MFP Lowballs your calories?

xstealth12x
xstealth12x Posts: 43 Member
edited November 8 in Health and Weight Loss
I've been to a couple of other calculators online and am getting some completely different "daily recommended" intake of calories. Not by just a couple hundred, but generally they're off by about a thousand! MPF puts me at approx 2100 cal/day to lose weight to my desired goal but other research says I should be closer to 2800 cal/day to reach my goal. Has anyone else run across similar findings? Any tips on which to go with? I've been hitting MFP goals with relative ease but still eating healthy and going to bed satisfied but if my body is in starvation mode it's gonna slow down the burn.

Help!
«1

Replies

  • Mike523
    Mike523 Posts: 393 Member
    MFP does not take exercise into consideration until you actually record it in your tracker. So if you set up your goals and said you're going to exercise 5 days per week for an hour per day, MFP ignores that when setting up your calorie target. Only when you actually do the exercise and add it to your tracker does it count toward your calorie goal, increasing it for that day.
  • xstealth12x
    xstealth12x Posts: 43 Member
    Sure, I see where you're getting at but I mean just the base calories ignoring exercising. You're right though, as you exercise your calorie allowance increases but I'm more focused just on that base calorie starting point for the day.
  • Mike523
    Mike523 Posts: 393 Member
    But you're comparing the MFP goals calculator (which doesn't count exercise) to other online calculators that most likely DO account for your exercise level in their calculations. That would most likely be why there's a large discrepancy.
  • xstealth12x
    xstealth12x Posts: 43 Member
    That's a good point. Btw, great job on the 76lbs lost!
  • cramernh
    cramernh Posts: 3,335 Member
    MFP is, IMHO a much better resource - I love that I can change the parameters on my account to meet the numbers my doctors want me to work with. Im not a true fan of the exercise-calculations to be honest, some of them tend to run a little high in my books... but, at least its an all-in-one comprehensive approach... the reports that you can print up are great - ESPECIALLY when you are working with doctors like I am....
  • xraychick82
    xraychick82 Posts: 10
    I was going to post about the same topic. I just had abdominal surgery, so I set my exercise level to sedentry until I get the clearance to exercise again. MFP says 1200 and most of the other calculators are set to average at 1,600... so I am confused as I am not working out at the moment.
  • xstealth12x
    xstealth12x Posts: 43 Member
    xray - Agreed, because the calculators I've found online don't have a metric for workout calories, so that's where the confusion comes in. I don't understand how MFP says I should consume 2000cal/day and other ones say I should consume 2800cal/day to reach the same result from the same point. I've noticed on a day to day basis those days where I've accidently run across extra calories through the day make for a better change the following day more than the days I've eaten less and exercised more.

    cramernh - So you've noticed that MFP has similar calculations to what your doctors have provided you with?
  • xstealth12x
    xstealth12x Posts: 43 Member
    Hmm... upon further review, I think that Mike may be correct. I've just found a couple different calculators and played with some settings and a lot of them are calculating some sort of extra exercise and not giving just a base maintain rate. Interesting
  • kmp411
    kmp411 Posts: 30 Member
    MFP is, IMHO a much better resource - I love that I can change the parameters on my account to meet the numbers my doctors want me to work with. Im not a true fan of the exercise-calculations to be honest, some of them tend to run a little high in my books... but, at least its an all-in-one comprehensive approach... the reports that you can print up are great - ESPECIALLY when you are working with doctors like I am....

    I disagree... There are better calc's on the internet to determine caloric intake for weight loss/maintenance. MFP could do a better job with the default settings, Macro's etc...
  • cramernh
    cramernh Posts: 3,335 Member
    MFP is, IMHO a much better resource - I love that I can change the parameters on my account to meet the numbers my doctors want me to work with. Im not a true fan of the exercise-calculations to be honest, some of them tend to run a little high in my books... but, at least its an all-in-one comprehensive approach... the reports that you can print up are great - ESPECIALLY when you are working with doctors like I am....

    I disagree... There are better calc's on the internet to determine caloric intake for weight loss/maintenance. MFP could do a better job with the default settings, Macro's etc...

    Im not complaining about default settings like you are.... my note said "can change the parameters on my account to meet the numbers my doctors want me to work with"

    Clearly MFP being considered by real healthcare professionals says alot to me.... and it works
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    The bottom line is that different calculators/methods use different assumptions, different formulas, etc as the basis for their recommendations.

    You have to pick ONE and stick with that ONE. If you try to take aspects of one method and mix them with pieces of another you're bound to run into problems.

    Use MFP or don't... but don't mix it with pieces of other methods.
  • DoreenDC
    DoreenDC Posts: 17 Member
    I just noticed that as well.....they dropped me to 1200, saying thats an average of 1.8 lbs a week.....that's insane, I will lose an easy 6 lbs/week.....

    I'm a personal trainer just looking to start counting calories instead of all these high protein low carb diets, I'm burnt out on them and my weight isn't moving anymore.....

    I'm fine with the 1200, I can do that......but I'm just very surprised with their calculations....they are definitely off a bit. In order to lose, I should be up more so between 1800-2000
  • DoreenDC
    DoreenDC Posts: 17 Member
    And you should focus on just that.....leave the workout calories OUT!!!!!

    :)
    Doreen
  • ILiftHeavyAcrylics
    ILiftHeavyAcrylics Posts: 27,732 Member
    I like that the calculation has the deficit built in whether I exercise or not. I have mine set on sedentary so that if I do exercise I know I can eat more calories, but if I don't exercise it doesn't give me a false sense of how many calories I can eat.

    That said, calorie intakes are always just estimates and have to be adjusted if they aren't working. If MFP's seems low for you then you can set it higher.
  • 714rah714
    714rah714 Posts: 759 Member
    You can always manually change your calories to meet your specific needs/goals, not a problem.
  • jenniebean1680
    jenniebean1680 Posts: 350 Member
    I think people aren't aware of what "NET" means. People post this literally multiple times a day. This site says you should NET whatever calories it gives you.

    So if your number is 1200, and you burn 800 through exercise, you need to be eating 2000 to lose.

    MFP should have some sort of note about that. These threads only show how confused people are.
  • thatgirl125
    thatgirl125 Posts: 294 Member
    for me MFP and other calculators are right around the same point for me.
    I am only 4' 11" and MFP says to have 1200 calories a day, and I looked up other ones and the most one had told me to eat was 1285/1358 (right around there).
  • EMagineBeingEMazing
    EMagineBeingEMazing Posts: 76
    That said, calorie intakes are always just estimates and have to be adjusted if they aren't working. If MFP's seems low for you then you can set it higher.

    exactly. It's all an estimate, since everyone's body works differently. So find what works for you. :)
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    I just noticed that as well.....they dropped me to 1200, saying thats an average of 1.8 lbs a week.....that's insane, I will lose an easy 6 lbs/week.....

    I'm a personal trainer just looking to start counting calories instead of all these high protein low carb diets, I'm burnt out on them and my weight isn't moving anymore.....

    I'm fine with the 1200, I can do that......but I'm just very surprised with their calculations....they are definitely off a bit. In order to lose, I should be up more so between 1800-2000
    And you should focus on just that.....leave the workout calories OUT!!!!!

    :)
    Doreen

    Again, I think you're confusing the matter. MFP is setup to eat back exercise cals. So MFP suggests 1200 cals per day PLUS whatever cals you burn working out. Eat your 1200 cals, then burn 500 cals working out, eat those 500 cals and you're at the 1700 cals total for the day that you think you should be at.
  • Mom0fTwo
    Mom0fTwo Posts: 326 Member
    i find that on the days that i just do the 1200 cals with no exercise that i am starving, so recently i have been bumping it up by about 200 cals a day when i dont exercise and i have lost another 2 lbs, it was just an experiment but it works for me, when i do exercise i eat back all of it plus maybe an extra 100 cals and in the last 2 days have lost .5 lbs so i am thinking that it is too low for me, maybe try experimenting :)
  • mrsdizzyd84
    mrsdizzyd84 Posts: 422 Member
    In the past I've used FitDay and LoseIt! I like MFP much better than those two, that's why I'm here.

    I had a really hard time losing weight with LoseIt! It's a lot more rigid than MFP. I love that MFP allows you to change your macro settings, caloric intake, and exercise goals. I also love that it calculates your caloric intake without taking your exercise into account. In the end, LoseIt! had me eating way more than I should.

    FitDay is a great program as well. In a lot of ways it is even better than MFP in terms of customization and the ability to track all aspects of your bodily changes. The problem with FitDay is the user interface. It is clunky at best and nearly impossible at worst.

    At the end of the day, MFP is the perfect compromise for me, and it has given me the best results. I'm sticking with MFP and my customized goals.
  • rescueangel
    rescueangel Posts: 28 Member
    I think, in all honesty, that everyone is going to lose or gain differently......so really, if you find that you do better with higher numbers rather then lower ones, then go with it. I wouldn't worry as much about what MFP says (they are simply a starting point). Tweak things to better suite you and your goals.
    I personally found the MFP information very helpful.
  • bhalter
    bhalter Posts: 582 Member
    Yep - MFP had my calories at 1350/day, and when I did some research, every other website was telling me to be eating around 1800 for weight loss. (I have a desk job, which all the sites factored in.)

    I changed my calories to 1700 last week and I'm going to see how that works out.
  • Ellorente
    Ellorente Posts: 5
    I dont know. I kinda like MFP.
  • jenniebean1680
    jenniebean1680 Posts: 350 Member
    Yep - MFP had my calories at 1350/day, and when I did some research, every other website was telling me to be eating around 1800 for weight loss. (I have a desk job, which all the sites factored in.)

    I changed my calories to 1700 last week and I'm going to see how that works out.

    MFP had you at 1350 NET cals. NET. That means if you burn 400 thorugh exercise, you have to eat it. Getting you to your 1700.

    These threads are killing me. I gotta get off them.
  • gj4man
    gj4man Posts: 52 Member
    I just noticed that as well.....they dropped me to 1200, saying thats an average of 1.8 lbs a week.....that's insane, I will lose an easy 6 lbs/week.....

    I'm a personal trainer just looking to start counting calories instead of all these high protein low carb diets, I'm burnt out on them and my weight isn't moving anymore.....

    I'm fine with the 1200, I can do that......but I'm just very surprised with their calculations....they are definitely off a bit. In order to lose, I should be up more so between 1800-2000

    Eh?

    6lb / week is a deficit of about 21,000 calories, or 3,000 a day.

    As you're a personal trainer I suppose it's possible that you're burning 4,800 a day whilst consuming 1,800, but then you really do need to log your exercise. And probably eat more to be honest.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    I just noticed that as well.....they dropped me to 1200, saying thats an average of 1.8 lbs a week.....that's insane, I will lose an easy 6 lbs/week.....

    I'm a personal trainer just looking to start counting calories instead of all these high protein low carb diets, I'm burnt out on them and my weight isn't moving anymore.....

    I'm fine with the 1200, I can do that......but I'm just very surprised with their calculations....they are definitely off a bit. In order to lose, I should be up more so between 1800-2000

    that 1200 ignores exercise so if you workout and burn 600 cals, MFP will increase you to 1800 to lose your goal amount of weight.

    As an example say MFP gives you 1450 calories to lose 1 lb/week, and you plan on exercising 5x/week for an average of 400 cals per workout. well MFP will tell you to eat 1450 on the days you don't workout and 1850 on the days you do whereas a "professional" (doctor, trainer, nutritionist) may tell you to eat 1750 everyday regardless if you workout.

    So for the week MFP will have you eat 12,150 (1450*2+1850*5) whereas taking the professionals advice will have you eat 12,250 (1750*7) almost the same number of cals for the week. The issue in not following MFP is if you don't workout the full 5 days or burn more or less than planned. If that is the case you may lose more or less than your goal, whereas MFP will have you lose your goal amount regardless how much you actually workout.

    What many MFPers do is take the low 1450 and not eat back exercise calories which is wrong, if you are not eating them back then your daily activity level should reflect the higher burn with would be covered in the 1750/day above.
  • anta1
    anta1 Posts: 53 Member
    Yep - MFP had my calories at 1350/day, and when I did some research, every other website was telling me to be eating around 1800 for weight loss. (I have a desk job, which all the sites factored in.)

    I changed my calories to 1700 last week and I'm going to see how that works out.

    MFP had you at 1350 NET cals. NET. That means if you burn 400 thorugh exercise, you have to eat it. Getting you to your 1700.

    These threads are killing me. I gotta get off them.

    Lol!
  • TNTwedell
    TNTwedell Posts: 277 Member
    I appreciate all this dialogue - the whole calorie/exercise calculation is confusing the hell out of me!
    MFP says I should be eating 1200 calories a day - Im 5'8 and want to lose about 20lbs.... I've been sticking to 1200 (net) or slightly under since the first of January and i have lost 1lb
    Im also exercising about 5x a week -
    Been pretty frustrated so far with these results...
    I have always just accepted the basic math that if you eat less, you'll lose weight - right? but apparently, the more I read, the less that approach seems to hold water... Im so confused. HA
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    I appreciate all this dialogue - the whole calorie/exercise calculation is confusing the hell out of me!
    MFP says I should be eating 1200 calories a day - Im 5'8 and want to lose about 20lbs.... I've been sticking to 1200 (net) or slightly under since the first of January and i have lost 1lb
    Im also exercising about 5x a week -
    Been pretty frustrated so far with these results...
    I have always just accepted the basic math that if you eat less, you'll lose weight - right? but apparently, the more I read, the less that approach seems to hold water... Im so confused. HA

    Health issues/concerns aside, to lose weight you have to be in a caloric deficit. That is pretty much the only hard and fast rule. Once you get beyond that you get into a lot of grey area. There are starting points and general rules of thumb where people should start, but at the end of the day what works for some may not work for you.

    The first thing you should do is make sure you are logging, honestly and correctly, both exercise and diet.
    Next, calculate your TDEE. MFP does that for you, there are zillions of site out there that will too. Pick one and go with it.
    This is where things start to vary.

    Option 1 - Set your daily caloric intake at a deficit
    This is what most people do, and is how MFP is designed to work. You figure out your daily caloric need (TDEE, or total daily energy expenditure), then set your calorie goal lower than that. For example.. if your TDEE is 1800, you might set your daily calorie goal to 1400. That puts you in a caloric deficit and you will start to lose weight. When you exercise you burn additional calories. These burned calories are not accounted for in your TDEE or the calorie goal you set based on your TDEE. So exercising increases that caloric deficit. The thing to watch here is how big that deficit gets. Every body responds differently, but the larger the deficit the worse it is for your body (the assumption is that the larger the deficit gets the harder it is to properly fuel your body). And this is why people recommend eating back exercise calories.

    Option 2 - Use exercise to create the deficit
    With this method you set your daily caloric intake to equal your TDEE. Then you exercise and burn calories. Those burned calories are not accounted for when you set your daily goal equal to your TDEE, and thus you end up in a deficit. The size of that deficit is dependent on your workouts. You burn 75cals walking the dog and your deficit is 75 cals. You burn 500 cals running and the deficit is 500.

    Now it's about tweaking things to find your sweet spot... to find out what your body responds to best. Some people can eat 2 or 3 big meals and lose weight, some people have to eat smaller meals more often. Some people can lose weight eating almost anything as long as they stick to their caloric goal, some people have to micromanage the types of cals they are consuming. And it just keeps going.

    This is far from an exact science. It takes a lot of time, a lot of work, and a lot of patience to see healthy results.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories