Fat2Fit radio calculations

I've been reading about this a lot on the forums, but would you say eating more calories per Fat2Fit would apply to someone who is morbidly obese as opposed to someone who only needed to lose 20lbs or was maintaining? Seems like the same rules wouldn't apply to everyone, but I really don't know. I'm curious about opinions.

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

How many calories are you burning with this workout?

Between 175-250 calories for a 30ish minute workout. However, I don't eat my exercise calories back because with fat2fit you aren't supposed to eat back exercise calories. So I net between 1600-1700 usually.

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

I'm skeptical about programs that set caloric intake based on the number of times a week you exercise and the guage for activity level. I've come across a few of these and I question their accuracy. Based on the number of workouts per week and not taking into account duration or exertion, this could be way off for a lot of people. One person could do 30 minutes a day 6x a week and another could do 120 minutes a day 6x a week and they could both consider themselves very active and they would get the same calculations. Am I misunderstanding something here?

I took the time once to plug one of these "activity level/#of workouts a week" type calculators into a spreadsheet to get the margin for each step. Based on the multiplier, I calculated the number of calories required above BMR at sedentary and each step above that. I also calculated the number of calories required to meet each activity level > than sedentary (which I use as my baseline). What I found is that at the 1.375 multiplier (lightly active) I have to burn 450 calories 5 times a week to meet the lowest level. Extremely active requires 1,200 calories 6 times a week above sedentary. Anyway, putting it into numbers helped me get a more accurate idea of where I'm at. I would consider myself at the very least Moderately active, if not Very active, but apparently I'm only Lightly active. Knowing this has prevented me from going too high and eating too much. Something to think about.

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

I'm skeptical about programs that set caloric intake based on the number of times a week you exercise and the guage for activity level. I've come across a few of these and I question their accuracy. Based on the number of workouts per week and not taking into account duration or exertion, this could be way off for a lot of people. One person could do 30 minutes a day 6x a week and another could do 120 minutes a day 6x a week and they could both consider themselves very active and they would get the same calculations. Am I misunderstanding something here?

I took the time once to plug one of these "activity level/#of workouts a week" type calculators into a spreadsheet to get the margin for each step. Based on the multiplier, I calculated the number of calories required above BMR at sedentary and each step above that. I also calculated the number of calories required to meet each activity level > than sedentary (which I use as my baseline). What I found is that at the 1.375 multiplier (lightly active) I have to burn 450 calories 5 times a week to meet the lowest level. Extremely active requires 1,200 calories 6 times a week above sedentary. Anyway, putting it into numbers helped me get a more accurate idea of where I'm at. I would consider myself at the very least Moderately active, if not Very active, but apparently I'm only Lightly active. Knowing this has prevented me from going too high and eating too much. Something to think about.

How many calories are you burning with this workout?

Between 175-250 calories for a 30ish minute workout. However, I don't eat my exercise calories back because with fat2fit you aren't supposed to eat back exercise calories. So I net between 1600-1700 usually.

What is your BMR? As long as your eating (netting) AT LEAST that number, you should be fine.

According to Fat2fit and the Harris Benedict formula it is 1318. However, I notice when I eat that few calories (anything under 1700) I get soooo irritable and cranky. I also have no energy. I think it is my bodys way of telling me I need more food. I don't think anything under 1700 is enough for me. Heck, I think 1800 is still pushing it:noway: .

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

I'm skeptical about programs that set caloric intake based on the number of times a week you exercise and the guage for activity level. I've come across a few of these and I question their accuracy. Based on the number of workouts per week and not taking into account duration or exertion, this could be way off for a lot of people. One person could do 30 minutes a day 6x a week and another could do 120 minutes a day 6x a week and they could both consider themselves very active and they would get the same calculations. Am I misunderstanding something here?

I took the time once to plug one of these "activity level/#of workouts a week" type calculators into a spreadsheet to get the margin for each step. Based on the multiplier, I calculated the number of calories required above BMR at sedentary and each step above that. I also calculated the number of calories required to meet each activity level > than sedentary (which I use as my baseline). What I found is that at the 1.375 multiplier (lightly active) I have to burn 450 calories 5 times a week to meet the lowest level. Extremely active requires 1,200 calories 6 times a week above sedentary. Anyway, putting it into numbers helped me get a more accurate idea of where I'm at. I would consider myself at the very least Moderately active, if not Very active, but apparently I'm only Lightly active. Knowing this has prevented me from going too high and eating too much. Something to think about.

Fat2Fit gives you 5 different levels of calories to eat. You can still do the Sedentary calories given and add in your workout calories after.

So according to Fat2fit I am Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) and I should be eating 2237 at my goal weight (114 lbs) for maintenance.

I'm skeptical about programs that set caloric intake based on the number of times a week you exercise and the guage for activity level. I've come across a few of these and I question their accuracy. Based on the number of workouts per week and not taking into account duration or exertion, this could be way off for a lot of people. One person could do 30 minutes a day 6x a week and another could do 120 minutes a day 6x a week and they could both consider themselves very active and they would get the same calculations. Am I misunderstanding something here?

I took the time once to plug one of these "activity level/#of workouts a week" type calculators into a spreadsheet to get the margin for each step. Based on the multiplier, I calculated the number of calories required above BMR at sedentary and each step above that. I also calculated the number of calories required to meet each activity level > than sedentary (which I use as my baseline). What I found is that at the 1.375 multiplier (lightly active) I have to burn 450 calories 5 times a week to meet the lowest level. Extremely active requires 1,200 calories 6 times a week above sedentary. Anyway, putting it into numbers helped me get a more accurate idea of where I'm at. I would consider myself at the very least Moderately active, if not Very active, but apparently I'm only Lightly active. Knowing this has prevented me from going too high and eating too much. Something to think about.

You're right it is not universal, and people often overestimate their exercise while underestimating their food intake. Thiis is why you could instead choose to eat at BMR plus exercise calories for a loss.

Once you have a consistent activity level you can judge from there. You can spot check by comparing your TDEE number with (BMR + exercise calories) over a week's time and see how it compares. In general, however, MFP estimates are low, and fit2fat calcs are very accurate for people who truly choose their levels honestly.

I'm not sure your multiplier is completely accurate; 1200 6 times a week seems unlikely for most non-professional athletes. Also, you cannot go flat with a burn assumption, bc the lower someone's body fat, the higher their BMR and resting burn will be, compared with another person of identical body weight but higher body fat%. Two people can weigh the same, but one of them has, say 30% body fat, while the other has 21% -- that person with the lower body fat can eat more without gaining.

This is why you can find a 125# girl with low BF% who lifts heavy and can eat 2500 - 3000 cals just to maintain, while another 125# girl who does primarily cardio and has average BF% eats 1600 to maintain. Or take another 125# girl who doesn't work out at all, and regularly starves herself on 1200 cals a day -- if she chronically underfeeds trying to lose, each time she has an extra donut she's going to gain, even if she only ate 1400 that day, AND every bit she gains will be pure fat, increasing her BF% each time.

For me, switching to 3 hours weight training (appx 750 burn) + 3 hours cardio (appx 1500 burn) is proving much more strenuous than the 13.5 hours cardio alone that I used to do (appx 6750 burn). The fact that my body fat percentage is decreasing contributes to my ability AND NEED to eat more (high protein) calories in order to keep training and maintain.

My question is about how long will it take me to get to my goal if I eat my Fat2fit? I want to lose 13 more lbs. Fat2fit says my bmr is 1454 and sedentary is 1676.