ninjachicken4000 Member

Every TDEE calculator I have used as given a TDEE of between 1570 and 1620 calories with "little to no exercise" selected. And it is accurate because when I eat at 1600 I don't gain any weight at all. And if I eat 500 below I lose lb per week on average. So clearly that is my TDEE. And yes with sedentary selected it says…

I'm 4'10 It does let you get projections for 5 weeks if you dip below 1200, it just won't let you get them if you are below 1000. If I change my activity level to active (even though I'm not remotely active) and input my calories at 1000 and complete my entry it says I'll be 5lbs lighter in 5 weeks, which is on par with my…

I'm 4'10 Yes they're all entered correctly, I've double and triple checked. No not every day, because when I was 113lbs it would say I'd be 112.6 in 5 weeks. Yeah I'm always 1000-1100. Nope no exercise. Yeah I might email them because I've changed and re-entered all my stats numerous times and it is still doing it.

Current weight: 112.4lbs Goal weight 90lbs (I'm extremely short, so this isn't tiny) rate of loss selected =1lbs per week Net calorie goal provided = 1200 Total calories consumed =1100 No exercise calorie adjustment as I don't work out. Net calorie result = 1100 Yeah sorry I know that is how MFP says it, but yeah it is…

Exactly, so it makes 0 sense. And that is without even taking into account that MFPs maintenance for me is 1450 instead of my actual maintenance of 1600. My laptop is ancient and doesn't take screenshots sorry.

They ARE inaccurate because obviously it projecting me to only lose 0.4 lbs per 5 weeks despite being at a 500 cal a day deficit (and yeah I'm consistent every day) is clearly inaccurate. It makes no sense. I have been ignoring it, but I was wondering why it was doing this. God forbid I ask a question. I don't understand…

Why does breaking the fast matter? genuinely curious? The reason intermittent fasting works isn't because you go a few hours without eating and therefore something magical metabolically happens. It works because you are eating fewer calories through the day.

Use this to get a better idea: http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/tdee-calculator.html It's always been accurate for me.

Nope it's completely off for me, like I've said numerous times on this thread. It is projecting my weight loss as 0.4lbs per 5 weeks, when actually m weight loss is more around 1lb per week (as eat 500 below my TDEE a day which equates to around 1lb per week). It is COMPLETELY off. Not even close. And it is doing this…

That is not what I am talking about. I already input my own calorie goal using my TDEE calculated on another site. That is not the problem. The problem is MFP saying if I eat at my calorie goal I would only be losing 0.4lbs per 5 weeks, which is not the case. At my calorie goal and TDEE I'm losing 1lb per week as I eat 500…

I'd just say digital scales are easier to read.

Nothing, because they don't exist. There is no such thing.

Unless you go ridiculously overboard with the amount you eat and drink you're not going to again 10lbs in a week or two. You'd have to massively overeat/ drink in terms of calories. 3500 extra than your maintenance TDEE calories =1 lb of fat. So 10lbs = 35,000 extra calories. If you're there for a week that's an extra 5000…

Ignore anyone who tells you certain foods or macro nutrients cause weight gain. Only excess calories cause weight gain.

Hi. Just to put the amount of weight you want to lose in that time frame into perspective for you. 1lb of fat = 3500 calories To lose 1lb of fat a week (approximately as some weight you lose will always be muscle mass as well, however if you exercise and eat a high protein diet while not losing weight too fast you can…

Haha, I have been doing. It's just a little irritating.

Hi, you don't seem to understand what the problem is. I know I can set my own calorie limits for the day. The problem is the daily projections it is giving me. My TDEE is 1600, if I input 1100 calories into my log it isn't projecting my weight loss correctly (as it is apparently using NEAT and not TDEE) so instead of it…

It gives me 1450, which is 150 lower than my actual TDEE. But is higher than what makes sense for the calculation projections (under daily log) when I'm eating 1000-1100 calories a day (0.4lbs in 5 weeks) makes no sense.

That's the thing though. I do no exercise whatsoever yet my TDEE is still 1600 whereas my NEAT is apparently 1250 ish. And I know my TDEE is right because I lose weight at a steady 1lb a week by eating 500 less than it.

Yeah the software may be working as planned, but it is wrong for me because I don't use NEAT, never have. So it is not projecting my weight loss accurately, BECAUSE it is using NEAT and nothing else. Not sure how I can make that clearer? Not saying NEAT is wrong, saying I don't use it and so it is wrong for me as I'm not…

Like I said, even if I'm inputting 1200 calories it is still projecting the wrong weight loss goals because it is using NEAT (so it thinks I'm burning way below what I am). NEAT is system I have never used that just seems like a complete hassle to me. TDEE is much better as it's all inclusive and no fuss. I've just changed…

I actually eat 1100 (and yes this is totally fine for me and my doctor has OK'd it, I am a very small in height woman so don't need as much) to lose 1lb per week as TDEE is 1600. But even at 1200 it doesn't show me losing weight at the rate it should because of the whole using NEAT system (which I don't understand at all…

Thanks, it seems it not letting me choose 1lb per week because it uses NEAT and I'm not inputting exercise as I am sedentary. So basically NEAT is not a good system for me. But I don't mind so much, I was just wondering why this was happening. I'll still be using the food log as it's great.

Thanks, I had not seen that. I'd always assumed MFP used TDEE.

I'd never heard of NEAT before, if that basically basal metabolic rate? As in coma levels of calories? Because even at doing little to no exercise a day (except for basic daily activities such as showering, making food, walking 2 minutes to the bus stop etc) My calorific expenditure is still higher than what MFP is…