Opinion? Weight x 11 = calories

I never heard of that before. While that rough estimate may get in the ball park for some people, it is not really accurate, as it doesn't include a lot of factors. MFP's estimate includes your weight, height, gender, age, activity level, and the rate of which you want to lose weight, all of which factor into your goal, not simply weight.

How much weight are you telling MFP that you want to lose per week? If you are setting too aggressive a goal, that is why you are getting 1200. Based on your stats, you should aim for no more than 1/2 to 1 pound per week of loss. Plus MFP is designed for you to eat your exercise calories back, so make sure to do that as well.

@abetteryou082807 try this link
https://www.calculator.net/calorie-calculator.html
If it’s close to what your trainer recommends I would use this calculator

I'm sure it could work for some people but it doesn't take height, activity or exercise into account. If I used that my deficit would be way too steep.

So does the 11 reflect a certain exercise/activity level? height?

If not then how can these two people eat the same number of calories and maintain?
- sedentary 5'1 115lb woman (let's say walks a max of 3000 steps a day, no purposeful exercise)
- 5'7 115lb woman training for a marathon

Both would get 115*11= 1265 calories

ETA: MFP gave you 1200 based on your height, activity level, gender and specifically the rate of loss you selected. if you go for a fast rate of loss it's drop your calories fast. It also DOES NOT account for purposeful exercise. So if you go to gym, go for a run, whatever purposeful exercise, MFP is desgined for you to eat those calories back (to maintain your requested rate of loss/maintenance)

abetteryou082807 wrote: »

Many trainers have told me to take my body weight, multiply by 11 and that's the calories you should eat. As you lose, you adjust.
MFP says I need 1200 and a trainer tells me 1452.
Can anyone verify this?

Add me if your all about proper nutrition and doing things the right way!

MFP tells you 1200 plus to eat back what you burn from exercsie. and it only told you 1200 based on your weekly weight loss goal..
what did you pick as your weekly weight loss goal?
How much do you have to lose?

As an example say MFP gives you 1450 calories to lose 1 lb/week, and you plan on exercising 5x/week for an average of 400 cals per workout. well MFP will tell you to eat 1450 on the days you don't workout and 1850 on the days you do whereas a "professional" or TDEE calculator may tell you to eat 1700 every day regardless if you workout.

So for the week MFP will have you eat 12,150 (1450*2+1850*5) whereas doing it the other way will have you eat 11,900 (1700*7) almost the same number of cals for the week (250 dif). The issue in not following MFP is if you don't work out the full 5 days or burn more or less than planned. If that is the case you may lose more or less than your goal, whereas MFP will have you lose your goal amount regardless of how much you actually workout.

What many MFPers do is take the low 1450 and not eat back exercise calories which is wrong, if you are not eating them back then your daily activity level should reflect the higher burn with would be covered in the 1700/day above.

Here is a good reference, if you have over 100 lbs to lose you can lose more than 2 lbs/week safely, that being said it is best to set a realistic safe weekly loss goal and:
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.

pilia13 wrote: »

I would think that number is to maintain current weight, not lose.

Nope, my maintenance at 160lbs is well over 2,000 cals, not 1760. I am losing on 1900+exercise cals

MarvinsFitLife wrote: »

@abetteryou082807 try this link
https://www.calculator.net/calorie-calculator.html
If it’s close to what your trainer recommends I would use this calculator

thanks for the link!