Best Calorie Calculator

wstephens87 wrote: »

I'm having the same issue. MFP has me at 1200 calories and I think it may be hindering me from losing weight. I'm only like 3 lbs from being withing a healthy weight and under 1200 risks starvation mode. I just don't want to eat way too much.

Starvation mode in that sense does not exist. Eating too few calories does not hinder weight loss; that would be contrary to the laws of thermodynamics.

(Dieting in the long term does result in some changes in metabolism, but not enough to have a significant effect on weight loss. What does sometimes happen is that eating too few calories results in having less energy and therefore moving less; and obviously, moving less means burning fewer calories and decreases your deficit.)

If you're only 3 lb from a healthy weight you should probably be aiming at a 1 lb or 0.5 lb loss per week. Unless you're both short and sedentary, that probably puts you at more than 1200 calories.

Remember the biggest difference between the calculators are 2 fold,
1. TDEE or NEAT method...
MFP + exercise for the week should be almost the same as a TDEE calc will tell you, if your weight loss/week goal is similar.
2. Most TDEE calculators take off a % of your TDEE for your deficit, whereas MFP you choose 0.5 to 2lbs. the % of TDEE may be close to one lb/week but in MFP you entered 2lbs/week, which would have a difference on 3500 cals/week (500/day more cals on TDEE)

If you choose a similar weekly weight loss goal, and eat back exercise cals, there should be very litter difference between TDEE and MFP (NEAT+exercsie) calorie goals.

Yep, you should be set to lose 0.5lbs per week AND you are expected to log your exercise and eat back at least some if not all of those calories as well.

heybales wrote: »

Have either of you like tried to setup MFP correctly?

Those other sites are good and you can tweak MFP to work that way, but it is different method.
MFP is trying to teach a life lesson regarding weight control I've found those sites don't teach if someone doesn't realize it.
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less. (that's usually the kicker)

For MFP activity level Sedentary does NOT mean just a desk job, but desk job and bump on a log all night and weekends.

Those with family/pets/household duties discover they are Lightly Active.

Set your activity level correctly. It does NOT include exercise.

Then select weekly loss amount correctly for reasonable sustainable rate. You didn't gain it fast, don't attempt to lose it fast.
Pounds until healthy weight range.
up to 10 or 15 - 1/2 lb weekly
15-30 lbs - 1 lb weekly
30-50 - 1.5
over 50 - 2 lbs.

And then with MFP, you do workouts and honestly record them (some at perhaps 1/2 the time if low calorie burn stuff like walking a long time, 3/4 to full time if intense and short).

Even if your base goal was 1200 from entering those items correctly - that would only apply to those days with no exercise.
But you do more you eat more.
You'd find others days actually eating more.

Completely endorsed.

But wanting to add this:

The so-called "calculators" (which are actually "estimators") are just useful to get a statistically-based starting estimate. They're not a crystal ball.

Pick a sensible approach, as others have described above, log eating/exercise as accurately as you can manage, stick with this for 4-6 weeks **, then compare your actual results to the estimates. At that point, adjust if necessary.

Most people are going to be close to the calorie level the "calculators" suggest. A few will be further off; a very few will be quite significantly off. That's the nature of statistical estimates.

Pick a plan, stick with it, monitor and adjust.

** If you start feeling weak, fatigued, or have other negative symptoms alongside seemingly losing fast, before 4-6 weeks are up, that's a danger sign. Eat a little more, starting ASAP. OTOH, if you don't seem to be losing as fast as you'd (sensibly) like, stick with it. Losing too slowly can be very frustrating, but losing too fast can be a health risk.

Weight loss is inherently not linear, so you may see either a big loss up front (that slows down), or a very slow loss (that later increases). A month or so will give you a good idea, but a full menstrual cycle plus a bit is going to be more representative for premenopausal women.