Are You Over-Eating or Under-Eating?

Don't base your goals on your BMR. That's what you burn just staying in bed all day. When figuring out how much to eat, you want to consider your lifestyle (how much you move through non-intentional exercise) and any exercise you're doing.

If you try to create a deficit based on your BMR, that will result in under-eating for virtually everyone.

Since I'm not sure how to communicate clearly here, to answer, I'm going to start by clarifying the terminology I'd use.

BMR (basal metabolic rate) is the amount of calories you'd burn in a coma. Calculators will give you a number, but it's only an estimate. Certain tests in a sports/metabolic lab (not gym) can give better estimates. So, BMR as such is not directly a relevant number for weight loss goal-setting, because it doesn't include the calories you burn on your job, doing home chores, etc., let alone exercise calories.

NEAT (non-exercise activity thermogenesis) is the number of calories you burn doing daily life stuff, but not exercise. Strictly, IMU, BMR + NEAT (plus some tiny stuff that doesn't matter much) is what MFP estimates with its built in calculator, if a person follows directions and sets activity level based on what they do *before* intentional exercise. Some people here refer to BMR+NEAT just as NEAT, so you'll often see NEAT said when someone means to include BMR as well.

Some outside calculators estimate TDEE (total daily energy expenditure), which is BMR+NEAT+planned exercise. Those average in exercise over the week. Those estimates intend you to eat the same number of calories daily, exercise or not.

When you set up MFP, as per directions, you're asked for a weight loss target, X pounds or kilograms per week.

MFP estimates your BMR, uses your activity level setting to calculate (estimate) BMR+NEAT, then subtracts calories from that to give you a base calorie goal. That base goal already includes the deficit (subtracted calories) to create the weight loss rate you requested, although it won't give a man less than 1500 or a woman less than 1200 because it thinks the person has requested dangerously fast weight loss for their size, basically. (In effect, it gives those people a slower weight loss rate than they requested.)

So, if you set your activity level in MFP based on your life activity *before* exercise, you eat your goal calories on a non-exercise day. On an exercise day, you log the exercise and eat back a reasonable estimate of those calories, too, to keep the same target weight loss rate.

Example, base goal of 1800 calories, with a requested weight loss rate of a pound a week:

MFP thinks you'd burn 2000 calories to maintain your current weight at the time the calculation is made. 500 calories give you your weekly pound a week loss estimate (deficit), so the goal is 1800.

Non exercise day, eat 1800 (or close).

Exercise day, say you burn 250 calories via exercise:
Daily life total calories 2300 + 250 extra = 2550 calories burned, estimated total. To keep the weight loss, subtract the 500 for deficit, eat 2050 or close. MFP does that math as 1800 base calorie goal (already includes the deficit) + 250 calories exercise = 2050 updated goal.

So, on an exercise day, you eat your base goal calories + a reasonable estimate of exercise calories, and MFP thinks you'll still lose that pound a week.

These are all *estimates*, so you do that for 4-6 weeks, and see if your average weekly weight loss is a pound a week (or close enough). If the first week or two look dramatically different, throw those out and use later weeks. (Sometimes there's a misleading water weight effect right at first). Women should compare bodyweight at the same relative point in two different monthly cycles, but you're a guy, so 4-6 weeks should be enough. If weight loss isn't happening per a reasonable target rate, adjust calorie intake as needed to get there.

wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »

Ok. Let’s use my specific situation. I started the app choosing the active level because I exercise every day and the app doesn’t factor calories for strength training just cardio. So my original calories was set at 1930. But, If I choose not very active my calories then become 1500 and I work out everyday except Sunday. Wouldn’t I need more then that daily?

Well yes, cause if you log your exercise in your daily diary, you should be eating back at least part of your exercise. I'm not sure what a good substitute exercise would be though that would equate to the cardio equivalent of weight lifting. I think I'll step aside and let someone with more knowledge help you out at this point. *Turns and runs our of the room!*

wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »

Ok. Let’s use my specific situation. I started the app choosing the active level because I exercise every day and the app doesn’t factor calories for strength training just cardio. So my original calories was set at 1930. But, If I choose not very active my calories then become 1500 and I work out everyday except Sunday. Wouldn’t I need more then that daily?

If your movement is part of your LIFESTYLE then you include it in your activity level - because it's relatively static. Ie: I work a desk top but 5-7 days a week I am doing at least a couple of hours of hiking, swimming, disc, agility - whatever - that involves a heck of a lot of moving at various speeds and difficulty levels. For competition 'season' it's less 2 hours and more 8-10 of on my feet with occasional sprints for 3 out of 7 days. This is a constant state. It is the result not of purposeful exercise, but because I have 5, high energy, herding breeds who are bred to do dog sports.

It would be the same if you were a mom with 2 toddlers you had to run after, or worked a physical job, or biked to and from work. It isn't a thing I make time for, schedule, or make a point to do in order to improve my health. It is the function of daily life, the same as doing the laundry or getting the mail. There is no 'not doing this' option. My life would fall apart and my house would be eaten.

As such this gives me a 'lightly active' TDEE. My weight loss falling in line with MPF recommendation tells me this is right.

The things that are not 'just life' for me - ie: I run 3 days a week and do a couple of days of weight training sessions - those things I make time for, a point of doing outside of 'this is just life', NO MATTER HOW CONSISTENTLY I DO THEM, are logged as exercise, not counted as my activity level. They're not lifestyle, they're what I *consciously* and *actively* decide to do in order to improve fitness or health.

And I eat most of those calories back (well the running, I don't even bother with the strength stuff), because MFP has built my deficit in without the exercise calories.

Neither. Find your balance or none of this will stick going forward.

"I started the app choosing the active level because I exercise every day"
That isn't what the Acivity setting is for - it specifically excludes exercise. Look at the descriptions and you should notice there's no mention of purposeful exercise.

You have described a sedentary/not very active lifestyle.....
" I’m disabled vet and I don’t work. And when I’m not exercising. I’m just lounging around."

"and the app doesn’t factor calories for strength training just cardio."
It does if you log it properly - search for strength training in the cardiovascular part of the exercise diary, the strength part is just an online notebook with no calorie functionality.

If you aren't going to use MyFitnessPal as designed I would suggest using a TDEE calculator instead to set your calorie goal which will give you a same everyday calorie goal that includes an estimated average of your exercise.

Do be aware that being sedentary and going for a fast rate of loss will result in a low calorie allowance.
But you don't have to select a fast rate of loss if that makes adherence too hard.

wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »

Ok. Let’s use my specific situation. I started the app choosing the active level because I exercise every day and the app doesn’t factor calories for strength training just cardio. So my original calories was set at 1930. But, If I choose not very active my calories then become 1500 and I work out everyday except Sunday. Wouldn’t I need more then that daily?

Yes, it seems like you incorrectly chose the active setting.

The way it works is that the activity setting is your activity not including intentional exercise. So if you have an active job or walk a bunch in daily life, you might want active. If you are largely sedentary but for planned exercise and log the exercise, go with sedentary. If somewhat in-between, choose that.

Also, you can log strength training, although it typically doesn't burn a bunch of cals. Just search for it where you would search for biking or running. That's probably the best option.

1500 could mean you chose an overly aggressive loss rate, which is a concern especially if you aren't particularly overweight and trying to maintain or gain muscle. Too aggressive a loss rate makes muscle loss more likely. Anyway, if you log cals from exercise it shouldn't be 1500 any more.

I lose about 1 lb/week on 1500 (I normally eat more), and I'm 5'3, 51, and around 128, so presumably you would do well on more than 1500.

Neither.

I've successfully been in maintenance for the past 5 years and remaining in maintenance requires that you neither eat too much nor too little.

Of course, there have been variations but, since I log all my cals on MFP and weigh myself daily, I have always been able to make necessary corrections in order remain w/in my desired weight range.