Burnt over 1200, with Fitbit on...

saminleo
saminleo Posts: 14 Member
edited November 17 in Health and Weight Loss
Hi all,

Information:

Age: 25

Sex: male

Height: 5ft 8

Body fat percentage: just under 10%
Weight on 1st of Jan: 80kg

Current weight 69kg
Aim.... maintain weight but lower body fat

I recently brought my self a Fitbit charger 2...
today was my first day of using it...

When I do cardio just holding my phone it stats I have burnt around 200 calories running 6km speed of around 8.3 kmh

Today I played football from 6.30pm to 7.30pm

My steps was around 4000 when I played
And finished on 11k when I finished
However my burnt calories was 900....

I was rather surprised

I went to the gym... done a few ab work out... and my calories burnt increased to 1200... which put me on panic mode
And I ate 3 protein bars from the gym to increase my calories for the day...

I still have 500 calories reminding

Is this accurate/ normal

I know Fitbit isn't the most accurate thing when it comes to step counting but then surly heart rate plays a big role with calories burnt...
How much of the exercise calorie do I eat back...


Help me out here please guys

Replies

  • KateTii
    KateTii Posts: 886 Member
    1200 is athlete-level amounts of calories to burn. I wouldn't be trusting it. The fitbits are meant to get more accurate the longer you wear it, so I would be very cautious of the outputs you are getting now. I would not be eating more than half of the calories back and see how you go.
  • TimothyFish
    TimothyFish Posts: 4,925 Member
    I burned 1650 calories on my bicycle today. I did it in about three hours at a leisurely pace. So, I would agree that it is possible to burn 1200 calories in that length of time, but I have might doubts that the activities you mentioned would do it.
  • PhilP0wer
    PhilP0wer Posts: 76 Member
    It's judging calorie burn by heart rate and weight. Where it goes wrong is that it assumes you are in great shape (cardio wise). If you're out of shape the calorie burn it tells you is wildly high. I'd agree with the don't eat more than half that amount if not even less. Now if you run 5 miles a day every day then I'd trust what it tells you. Otherwise, not so much
  • ccsernica
    ccsernica Posts: 1,040 Member
    If I'm not mistaken "football" here is probably the sport the rest of the world calls by that name, not American football. There's a lot more running involved than we might be thinking.
  • saminleo
    saminleo Posts: 14 Member
    thanks for your reply guys!!

    just to be clear guys... im talking about English football (soccer) not American football loll
    the level of football i play is semi- pro not far from professional, very physical and fast paced :)

    @KateTii that’s very interesting... how long until its classed as accurate any time scale on this or isit different for everyone?

    @capaul42 do you remember how much fitbit was incorrect before it fixed it self?

    @TimothyFish so taking into account that’s its soccer at a pretty high intense level would 900 calories burnt be accurate

    @PhilP0wer to be honest im in a pretty good shape... pretty toned and cardio levels are pretty good too... how long would you say to eat half of the burnt calories before increasing it.

    @ccsernica i agree with you.. there is a lot of walking... if your seen not moving all the time its classed as being lazy and the coach would ask you to do laps around the pitch either way we have to run loll

    @WinoGelato im looking at MFP exercise adjustment... so it stats my daily intake of calories then my exercise calories...


    once again thanks for everyone that’s trying to help me out here :)
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,254 Member
    Competitive soccer is a MET 10 activity and casual soccer is a MET 7 activity.

    Similarly:
    Running, 6 mph (10 min/mile) is MET 9.8 and bicycling, 14-15.9 mph, racing or leisure, fast, vigorous effort is a MET 10 activity.

    Jogging, general is MET 7 and bicycling, 10-11.9 mph, leisure, slow, light effort, is MET 6.8

    All this of course gives us ZERO information about the quality of your food intake logging and it gives us ZERO information as to whether the various equations correctly predict your personal BMR.

    If you're not an outlier and if your food logging is on-point, it is unlikely that your Fitbit will be far off when it comes to evaluating activities that are substantially step based steady state and aerobic in nature.

    But, as with everything else, your own results trump estimates.

    So all you can do is trust your tools and verify their performance a few weeks down the road.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    What is your calorie goal set at on MFP? Are you aiming to lose, maintain, or gain weight? What activity level did you select?

    The adjustments you see on MFP are reflective of the difference between what MFP thinks you would burn, based on the activity level you selected and the stats you provided during set up, and what FitBit says you actually burned, which is again, not just exercise but total calories burned during the day (essentially your TDEE).
  • saminleo
    saminleo Posts: 14 Member
    @PAV8888 thanks for the very insightful reply!!
    to be fair im in pretty good shape right now and i keep track of my calories to the T!!
    i weigh everything and anything and use barcodes when i can...
    just a little scary and weird when you see 900 calories burnt and not sure how accurate that is and how much of it you eat back :-/

    @WinoGelato my calorie intake is set for 1500 right now and its set to lose 1kg per week (its getting changed to maintain on Monday last week of shredding)
    and i don’t use FITBIT to see my calories burnt at all i only use MFP to see calorie intake and exercise calories... i think it might of actually been accurate its been a lazy day in the office today
    and it says exercise calories 0 so far loll
  • capaul42
    capaul42 Posts: 1,390 Member
    @saminleo I believe it was overestimating by approximately 500+ per day. I recall because I was set on MFP for a 500 deficit. Because I had read about the adjustment period, I would ignore the adjustment and just eat back half of what my exercise burns were. So if it said I burnt 400, I would eat back 200. Eventually I noticed my burns getting lower and more normal looking.
  • Colorscheme
    Colorscheme Posts: 1,179 Member
    edited March 2017
    KateTii wrote: »
    1200 is athlete-level amounts of calories to burn. I wouldn't be trusting it. The fitbits are meant to get more accurate the longer you wear it, so I would be very cautious of the outputs you are getting now. I would not be eating more than half of the calories back and see how you go.

    Athlete? IDK. I burn about 900 cals on the bike in an hour [I am overweight, not using the machines calculation but my own based on tme and distance], but I go almost 17.5 mph. So I rack up about 18 miles distance wise and push 120 rpms]. And then I take 8000 steps on top of that, which adds about 300 more calories for a total of 1200 burnt caloies. But that's not everyday, it's only three times a week.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    saminleo wrote: »
    @PAV8888 thanks for the very insightful reply!!
    to be fair im in pretty good shape right now and i keep track of my calories to the T!!
    i weigh everything and anything and use barcodes when i can...
    just a little scary and weird when you see 900 calories burnt and not sure how accurate that is and how much of it you eat back :-/

    @WinoGelato my calorie intake is set for 1500 right now and its set to lose 1kg per week (its getting changed to maintain on Monday last week of shredding)
    and i don’t use FITBIT to see my calories burnt at all i only use MFP to see calorie intake and exercise calories... i think it might of actually been accurate its been a lazy day in the office today
    and it says exercise calories 0 so far loll
    You are an in shape, active male at a healthy body weight, why would you have such a low calorie goal and why aiming for losing at the rate that is recommended for obese people? This is why your adjustment is so large, because FitBit is telling you that you have a much higher calorie burn than your activity level is set at.

    I'm a 5'2 female and I lose weight eating more than 1600 calories.
  • trigden1991
    trigden1991 Posts: 4,658 Member
    Unless I am misreading your post, you started at 80kg @ 10% bodyfat (72kg LBM) and now weigh 69kg?

    If so, you dieted horribly wrong and lost a tonne of LBM.
  • saminleo
    saminleo Posts: 14 Member
    @capaul42 you are right!! the more i think about it the more it stats that i should leave it on for about 2-3 weeks to get a accurate reading, so for now its just touch and go
    maybe eat back a little bit of the exercise calories

    @WinoGelato i agree with you, i need to up my calorie intake i will change it on Sunday or Monday latest!

    @trigden1991 just to clarify i was 80kg with a body fat % of around 20% give or take... at the current moment in time im 69KG with a body fat % of around 10 or just lower...
    my calorie intake is very low its going to be changed very soon only recently I’ve noticed how little I’ve been eating even thought it feels like 4 big large meals LOL
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,254 Member
    An initial jump in weight is to be expected when you add substantially more food and does not indicate fat gain.

    Cutting at the rate you are while not obese is.... well most of us have found it to be less than optimal.

    Someone in your position in the future should consider a slower approach.
  • patsyhiggins17
    patsyhiggins17 Posts: 5 Member
    Hello can you recommend a Fitbit for swimmers - not keen on the flex as it doesn't show the time on the face.
  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    patsyhiggins17 wrote: »
    Hello can you recommend a Fitbit for swimmers - not keen on the flex as it doesn't show the time on the face.

    I believe Flex and Flex 2 are the only Fitbit models that are water resistant. Other companies have options though.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories