We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
High calorie target - will I lose weight?
Replies
-
rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
Tacos are 1,700 to 2,000 calories of protein rich deliciousness. At least the way I make them.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
Tacos are 1,700 to 2,000 calories of protein rich deliciousness. At least the way I make them.
Jesus H. Christ! What are you putting in these tacos?! Lol4 -
dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
Exactly this. I just don’t have a huge appetite either, I just drink too much and eat fried food, crisps and chocolate!
I guess I just have to learn to eat more. Lol.
1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
If you're struggling to eat enough "healthy food," it could be that you're trying to restrict too much from your diet.
I can see what you are saying, I eat most things, except my danger foods (pizza, chips, crisps, chocolate).
I guess eating more non calorie high food is just something I have to adapt to.0 -
rachaelgifford wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
If you're struggling to eat enough "healthy food," it could be that you're trying to restrict too much from your diet.
I can see what you are saying, I eat most things, except my danger foods (pizza, chips, crisps, chocolate).
I guess eating more non calorie high food is just something I have to adapt to.
If it's too difficult to eat more low calorie food, you can always try eating more calorie-dense foods that aren't hard for you to moderate.3 -
dinadyna21 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
Tacos are 1,700 to 2,000 calories of protein rich deliciousness. At least the way I make them.
Jesus H. Christ! What are you putting in these tacos?! Lol
Well that's for the whole meal, not per taco.
2 -
NorthCascades wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
Tacos are 1,700 to 2,000 calories of protein rich deliciousness. At least the way I make them.
That’s probably my kind of taco1 -
OP, I just read the whole thread and got increasingly worried while I was reading it.
You started off by stating that you've failed in the past by over exercising and undereating and that you decided you were going to do things differently this time, and then as the thread evolved, gradually dropped your calories and even stated that you were even going to give things a try with a 2 pound a week loss goal.
If you're on your feet a lot during the day, you are not sedentary. You are at the least lightly active. You are exercising and should also be eating back a portion of your exercise calories.
You have past experience of shooting yourself in the foot from underfeuling and you're putting yourself on the path to do it again. I don't get it.
I have been there. I spent this past year gaining weight because I was so desperate to lose the last of my weight that I was over exercising and underfueling and all that led me to do was binge. The binging eventually overcame my deficits and I put on weight.
It sounds like in the past you just gave up when you suffered the same effects.
You had a good plan when you wrote this post. Keep to what it was. If you don't lose a pound a week, re-evaluate at that point. There's no rush.
The bottom line is that you already know that over restricting doesn't work. You've been down that road. Take a different one this time.18 -
There is such a vast middle ground between chicken breast, brown rice and broccoli and deep fried oreos followed by a bottle of Jack Daniels. What did you eat as a child? What do you like? What would you like to eat? What about meat and potatoes, sandwich with ham, porridge, omelet, fruit smoothie, yogurt parfait, pasta, corn on the cob, pancakes, chili, burritos, couscous, clam chowder, fruit salad, spinach pie, shrimp stir-fry, ratatouille?rachaelgifford wrote: »I can see what you are saying, I eat most things, except my danger foods (pizza, chips, crisps, chocolate).
I guess eating more non calorie high food is just something I have to adapt to.
Later you can work on why you feel certain foods are dangerous. But first aim to get in good nutrition and learn to understand and trust your appetite with normal everyday foods.7 -
What do you consider "junk" and what do you consider "healthy" food? Some people would say nonfat yogurt is healthy. I say it tastes gross with an awful mouth feel, and full fat yogurt keeps me full longer, so for me, full fat is a better option. Are you cutting out alcohol completely? Why? Unless you have a drinking problem there's no reason to do that. Think about adding nuts, seeds, full fat dairy, and an occasional pint to your diet, meet your calorie goals as outlined by MFP. If, after a month or 2, you aren't losing the lb a week you've set as your goal, look at your logs to see where your problem is. I think the error most of us make (over and over for some of us) is we see a diet as this restrictive thing to lose weight, rather than the food we eat every day for the rest of our lives.3
-
Keep in mind that there are 2 ways to use MFP.
1. Set your activity level to Sedentary and manually log exercise calories
2. Set your activity level to your actual activity level (Lightly Active, Active, etc) and NOT log exercise calories
@toxikon
No that's completely wrong I'm afraid and not the way this tool works.
Activity setting and exercise are completely separate.
Whatever is your true activity setting is that's what you set to account for your daily routine.
My son is a builder so has an active setting to account for his job - when he exercises he needs more.
For me for example I recently retired from a sedentary job but with a very large exercise routine.
Now I'm retired my activity setting would be lightly active as I'm moving much more during the day - but I still have the same large exercise routine.
You might notice above that @janejellyroll pointed out that some people who lead naturally active lives (like working on their feet all day) would want to input a higher activity level than Sedentary - which I agree with. I'm a Sedentary person so I forgot about that point - but it would still fall under "option 1" - just sub out Sedentary with whatever your non-exercise-routine activity level would be.
You still aren't getting it.
Of course a person who isn't sedentary shouldn't choose sedentary!
Whatever your activity level is you still add exercise. That's the way the tool is designed - to give an allowance to both parts, activity and exercise.
Your calorie goal on here is all of your daily routine activity plus exercise calories.
The two options are in fact:
1/ MFP method: Set your correct daily activity setting and add exercise in addition. A variable daily amount.
2/ Follow the TDEE method where your daily estimate includes exercise as well. An average daily portion of your exercise is included so you have a same every day allowance.
5 -
rachaelgifford wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
If you're struggling to eat enough "healthy food," it could be that you're trying to restrict too much from your diet.
I can see what you are saying, I eat most things, except my danger foods (pizza, chips, crisps, chocolate).
I guess eating more non calorie high food is just something I have to adapt to.
A good way around this is to add in full fat things like full fat Greek yoghurt, some cheese, full fat milk, avocados, nuts, seeds etc, or even some dark chocolate, at least 75% to get in those extra calories. Nuts are certainly not that filling, and a tablespoon of peanut butter is around 100 calories.
But honestly, unless you plan on giving up pizza, chocolate, cake etc forever, it would be better to learn to incorporate normal portions of those into your diet. I aim for an 80/20 ration - 80% nutrient dense foods and 20% of whatever I fancy...whether it be a once a week thing or a daily thing.5 -
You can only try and see if it works for you, IMHO between 1,300 cals and close to 2,000 there's a BIG difference!
If it works cool if it doesn't you can always eat 200/300 less whatever makes the scale moving in the right direction
Good Luck!3 -
I guess eating more non calorie high food is just something I have to adapt to. [/quote]
You keep saying this. High calorie and unhealthy are NOT SYNONYMOUS. In your case, you need to eat some higher caloric foods as you are struggling to get enough calories.
4 -
I don't log the exercise section of MFP because given that I may overestimate my calorie intake, atleast the exercise offsets it. MFP can not pinpoint how many calories you burned or how much muscle you have to assist in calorie burning but it can accurately estimate what goes into your body. Exercise is not a licence to eat. For example, if you input your activity level into MFP, it will assume that your activity level is of that everyday. Some days you don't go to the gym but you will still consume the same amount of calories as if you went, and bam that's when the calories climb back up. Maybe you should focus doing on one thing (that is, calorie restricting) and let exercise be a bonus.
It's really as simple as move more, eat less, drink water, avoid packaged food and you'll gradually see a difference.
I gained around 10kg over the past year once I stopped going to the gym and tracking my calories, pretty much let myself go.
I'm currently on "1700" calories, weight training only for 4-5 times a week. Still occasionally have my junk food here and there, but the main difference to my diet is more meat, less sugared snacks (replaced with mandarins) and ONLY water (with the occasional coffee).
Started in early September at 78kg, now at 72kg as of November. Newbie gains kicking in.
Of course, my body functions differently from you because of my age, gender, height etc but I hope you got the point I'm trying to make.
All the best
11 -
I don't log the exercise section of MFP because given that I may overestimate my calorie intake, atleast the exercise offsets it. MFP can not pinpoint how many calories you burned or how much muscle you have to assist in calorie burning but it can accurately estimate what goes into your body. Exercise is not a licence to eat. For example, if you input your activity level into MFP, it will assume that your activity level is of that everyday. Some days you don't go to the gym but you will still consume the same amount of calories as if you went, and bam that's when the calories climb back up. Maybe you should focus doing on one thing (that is, calorie restricting) and let exercise be a bonus.
It's really as simple as move more, eat less, drink water, avoid packaged food and you'll gradually see a difference.
I gained around 10kg over the past year once I stopped going to the gym and tracking my calories, pretty much let myself go.
I'm currently on "1700" calories, weight training only for 4-5 times a week. Still occasionally have my junk food here and there, but the main difference to my diet is more meat, less sugared snacks (replaced with mandarins) and ONLY water (with the occasional coffee).
Started in early September at 78kg, now at 72kg as of November. Newbie gains kicking in.
Of course, my body functions differently from you because of my age, gender, height etc but I hope you got the point I'm trying to make.
All the best
Exercise isn't included in MFP's calorie goals or activity level, so you can eat that amount on days you don't work out and still lose.8 -
Exercise isn't included in MFP's calorie goals or activity level, so you can eat that amount on days you don't work out and still lose.[/quote]
Right, but setting your activity level from lightly active to active increases calories required by 300 which is a big difference. MFP is very broad in what is lightly active and what is active so it can not tailor to every individual. I could burn 100 calories cleaning the house, but MFP wouldn't know that. Just seems like OP is fixated on setting the right activity level, which can be a trap for many.2 -
Exercise isn't included in MFP's calorie goals or activity level, so you can eat that amount on days you don't work out and still lose.
Right, but setting your activity level from lightly active to active increases calories required by 300 which is a big difference. MFP is very broad in what is lightly active and what is active so it can not tailor to every individual. I could burn 100 calories cleaning the house, but MFP wouldn't know that. Just seems like OP is fixated on setting the right activity level, which can be a trap for many.[/quote]
Maybe, maybe not. It depends on what you do for a living, and I think this is the source of confusion for people.
Your activity setting is about your daily routine and how active you are in it. It has nothing to do with exercise. If you have a job or a lifestyle that has you constantly in motion, you should choose an appropriate activity setting AND THEN also log purposeful exercise on top of that.
TL;DR Activity settings aren't the same as logging purposeful exercise when it comes to MFP's system.6 -
dinadyna21 wrote: »I'm 5'4 so we're the same height, 193lbs currently and 27 years old. My TDEE is 1950 and to lose 1lb a week I have to eat 1450. Is MFP telling you to eat that much?
And also are you sedentary or pretty active throughout the day? Your activity level affects how much you should eat to lose weight. I work a desk job so I'm pretty sedentary throughout the day.
OP weighs 42 pounds more than you, and said she is "normally pretty active day to day," on top of four to five sessions of intentional exercise weekly, so you're not exactly comparable.3 -
rachaelgifford wrote: »kommodevaran wrote: »
I think that if you challenge this, you'll have a much easier time. No foods are wrong and right, it's about balance and moderation. Yes, it is indeed true that socalled healthy food is more "filling", and that's why it's promoted when losing weight, but as you've already discovered, eating too little, as in too few calories, eating boring food (probably), demonizing food you like (if I'm interpreting this correctly), is not going to work in the long run. At 1700 or 1900 calories, you have enough to play with to get in good nutrition and a few occasional treats. If you make this endeavour into some kind of punishment, you'll only want to quit. It's easy to quit. But quitting is a moot point if you're already eating the way you want to eat.rachaelgifford wrote: »I also don't eat much (as in large portions) I just eat too much of the wrong stuff and drink too much.
That is why I am struggling with the high target - it is harder to get to with healthy food!
You are so right, and telling me all the things I know but need to hear.
I am fully aware that I am my own worst enemy, and need to change my mindset as much as my eating habits. This is why it has never worked for me before, and a cycle I am determined to break!
Thank you!
Also, I have looked at my 2lb per week loss target which is 1210 (I've dropped my activity to sedentary in case I am less active than I think). I think I will have a week at eating to 1700 with no exercise calories back, and a week at 1210 with eating back and see which way I prefer.
Like you said, it is a long game... so I have to find out what works for me.in a nursery most days running about.
You are not sedentary by MFP's definition. It sounds like you're headed back to your familiar pattern:I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.2 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Keep in mind that there are 2 ways to use MFP.
1. Set your activity level to Sedentary and manually log exercise calories
2. Set your activity level to your actual activity level (Lightly Active, Active, etc) and NOT log exercise calories
This is like:
1. Paying with cash. You can't buy things until you can afford them.
2. Paying with a credit card. You can buy things immediately on the promise that you'll earn them later. Some people can get into trouble this way. "I'm an active person generally, so I can eat this" can be dangerous because people have a natural tendency to over estimate the level of exercise they do and under estimate the food they eat.
I'm not saying nobody should ever do #2, just be aware of the danger.
If you're not actually sedentary, and you do exercise, both 1 and 2 are like having money in the bank and refusing to use it to pay your rent or your mortgage, so you end up living on the street.12 -
dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
OP spells out in her OP that what she means by gaming the system is "under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it," so there's really no need need for us to guess what she meant. You aren't so clear, so I don't know what you mean by "game the system in her favor," but I think most people reading that would interpret "in her favor" to mean eating more, not eating less.0 -
rachaelgifford wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
Exactly this. I just don’t have a huge appetite either, I just drink too much and eat fried food, crisps and chocolate!
I guess I just have to learn to eat more. Lol.
Where do you see dinadyna saying that she doesn't have a huge appetite? I think you may be agreeing with a meaning that you're projecting from your own experience. It's interesting that you interpret an ambiguous phrase like gaming the system in your favor as undereating.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
OP spells out in her OP that what she means by gaming the system is "under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it," so there's really no need need for us to guess what she meant. You aren't so clear, so I don't know what you mean by "game the system in her favor," but I think most people reading that would interpret "in her favor" to mean eating more, not eating less.
I took that to mean losing weight faster than the recommendations allow. Given the context.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
OP spells out in her OP that what she means by gaming the system is "under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it," so there's really no need need for us to guess what she meant. You aren't so clear, so I don't know what you mean by "game the system in her favor," but I think most people reading that would interpret "in her favor" to mean eating more, not eating less.
I took that to mean losing weight faster than the recommendations allow. Given the context.
I would find that more likely if dinadyn hadn't said she was guessing what the OP meant, when the OP stated it clearly in the original post. Which would be the context that dinadyn is ignoring in saying that she's guessing what OP meant. Either she missed that part of the thread or she forgot it, or she's ignoring it, or her own perceptual filter kept from processing and retaining it. So I don't think she's reading this with the same context that you and I are.1 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »I'm 5'4 so we're the same height, 193lbs currently and 27 years old. My TDEE is 1950 and to lose 1lb a week I have to eat 1450. Is MFP telling you to eat that much?
And also are you sedentary or pretty active throughout the day? Your activity level affects how much you should eat to lose weight. I work a desk job so I'm pretty sedentary throughout the day.
OP weighs 42 pounds more than you, and said she is "normally pretty active day to day," on top of four to five sessions of intentional exercise weekly, so you're not exactly comparable.
Op already mentioned this, and I realize she's more active than me a point I said makes sense that she would thus eat more.lynn_glenmont wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
Exactly this. I just don’t have a huge appetite either, I just drink too much and eat fried food, crisps and chocolate!
I guess I just have to learn to eat more. Lol.
Where do you see dinadyna saying that she doesn't have a huge appetite? I think you may be agreeing with a meaning that you're projecting from your own experience. It's interesting that you interpret an ambiguous phrase like gaming the system in your favor as undereating.
You might wanna re-read the thread again, I told OP in an earlier post that I don't eat much which is why my low calorie budget is easier for me to handle than others. This is why she says I don't have a huge appetite.lynn_glenmont wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
OP spells out in her OP that what she means by gaming the system is "under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it," so there's really no need need for us to guess what she meant. You aren't so clear, so I don't know what you mean by "game the system in her favor," but I think most people reading that would interpret "in her favor" to mean eating more, not eating less.
Not entirely sure why you made a point to mention this, I was attempting to clarify for another poster who was confused about what OP meant about gaming the system. I didn't want to say something that OP might not have actually meant as that would've caused even more confusion.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Hi there!
I have tried and failed MFP many times, and it has all been down to me trying to beat the system... under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it.
So, this time in an effort to actually make it work I have set my goal to losing 1lb per week and I have set myself a gym routine to ensure that I am working sensibly in the gym.
However, my calorie goal has come up at 1920 calories, and this seems like quite a lot to me when losing weight. However, I am determined to do this properly, so am trying to eat around that, and exercise on top.
I exercise 4/5 times a week. 2 weight sessions and 2/3 cardio depending on how I feel. I am normally pretty active day to day as well.
I don't think I will be eating back my exercise calories though , as I am going from about 1300 to 1900.
Could someone please reassure me that I will actually lose weight this way???? Obviously, I wouldn't be sad losing more than 1lb per week... but I need to start doing something that will work so if slow and steady is the key, than that is what I will try!
Can you not see that the two bold segments are in conflict?
The tool works if done properly.
If you think "slow & steady" is the key to being successful this time then why are you trying to speed it up?
I think OP just means that when she did MFP before she tried to game the system in her favor instead of following what it told her. I can admit to doing that when I first started before getting serious but she can chime in and tell me if I'm wrong with my guess.
OP spells out in her OP that what she means by gaming the system is "under eating, over exercising and generally just hating it," so there's really no need need for us to guess what she meant. You aren't so clear, so I don't know what you mean by "game the system in her favor," but I think most people reading that would interpret "in her favor" to mean eating more, not eating less.
I took that to mean losing weight faster than the recommendations allow. Given the context.
I would find that more likely if dinadyn hadn't said she was guessing what the OP meant, when the OP stated it clearly in the original post. Which would be the context that dinadyn is ignoring in saying that she's guessing what OP meant. Either she missed that part of the thread or she forgot it, or she's ignoring it, or her own perceptual filter kept from processing and retaining it. So I don't think she's reading this with the same context that you and I are.
You seem to be the one missing parts of the thread not me.0 -
Keep in mind that there are 2 ways to use MFP.
1. Set your activity level to Sedentary and manually log exercise calories
2. Set your activity level to your actual activity level (Lightly Active, Active, etc) and NOT log exercise calories
@toxikon
No that's completely wrong I'm afraid and not the way this tool works.
Activity setting and exercise are completely separate.
Whatever is your true activity setting is that's what you set to account for your daily routine.
My son is a builder so has an active setting to account for his job - when he exercises he needs more.
For me for example I recently retired from a sedentary job but with a very large exercise routine.
Now I'm retired my activity setting would be lightly active as I'm moving much more during the day - but I still have the same large exercise routine.
You might notice above that @janejellyroll pointed out that some people who lead naturally active lives (like working on their feet all day) would want to input a higher activity level than Sedentary - which I agree with. I'm a Sedentary person so I forgot about that point - but it would still fall under "option 1" - just sub out Sedentary with whatever your non-exercise-routine activity level would be.
You still aren't getting it.
Of course a person who isn't sedentary shouldn't choose sedentary!
Whatever your activity level is you still add exercise. That's the way the tool is designed - to give an allowance to both parts, activity and exercise.
Your calorie goal on here is all of your daily routine activity plus exercise calories.
The two options are in fact:
1/ MFP method: Set your correct daily activity setting and add exercise in addition. A variable daily amount.
2/ Follow the TDEE method where your daily estimate includes exercise as well. An average daily portion of your exercise is included so you have a same every day allowance.
...That's exactly what I said?
You either set your Activity level to your natural Activity level (deskjob = Sedentary, working on your feet = Lightly Active, whatever) and manually input your intentional excercise (log that you ran a 5k after work).
OR
If you run a 5k every day, set your Activity Level higher so you don't need to manually log the 5ks.
What am I missing here?4 -
I honestly don't trust the machines at my gym to accurately calculate my calorie burn because the totals when I'm done seem way off. And until I get a heart rate monitor I just don't see a point in logging my exercise and eating back the calories. I tried doing that when I first started and my weight didn't budge because I had no deficit.3
-
NorthCascades wrote: »dinadyna21 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »rachaelgifford wrote: »Why do you think you don't need to eat back some of your exercise cals?? I suggest you try following the MFP system **as laid out ** for 2 months and see how it works. It seems that inventing your own variations has not worked well in the past.
It isn’t that I don’t think I should, it is that I do t think I can. I struggle to eat enough healthy food, most of my calories come from junk and booze. It is just too much.
Tacos are 1,700 to 2,000 calories of protein rich deliciousness. At least the way I make them.
Jesus H. Christ! What are you putting in these tacos?! Lol
Well that's for the whole meal, not per taco.
Damn now I want a taco.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.3K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 440 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions