Anyone else do this???I had an AHA! Moment.

Prefessa
Prefessa Posts: 90
edited November 10 in Health and Weight Loss
Folks, from my MFP stats....My TDEE is 2170, so that equates to 90 cals/hr base.....SO If I don't work out at all thats what I burn.

Yesterday I went out fishing....according to MFP 6 hrs of fishing standing up burns 1886 cals....now I was dead tired when I got home, 8 hrs on a boat, 6 hrs fishing(1 hr each way to the fishing grounds where I chilled out in the cabin house didn't count, only time at the rail.)

But I realized that If I was home or at work.....that period of time burns 540 cals! I had an AHA moment and realized, that for lengthy activity...your normal TDEE is counted twice!!! and is VERY significant. Sooo...

I adjusted the calorie output by decreasing the duration until I got 1346 cals....


What do you guys think??? Is this the right thing to do?? Most algorithims that calculate energy expenditure calculate the expenditure for that activity, but time spent active, is NOT Time spend doing TDEE activity, so the TDEE expenditure needs to be removed.

Replies

  • Kany
    Kany Posts: 336
    This is the reason why I don't eat all of my exercise calories back.
  • AirCircleI
    AirCircleI Posts: 334 Member
    I have recently started substracting. Some people choose not to eat all their excercise calories back, and I don't always eat them all back, but to keep me on the right side of things I substract some before I log them.
  • subigirl
    subigirl Posts: 53 Member
    Same here...I don't eat back in my exercise calories either. Of course, in my case, it was my personal trainer who gave me the advice to eat nearly as exactly as possible the same amount of calories each day as my resting metabolic rate...no more, no less...and adjust my deficit via exercise and activity. This is what I was told while I was in the longest stall of my journey (about 6 months, to be exact...eating AN AVERAGE of only 1200 calories a day...some days more, some days less). Since taking his advice, I finally achieved my weight goal after being frustrated for quite some time. This is the only advice that has kept me steadily losing...even if it is only a half a pound in a week...but I attribute that to the fact that now I'm trying to put on muscle, so I have rested in the fact I may have some weeks of no loss.
  • ashhills
    ashhills Posts: 64 Member
    I don't think I'm understanding...
  • MoreThanMommie
    MoreThanMommie Posts: 597 Member
    I don't get it. It's like a foreign language.
  • Prefessa
    Prefessa Posts: 90
    Folks.... When MFP figures out your goals based on your age, weight and gender...that is the amount of calories you need to maintain your current weight....IF YOU DON"T WORKOUT in a single day(24 hrs)

    So...Total Daily Energy Expenditure(TDEE)/24 hrs= the amount of calories you burn in an hour.

    So If you workout for 1 hr, you need to remove/subtract the amount of calories you burn in an hour away from the calories calculated for your workout, to get the true calorie impact to your diet.

    It is counterproductive to create a very large calorie deficit, because it will make you hit plateus and slow or stop your weight loss.
  • deksgrl
    deksgrl Posts: 7,237 Member
    ??

    I set my goals up manually so that I am eating 20% less than my TDEE. Not the amount MFP set me up for.
  • BAMFMeredith
    BAMFMeredith Posts: 2,810 Member
    I don't math.


    But I have lost 7 lbs in the last 6 weeks so I think I'm doing it right :)
  • HJCsDaddy
    HJCsDaddy Posts: 419 Member
    I don't math.


    But I have lost 7 lbs in the last 6 weeks so I think I'm doing it right :)

    Precisely, we can punch numbers all we want, but the numbers that matter to me are the ones that started at 209 on Jan. 6th and the one that read 194 yesterday. I am sticking to a diet between 1200-1520 calories per day while burning anywhere from 700-1000 at the gym and while running. I am building lean muscle mass and losing fat, thus those numbers work for me and I will continue what I am doing until proven otherwise.
  • mjbrenner
    mjbrenner Posts: 222 Member
    Are we sure that the exercise cited by MFP and other web sites is not above-and-beyond your normal energy expenditure for that time frame? I am unconvinced that such an easy thing to factor in is not already accounted for.
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    My brain is foggy with all those numbers! IMO, I wouldn't trust MFP or any other website to tell you how much your burned for 6 hours of fishing.
  • Elizabeth_C34
    Elizabeth_C34 Posts: 6,376 Member
    Folks.... When MFP figures out your goals based on your age, weight and gender...that is the amount of calories you need to maintain your current weight....IF YOU DON"T WORKOUT in a single day(24 hrs)

    So...Total Daily Energy Expenditure(TDEE)/24 hrs= the amount of calories you burn in an hour.

    So If you workout for 1 hr, you need to remove/subtract the amount of calories you burn in an hour away from the calories calculated for your workout, to get the true calorie impact to your diet.

    It is counterproductive to create a very large calorie deficit, because it will make you hit plateus and slow or stop your weight loss.

    Um no.

    If your BMR is approximately 85 calories per hour (just by existing), and you burn 500 calories in that hour for exercise, your total calorie burn is 585 calories, not 415. It is not counted twice. The exercise calories are what you burn doing only that exercise (not including the existing calories).
  • nutandbutter
    nutandbutter Posts: 447
    ??

    I set my goals up manually so that I am eating 20% less than my TDEE. Not the amount MFP set me up for.

    This.
  • llkilgore
    llkilgore Posts: 1,169 Member
    Folks.... When MFP figures out your goals based on your age, weight and gender...that is the amount of calories you need to maintain your current weight....IF YOU DON"T WORKOUT in a single day(24 hrs)

    So...Total Daily Energy Expenditure(TDEE)/24 hrs= the amount of calories you burn in an hour.

    So If you workout for 1 hr, you need to remove/subtract the amount of calories you burn in an hour away from the calories calculated for your workout, to get the true calorie impact to your diet.

    It is counterproductive to create a very large calorie deficit, because it will make you hit plateus and slow or stop your weight loss.

    Um no.

    If your BMR is approximately 85 calories per hour (just by existing), and you burn 500 calories in that hour for exercise, your total calorie burn is 585 calories, not 415. It is not counted twice. The exercise calories are what you burn doing only that exercise (not including the existing calories).

    I don't think so.

    http://www.caloriesperhour.com reports the same or very nearly the same burns as MFP, at least for the exercises I do, and posts this warning about the use of their database

    "Important Note
    Calories burned calculations reflect the total number of calories burned during the period of time calculated. Therefore when calculating how many calories you need or burn in a day, do not add your RMR or BMR."

    And the burns calculated for my runs by http://www.mapmyrun.com are lower than MFP reports by around 50 cal/hour, which is about 1/24th of my BMR as calculated by MFP.

    MFP could be right and the other two sites wrong, but I tend to believe them because their numbers have done a better job of keeping me on target.

    Edited to add that SparkPeople is in agreement with MapMyRun and LiveStrong.com is in agreement with MFP. So that's 3 to 2.
  • CallmeSbo
    CallmeSbo Posts: 611 Member
    bump
  • Elizabeth_C34
    Elizabeth_C34 Posts: 6,376 Member
    Folks.... When MFP figures out your goals based on your age, weight and gender...that is the amount of calories you need to maintain your current weight....IF YOU DON"T WORKOUT in a single day(24 hrs)

    So...Total Daily Energy Expenditure(TDEE)/24 hrs= the amount of calories you burn in an hour.

    So If you workout for 1 hr, you need to remove/subtract the amount of calories you burn in an hour away from the calories calculated for your workout, to get the true calorie impact to your diet.

    It is counterproductive to create a very large calorie deficit, because it will make you hit plateus and slow or stop your weight loss.

    Um no.

    If your BMR is approximately 85 calories per hour (just by existing), and you burn 500 calories in that hour for exercise, your total calorie burn is 585 calories, not 415. It is not counted twice. The exercise calories are what you burn doing only that exercise (not including the existing calories).

    I don't think so.

    http://www.caloriesperhour.com reports the same or very nearly the same burns as MFP, at least for the exercises I do, and posts this warning about the use of their database

    "Important Note
    Calories burned calculations reflect the total number of calories burned during the period of time calculated. Therefore when calculating how many calories you need or burn in a day, do not add your RMR or BMR."

    And the burns calculated for my runs by http://www.mapmyrun.com are lower than MFP reports by around 50 cal/hour, which is about 1/24th of my BMR as calculated by MFP.

    MFP could be right and the other two sites wrong, but I tend to believe them because their numbers have done a better job of keeping me on target.

    Edited to add that SparkPeople is in agreement with MapMyRun and LiveStrong.com is in agreement with MFP. So that's 3 to 2.

    As far as I am aware, MFP has no such disclaimer.

    I'd be curious to see if you calculated this with a HRM also to verify.
  • firedragon064
    firedragon064 Posts: 1,082 Member
    AHA!
  • salene17
    salene17 Posts: 16 Member
    I have been wondering about this since I got my HRM. I want to know because I want to be sure I am eating enough on days I work out... but don't want to go over. I was thinking of subtracting just as you were... but you would think that we can't be the only ones who thought of that. That would sort of be an important detail... especially if you were only burning like 200-300 calories. Someone MUST know the real deal!!!
  • Dexy_
    Dexy_ Posts: 593 Member
    The amount you burn while not exercising is relatively insignificant. Sure, if you want to be SO darn nitpicky, don't eat back all your exercise calories. But if you are working out a lot and eating little, you will hit a brick wall very quickly.
  • NicolettetheGreek
    NicolettetheGreek Posts: 246 Member
    Sorry to be way behind, but I don't understand.

    My BMR=1676 ca/day. I am only getting about 130-145 cals for exercising, and trying to eat the 1200 cals allotted to me by this site. But, that is a lot of cals for me, unless I eat some crappy foods.

    How do I figure what you are doing? How much to exercise/eat?

    Pls help

    Thanks, Nicolette
  • sylvuz323
    sylvuz323 Posts: 468 Member
    I for one don't trust MFP when it comes to the calories burned/activities. I wouldn't trust that number. But everything else looks about right.
  • llkilgore
    llkilgore Posts: 1,169 Member
    Folks.... When MFP figures out your goals based on your age, weight and gender...that is the amount of calories you need to maintain your current weight....IF YOU DON"T WORKOUT in a single day(24 hrs)

    So...Total Daily Energy Expenditure(TDEE)/24 hrs= the amount of calories you burn in an hour.

    So If you workout for 1 hr, you need to remove/subtract the amount of calories you burn in an hour away from the calories calculated for your workout, to get the true calorie impact to your diet.

    It is counterproductive to create a very large calorie deficit, because it will make you hit plateus and slow or stop your weight loss.

    Um no.

    If your BMR is approximately 85 calories per hour (just by existing), and you burn 500 calories in that hour for exercise, your total calorie burn is 585 calories, not 415. It is not counted twice. The exercise calories are what you burn doing only that exercise (not including the existing calories).

    I don't think so.

    http://www.caloriesperhour.com reports the same or very nearly the same burns as MFP, at least for the exercises I do, and posts this warning about the use of their database

    "Important Note
    Calories burned calculations reflect the total number of calories burned during the period of time calculated. Therefore when calculating how many calories you need or burn in a day, do not add your RMR or BMR."

    And the burns calculated for my runs by http://www.mapmyrun.com are lower than MFP reports by around 50 cal/hour, which is about 1/24th of my BMR as calculated by MFP.

    MFP could be right and the other two sites wrong, but I tend to believe them because their numbers have done a better job of keeping me on target.

    Edited to add that SparkPeople is in agreement with MapMyRun and LiveStrong.com is in agreement with MFP. So that's 3 to 2.

    As far as I am aware, MFP has no such disclaimer.

    I'd be curious to see if you calculated this with a HRM also to verify.

    I haven't found a disclaimer on LiveStrong.com either, but they've taken over http://www.caloriesperhour.com, which does have the disclaimer and which goes into MUCH more detail about how their calculators work. And I think that's the older site.

    I lost nearly 60 pounds without the benefit of an HRM, though I'd certainly want one if I ever need to do it again.
  • Elizabeth_C34
    Elizabeth_C34 Posts: 6,376 Member
    I haven't found a disclaimer on LiveStrong.com either, but they've taken over http://www.caloriesperhour.com, which does have the disclaimer and which goes into MUCH more detail about how their calculators work. And I think that's the older site.

    I lost nearly 60 pounds without the benefit of an HRM, though I'd certainly want one if I ever need to do it again.

    That is really interesting. I'll go check it out and read some more. I usually eat my workout cals back, so this would be beneficial to me.

    Thanks for taking more time to research this, and congrats on your 60 lb loss!
  • Prefessa
    Prefessa Posts: 90
    My brain is foggy with all those numbers! IMO, I wouldn't trust MFP or any other website to tell you how much your burned for 6 hours of fishing.

    Jenn...love your Avatar!

    I dunno...1346 cals for 6 hrs of standing up in a boat, in the dead of winter, contually droping and reeling in deep water, while trying to maintain your balance and keep warm for a 198# guy sounds about right...I think six hours of anything you do standing up is gonna burn significant calories..even cooking if you don't snack!

    One of these days I will check these things out with a HRM. For now I'll stick with this and see how I do. I tried sticking to my alloted calories and not eating back my exercise cals and my weight didn't budge, some days my net cals were like 800.
  • Prefessa
    Prefessa Posts: 90
    The amount you burn while not exercising is relatively insignificant. Sure, if you want to be SO darn nitpicky, don't eat back all your exercise calories. But if you are working out a lot and eating little, you will hit a brick wall very quickly.

    True for high intensity, short duration activity...very significant for "steady state" long duration activities.

    For an example...I punched up 6 hrs of Food Prep/Cooking....1036 cals! Base Calories for 6 hrs is 540 cals...thats and error of over 50%!

    Now punch up 40 minutes of "race pace" cycyling....thats 718 cals, base calories=60 cals....less than 10%

    Again it depends....but from the sweat I break doing steady state things like mowing my lawn or raking leaves....Its definitely exercise!!
  • llkilgore
    llkilgore Posts: 1,169 Member

    True for high intensity, short duration activity...very significant for "steady state" long duration activities.

    I ran into that problem early on when I was walking every day for cardio. The more walking time I logged, the less weight I lost that week. It finally dawned on me...
This discussion has been closed.

Categories