Had my first BodPod scan, now more confused than ever!

Crazyartgrrl
Crazyartgrrl Posts: 46 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I've been exercising 5 days a week, for the last 5 weeks (3days/week in the first 2) with both CARDIO and a STRENGTH TRAINING routine. I had estimated my caloric need based on input from MFP, my Fitbit, and bodybuilding.com. I have about 60 lbs to lose.
Today I had my first BodPod scan, because while the weight is coming off, I feel that a baseline, albeit 5 weeks too late, was in order.
My results indicated a BF% of a whopping 39.5%, which is higher than the 35% I predicted, but "ok fine." The thing that has me tripped up is the RMR calculation of 1498 cals/day. Figure in a TDEE (based on the RMR) of approximately 2200-2600 cals/day, a one pound a week weight loss SHOULD be achieved at around 1800-2000 calories daily. That of course includes the workouts I've been completing.
My confusion stems from the fact that this is not the case for me. I've been eating anywhere from 1400-1600 calories, which truthfully, is leaps and bounds above the customer 1200 I would have eaten to lose weight. I've seen about a pound and a half per week.
PLEASE NOTE: I am definitely content with this weight loss. I don't want to lose any faster but if I'm eating potentially 700-1000 calories under my TDEE daily, shouldn't that be eliciting a greater weight loss? Am I potentially in one of those situations where I'm actually eating too little?
Or am I really overthinking this, as 1.5 lbs per week is dandy and I should not fix what isn't broken? I guess I'm nerding out and trying to get the math down to the calorie....

Replies

  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    edited April 2016
    1.5 lbs per week = 750 calorie deficit per day.

    no errors in logging = 2150 - 2350 to maintain (based on eating 1400-1600 cals)

    That's on the low side of your 2200-2600 range, but any errors in logging could easily put your maintenance in the middle or high side of the range you came up with.



  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    edited April 2016
    Keep in mind the your RMR/TDEE is only one part of the equation. This isn't a perfect equation.

    First of all, any exercise calories are still estimates.
    Secondly, you still have to consider the calories in side of things. Even with the most diligent logging, it is still an estimate. For a 1.5 lb a week weight loss, you are looking at 750 calorie deficit vs 1000 calorie for 2lbs a week. That's only 250 calorie difference. Minor inaccuracies could easily make the difference between the two.

    Also you say you are eating 700-1000 calorie under you estimated TDEE. At 700 you are right on track for 1.5lb a week which you have been seeing.

    Bascially I think you are right on where you should be.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    I'm too tired to do the math but you could be underestimating how much you eat too.
  • Crazyartgrrl
    Crazyartgrrl Posts: 46 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    I'm too tired to do the math but you could be underestimating how much you eat too.

    I read back my post and I'm too tired to do the math too! LOL

    Thanks everybody, I think you're right. Inaccuracies can account for a sway here or there. I guess I was just broadsided by a TDEE that I wasn't expecting. I'll keep on keeping on and trust I'm heading where I want to be.

    Thanks again!
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    Keep in mind that when you cut calories, the number of calories burned to digest your food decreases as well. Cut 500 calories and your TEF calories decreases by around 50. So your 500 calories cut gives you a 450 deficit. And then remember that 3500 is an imperfect estimate but what we have to work with. Bottom line, don't expect the numbers to work out perfectly. I maintain at 2350 and lose a pound a week at 1650. It is what it is.
  • lorrpb
    lorrpb Posts: 11,463 Member
    Keep doing what you're doing! If both numbers are off by only 100 cals, they would agree at 1500.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    edited April 2016
    There are a lot of things that are going to affect the equation...your CO isn't a constant...nobody has a TDEE of exactly XXXX calories and they certainly don't have that every single day. Beyond that, even the most meticulous of calorie counters are going to have errors that are just inherent to calorie counting. Also, the whole 3500 calorie per Lb thing is a good approximation...it's not an exact thing.

    I think your issue is more that you're expecting exactness in a process that is far from exact.
  • scolaris
    scolaris Posts: 2,145 Member
    Calorie burn calculators are the worst. I wear a Fitbit HR. Before the HR I would get a 500-600 calorie burn for doing an hour of Zumba. I've had a nagging knee injury so I did class low impact for awhile. My burns were different after every class with the HR ranging from about 357 calories to 478 last night now that the knee is better. Even with the best calculators we are all guesstimating. Just keep shaving those numbers to what seems right for YOU.
    Also: recompositioning the body is real, it happens, but it takes time! Be patient. Recompositioning takes longer than just at shedding fat. You sound like you have a great attitude. Stay curious! xoL
  • scolaris
    scolaris Posts: 2,145 Member
    edited April 2016
    PS there are a lot fewer women who need to eat 1200 cals to lose than do, in my humble opinion.
    Everybody starts there but it's so restrictive! Yuck. I lose at much higher numbers.
  • Crazyartgrrl
    Crazyartgrrl Posts: 46 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »

    I think your issue is more that you're expecting exactness in a process that is far from exact.

    Exactly! I think I don't trust myself to do the right things. I've been doing the wrong things for so long and the right things not long enough during that time. I cling to the numbers so I feel like I've got a beacon in the storm, you know? My body may be a bit mysterious but number never lie, kind of thing.....

    So it appears the BodPod might be in the realm of reality. That's good to know too.

Categories