Counting macros
Nidiaa0325
Posts: 1 Member
Ive never tracked macros using my apple watch, so when i workout and track my workouts with my watch, MyFitnessPal enters the calories ive burned.. then deducts from the calories ive consumed and adds additional ones i need.. do i go by what MyFitnessPal says i have left? Or do i go by the calories it says ive consumed?? 😭😭
0
Replies
-
When you use the guided setup with MyFitnessPal and it gives you a calorie goal for the day, based on the rate of weight loss that you set, that assumes no intentional exercise. So yes, when your tracker syncs to MFP with your exercise information, MFP will add on some calories for you that day with the idea that you would eat them back, while still losing at the rate you set. Some people find that the calorie burn estimates are too generous so they eat back only a portion. I would recommend eating them all back for a few weeks and see how it goes. If you lose at the rate you set, then all is good. If you lose less than expected, maybe try just half of them.
I don't have an Apple Watch so I don't know if there are sometimes issues with how the apps "talk" to each other, which can sometimes happen.
For weight loss purposes it's really the calories that matter. I use my macro goals for general nutrition, but it's not vitally important for me to hit them exactly on target every single day.1 -
don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.0
-
lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
1 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
0 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
I would think it would be better by trying to get more accurate on BOTH the calories in and the calories out portion. Some estimation is inevitable, sure, but ignoring one half of that entirely seems to be inviting MORE inaccuracy, not less.
If you're advocating a TDEE method, where you're averaging out the estimated calorie burn of your intentional exercise, OK, sure. Lots of people here do that because it works better for them than MFP's setup. But up until now that doesn't seem to me to be what you've actually said.5 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.3 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
If Layne Norton would tell me to eat 1,460 calories a day when my results show that I need at least 2,000 to maintain my weight, then I would not consider his fitness advice to be reliable.
You can't track your weight loss and gain via "calories alone" if you ignore the calories you're actually using each day. Part of using calorie tracking to manage your weight is an accurate assessment of how many calories you're actually using. There are a number of ways to account for the calories used during exercise. MFP's is one of them. Deciding not to pay attention to calories burnt through exercise is guaranteed to be the least accurate method of accounting for them, which is why it's bizarre to see you recommend that we not pay attention to them due to concerns about accuracy.
If accuracy is a concern, then you will always want to assume SOME calories are burnt through exercise.2 -
For the original poster:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
@lukejoycePT
Your way is valid, so is the MFP way.
I personally started off my weight loss when I was completely a lump on the couch.
Now at goal weight after losing 80 pounds I am active in some way every day. I first started by walking, then added other exercise like swimming, biking and dancing and finally added resistance exercises and weights.
To me, it makes sense to eat more on exercise days, and to me it is a motivator. When you're eating 1400 a day, that extra 300-400 is HUGE.
Sure, now that I've been at maintenance for a long time (over 13 years) I don't need the extra step of adding those calories and I know how much I should need, but it was a great carrot-on-a-stick motivation when I felt like I was starving. In early days I was not exercising regularly - hated it - and I'm guessing that's the case with a lot of people who are obese. The fine-tuning is helpful in those cases. Not so much when you are a regular exerciser.
The numbers work out to the same, not sure why you need to come on this site and make a fuss about how it calculates. Of course none of the numbers are exact, but don't confuse the poor new people who have no idea how any of this works.
https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
4 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
1 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
If someone cannot accurately track the calories burnt through exercise, then how is TDEE going to work either?
The point is that some people prefer NEAT, others prefer TDEE . . . but they are two paths to the exact same destination. Both require some assessment of calories burnt through exercise and both can be adjusted to account for variances from expected results.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
If Layne Norton would tell me to eat 1,460 calories a day when my results show that I need at least 2,000 to maintain my weight, then I would not consider his fitness advice to be reliable.
You can't track your weight loss and gain via "calories alone" if you ignore the calories you're actually using each day. Part of using calorie tracking to manage your weight is an accurate assessment of how many calories you're actually using. There are a number of ways to account for the calories used during exercise. MFP's is one of them. Deciding not to pay attention to calories burnt through exercise is guaranteed to be the least accurate method of accounting for them, which is why it's bizarre to see you recommend that we not pay attention to them due to concerns about accuracy.
If accuracy is a concern, then you will always want to assume SOME calories are burnt through exercise.
*face palm*
people can and do track their weight loss via calories alone. calories are a measurement of energy.
lets just clear something up here...
reasons why tracking exercise is pointless...
1. your body and the rate it burns calories changes dependant many factors. - how hard you train in that session, how much muscle you have build or lost in the last week etc etc.
2. a peice of electronics on your arm who doesn't know your genetics or metabolsim is not going to be able track the calories you burn. it just can't
3. if you exercise regularly then your body will become acustom to this exercise and will no longer burn as many calories and it becomes more efficient at this exercise.
4. all of these factors (there are more) make it like stabbing in the dark)
measuring with just calories...
set calories. measure weight. eat calories, re measure weight. if there is a large loss add calories if there is no loss deduct calories.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
0 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
If Layne Norton would tell me to eat 1,460 calories a day when my results show that I need at least 2,000 to maintain my weight, then I would not consider his fitness advice to be reliable.
You can't track your weight loss and gain via "calories alone" if you ignore the calories you're actually using each day. Part of using calorie tracking to manage your weight is an accurate assessment of how many calories you're actually using. There are a number of ways to account for the calories used during exercise. MFP's is one of them. Deciding not to pay attention to calories burnt through exercise is guaranteed to be the least accurate method of accounting for them, which is why it's bizarre to see you recommend that we not pay attention to them due to concerns about accuracy.
If accuracy is a concern, then you will always want to assume SOME calories are burnt through exercise.
*face palm*
people can and do track their weight loss via calories alone. calories are a measurement of energy.
lets just clear something up here...
reasons why tracking exercise is pointless...
1. your body and the rate it burns calories changes dependant many factors. - how hard you train in that session, how much muscle you have build or lost in the last week etc etc.
2. a peice of electronics on your arm who doesn't know your genetics or metabolsim is not going to be able track the calories you burn. it just can't
3. if you exercise regularly then your body will become acustom to this exercise and will no longer burn as many calories and it becomes more efficient at this exercise.
4. all of these factors (there are more) make it like stabbing in the dark)
measuring with just calories...
set calories. measure weight. eat calories, re measure weight. if there is a large loss add calories if there is no loss deduct calories.
Calories are a measurement of energy. In order to use calories for weight management, calories OUT are as important as calories IN. I need to have some baseline understanding of how many calories I need to maintain my current weight in order to set a calorie goal.
I've been using MFP's NEAT method for six years now and my weight has behaved exactly as I would have expected. Accounting for exercise allows me to easily manage my weight though times when I'm exercising more or less than usual. All our estimates of calories in and out are just estimates, but the truth is that it isn't "stabbing in the dark," they're estimates that we can measure the results of and adjust as necessary.
You prefer to start with a generic assumption that no energy is burnt through activity, others prefer to account for that. Assuming that SOME calories are burnt when I run five miles isn't "pointless," it's just common sense.1 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
Wait.
You don't add Exercise on top of TDEE.
MFP uses the Mifflin St Jeor calculation, maybe Google that, or read that link I posted above about how MFP calculates.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
If Layne Norton would tell me to eat 1,460 calories a day when my results show that I need at least 2,000 to maintain my weight, then I would not consider his fitness advice to be reliable.
You can't track your weight loss and gain via "calories alone" if you ignore the calories you're actually using each day. Part of using calorie tracking to manage your weight is an accurate assessment of how many calories you're actually using. There are a number of ways to account for the calories used during exercise. MFP's is one of them. Deciding not to pay attention to calories burnt through exercise is guaranteed to be the least accurate method of accounting for them, which is why it's bizarre to see you recommend that we not pay attention to them due to concerns about accuracy.
If accuracy is a concern, then you will always want to assume SOME calories are burnt through exercise.
*face palm*
people can and do track their weight loss via calories alone. calories are a measurement of energy.
lets just clear something up here...
reasons why tracking exercise is pointless...
1. your body and the rate it burns calories changes dependant many factors. - how hard you train in that session, how much muscle you have build or lost in the last week etc etc.
2. a peice of electronics on your arm who doesn't know your genetics or metabolsim is not going to be able track the calories you burn. it just can't
3. if you exercise regularly then your body will become acustom to this exercise and will no longer burn as many calories and it becomes more efficient at this exercise.
4. all of these factors (there are more) make it like stabbing in the dark)
measuring with just calories...
set calories. measure weight. eat calories, re measure weight. if there is a large loss add calories if there is no loss deduct calories.
Calories are a measurement of energy. In order to use calories for weight management, calories OUT are as important as calories IN. I need to have some baseline understanding of how many calories I need to maintain my current weight in order to set a calorie goal.
I've been using MFP's NEAT method for six years now and my weight has behaved exactly as I would have expected. Accounting for exercise allows me to easily manage my weight though times when I'm exercising more or less than usual. All our estimates of calories in and out are just estimates, but the truth is that it isn't "stabbing in the dark," they're estimates that we can measure the results of and adjust as necessary.
You prefer to start with a generic assumption that no energy is burnt through activity, others prefer to account for that. Assuming that SOME calories are burnt when I run five miles isn't "pointless," it's just common sense.
good for you.
however, the problem lies in others. you are not the OP and in my experience in dealing with many people they are not interested tracking anything. they see it all as a pain in the a** so adding extra stress to an already confusing system is just setting up people to fail. not all people. just a lot of people. its about removing road blocks and making it a cookie cutter as it can be when the reality is there are many factors at play.
if tracking NEAT works for you then fantastic. But i dont know many if any pro BB or strength athletes who track thier exercise back because it just creates more problems than its worth. They are do pretty well working from simple calorie cylcling from a goal.1 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
You didn't mention TDEE until someone else brought it up; you said to not eat back your exercise calories. If a person is getting his or her calorie goal from MFP's guided setup, that's not TDEE, and to take your advice could lead to serious undereating.
This is the OP's first post, and a lot of threads are posted by new people who aren't familiar with the lingo. Precision matters with calories, but it matters with words, too. A person could easily interpret your words to mean they should eat very, very little.2 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
Using a power meter for cycling. Net calorie estimates typically +/- 2.5% with the probability that the estimate will tend to be slightly high. Considerably more accurate than than someone guesstimating their spoon of peanut butter.
Yes the TDEE method (which includes exercise remember) can work and is more suitable for some people, especially if their routine is consistent. But mine is not consistent day to day (we are talking thousands here), week to week, month to month (massive differences). Some sessions also needs specific fuelling on the day.
That wearable trackers, TDEE and MyFitnessPal all take exercise (and activity) into account differently and people have success with all three methods really does show there isn't a one size fits all approach. People would have a higher opinion of your advice if you didn't make sweeping pronouncements and absolute statements that are clearly false.3 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
Wait. Are you under the impression that NEAT (MFP's method) is TDEE plus exercise?
No.
You're confused because you don't understand how MFP works. NEAT isn't TDEE with exercise added on top.
Both account for exercise. If you're fine with estimating calories burnt through exercise when someone is using TDEE, then it's completely illogical to somehow assume that NEAT is less accurate.6 -
penguinmama87 wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
You didn't mention TDEE until someone else brought it up; you said to not eat back your exercise calories. If a person is getting his or her calorie goal from MFP's guided setup, that's not TDEE, and to take your advice could lead to serious undereating.
This is the OP's first post, and a lot of threads are posted by new people who aren't familiar with the lingo. Precision matters with calories, but it matters with words, too. A person could easily interpret your words to mean they should eat very, very little.
this is why i didnt use the words TDEE because someone isnt going to know this.
if you read my above posts i state a very simple method.
plus if someone was "under eating" they would be losing a lot of weight so its safe to assume that's not whats going on.0 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
If Layne Norton would tell me to eat 1,460 calories a day when my results show that I need at least 2,000 to maintain my weight, then I would not consider his fitness advice to be reliable.
You can't track your weight loss and gain via "calories alone" if you ignore the calories you're actually using each day. Part of using calorie tracking to manage your weight is an accurate assessment of how many calories you're actually using. There are a number of ways to account for the calories used during exercise. MFP's is one of them. Deciding not to pay attention to calories burnt through exercise is guaranteed to be the least accurate method of accounting for them, which is why it's bizarre to see you recommend that we not pay attention to them due to concerns about accuracy.
If accuracy is a concern, then you will always want to assume SOME calories are burnt through exercise.
*face palm*
people can and do track their weight loss via calories alone. calories are a measurement of energy.
lets just clear something up here...
reasons why tracking exercise is pointless...
1. your body and the rate it burns calories changes dependant many factors. - how hard you train in that session, how much muscle you have build or lost in the last week etc etc.
2. a peice of electronics on your arm who doesn't know your genetics or metabolsim is not going to be able track the calories you burn. it just can't
3. if you exercise regularly then your body will become acustom to this exercise and will no longer burn as many calories and it becomes more efficient at this exercise.
4. all of these factors (there are more) make it like stabbing in the dark)
measuring with just calories...
set calories. measure weight. eat calories, re measure weight. if there is a large loss add calories if there is no loss deduct calories.
Calories are a measurement of energy. In order to use calories for weight management, calories OUT are as important as calories IN. I need to have some baseline understanding of how many calories I need to maintain my current weight in order to set a calorie goal.
I've been using MFP's NEAT method for six years now and my weight has behaved exactly as I would have expected. Accounting for exercise allows me to easily manage my weight though times when I'm exercising more or less than usual. All our estimates of calories in and out are just estimates, but the truth is that it isn't "stabbing in the dark," they're estimates that we can measure the results of and adjust as necessary.
You prefer to start with a generic assumption that no energy is burnt through activity, others prefer to account for that. Assuming that SOME calories are burnt when I run five miles isn't "pointless," it's just common sense.
good for you.
however, the problem lies in others. you are not the OP and in my experience in dealing with many people they are not interested tracking anything. they see it all as a pain in the a** so adding extra stress to an already confusing system is just setting up people to fail. not all people. just a lot of people. its about removing road blocks and making it a cookie cutter as it can be when the reality is there are many factors at play.
if tracking NEAT works for you then fantastic. But i dont know many if any pro BB or strength athletes who track thier exercise back because it just creates more problems than its worth. They are do pretty well working from simple calorie cylcling from a goal.
1. This isn't Bodybuilders-R-Us website.
2. Simple Calorie Cycling is precisely what MFP does....
Read that danged link.
4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
Wait. Are you under the impression that NEAT (MFP's method) is TDEE plus exercise?
No.
You're confused because you don't understand how MFP works. NEAT isn't TDEE with exercise added on top.
Both account for exercise. If you're fine with estimating calories burnt through exercise when someone is using TDEE, then it's completely illogical to somehow assume that NEAT is less accurate.
are you kidding me?! you are making yet a another asumption here. I did not say that. please tell me where i wrote that? it's ok i'll wait....
i am fully fully aware of what these are. i have a qualification to prove that. Plus around 6 years of helping others achieve thier goals so i think i know what i am talking about thank you.
my point is that TDEE is as you said a way of "accounting for exercise." so why do it twice if the origional works.0 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »penguinmama87 wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
You didn't mention TDEE until someone else brought it up; you said to not eat back your exercise calories. If a person is getting his or her calorie goal from MFP's guided setup, that's not TDEE, and to take your advice could lead to serious undereating.
This is the OP's first post, and a lot of threads are posted by new people who aren't familiar with the lingo. Precision matters with calories, but it matters with words, too. A person could easily interpret your words to mean they should eat very, very little.
this is why i didnt use the words TDEE because someone isnt going to know this.
if you read my above posts i state a very simple method.
plus if someone was "under eating" they would be losing a lot of weight so its safe to assume that's not whats going on.
Maybe at first, but when they hit a brick wall of fatigue, or their hair starts falling out or nails start breaking all the time, or they get so hungry they overeat and undo the deficit, they might think, and I can't blame them - "If losing weight is this miserable, why bother?" Anecdotally, I suspect this is a big part of why my previous weight loss attempts were not successful, and perhaps those of many others. Now I take care to eat much more (which TDEE would do too, but NEAT suits my purposes just fine so I'm not going to switch), so I actually have enough energy to exercise, and I'm still losing weight, without being miserable about it.
I think your "simple method" has backfiring written all over it, to be honest. It might work at first, but people aren't designed to go hard like that long term.3 -
Isn't TDEE only accurate for someone who has extremely consistent exercise and daily activity? My Fitbit can accommodate the seasonal variation or different daily life activity variations better than a method that assumes that every day/week/month is identical. I find it to be fairly accurate based on the past 1.5 years, except MFP+Fitbit adjustment together is a little less calories than I need to maintain my weight. If I tried to use TDEE, I would have to regularly be making adjustments (seasonal mostly) that happen automatically with my Fitbit. YMMV4
-
cmriverside wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
If Layne Norton would tell me to eat 1,460 calories a day when my results show that I need at least 2,000 to maintain my weight, then I would not consider his fitness advice to be reliable.
You can't track your weight loss and gain via "calories alone" if you ignore the calories you're actually using each day. Part of using calorie tracking to manage your weight is an accurate assessment of how many calories you're actually using. There are a number of ways to account for the calories used during exercise. MFP's is one of them. Deciding not to pay attention to calories burnt through exercise is guaranteed to be the least accurate method of accounting for them, which is why it's bizarre to see you recommend that we not pay attention to them due to concerns about accuracy.
If accuracy is a concern, then you will always want to assume SOME calories are burnt through exercise.
*face palm*
people can and do track their weight loss via calories alone. calories are a measurement of energy.
lets just clear something up here...
reasons why tracking exercise is pointless...
1. your body and the rate it burns calories changes dependant many factors. - how hard you train in that session, how much muscle you have build or lost in the last week etc etc.
2. a peice of electronics on your arm who doesn't know your genetics or metabolsim is not going to be able track the calories you burn. it just can't
3. if you exercise regularly then your body will become acustom to this exercise and will no longer burn as many calories and it becomes more efficient at this exercise.
4. all of these factors (there are more) make it like stabbing in the dark)
measuring with just calories...
set calories. measure weight. eat calories, re measure weight. if there is a large loss add calories if there is no loss deduct calories.
Calories are a measurement of energy. In order to use calories for weight management, calories OUT are as important as calories IN. I need to have some baseline understanding of how many calories I need to maintain my current weight in order to set a calorie goal.
I've been using MFP's NEAT method for six years now and my weight has behaved exactly as I would have expected. Accounting for exercise allows me to easily manage my weight though times when I'm exercising more or less than usual. All our estimates of calories in and out are just estimates, but the truth is that it isn't "stabbing in the dark," they're estimates that we can measure the results of and adjust as necessary.
You prefer to start with a generic assumption that no energy is burnt through activity, others prefer to account for that. Assuming that SOME calories are burnt when I run five miles isn't "pointless," it's just common sense.
good for you.
however, the problem lies in others. you are not the OP and in my experience in dealing with many people they are not interested tracking anything. they see it all as a pain in the a** so adding extra stress to an already confusing system is just setting up people to fail. not all people. just a lot of people. its about removing road blocks and making it a cookie cutter as it can be when the reality is there are many factors at play.
if tracking NEAT works for you then fantastic. But i dont know many if any pro BB or strength athletes who track thier exercise back because it just creates more problems than its worth. They are do pretty well working from simple calorie cylcling from a goal.
1. This isn't Bodybuilders-R-Us website.
2. Simple Calorie Cycling is precisely what MFP does....
Read that danged link.
didn't say it was. i am not a bodybuilder by the way.
MFP doesn't do calorie cycling for you. unlike a health coach app such as Carbon.
MFP is just a way of measuring your calorie intake.
yes you can inacurately track your exercise on there but anyone worth thier salt in the industry knows that its totally inacurate.0 -
penguinmama87 wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »penguinmama87 wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
exactly! so why track your exercise as well as TDEE if it does it so well?
You didn't mention TDEE until someone else brought it up; you said to not eat back your exercise calories. If a person is getting his or her calorie goal from MFP's guided setup, that's not TDEE, and to take your advice could lead to serious undereating.
This is the OP's first post, and a lot of threads are posted by new people who aren't familiar with the lingo. Precision matters with calories, but it matters with words, too. A person could easily interpret your words to mean they should eat very, very little.
this is why i didnt use the words TDEE because someone isnt going to know this.
if you read my above posts i state a very simple method.
plus if someone was "under eating" they would be losing a lot of weight so its safe to assume that's not whats going on.
Maybe at first, but when they hit a brick wall of fatigue, or their hair starts falling out or nails start breaking all the time, or they get so hungry they overeat and undo the deficit, they might think, and I can't blame them - "If losing weight is this miserable, why bother?" Anecdotally, I suspect this is a big part of why my previous weight loss attempts were not successful, and perhaps those of many others. Now I take care to eat much more (which TDEE would do too, but NEAT suits my purposes just fine so I'm not going to switch), so I actually have enough energy to exercise, and I'm still losing weight, without being miserable about it.
I think your "simple method" has backfiring written all over it, to be honest. It might work at first, but people aren't designed to go hard like that long term.
i stated that the goal is to burn as much fat as possible while eating as many calories as possible.
i also stated that you should see your calories as a total weekly amount not daily.
i also stated that if you lose more weight that required you should increase or decrease if you don't lose any.
This method is sensible and sustainable because it allows people to enjoy life without the extra stress.
using exercise as a means to eat more will cause the person to have a worse realtionship with food long term because it makes food a reward.
1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
I have a very accurate way to measure my exercise calories - does that make me Mr Nobody?
And it's actually a false argument that you need accuracy - reasonable is good enough for purpose.
You seem to be suggesting a TDEE method which includes an upfront estimate of your average type, duration and intensity of exercise. That it can also work, really underlines reasonable estimates with the common sense to adjust based on results over time is plenty good enough for purpose.
what is your "accurate way of measuring"?
Nope i dont suggest that either. I am simply stating that there is no need or practicality to tracking your exercise. it over complicates it.
the TDEE method is SIMPLE and works well if you are sensible about it.
the problem with MFP is it only takes into consideration your activity level not your daily movement.
MFP is just a calorie tracker, not a coach.
The problem with tracking exercise is there are many factors which need to be considered to make it accurate.
using an apple watch is not.
TDEE is just another way of accounting for exercise. It's six of one, half dozen of another.
If someone cannot accurately track the calories burnt through exercise, then how is TDEE going to work either?
The point is that some people prefer NEAT, others prefer TDEE . . . but they are two paths to the exact same destination. Both require some assessment of calories burnt through exercise and both can be adjusted to account for variances from expected results.
Yes, exactly.
MFP starts with the premise that someone may not actually do the exercise they plan (or may do more) -- as it deals with a lot of people just starting out, it tries to help you estimate more accurately and based on what you really do, which works for a lot of people. It worked for me when I first started out, although I actually found I was more active overall than I had thought, and so eventually adjusted upwards.
Many of us do use TDEE method -- I switched after a few months, when my daily or weekly actively was pretty consistent, and continue to prefer that method, but it is not ignoring or not counting exercise, of course, but as you say a different way of accounting for exercise.3 -
What I love about MFP forums is how informative they are and, with rare exception, how civil and respectful people are.
People are here to share what has worked for them. Everyone has a voice. It is so different from any online forum I have read. Sometimes though, people thrive on conflict and being right.
What I also love about MFP is that there are thousands of threads. I cross read and confirm everything using my anyalytical mind. I don't take any one person's POV as absolute truth.
What I don't like about MFP forums is when, on rare occasion, they get bogged down on ego. But that's really a plus because that rarely rarely rarely happens. I have been to hundreds of threads and I have only seen this happen once.
Writing on these forums is helping me to check myself. I clarify, "This is my knowledge and my experience. And this is why." I try to add to the content of the conversation not be the person who is right.
There are a lot of knowing people on this forum. I am no expert, but I do like to keep an open mind while I learn and share. All this has nothing to do with counting macros so thanks for reading my two cents and what I value about this site that is helping me to loose weight.2 -
lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »lukejoycePT wrote: »don't eat your exercise calories back. this function on MFP is as a dumb as a bag of spanners. Your apple watch is not accurate. Niether are any of those fitbits etc. Just eat your calorie goal and if you are losing too much then change your activity level on the settings.
How is it dumb? MFP gives you a calorie goal assuming that you aren't doing any intentional exercise. If you move more than anticipated when calculating your calorie goal, it seems like the smart thing to do is to consider that.
only if you have an acurate way of measuring it. which nobody does. it muddys the waters and creates even more inacuracy in an already inacurate field. weighing and measuring food is still a guestimate so adding in tracking your exercise makes it even worse.
the whole way mfp is set up is pretty awful to be fair and extremely basic. i dont want to get in amongst the weeds here but this isnt just my view. it's the view of many well known fitness experts.
Assuming you're burning 0 calories through exercise (which is what you're recommending) is going to be the least accurate way to measure.
I don't know of any fitness experts who recommend that we ignore the calories we burn through exercise. Who are you referring to here?
Take me for example. As a sedentary person, I need about 1,460 calories a day to maintain my weight. Through tracking my intake and results, I know that my activities actually add about 600 calories to my average day, so I need closer to 2,000 calories to maintain my weight. I would not be better off if I ate 1,460 calories a day.
By tracking my results over time, I have confidence that I am accurately measuring. If I'm not seeing the results I want, I can adjust appropriately. The average person is far better off assuming their exercise burns calories and then making adjustments as necessary instead of following your advice to assume they are not burning any calories through exercise.
Then you dont know any fitness experts, i know many. Layne Norton would be one.
i didn't say you dont burn calories through exercise. Of course you burn calories, you burn calories just breathing.
what i am saying is that it is impossible to accurately log your calories burn't. why add that to the mix when you can remove it entirely and track you weighloss/gain via calories alone.
If Layne Norton would tell me to eat 1,460 calories a day when my results show that I need at least 2,000 to maintain my weight, then I would not consider his fitness advice to be reliable.
You can't track your weight loss and gain via "calories alone" if you ignore the calories you're actually using each day. Part of using calorie tracking to manage your weight is an accurate assessment of how many calories you're actually using. There are a number of ways to account for the calories used during exercise. MFP's is one of them. Deciding not to pay attention to calories burnt through exercise is guaranteed to be the least accurate method of accounting for them, which is why it's bizarre to see you recommend that we not pay attention to them due to concerns about accuracy.
If accuracy is a concern, then you will always want to assume SOME calories are burnt through exercise.
*face palm*
people can and do track their weight loss via calories alone. calories are a measurement of energy.
lets just clear something up here...
reasons why tracking exercise is pointless...
1. your body and the rate it burns calories changes dependant many factors. - how hard you train in that session, how much muscle you have build or lost in the last week etc etc.
2. a peice of electronics on your arm who doesn't know your genetics or metabolsim is not going to be able track the calories you burn. it just can't
3. if you exercise regularly then your body will become acustom to this exercise and will no longer burn as many calories and it becomes more efficient at this exercise.
4. all of these factors (there are more) make it like stabbing in the dark)
measuring with just calories...
set calories. measure weight. eat calories, re measure weight. if there is a large loss add calories if there is no loss deduct calories.
Calories are a measurement of energy. In order to use calories for weight management, calories OUT are as important as calories IN. I need to have some baseline understanding of how many calories I need to maintain my current weight in order to set a calorie goal.
I've been using MFP's NEAT method for six years now and my weight has behaved exactly as I would have expected. Accounting for exercise allows me to easily manage my weight though times when I'm exercising more or less than usual. All our estimates of calories in and out are just estimates, but the truth is that it isn't "stabbing in the dark," they're estimates that we can measure the results of and adjust as necessary.
You prefer to start with a generic assumption that no energy is burnt through activity, others prefer to account for that. Assuming that SOME calories are burnt when I run five miles isn't "pointless," it's just common sense.
good for you.
however, the problem lies in others. you are not the OP and in my experience in dealing with many people they are not interested tracking anything. they see it all as a pain in the a** so adding extra stress to an already confusing system is just setting up people to fail. not all people. just a lot of people. its about removing road blocks and making it a cookie cutter as it can be when the reality is there are many factors at play.
if tracking NEAT works for you then fantastic. But i dont know many if any pro BB or strength athletes who track thier exercise back because it just creates more problems than its worth. They are do pretty well working from simple calorie cylcling from a goal.
I think the mistake you're making is assuming that everyone is interested in living like a professional body builder. I'm not. I'm just a regular person and NEAT works well for me. If I can make it work, I have confidence that OP can too (if it's the method they decide to go with).4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions