So if im netting 1200, I will lose weight?

I ate 2200 calories today and burned 1200, so my net is under 1200...this means I'm on the right path to weight loss? Using kitchen scale and Garmin 235 to track.

Replies

  • trustinwhatworks
    trustinwhatworks Posts: 9 Member
    I'm just very nervous about taking this approach
  • FitGamerSmoak
    FitGamerSmoak Posts: 224 Member
    What are your goals? Starting weight current weight? It seems like a huge deficit to have and what are you doing to burn 1000 calories a day?
  • trustinwhatworks
    trustinwhatworks Posts: 9 Member
    I run doubles, I'm a runner. I'm 5'6 and 140 as of right now and I want to lose weight. I'm just having trouble wrapping my head around net calories...
  • trustinwhatworks
    trustinwhatworks Posts: 9 Member
    Ruatine wrote: »
    If MFP is giving you a calorie goal of 1200, you may need to assess whether you are trying lose weight too quickly. Generally only women who are short and sedentary will need a calorie goal of 1200. Weight loss is more sustainable and healthier when done at a slow, steady pace. When you lose weight too quickly, you end up losing a lot of muscle along with the fat you want to lose.

    Consider if your pounds per week loss rate is appropriate for you.

    Pound per week goals for number of pounds until normal weight range is reached:
    75+ lbs set to lose 2 lbs
    Between 40-75 lbs set to lose 1.5 lbs
    Between 25-40 lbs set to lose 1 lbs
    Between 15-25 lbs set to lose .5-1 lbs
    Less than 15 lbs set to lose .5 lbs


    Also, many fitness trackers will overestimate the amount of calories burned for an activity, which is why many people only eat 50% of their calories earned through exercise. This may not be the case for yours, but if you find yourself losing weight not losing weight as expected, that could easily be the cause.

    When you say calorie goal are you referring to net calorie goal or just the calorie goal? Why is Mfp so confusing
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    Ruatine wrote: »
    If MFP is giving you a calorie goal of 1200, you may need to assess whether you are trying lose weight too quickly. Generally only women who are short and sedentary will need a calorie goal of 1200. Weight loss is more sustainable and healthier when done at a slow, steady pace. When you lose weight too quickly, you end up losing a lot of muscle along with the fat you want to lose.

    Consider if your pounds per week loss rate is appropriate for you.

    Pound per week goals for number of pounds until normal weight range is reached:
    75+ lbs set to lose 2 lbs
    Between 40-75 lbs set to lose 1.5 lbs
    Between 25-40 lbs set to lose 1 lbs
    Between 15-25 lbs set to lose .5-1 lbs
    Less than 15 lbs set to lose .5 lbs


    Also, many fitness trackers will overestimate the amount of calories burned for an activity, which is why many people only eat 50% of their calories earned through exercise. This may not be the case for yours, but if you find yourself losing weight not losing weight as expected, that could easily be the cause.

    When you say calorie goal are you referring to net calorie goal or just the calorie goal? Why is Mfp so confusing

    Net
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Ruatine wrote: »
    If MFP is giving you a calorie goal of 1200, you may need to assess whether you are trying lose weight too quickly. Generally only women who are short and sedentary will need a calorie goal of 1200. Weight loss is more sustainable and healthier when done at a slow, steady pace. When you lose weight too quickly, you end up losing a lot of muscle along with the fat you want to lose.

    Consider if your pounds per week loss rate is appropriate for you.

    Pound per week goals for number of pounds until normal weight range is reached:
    75+ lbs set to lose 2 lbs
    Between 40-75 lbs set to lose 1.5 lbs
    Between 25-40 lbs set to lose 1 lbs
    Between 15-25 lbs set to lose .5-1 lbs
    Less than 15 lbs set to lose .5 lbs


    Also, many fitness trackers will overestimate the amount of calories burned for an activity, which is why many people only eat 50% of their calories earned through exercise. This may not be the case for yours, but if you find yourself losing weight not losing weight as expected, that could easily be the cause.

    When you say calorie goal are you referring to net calorie goal or just the calorie goal? Why is Mfp so confusing

    Yes that is what they meant.

    MFP calculates your goals based on Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis. This allows you to lose weight without exercise. When you exercise, you increase your calorie burn past your NEAT. To maintain the same deficit you have without exercise, you have to eat more (NET your goal).

    At your height and weight, you probably should be set to 0.5 lb per week to 1 lb per week at most.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,226 Member
    The Garmin (or any like device, even the good ones) isn't magic, so it still matters whether the exercise calorie estimate turns out to be accurate (likely to be close for some activities, more questionable for others). And you didn't tell us anything about your age, size, current weight, daily life activity, etc.

    But at age 59, 5'5" and a weight in the mid-150s when I started MFP, I lost way. too. fast. on 1200 net calories. (Not at all typical for my age, but still.)

    In general, the net calories approach works fine, though (50+ pounds worth, in my case), once the intake/output estimates are dialed in.
  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,486 Member
    edited August 2018
    You have under 20lbs to lose. Losing more would put you at an unhealthy weight.
    Put your deficit at 0.5 lbs a week.

    If running is your sport, compare your Garmin cal burn adjustment to this equation.

    (Weight in lbs x 0.63) x distance in miles =cals burnt.

    Choose a consistent method of eating back your running cals.

    Use the data you collect over time (4-6weeks) to adjust your calorie balance.

    Under eating will have a negative effect on your running performance, amongst other things, over eating will stall weight loss.

    Cheers, h.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,254 Member
    Use a trending weight app to evaluate progress over 4 to 6 week time period and consider water weight fluctuation caused by time of month, sodium, exercise, stomach and bowel contents, floor condition/flex where scale is located....

    As a normal weight person I would consider the creation of a deficit > 20% of TDEE to be too aggressive.

    If your expected daily burn including exercise is 2000 to 2500 Cal, this means that anything above 1lb a week is definitely out in terms of "suitable" goals.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    Another vote for changing your weekly weight loss goal to a half pound per week.
  • trustinwhatworks
    trustinwhatworks Posts: 9 Member
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Another vote for changing your weekly weight loss goal to a half pound per week.

    I tried that and it went from 1200 to 1210?
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,419 Member
    edited August 2018
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Another vote for changing your weekly weight loss goal to a half pound per week.

    I tried that and it went from 1200 to 1210?

    Is that using "sedentary?" If you're a younger woman with a job, kids or school you're not likely sedentary.

    I find it hard to believe you still got 1200.

    I'm taller (5'8"), the same weight, and in my sixties. I don't run. I'm retired. Tiny condo, not a lot of daily activity. When I want to lose I set it at 1700 PLUS exercise calories.

    I am sure you could easily lose on the same - 1700 - possibly more, PLUS exercise calories.

  • Ruatine
    Ruatine Posts: 3,424 Member
    edited August 2018
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Another vote for changing your weekly weight loss goal to a half pound per week.

    I tried that and it went from 1200 to 1210?

    You input something wrong. When I put your stats into the MFP calculator: 5'6", 140 lbs, sedentary and losing .5 lb/week, I get a calorie goal of 1450.
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,256 Member
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Another vote for changing your weekly weight loss goal to a half pound per week.

    I tried that and it went from 1200 to 1210?

    Yeah, no. Sounds like you accidentally selected 1lb rather than half a pound.

    Your maintenance at sedentary is somewhere around 1700 kcal. To lose half a pound a week you’d subtract 250 to get 1450 calories a day.

    Since you’re not actually sedentary, you’re also ‘spending’ calories to fuel your exercise and need to eat at least some of those back. You shuld never let your net calories go below 1200.
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    Ruatine wrote: »
    If MFP is giving you a calorie goal of 1200, you may need to assess whether you are trying lose weight too quickly. Generally only women who are short and sedentary will need a calorie goal of 1200. Weight loss is more sustainable and healthier when done at a slow, steady pace. When you lose weight too quickly, you end up losing a lot of muscle along with the fat you want to lose.

    Consider if your pounds per week loss rate is appropriate for you.

    Pound per week goals for number of pounds until normal weight range is reached:
    75+ lbs set to lose 2 lbs
    Between 40-75 lbs set to lose 1.5 lbs
    Between 25-40 lbs set to lose 1 lbs
    Between 15-25 lbs set to lose .5-1 lbs
    Less than 15 lbs set to lose .5 lbs


    Also, many fitness trackers will overestimate the amount of calories burned for an activity, which is why many people only eat 50% of their calories earned through exercise. This may not be the case for yours, but if you find yourself losing weight not losing weight as expected, that could easily be the cause.

    When you say calorie goal are you referring to net calorie goal or just the calorie goal? Why is Mfp so confusing

    MFP gives you a calorie goal before exercise. If you do zero exercise and eat 1200 calories (your goal) .......you lose weight.

    If you do added exercise, you log it and earn extra calories. Keep in mind exercise calorie burns are estimates. Many people eat back a portion for awhile and see how weight loss progresses.

    5'8"......no way is 1200 appropriate for you. Moderate paced weight loss helps you lose weight while minimizing lean muscle loss. For more fat loss, slow your weekly goal down.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    edited September 2018
    I'll repost the infographic, courtesy of @tinkerbellang83, which explains it well and provides an actual example:

    0xrjim2au9ql.jpg
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    My net goal is now 1450

    That's great. Stick to that limit. Don't go over and don't go under your weekly net calorie goal.

    Check your weekly net calories on the app:

    Diary>Nutrition>Calories>Week View>Net

    You can go over on a day, or under on a day, and it won't matter, so long as your weekly goal is even.
  • AvandHK
    AvandHK Posts: 36 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    AvandHK wrote: »
    I’ll try to use my mind for a second and explain it clearly so listen up

    You body burns a set amount of calories even if you didn’t lift a finger that whole day it’s it’s just to keep you alive


    Let’s say it’s “X”

    You need to be under “X” to lose weight

    So if your “X” is 2000 and you ate 2000 but burnt 800 with exercising your at an 800 calorie deficit


    Try to aim for a 500 calorie deficit so that you don’t mess up your metabolism and your body

    You can figure the “X” out on the Internet just search calorie calculator and it’s easy from there

    Hope i helped cuz I used my brain a lot 😅

    That's actually not how it works.

    Your body burns a certain amount of calories even if you're at rest, as you described above and called "X". That is referred to as BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate) - or more technically, RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate).

    Above and beyond that, you burn a certain amount of calories in your daily activities - showering, preparing meals, cleaning house, gardening, whatever you do at work, etc. That is referred to as NEAT (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis).

    There are also calories expended during purposeful exercise, which are referred to as EAT (Exercise Activity Thermogenesis).

    When you put BMR+NEAT+EAT together, you get your TDEE (Total Daily Energy Expenditure).


    Using the MFP method, you would combine BMR + NEAT, calculate your caloric deficit from there, then eat back all or part of your exercise (EAT) calories.

    Using the TDEE method (assuming that your day to day activity and exercise is reasonably consistent and similar), you would calculate your deficit from TDEE and not eat your exercise calories back.

    BMR has nothing to do with calculating your deficit, other than the fact that it's the most substantial portion of your calorie expenditure every day. You do not set your deficit from BMR - if you do, you will be significantly undereating.


    Thanks for the correction mate it was late at night so I guess I’m a a dumb mofo too 😅