In place of a road map!
Replies
-
Not to add too much confusion to it, but wouldn't it be more accurate (and perhaps easier for people to log on MFP) to use the "sedentary" number and then log exercise using a heart rate monitor, and then eat those calories? I mean, I can say I exercise 3-5 days/week, which I do, but if I only exercise for 30 minutes versus 1 hour, obviously I'm burning fewer calories.
Again, not to make it too complicated, but just wondering if you think that might be easier for some/more accurate for calorie tracking?
Because MFP has me on 1,200 cals a day -- which was fine for me in the start, because I have a lot of weight to lose, but now my weight loss has stalled. I've just worked out my BMR and it's a LOT higher than MFP has set me to eat.0 -
bump0
-
Not to add too much confusion to it, but wouldn't it be more accurate (and perhaps easier for people to log on MFP) to use the "sedentary" number and then log exercise using a heart rate monitor, and then eat those calories? I mean, I can say I exercise 3-5 days/week, which I do, but if I only exercise for 30 minutes versus 1 hour, obviously I'm burning fewer calories.
Again, not to make it too complicated, but just wondering if you think that might be easier for some/more accurate for calorie tracking?
Because MFP has me on 1,200 cals a day -- which was fine for me in the start, because I have a lot of weight to lose, but now my weight loss has stalled. I've just worked out my BMR and it's a LOT higher than MFP has set me to eat.
I'm a little confused by your response. All I was saying was go to the link in the original post, find your BMR, and instead of going by the chart for how much you exercise, just use the number they give for sedentary, and then log your exercise as extra because on MFP if you put in the number next to "moderate exercise," and then log your exercise, it's adding more calories than you need.
Again, not quite sure what the connection is between my post and your response, maybe just a misunderstanding/miscommunication?0 -
bump0
-
Bump0
-
Not to add too much confusion to it, but wouldn't it be more accurate (and perhaps easier for people to log on MFP) to use the "sedentary" number and then log exercise using a heart rate monitor, and then eat those calories? I mean, I can say I exercise 3-5 days/week, which I do, but if I only exercise for 30 minutes versus 1 hour, obviously I'm burning fewer calories.
Again, not to make it too complicated, but just wondering if you think that might be easier for some/more accurate for calorie tracking?
Because MFP has me on 1,200 cals a day -- which was fine for me in the start, because I have a lot of weight to lose, but now my weight loss has stalled. I've just worked out my BMR and it's a LOT higher than MFP has set me to eat.
I'm a little confused by your response. All I was saying was go to the link in the original post, find your BMR, and instead of going by the chart for how much you exercise, just use the number they give for sedentary, and then log your exercise as extra because on MFP if you put in the number next to "moderate exercise," and then log your exercise, it's adding more calories than you need.
Again, not quite sure what the connection is between my post and your response, maybe just a misunderstanding/miscommunication?
This is what I've always done. I know I'm by no means sedentary but I wanted to make sure I wasn't "double counting" the calories I eat back. I'm not sure if its correct or not. If someone has insight?
I guess I still NET the sedentary number (1400-1450)... but on workout days I can easily be eating 2050 cals or so...?0 -
Not to add too much confusion to it, but wouldn't it be more accurate (and perhaps easier for people to log on MFP) to use the "sedentary" number and then log exercise using a heart rate monitor, and then eat those calories? I mean, I can say I exercise 3-5 days/week, which I do, but if I only exercise for 30 minutes versus 1 hour, obviously I'm burning fewer calories.
Again, not to make it too complicated, but just wondering if you think that might be easier for some/more accurate for calorie tracking?
Because MFP has me on 1,200 cals a day -- which was fine for me in the start, because I have a lot of weight to lose, but now my weight loss has stalled. I've just worked out my BMR and it's a LOT higher than MFP has set me to eat.
I'm a little confused by your response. All I was saying was go to the link in the original post, find your BMR, and instead of going by the chart for how much you exercise, just use the number they give for sedentary, and then log your exercise as extra because on MFP if you put in the number next to "moderate exercise," and then log your exercise, it's adding more calories than you need.
Again, not quite sure what the connection is between my post and your response, maybe just a misunderstanding/miscommunication?
Sorry, I thought you meant to use MFP sedentary numbers and log exercise cals, rather than the BMR number from the link.
What you suggested is what I'm currently doing. I think that works for people with a HRM, but if they don't then it might be easier to go the other way.0 -
Not to add too much confusion to it, but wouldn't it be more accurate (and perhaps easier for people to log on MFP) to use the "sedentary" number and then log exercise using a heart rate monitor, and then eat those calories? I mean, I can say I exercise 3-5 days/week, which I do, but if I only exercise for 30 minutes versus 1 hour, obviously I'm burning fewer calories.
Again, not to make it too complicated, but just wondering if you think that might be easier for some/more accurate for calorie tracking?
Because MFP has me on 1,200 cals a day -- which was fine for me in the start, because I have a lot of weight to lose, but now my weight loss has stalled. I've just worked out my BMR and it's a LOT higher than MFP has set me to eat.
I'm a little confused by your response. All I was saying was go to the link in the original post, find your BMR, and instead of going by the chart for how much you exercise, just use the number they give for sedentary, and then log your exercise as extra because on MFP if you put in the number next to "moderate exercise," and then log your exercise, it's adding more calories than you need.
Again, not quite sure what the connection is between my post and your response, maybe just a misunderstanding/miscommunication?
This is what I've always done. I know I'm by no means sedentary but I wanted to make sure I wasn't "double counting" the calories I eat back. I'm not sure if its correct or not. If someone has insight?
I guess I still NET the sedentary number (1400-1450)... but on workout days I can easily be eating 2050 cals or so...?
zig zagging is a viable way of losing fat and maintaining lean mass.
Just be sure you are eating the number given by F2F for that day then on heavy lifting or heavy cardio days you hit carbs hard and go up to TDEE or above. Ad long as you are working out hard and you only have 3 high spike days youll still lose weight and the nutrients will partition to muscle rather than fat.
Its like being in a surplus 40% of the week and a deficit 60% of the week.
See my diary for tips on this.0 -
This is soooooo confusing. I can accept the confusion though because I am usually one to overthink things instead of just reading what the boxes say at the bottom. I also tend to get caught up in other posts and then my brain starts to hurt O_O
I have to keep looking at the top of the page of my Fat 2 Fit Radio Custom BMR Calculation to remind myself that the tool IS taking into account that I eventually want to weigh 135 lbs. I'm just going to throw it out there....it DOES NOT feel comfortable to know that with the calculations telling me that on the 4-5 days a week i'm moderately active (crossfit, jogging and weight training) I will need to eat 2065 calories, and 1598 on the days I have little or no exercise. I'm only saying this so I can get it out into the open so maybe my fear will dispel a little.
I'm eating 1300-1400 a day now. I train in the AM. By the time I get to work I AM TIRED. I don't want to do much and get a little irritated when asked to get up and participate in moving stuff, or carrying equipment (i'm in IT so it's usually computers, monitors, etc). I have also been one to stick to a super strict clean low calorie, high protein, lose a few pounds, then blow it all, carb it up and abandon the eating/workout plan for 3-4-5-6 months, come back and go through the entire cycle. AGAIN.
I'm going to try this way and trust the process. I'm tired of yo-yo'ing and stopping/starting over and over again. I really want a lifestyle change, something that I can stick with and not feel like i am just waiting for the next "blowout" lol
thanks for this post, and i'm so glad i found this site!
Melissa
Wrap your brain around this.
Most 6-10 year olds eat 1600-2200 cals a day and they grow.
As long as they are active they wont get fat.
This is the same with you!
you stay active and have your body partition the food correctly....
You too can eat 2k a day and live a healthy lifestyle.
Another thing to consider.
Look on each package of food in your grocery store.
See any that suggest 1200 cals?
Nope!
All numbers are based off a 2000-2500 calorie diet.
This isnt coincidence!
People can eat in the 2k and lose weight!0 -
bump0
-
Bump for later. And thank you!0
-
Bump because it hurt my brain.
I do know that when I was engaged I was certainly eating over 2000 "somewhat healthy" calories a day. 5 days on the treadmill a week for an hour. I lost 35 lbs in 4 months, and I started at 165.
I was losing weight so steadily and consistently. I was almost testing how much food I could eat and still lose weight.
I want to go back to that. 5 babies later and have quite a bit of weight to lose now!0 -
Bump0
-
bump0
-
bump for later!0
-
Thanks so much for this post I have printed it out for reading again, I have also checked out the fat2fitradio site, it is great and am learning plenty from it, Have my BMR and BMI etc, and plan to go in there to learn a bit more.0
-
Bump! Amazing! Thank you for this!0
-
bump0
-
Huge thanks to Dan and the others that are helping people in here. I
you all. :flowerforyou: 0 -
bump0
-
bump
thanks for the info0 -
BUMP0
-
Thanks for taking the time to post this Dan!!! Worth reading over and over until it all sinks in...:happy:0
-
bump for after work!0
-
Upping my calories AGAIN!! Ahhhh ... makes me so friggen nervous BUT obviously what I'm doing now isn't given me the results I want, so time to switch this ish up!!0
-
You are saying I can visit several websites, wear out the batteries in my calculator, and do it your way
OR
I can follow MFP's way.
I've lost 33 #, reached my goal in November 2011, and have maintained since then.
I'm sure you mean well, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If you don't like MFP's way, build your own site.
Thanks anyway.
Congratz on your weight loss!!
But...
Haters to the left!
'Haters to the left!' :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Dan Thanks!!!! You should get a commission for all your hard work here.
You ran my numbers for me a few weeks ago and recommended I eat 2000 calories a day for a while then start alternating 2000/2200. For anyone else reading, I'm a 51 year old female, 5'6", 164#, 29.5% body fat (result of losing 75# and muscle mass and maintained for 10 years on extreme low calorie diet), trying to lose additional 15#, desk job and I burn 4200-5000 calories a week in "sneakers on" exercise - cardio, weight lifting, and weight bearing 6x/week.
I'll admit I've only found the courage to gross 1900'ish per day for the past month, I haven't lost more than maybe 1/2# in a month and I'm seeing the same +/-3# daily fluctuations I saw on 1200 calories a day, but I HAVEN'T GAINED, my attitude is so much better, and I feel much stronger in my workouts.
Once I eeek up to 2000-2200 and sit there for a month or so, if I still don't see any losses in body fat should I go up or down?0 -
Bump0
-
Add me to the confused bunch.
Is my calculations right?
Current weight 370
Body fat = 39.5%
BMR = 2569 + 20% = 3,082.8
I exercise 3 - 4 times per week burning about 1 to 2k calories per day. What do I do?
Do I need to eat at least 3,000 calories per day? and what happens if I burn 1 to 2,000 calories per day?
Also do I set MFP calories goal to 3,082?
Thanks for any help.
I been doing the MFP since February but I haven't lost much still around 370 and I usually eat around 1500-1800 calories per day net.0 -
Add me to the confused bunch.
Is my calculations right?
Current weight 370
Body fat = 39.5%
BMR = 2569 + 20% = 3,082.8
I exercise 3 - 4 times per week burning about 1 to 2k calories per day. What do I do?
Do I need to eat at least 3,000 calories per day? and what happens if I burn 1 to 2,000 calories per day?
Also do I set MFP calories goal to 3,082?
Thanks for any help.
I been doing the MFP since February but I haven't lost much still around 370 and I usually eat around 1500-1800 calories per day net.
Lets test it against my calculator, its more efficient.
Post your:
Age
Height
Weight
Body Fat%
How often you work out
I'll post your stats and see if the numbers are close.
=D0 -
You are saying I can visit several websites, wear out the batteries in my calculator, and do it your way
OR
I can follow MFP's way.
I've lost 33 #, reached my goal in November 2011, and have maintained since then.
I'm sure you mean well, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If you don't like MFP's way, build your own site.
Thanks anyway.
Congratz on your weight loss!!
But...
Haters to the left!
'Haters to the left!' :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Dan Thanks!!!! You should get a commission for all your hard work here.
You ran my numbers for me a few weeks ago and recommended I eat 2000 calories a day for a while then start alternating 2000/2200. For anyone else reading, I'm a 51 year old female, 5'6", 164#, 29.5% body fat (result of losing 75# and muscle mass and maintained for 10 years on extreme low calorie diet), trying to lose additional 15#, desk job and I burn 4200-5000 calories a week in "sneakers on" exercise - cardio, weight lifting, and weight bearing 6x/week.
I'll admit I've only found the courage to gross 1900'ish per day for the past month, I haven't lost more than maybe 1/2# in a month and I'm seeing the same +/-3# daily fluctuations I saw on 1200 calories a day, but I HAVEN'T GAINED, my attitude is so much better, and I feel much stronger in my workouts.
Once I eeek up to 2000-2200 and sit there for a month or so, if I still don't see any losses in body fat should I go up or down?
Getting to a weight loss goal means you can move on to other things.
Calorie cycling for muscle gains while staying lean year round.
Upping cardio if need be.
Swimsuit shopping.0
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