Calorie Deficit
Options
ljlesane
Posts: 1 Member
I’m trying to figure this calorie deficit thing out. I figured out how much calories I can have each day now just to try to get my eating the right things.
0
Replies
-
For an average person, a 2,000-calorie diet is what they burn in a normal day just doing normal things.
To be in deficit, you have to either burn more calories or consume less calories. I'm oversimplifying, but does that help?
ONLINE CALORIE DEFICIT CALCULATOR
Examples:- If you worked out heavily every day, you'd burn more than 2,000 calories, so if you only ate 2,000 calories then you'd be in a calorie deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
- If you work out lightly or not at all, then you would eat less than 2,000 calories. Usually, between 1,200 and 1,800 calories a day. So, eating under 2,000 calories would put you in a deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
2 -
I’m trying to figure this calorie deficit thing out. I figured out how much calories I can have each day now just to try to get my eating the right things.
And what does 'eating the right things' mean to you? For weight loss it doesn't really matter (number of calories in versus out determines weight loss), but food choices influence:
- health: some health issues require adjusting your diet, getting a varied diet is good to avoid deficiencies, consuming sufficient protein will minimize muscle or help build muscle depending on circumstances (also takes a bit more calories to digest)
- satiation: some people find protein and/or fiber satiating, some people like to eat a high volume of low calorie foods,...
Do you have any particular health concerns? If you don't, I would just recommend sticking to your regular foods but eating them in smaller quantities.
The calorie tracking experience will be helpful in determining which foods satiate you or not and how calorific those foods are. You can gradually tweak your diet by changing the proportions of your regular foods (for example: I now eat a bit less bread and use more toppings), choosing lower calorie alternatives that you enjoy (for example low fat dairy instead of full fat), adding veggies where possible if needed (for extra meal volume and vitamins) and other changes.
Gradual changes are more likely to lead to durable weight loss. That's if there are no urgent medical issues, obviously.4 -
Assuming you understand the calorie end of business, because you said you did. Try keeping away from junk and UPF's would be a good place to start. Otherwise have at it and if your thinking vegetarian or vegan make sure you understand those specific eating styles will require some extra attention.1
-
For an average person, a 2,000-calorie diet is what they burn in a normal day just doing normal things.
To be in deficit, you have to either burn more calories or consume less calories. I'm oversimplifying, but does that help?
ONLINE CALORIE DEFICIT CALCULATOR
Examples:- If you worked out heavily every day, you'd burn more than 2,000 calories, so if you only ate 2,000 calories then you'd be in a calorie deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
- If you work out lightly or not at all, then you would eat less than 2,000 calories. Usually, between 1,200 and 1,800 calories a day. So, eating under 2,000 calories would put you in a deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
I would gain weight on 2000 calories, even when doing strength training. This really is an overgeneralization. Also, TO seems to be male, and the old recommendation is 2000 for females and 2500 for males.
All TO needs to do is to chose a realistic activity level for everyday life without exercise, and a realistic weightloss goal. Provided they are male and they get 1500 calories per day they should chose a lower weightloss rate until they get something above 1500. And 1200 for female.2 -
For an average person, a 2,000-calorie diet is what they burn in a normal day just doing normal things.
To be in deficit, you have to either burn more calories or consume less calories. I'm oversimplifying, but does that help?
ONLINE CALORIE DEFICIT CALCULATOR
Examples:- If you worked out heavily every day, you'd burn more than 2,000 calories, so if you only ate 2,000 calories then you'd be in a calorie deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
- If you work out lightly or not at all, then you would eat less than 2,000 calories. Usually, between 1,200 and 1,800 calories a day. So, eating under 2,000 calories would put you in a deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
I would gain weight on 2000 calories, even when doing strength training. This really is an overgeneralization. Also, TO seems to be male, and the old recommendation is 2000 for females and 2500 for males.
All TO needs to do is to chose a realistic activity level for everyday life without exercise, and a realistic weightloss goal. Provided they are male and they get 1500 calories per day they should chose a lower weightloss rate until they get something above 1500. And 1200 for female.
They said "average person" which can be a pretty wide spectrum with more than a few far flung outliers. They also went out of the way to say To be in deficit, you have to either burn more calories or consume less calories. I'm oversimplifying, but does that help? Personally I would lose on 2000 calories.
0 -
@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.2 -
The NIH page from which that calculator was "borrowed"...
The site explanation:
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/at-niddk/labs-branches/laboratory-biological-modeling/integrative-physiology-section/research/body-weight-planner
Here is the official Body Weight Planner from the NIH, that also uses Kevin Hall's input without the misleading interpretive article attached.
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/bwp
That article on loulee's post was written by who knows who - the site from which it is taken has some marginal info. I mean, who is "FatCalc?"
2 -
For an average person, a 2,000-calorie diet is what they burn in a normal day just doing normal things.
To be in deficit, you have to either burn more calories or consume less calories. I'm oversimplifying, but does that help?
ONLINE CALORIE DEFICIT CALCULATOR
Examples:- If you worked out heavily every day, you'd burn more than 2,000 calories, so if you only ate 2,000 calories then you'd be in a calorie deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
- If you work out lightly or not at all, then you would eat less than 2,000 calories. Usually, between 1,200 and 1,800 calories a day. So, eating under 2,000 calories would put you in a deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
I would gain weight on 2000 calories, even when doing strength training. This really is an overgeneralization. Also, TO seems to be male, and the old recommendation is 2000 for females and 2500 for males.
All TO needs to do is to chose a realistic activity level for everyday life without exercise, and a realistic weightloss goal. Provided they are male and they get 1500 calories per day they should chose a lower weightloss rate until they get something above 1500. And 1200 for female.
Yep, it is an oversimplification as I said. I was just putting it in the most simplified terms to explain the concept. I also linked the calculator which I find helpful as a guide but do not take as 100%.
I didn't want to overwhelm the person asking for help. I gave a very basic example of how calorie deficit works. I also provided a calculator which will get her closer to 'accurate'.
0 -
neanderthin wrote: »For an average person, a 2,000-calorie diet is what they burn in a normal day just doing normal things.
To be in deficit, you have to either burn more calories or consume less calories. I'm oversimplifying, but does that help?
ONLINE CALORIE DEFICIT CALCULATOR
Examples:- If you worked out heavily every day, you'd burn more than 2,000 calories, so if you only ate 2,000 calories then you'd be in a calorie deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
- If you work out lightly or not at all, then you would eat less than 2,000 calories. Usually, between 1,200 and 1,800 calories a day. So, eating under 2,000 calories would put you in a deficit. You'd probably lose weight.
I would gain weight on 2000 calories, even when doing strength training. This really is an overgeneralization. Also, TO seems to be male, and the old recommendation is 2000 for females and 2500 for males.
All TO needs to do is to chose a realistic activity level for everyday life without exercise, and a realistic weightloss goal. Provided they are male and they get 1500 calories per day they should chose a lower weightloss rate until they get something above 1500. And 1200 for female.
They said "average person" which can be a pretty wide spectrum with more than a few far flung outliers. They also went out of the way to say To be in deficit, you have to either burn more calories or consume less calories. I'm oversimplifying, but does that help? Personally I would lose on 2000 calories.
Yes, as I said, it is an oversimplification to explain the concept. I attached a calculator--which is more helpful for accuracy, but, as with all things, take it with a grain of salt.
1 -
cmriverside wrote: »@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.
Yes, when I started out--this calculator was the simplest one and it helped me understand. I liked that I could click different timelines and see how different calories could slow or quicken the timeline. All the calculators need to be taken with a grain of salt. As I understood it, she wanted help with figuring out calorie deficit and understanding it. I offered a basic understanding and a simplified calculator. I assume the one on here didn't help her--as she was asking for help.
It is complicated. Yes, logging food and exercise are essentials. However, if she doesn't have her calorie goal sorted it won't be much help. Originally the site had me on 1,200 calories. It was too low for me. I upped it to 1,600 and am losing currently.
T
0 -
For me, I just walk a couple miles a day and sometimes garden or play pickle ball. No need to go crazy on exercise. Just eat the calories that MFP says for what you put in. Make sure to log sauces, oil, drinks. Weigh things if you need to. Estimate higher on the calories vs. Lower. Drink more water or plain tea. For me, lean meat or a plain potato fills me up. I use an air fryer with a spray or two of olive oil.1
-
cmriverside wrote: »@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.
Yes, when I started out--this calculator was the simplest one and it helped me understand. I liked that I could click different timelines and see how different calories could slow or quicken the timeline. All the calculators need to be taken with a grain of salt. As I understood it, she wanted help with figuring out calorie deficit and understanding it. I offered a basic understanding and a simplified calculator. I assume the one on here didn't help her--as she was asking for help.
It is complicated. Yes, logging food and exercise are essentials. However, if she doesn't have her calorie goal sorted it won't be much help. Originally the site had me on 1,200 calories. It was too low for me. I upped it to 1,600 and am losing currently.
T
Probably because you didn't follow the directions upon setup. That's the likely reason you'd get 1200 calories as a daily goal unless you're really tiny and older (which it doesn't appear you are.)
1. Setup wizard tells you to choose, "Lose 1 pound per week." I'm guessing you chose two pounds a week. We all do that. Then we can't stick to it, and we change our goals to become more reasonable.
2. Myfitnesspal wants you to add back in your purposeful exercise. That calculator you linked rolls the exercise IN TO your daily goal. If you had chosen "Lose 1 pound" and added back in your exercise here on myfitnesspal for an additional 200-400 calories on the days you do it, that would have you at your 1600. It isn't the calculator - they're all getting you to the same place using population-wide averages - it's your faulty input.
Always makes sense to understand the tool. That's why I linked that "How Myfitnesspal calculates" Support article. Maybe read that, so you will understand why I suggested that you don't try mixing methods for new people. It's confusing to them. At the very least, when you understand then you can explain the differences between the two methods. Your link uses a weekly TDEE average minus a deficit. Myfitnesspal uses....see that article I linked.
4 -
To the original poster
Bless your heart! You didn't ask for all that, did you?
The best way to figure out what's right for YOU is probably trial and error. We can each tell you what is right for ME, but that's not what you need to know. Some hints--
1. Adding healthy low calorie foods is easier than cutting foods. It automatically cuts higher calorie foods by filling your tummy.
2. As you record your foods eaten, really look. How many calories in a meal you eat often. How much energy does it give you? Consider lower calorie meals, as well as individual foods more often.
3. Find activities you enjoy. Time not thinking about food. Burns calories. Makes you happy.
4. --??4 -
I’m trying to figure this calorie deficit thing out. I figured out how much calories I can have each day now just to try to get my eating the right things.
I found that if I just got a reasonable calorie goal from MFP, then started logging the foods I was already eating, it became obvious pretty fast which foods I could most easily limit to hit my calorie goal. "Easily" means things that were less important to me personally for feeling full or well-nourished or happy.
The easiest things to reduce will differ from one person to the next. But it's a thing you can figure out, if you log your eating and adjust from there. The right things to eat are the ones that you find filing, nutritious, practical, affordable, and tasty.
You don't have to be perfect on day 1. You can take a bit of time (days, even a few weeks) to tweak your eating in a direction that will help you reach your goals. Once you're there, you don't have to be perfect every day, either. Pretty good, on average: That will work fine.
You can do this - best wishes for success!3 -
cmriverside wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.
Yes, when I started out--this calculator was the simplest one and it helped me understand. I liked that I could click different timelines and see how different calories could slow or quicken the timeline. All the calculators need to be taken with a grain of salt. As I understood it, she wanted help with figuring out calorie deficit and understanding it. I offered a basic understanding and a simplified calculator. I assume the one on here didn't help her--as she was asking for help.
It is complicated. Yes, logging food and exercise are essentials. However, if she doesn't have her calorie goal sorted it won't be much help. Originally the site had me on 1,200 calories. It was too low for me. I upped it to 1,600 and am losing currently.
T
Probably because you didn't follow the directions upon setup. That's the likely reason you'd get 1200 calories as a daily goal unless you're really tiny and older (which it doesn't appear you are.)
1. Setup wizard tells you to choose, "Lose 1 pound per week." I'm guessing you chose two pounds a week. We all do that. Then we can't stick to it, and we change our goals to become more reasonable.
2. Myfitnesspal wants you to add back in your purposeful exercise. That calculator you linked rolls the exercise IN TO your daily goal. If you had chosen "Lose 1 pound" and added back in your exercise here on myfitnesspal for an additional 200-400 calories on the days you do it, that would have you at your 1600. It isn't the calculator - they're all getting you to the same place using population-wide averages - it's your faulty input.
Always makes sense to understand the tool. That's why I linked that "How Myfitnesspal calculates" Support article. Maybe read that, so you will understand why I suggested that you don't try mixing methods for new people. It's confusing to them. At the very least, when you understand then you can explain the differences between the two methods. Your link uses a weekly TDEE average minus a deficit. Myfitnesspal uses....see that article I linked.
I chose 0.5 pounds, not 2 pounds a week because I am realistic. It gave 1,200 calories. I followed the click path. I adjusted the calories to fit my needs better. But I've had non-stop glitches with the site, so maybe it is just me.
This conversation is causing me a lot of stress. Have a good night. I'm out.
3 -
cmriverside wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.
Yes, when I started out--this calculator was the simplest one and it helped me understand. I liked that I could click different timelines and see how different calories could slow or quicken the timeline. All the calculators need to be taken with a grain of salt. As I understood it, she wanted help with figuring out calorie deficit and understanding it. I offered a basic understanding and a simplified calculator. I assume the one on here didn't help her--as she was asking for help.
It is complicated. Yes, logging food and exercise are essentials. However, if she doesn't have her calorie goal sorted it won't be much help. Originally the site had me on 1,200 calories. It was too low for me. I upped it to 1,600 and am losing currently.
T
Probably because you didn't follow the directions upon setup. That's the likely reason you'd get 1200 calories as a daily goal unless you're really tiny and older (which it doesn't appear you are.)
1. Setup wizard tells you to choose, "Lose 1 pound per week." I'm guessing you chose two pounds a week. We all do that. Then we can't stick to it, and we change our goals to become more reasonable.
2. Myfitnesspal wants you to add back in your purposeful exercise. That calculator you linked rolls the exercise IN TO your daily goal. If you had chosen "Lose 1 pound" and added back in your exercise here on myfitnesspal for an additional 200-400 calories on the days you do it, that would have you at your 1600. It isn't the calculator - they're all getting you to the same place using population-wide averages - it's your faulty input.
Always makes sense to understand the tool. That's why I linked that "How Myfitnesspal calculates" Support article. Maybe read that, so you will understand why I suggested that you don't try mixing methods for new people. It's confusing to them. At the very least, when you understand then you can explain the differences between the two methods. Your link uses a weekly TDEE average minus a deficit. Myfitnesspal uses....see that article I linked.
I chose 0.5 pounds, not 2 pounds a week because I am realistic. It gave 1,200 calories. I followed the click path. I adjusted the calories to fit my needs better. But I've had non-stop glitches with the site, so maybe it is just me.
This conversation is causing me a lot of stress. Have a good night. I'm out.
I apologize for the tone (?) of my post if it upset you, loulee. That was not my intention, it's a common issue on this site to get the TDEE method and myfitnesspal's method confused.
0 -
cmriverside wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.
Yes, when I started out--this calculator was the simplest one and it helped me understand. I liked that I could click different timelines and see how different calories could slow or quicken the timeline. All the calculators need to be taken with a grain of salt. As I understood it, she wanted help with figuring out calorie deficit and understanding it. I offered a basic understanding and a simplified calculator. I assume the one on here didn't help her--as she was asking for help.
It is complicated. Yes, logging food and exercise are essentials. However, if she doesn't have her calorie goal sorted it won't be much help. Originally the site had me on 1,200 calories. It was too low for me. I upped it to 1,600 and am losing currently.
T
Probably because you didn't follow the directions upon setup. That's the likely reason you'd get 1200 calories as a daily goal unless you're really tiny and older (which it doesn't appear you are.)
1. Setup wizard tells you to choose, "Lose 1 pound per week." I'm guessing you chose two pounds a week. We all do that. Then we can't stick to it, and we change our goals to become more reasonable.
2. Myfitnesspal wants you to add back in your purposeful exercise. That calculator you linked rolls the exercise IN TO your daily goal. If you had chosen "Lose 1 pound" and added back in your exercise here on myfitnesspal for an additional 200-400 calories on the days you do it, that would have you at your 1600. It isn't the calculator - they're all getting you to the same place using population-wide averages - it's your faulty input.
Always makes sense to understand the tool. That's why I linked that "How Myfitnesspal calculates" Support article. Maybe read that, so you will understand why I suggested that you don't try mixing methods for new people. It's confusing to them. At the very least, when you understand then you can explain the differences between the two methods. Your link uses a weekly TDEE average minus a deficit. Myfitnesspal uses....see that article I linked.
I chose 0.5 pounds, not 2 pounds a week because I am realistic. It gave 1,200 calories. I followed the click path. I adjusted the calories to fit my needs better. But I've had non-stop glitches with the site, so maybe it is just me.
This conversation is causing me a lot of stress. Have a good night. I'm out.
Sorry you're stressed :flowerforyou:
I wonder if it is possible that you intended to chose 0.5 pounds, but accidentally clicked 2 pounds a week, or the system accidentally gave you 2 pounds instead. Most of us who end up on 1200 calories get there by selecting 2 pounds a week.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.
Yes, when I started out--this calculator was the simplest one and it helped me understand. I liked that I could click different timelines and see how different calories could slow or quicken the timeline. All the calculators need to be taken with a grain of salt. As I understood it, she wanted help with figuring out calorie deficit and understanding it. I offered a basic understanding and a simplified calculator. I assume the one on here didn't help her--as she was asking for help.
It is complicated. Yes, logging food and exercise are essentials. However, if she doesn't have her calorie goal sorted it won't be much help. Originally the site had me on 1,200 calories. It was too low for me. I upped it to 1,600 and am losing currently.
T
Probably because you didn't follow the directions upon setup. That's the likely reason you'd get 1200 calories as a daily goal unless you're really tiny and older (which it doesn't appear you are.)
1. Setup wizard tells you to choose, "Lose 1 pound per week." I'm guessing you chose two pounds a week. We all do that. Then we can't stick to it, and we change our goals to become more reasonable.
2. Myfitnesspal wants you to add back in your purposeful exercise. That calculator you linked rolls the exercise IN TO your daily goal. If you had chosen "Lose 1 pound" and added back in your exercise here on myfitnesspal for an additional 200-400 calories on the days you do it, that would have you at your 1600. It isn't the calculator - they're all getting you to the same place using population-wide averages - it's your faulty input.
Always makes sense to understand the tool. That's why I linked that "How Myfitnesspal calculates" Support article. Maybe read that, so you will understand why I suggested that you don't try mixing methods for new people. It's confusing to them. At the very least, when you understand then you can explain the differences between the two methods. Your link uses a weekly TDEE average minus a deficit. Myfitnesspal uses....see that article I linked.
I chose 0.5 pounds, not 2 pounds a week because I am realistic. It gave 1,200 calories. I followed the click path. I adjusted the calories to fit my needs better. But I've had non-stop glitches with the site, so maybe it is just me.
This conversation is causing me a lot of stress. Have a good night. I'm out.
Sorry you're stressed :flowerforyou:
I wonder if it is possible that you intended to chose 0.5 pounds, but accidentally clicked 2 pounds a week, or the system accidentally gave you 2 pounds instead. Most of us who end up on 1200 calories get there by selecting 2 pounds a week.
I have to disagree. I'm currently set at 0.5lbs per week and my (base) goal is barely above 1300. Even a rate of 1lb per week would give me the infamous 1200 calorie goal.
Yes, I'm only set at sedentary (because I have a synced tracker), but at 5ft5 and 135lbs I'm not particularly petite. It's still very possible to get 1200 calories as a goal without choosing 2lbs per week.1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »@loulee997, I like that calculator you linked. I don't like the attached info on the page particularly and the fact that it uses Kevin Hall's name. I don't think he made that page, and it's a bit misleading.
The numbers are spot-on for me but MFP gives me the same numbers when I choose the same parameters...not sure why you wouldn't just keep it simple and tell people to use the (exact same) calculator here when you use the Guided Setup in GOALS. https://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/change-goals-guided
There's nothing really new under the sun when it comes to activity multipliers. Sending people to outside calculators just muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for them to use this food logging site. Accounting for exercise and activity levels are the most discussed confusion. Keep it simple. If you're going to use myfitnesspal for logging food then why not just use it like it's designed (at least at first when people have zero idea about all this.)
Here is how this site calculates: https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-
It is a complicated process, regardless. Anyone using any online calculator has to go into it understanding the limitations of any of them. Do the work: log food and exercise and track your progress over TIME. Adjust as results warrant.
Yes, when I started out--this calculator was the simplest one and it helped me understand. I liked that I could click different timelines and see how different calories could slow or quicken the timeline. All the calculators need to be taken with a grain of salt. As I understood it, she wanted help with figuring out calorie deficit and understanding it. I offered a basic understanding and a simplified calculator. I assume the one on here didn't help her--as she was asking for help.
It is complicated. Yes, logging food and exercise are essentials. However, if she doesn't have her calorie goal sorted it won't be much help. Originally the site had me on 1,200 calories. It was too low for me. I upped it to 1,600 and am losing currently.
T
Probably because you didn't follow the directions upon setup. That's the likely reason you'd get 1200 calories as a daily goal unless you're really tiny and older (which it doesn't appear you are.)
1. Setup wizard tells you to choose, "Lose 1 pound per week." I'm guessing you chose two pounds a week. We all do that. Then we can't stick to it, and we change our goals to become more reasonable.
2. Myfitnesspal wants you to add back in your purposeful exercise. That calculator you linked rolls the exercise IN TO your daily goal. If you had chosen "Lose 1 pound" and added back in your exercise here on myfitnesspal for an additional 200-400 calories on the days you do it, that would have you at your 1600. It isn't the calculator - they're all getting you to the same place using population-wide averages - it's your faulty input.
Always makes sense to understand the tool. That's why I linked that "How Myfitnesspal calculates" Support article. Maybe read that, so you will understand why I suggested that you don't try mixing methods for new people. It's confusing to them. At the very least, when you understand then you can explain the differences between the two methods. Your link uses a weekly TDEE average minus a deficit. Myfitnesspal uses....see that article I linked.
I chose 0.5 pounds, not 2 pounds a week because I am realistic. It gave 1,200 calories. I followed the click path. I adjusted the calories to fit my needs better. But I've had non-stop glitches with the site, so maybe it is just me.
This conversation is causing me a lot of stress. Have a good night. I'm out.
Sorry you're stressed :flowerforyou:
I wonder if it is possible that you intended to chose 0.5 pounds, but accidentally clicked 2 pounds a week, or the system accidentally gave you 2 pounds instead. Most of us who end up on 1200 calories get there by selecting 2 pounds a week.
I have to disagree. I'm currently set at 0.5lbs per week and my (base) goal is barely above 1300. Even a rate of 1lb per week would give me the infamous 1200 calorie goal.
Yes, I'm only set at sedentary (because I have a synced tracker), but at 5ft5 and 135lbs I'm not particularly petite. It's still very possible to get 1200 calories as a goal without choosing 2lbs per week.
MFP would give me 1200 if I set everything accurately and asked for 0.5 pounds/week loss rate . . . and that would estimate me to lose slower than half a pound weekly. (Female, sedentary, age 67, 133 pounds, 5'5". That is the classic old, not very overweight, not very active category . . . but not especially petite.)
I get that either you (Lietchi) or I would be be best served by losing very slowly at our height/weight, of course. But 1200 = 2 pounds a week, or even 1200 = aggressively fast isn't necessarily a correct perception.
Fortunately, for me. MFP's estimate is wrong - very wrong. From playing with calculators, at least part of the reasons is probably muscle mass.
As an aside, there's a trap in there to some extent for people who do get the 1200 estimate, but who - like me - could in reality lose weight at a reasonable rate on more. Too-low calories are going to bleed activity out of daily life through fatigue.
Some people really do need to eat that little to lose even slowly, though. Most people are close to the formulas, but it's possible to have lower needs as well as higher needs, too. I think it's a good thing to keep that in mind when tempted to say no one should eat as little as 1200.
I 100% agree that more people come here seeming to think they must eat 1200 than would really be best served by doing that, though.0 -
I got the 1200 goal, but I've found that I can generally slowly lose weight if I eat under 1700. Which is hard enough for me to do....I don't think I've EVER ate as few as 1200!
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 399 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 979 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions