Net calories dangerous?
Syre96
Posts: 28 Member
Mpf is suggesting I eat 1200 calories a day based the information I put into my diary settings. However, I tend to burn 200/300 calories during a workout. Is this number of calories too low or should I go ahead and follow it? My info: 5'2, 158lbs, 21yr female. Gym 5x week w resistance/weight training & cardio
0
Replies
-
You can eat at least a portion of your exercise calories.
2 -
Eat back exercise calories3
-
Eat 1200 + 200ish calories a day. MFP works by giving you the number of calories you need to consume to reach your goals with your day to day activities and expects you to add exercise on top of that. Just remember that calories burned exercising are estimates only and may be over generous. If, over a month you have not been losing as expected it could mean you are overestimating calories burned so would have to drop the amount eaten back a bit. It could also mean inaccuracy in logging calories in too so read stickies about how to do this as accurately as possible.4
-
FYI if it gives you 1,200 cals... that's the bare minimum it will give you. You probably have it set to 2 lbs/week. That's likely too aggressive.3
-
So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).2 -
FYI if it gives you 1,200 cals... that's the bare minimum it will give you. You probably have it set to 2 lbs/week. That's likely too aggressive.
This. Generally speaking, if MFP tells you 1200 calories, it’s because you’ve told it you want to lose weight faster than is healthy for your frame (a good rule of thumb is 1% of your body weight per week, max). Like, I could lose 4 pounds per week if I walk about an hour each day and eat nothing at all, but that doesn’t make it a good plan. Lower your loss speed a bit; it’ll help you sustain the changes you’re making.1 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).
I went and edited my goals to lose 1 lb per week and my new calorie need is apparently 1,290. Should I still try to reach for 1300 or 1400? Also when you say eat back half of my exercise calories, what would you suggest is the best way to do so? Like if I burn about 300 calories per workout(estimated by my workout watch), should I try to cleanly eat back 150? Isn't it counterproductive to eat back exercise calories? I'm still a little new to these concepts0 -
Yes. Didn't we answer this yesterday?1
-
Tacklewasher wrote: »So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).
I went and edited my goals to lose 1 lb per week and my new calorie need is apparently 1,290. Should I still try to reach for 1300 or 1400? Also when you say eat back half of my exercise calories, what would you suggest is the best way to do so? Like if I burn about 300 calories per workout(estimated by my workout watch), should I try to cleanly eat back 150? Isn't it counterproductive to eat back exercise calories? I'm still a little new to these concepts
MFP is set to estimate your loss without taking exercise into account, so the calorie goal you get when you say you want to lose 1 pound is before any exercise at all - theoretically you would lose faster if you did not account for your exercise calories, which may not be a healthy rate of loss. People usually suggest 50% to start with to account for the fact that exercise calories are often inflated. It's fine not to use the tool that way (I do not), but it is still good to take exercise into account somehow.0 -
MFP is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Your net calories should be at your MFP goal, not your gross calories.
That said, if you have concerns about over-estimation of exercise calories, it's okay to eat back just a portion of them. Just monitor your progress to ensure you aren't losing faster than you expected.0 -
Yes, that is better. It also means that if you ate 1,200 you likely would have lost just over 1 lb per week, not 2 lbs. It won't dip below 1,200. To actually lose 2 lbs/week you would have had to eat less than 1,200, which it will never say.
The general rule of thumb:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.2 -
All of these (MFP, the site I linked to, etc.) sites give you an estimate of what your calorie burn from normal activity is. So 1300, or 1400 is well withing the range they will give. Same for exercise calories. Yeah, the half is because most equipment gives funky calorie counts.
The best thing to do is pick a number (say 1300 plus half your exercise calories) and try it for 6-8 weeks. If you find yourself getting too hungry, or unable to do your exercises, then add 100 or so calories, but what you are looking to do is to lose ~1 lb per week over the 6-8 weeks, ignoring the normal fluctuations that happen to our weight.
Put your weight into a trending app (Libra for android, Happy scale for IOS, trendweight.com for web) and watch the trend instead of the daily or weekly numbers.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »MFP is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Your net calories should be at your MFP goal, not your gross calories.
That said, if you have concerns about over-estimation of exercise calories, it's okay to eat back just a portion of them. Just monitor your progress to ensure you aren't losing faster than you expected.
I have the app my watch uses to track my workouts (S-Health) linked to MFP. I do notice it subtracts my exercise calories after a workout, but I am now noticing people saying tracker do often over-estimate. Even so, in the past I would not eat back my exercise calories as I would work out at the end of my day and my last meal would just complete my calories for the day(which was when my goal was 1600 which I'm thinking now was too much), not my exercise calories.0 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).
I went and edited my goals to lose 1 lb per week and my new calorie need is apparently 1,290. Should I still try to reach for 1300 or 1400? Also when you say eat back half of my exercise calories, what would you suggest is the best way to do so? Like if I burn about 300 calories per workout(estimated by my workout watch), should I try to cleanly eat back 150? Isn't it counterproductive to eat back exercise calories? I'm still a little new to these concepts
MFP is set to estimate your loss without taking exercise into account, so the calorie goal you get when you say you want to lose 1 pound is before any exercise at all - theoretically you would lose faster if you did not account for your exercise calories, which may not be a healthy rate of loss. People usually suggest 50% to start with to account for the fact that exercise calories are often inflated. It's fine not to use the tool that way (I do not), but it is still good to take exercise into account somehow.
Yes this is the part that always confuses me because you can never really know exactly how many calories you burn after a workout. Especially when people say there's an afterburn of calories when you do weight lifting. I just never know what to do in terms of eating back excercise calories. In the past, my last meal would be after my workout and just complete my caloric need for the day(which was 1600. Maybe this was maintenance and thats why I wasn't losing weight?)0 -
-
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).
I went and edited my goals to lose 1 lb per week and my new calorie need is apparently 1,290. Should I still try to reach for 1300 or 1400? Also when you say eat back half of my exercise calories, what would you suggest is the best way to do so? Like if I burn about 300 calories per workout(estimated by my workout watch), should I try to cleanly eat back 150? Isn't it counterproductive to eat back exercise calories? I'm still a little new to these concepts
MFP is set to estimate your loss without taking exercise into account, so the calorie goal you get when you say you want to lose 1 pound is before any exercise at all - theoretically you would lose faster if you did not account for your exercise calories, which may not be a healthy rate of loss. People usually suggest 50% to start with to account for the fact that exercise calories are often inflated. It's fine not to use the tool that way (I do not), but it is still good to take exercise into account somehow.
Yes this is the part that always confuses me because you can never really know exactly how many calories you burn after a workout. Especially when people say there's an afterburn of calories when you do weight lifting. I just never know what to do in terms of eating back excercise calories. In the past, my last meal would be after my workout and just complete my caloric need for the day(which was 1600. Maybe this was maintenance and thats why I wasn't losing weight?)
The best way to approach it is to log your food intake accuracy and then notice your weight loss results over time. If you're eating back a portion of your exercise calories and losing faster than you expected, that means that you're likely burning more and you can eat more of them back. If you find you're losing less than you expected, that means you should eat less of them.
Your real life results are always going to be a better guide than estimates. It's just that the estimates give us a place to start when we're setting out.2 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).
I went and edited my goals to lose 1 lb per week and my new calorie need is apparently 1,290. Should I still try to reach for 1300 or 1400? Also when you say eat back half of my exercise calories, what would you suggest is the best way to do so? Like if I burn about 300 calories per workout(estimated by my workout watch), should I try to cleanly eat back 150? Isn't it counterproductive to eat back exercise calories? I'm still a little new to these concepts
MFP is set to estimate your loss without taking exercise into account, so the calorie goal you get when you say you want to lose 1 pound is before any exercise at all - theoretically you would lose faster if you did not account for your exercise calories, which may not be a healthy rate of loss. People usually suggest 50% to start with to account for the fact that exercise calories are often inflated. It's fine not to use the tool that way (I do not), but it is still good to take exercise into account somehow.
Yes this is the part that always confuses me because you can never really know exactly how many calories you burn after a workout. Especially when people say there's an afterburn of calories when you do weight lifting. I just never know what to do in terms of eating back excercise calories. In the past, my last meal would be after my workout and just complete my caloric need for the day(which was 1600. Maybe this was maintenance and thats why I wasn't losing weight?)
Tracking calories is really just trial and error. If you track your calories in/calories out and weight change for a few weeks, you can use your trend to work out if you should eat more or less, and possible identify areas where your tracking is off. That 50% recommendation is conservative because of the assumption that most people would prefer to lose a little faster rather than slower, and because it's more common to underestimate calories in and overestimate calories out than vice versa.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).
I went and edited my goals to lose 1 lb per week and my new calorie need is apparently 1,290. Should I still try to reach for 1300 or 1400? Also when you say eat back half of my exercise calories, what would you suggest is the best way to do so? Like if I burn about 300 calories per workout(estimated by my workout watch), should I try to cleanly eat back 150? Isn't it counterproductive to eat back exercise calories? I'm still a little new to these concepts
MFP is set to estimate your loss without taking exercise into account, so the calorie goal you get when you say you want to lose 1 pound is before any exercise at all - theoretically you would lose faster if you did not account for your exercise calories, which may not be a healthy rate of loss. People usually suggest 50% to start with to account for the fact that exercise calories are often inflated. It's fine not to use the tool that way (I do not), but it is still good to take exercise into account somehow.
Yes this is the part that always confuses me because you can never really know exactly how many calories you burn after a workout. Especially when people say there's an afterburn of calories when you do weight lifting. I just never know what to do in terms of eating back excercise calories. In the past, my last meal would be after my workout and just complete my caloric need for the day(which was 1600. Maybe this was maintenance and thats why I wasn't losing weight?)
The best way to approach it is to log your food intake accuracy and then notice your weight loss results over time. If you're eating back a portion of your exercise calories and losing faster than you expected, that means that you're likely burning more and you can eat more of them back. If you find you're losing less than you expected, that means you should eat less of them.
Your real life results are always going to be a better guide than estimates. It's just that the estimates give us a place to start when we're setting out.
This is great advice, and something that sometimes gets overlooked here because it takes time, accuracy, and patience to recognize the trend. Logging your calories in will ALWAYS be an estimate. Your activity calories out will also ALWAYS be an estimate. But your results over time don't lie (except in the case of water weight, that *kitten*
) 4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »So, according to http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator your BMR is 1535.
Assuming you are sedentary, multiply by 1.25 for a Neat of ~1900.
So I'm also guessing you are trying to lose 2 lbs per week. I also think that is too aggressive. Aim for 1 lb per week, or 1400 before exercise. Eat back half you exercise calories and do this for 6-8 weeks and see if the weight is coming off as expected (6-8 lbs).
I went and edited my goals to lose 1 lb per week and my new calorie need is apparently 1,290. Should I still try to reach for 1300 or 1400? Also when you say eat back half of my exercise calories, what would you suggest is the best way to do so? Like if I burn about 300 calories per workout(estimated by my workout watch), should I try to cleanly eat back 150? Isn't it counterproductive to eat back exercise calories? I'm still a little new to these concepts
MFP is set to estimate your loss without taking exercise into account, so the calorie goal you get when you say you want to lose 1 pound is before any exercise at all - theoretically you would lose faster if you did not account for your exercise calories, which may not be a healthy rate of loss. People usually suggest 50% to start with to account for the fact that exercise calories are often inflated. It's fine not to use the tool that way (I do not), but it is still good to take exercise into account somehow.
Yes this is the part that always confuses me because you can never really know exactly how many calories you burn after a workout. Especially when people say there's an afterburn of calories when you do weight lifting. I just never know what to do in terms of eating back excercise calories. In the past, my last meal would be after my workout and just complete my caloric need for the day(which was 1600. Maybe this was maintenance and thats why I wasn't losing weight?)
The best way to approach it is to log your food intake accuracy and then notice your weight loss results over time. If you're eating back a portion of your exercise calories and losing faster than you expected, that means that you're likely burning more and you can eat more of them back. If you find you're losing less than you expected, that means you should eat less of them.
Your real life results are always going to be a better guide than estimates. It's just that the estimates give us a place to start when we're setting out.
This is great advice, and something that sometimes gets overlooked here because it takes time, accuracy, and patience to recognize the trend. Logging your calories in will ALWAYS be an estimate. Your activity calories out will also ALWAYS be an estimate. But your results over time don't lie (except in the case of water weight, that *kitten* )
To piggy back all of this (not my original work or advice but some super smart people named SideSteel and Sarauk2sf):
1) Eat the appropriate caloric (and macronutrient) intake for your goals and track intake accurately.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets
The above link is not going to be accurate for everyone. Please treat it as a starting point and general information.
If you choose to use MFP's default setting rather than a TDEE method, it's important to set realistic weight loss targets based on your current bodyweight. I think .5 to 1% bodyweight per week is a good general recommendation for most people. Very obese people may go a bit faster. Be aware of the exercise calorie model that MFP uses if you choose to use MFP's default method. Exercise expenditures are often over-stated so you may wish to eat back a set percentage of those calories, such as 50% for starters.
See here:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
An aside on food selection
I am a firm believer in moderation. However, if you're the type that can't have a serving of potato chips without eating two bags of potato chips then it stands to reason that you may not be able to practice moderation with potato chips. I concede that for some people, elimination of some things, even if temporary, could be a viable short term strategy while you learn to apply moderation. That being said, I think "most" people will do very well using a food selection strategy where somewhere around 80% of their diet consists of whole and nutrient dense foods with the other 20% consisting of whatever you prefer.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym
Yes, health is important and you should be looking to consume a lot of nutrient dense foods in your diet. But this doesn't mean you can't also have a pop tart or some ice cream. Going from fat to not fat is very likely to significantly improve your health.
Stop guessing .
TRACK ACCURATELY. Use a digital food scale even if it is just for a few weeks so you can get yourself well aligned with how many calories you are really consuming. Now there are arguments against this -- if being this meticulous is going to prevent you from adhering to your diet then I can understand not wanting to be attached to the food scale. However if you are not making progress at a pace expected by your assumed food intake, you really need to take some time to dial that intake in accurately and a food scale along with detailed and consistent logging is the best way to do this. I think at the very least, a couple of weeks spent meticulously weighing and measuring will teach you portion sizes. If you get very OCD or possibly have ED related issues that are magnified or brought out by meticulous tracking then I could see not wanting to use this method. But as a general recommendation I think it's a smart idea to implement.
Sara and I run a group called Eat, Train, Progress, where we frequently help people who are stalled on progress. The number one issue (by a very significant margin) is inaccurate tracking and not weighing portions properly. They are consuming more calories than they think. Followed closely by simply eating too many calories (tracking is fine but the goal intake is just too high). Very seldom do we see people who are truly not eating enough, although it has happened.
See here: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/872212-you-re-probably-eating-more-than-you-think
Finally, once you have accurate data you should be using this data and your results to make adjustments up or down to that intake to produce the desired results. I would suggest that what actually happens with your body is going to be far more valuable than what any online calculator tells you.
Your goal with setting your intake is to sort of hone-in on what is going to give you results at a reasonable intake level. It is most definitely not a "use this calculator and permanently set my intake to this level for several months regardless of what my weight does or how I feel".2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions