reach ten pounds loss, the app will want to recalculate your goals and will lower your calories. You'll have to override that and/or tell it not to do that if you prefer to just let the losses slow down.
Good to know, thanks.
0 -
http://www.iifym.com/tdee-calculator/
This is the site i used. Also can't find on MFP what classifications their activity levels suggest.
Edit: just seen a mail man should be classed as Active so if i do use the MFP goals then thats the one for me.0 -
I don't give 2lbs a week to be worth anything except a headache. I'm almost certain u can get a good loss with 1900 cals daily.0
-
Out of interest, what do people think is better for me. To stick with the MFP calorie suggestion for 'active' activity level or the TDEE suggested calorie level? I know the two are different and to vary my plan based on my own results etc but is there a rule of thumb where people have noticed MFP goals a little to relaxed?0
-
I say go with MFP set as active and eat the 2138 everyday, and don't log your walking as exercise as it would be taken into account in activity level. It doesn't matter if on Sunday you are sedentary as overall for the week you are active and it would average the cals out over the full week.
And your TDEE would not be 1685 on Sunday, 1685 would be to lose 2 lbs/week on Sunday. TDEE does not include your deficit. That said just eat the 2100 cals everyday, or change to light active if you think Sunday will have that much of an impact.0 -
I say go with MFP set as active and eat the 2138 everyday, and don't log your walking as exercise as it would be taken into account in activity level. It doesn't matter if on Sunday you are sedentary as overall for the week you are active and it would average the cals out over the full week.
And your TDEE would not be 1685 on Sunday, 1685 would be to lose 2 lbs/week on Sunday. TDEE does not include your deficit. That said just eat the 2100 cals everyday, or change to light active if you think Sunday will have that much of an impact.
Yeah, my TDEE is 2685 actually. The 1685 is minus 1000 calories for the 2 pound fat burn. I think im gonna try and stick to 1685 a day and not be overly bothered if i go 100/200 calories over every now and then.
0 -
marty_smith wrote: »I say go with MFP set as active and eat the 2138 everyday, and don't log your walking as exercise as it would be taken into account in activity level. It doesn't matter if on Sunday you are sedentary as overall for the week you are active and it would average the cals out over the full week.
And your TDEE would not be 1685 on Sunday, 1685 would be to lose 2 lbs/week on Sunday. TDEE does not include your deficit. That said just eat the 2100 cals everyday, or change to light active if you think Sunday will have that much of an impact.
Yeah, my TDEE is 2685 actually. The 1685 is minus 1000 calories for the 2 pound fat burn. I think im gonna try and stick to 1685 a day and not be overly bothered if i go 100/200 calories over every now and then.
Just throwing it out there that it is strongly suggested that you eat the 2100 erickirb mentioned. 2lbs a week is to deep of a deficit in my opinion for someone your size. Also, it doesn't sound like you do any other exercise other than your job? Is that right? If so, that means no strength training I assume so you are at a bigger risk for losing a lot of muscle in a deficit that large. Remember, when we lose weight, we lose fat and muscle. Not just fat. The deeper your deficit, the more chance of muscle loss. No strength training? More chance of muscle loss. Add the two together and I would recommend highly against it.
0 -
What is means by your deficit should be smaller the less you have to lose is this:
The amount of fat your body can burn off per day is directly related to how much fat you have on your body. So an obese person can burn off more fat in a day than a person who is merely overweight. Now, if you give them both the same size calorie deficit, lets say the 1000 calories/day for a 2 pound a week loss how their body deals with it is different. For the obese person who has a lot of fat to lose and so can burn a lot of fat in a day, almost all of that calorie deficit will be made up from fat. For the person who is only overweight who has less fat, and because of that can because of that burn less fat off in a day, that 1000 calorie deficit is made up of that smaller amount of fat that they can burn, but what happens to the rest of the deficit? Their body still needs the energy that is missing to keep running. The answer is that the rest of the deficit is made up of lean mass, that is from muscles and organs.
A possible analogy would be you have a certain amount of money you need to spend each day to live. From your job you make a certain amount, but you are short 1000 every day. However, you have savings, but how much you can take out depends on how much you have in your savings account. The less you have, the less you can take out. At first when you have a lot in the account, you can take the whole 1000, but as your account balance goes down, a time comes when you can only take out 750. You need to pay the whole 1000, so you end up borrowing the rest on a credit card.
That is sort of how it works in burning off fat, but the credit card is taking away from lean mass which you don't want to do. The thing in fat loss, is you can change your deficit to keep yourself as a rate where the majority of your loss is from fat. Thus, as you have less fat to lose, you should lower your deficit.
Not really knowing how much you have to lose, I can't comment on your goal of 2 pound per week, but 1500 calories is generally considered the be the minimum for an adult male to get the nutrition they need. If you base settings put you down to 1500 to lost 2 pounds per week, it is possible your goal is too aggressive and you might want to back it off a bit to 1.5 or even 1 pound per week.0 -
I think this is over complicating it at this point, try one or the other for a week, then 2 and see if you have desired results0
-
lemonychild wrote: »I think this is over complicating it at this point, try one or the other for a week, then 2 and see if you have desired results
If you are talking about my post, it was simply answer his question of why it was suggested that one lower their weight loss goal (their calorie deficit) as they lose weight. In terms of what calorie amount to use, I didn't comment since others have more than answered it, but no one answered this particular question. If it is not about my post, they just ignore this post.0 -
lemonychild wrote: »I think this is over complicating it at this point, try one or the other for a week, then 2 and see if you have desired results
I would also suggest two weeks is not enough time to know if it works, give it 4-6 weeks.0 -
rileysowner wrote: »lemonychild wrote: »I think this is over complicating it at this point, try one or the other for a week, then 2 and see if you have desired results
If you are talking about my post, it was simply answer his question of why it was suggested that one lower their weight loss goal (their calorie deficit) as they lose weight. In terms of what calorie amount to use, I didn't comment since others have more than answered it, but no one answered this particular question. If it is not about my post, they just ignore this post.
Yeah I appreciate the insight buddy, thanks. Im currently 15.5 stone and want to get to at least 13.5 stone or ideally 13 stone to be happy with my weight, ie 35 pounds to lose. Once i get to, say, 14 stone... My concern would be that despite sticking to a lowish calorie diet as i have said previously that my weight gain will slow down and actually stop overall despite not eating over my calories. Could I technically lose muscle mass still at this stage and then build it back up again in the same week and not see any difference despite staying 750-1000 calories below my TDEE?
Im not planning on doing any exercise in this second week (im finishing day 8 as we speak), but after i weigh myself for the first time to begin week 3 i will consider running 2/3 times a week or trying out one of those Insanity dvd work outs. Reason i am delaying exercise for now is because every time i have tried to lose weight before i give up once i lose my consistency in exercising. Whether its 3/4 times a week or running 5 days a week like i done before for 2 months. I want to lose weight without the stress of feeling like I've failed if i dont do exercise. I want exercise to be a bonus to my diet so if I don't do it one week its no big deal.
0 -
I would say start in the middle - 2025 kcals/day. Track over time to see your rate of loss. Frankly, I'm a 5'7" girl with an office job and lost weight consistently eating 1800-2300 kcals/day. Eat more, but make sure you are tracking accurately.
*caveats: started about 100lbs overweight, and I am fairly active outside of work due to an interest in dance0
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
- 424 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