Mr_Knight Member

That requires a body weight of around 275 pounds.

In MFP setting, both sedentary and "low active" translate to the sedentary setting. No, it doesn't. But that doesn't mean there is a blank check for fitness band abuse, either. Over-estimation of burn calories by people who are essentially sedentary is probably the single most often seen reason for failed weight loss.

Have never found a need for anything but a generic cheapie. Couldn't even tell you what the brand name is - cost me $9 or something at Target.

It can be done in 30 minutes. But you need to be extremely cardiovascularly fit at a normal weight - or very fit at a heavy weight - to get there. 240 pounds running a 30 minute 5km will do it....

No. Not possible. Not even theoretically. Being able to metabolize calories that fast is roughly equivalent to running a 2 minute mile. Whoever claimed that has no idea what they're talking about.

I'm sure some people do.

It may not be conclusive, but it certainly is suggestive. Especially as there is no study, with the same rigour, using more people over a longer period, and showing the contrary.

Jam on your toast is not toxic.

Careful. 10k steps of walking about is not "active". Anybody assuming that will likely end up with a significant over-estimate on calories burned.

Sounds reasonable. You'll be able to tell after a few weeks of logging if it's still an overestimate (elliptical is notorious for that!) Good luck!

Raises hand. Twice. Because that's how manly I am.

You're eating more than you think... Somebody post the flowchart.

How are you getting this number?

I'm tempted to ask how many SOs you have :blush: but will limit my comment to...the difference between 130 and 140 makes no difference if you're currently at 260. Just pick a number somewhere around there and go.

Nothing burns calories more reliably or quickly than steady-state cardio. But if you hate it - you aren't likely to stick to it anyway - so limit it to a couple of 3km runs a week and spend your time doing an exercise more enjoyable for you.

It's nutrient-free sweetened caffeine. Just go have some coffee.

Apologies. I meant it in a colloquial sense - will be more aware in the future.

It starts and ends with food. Are you comfortable opening up your diary?

Nope. I know tons of extremely fit professional athletes - they are knowledgeable, have tons of professional advice, and are incredibly meticulous in their diet and fitness regimes. To a level most here would consider beyond OCD.

Very unlikely. If she were eating 1200 calories at 150 pounds, she would be losing weight, guaranteed.

There is zero chance you can gain weight on 1200 calories, at your current size and activity level. If you are gaining weight, you'll have to look at your calorie counting. If you're ok opening your diary, there's lots of experience here that can help.

What works well for me is to work from a base sedentary level. "Steps" are accounted for separately, as is intentional vigorous exercise. I always calculate net calorie burns, so as to not double-up. And I'm extremely careful about burn estimates for non-steady state exercise. Over the long term, this tracks extremely well…

Those tests, under those conditions, are notoriously inaccurate. Track your food and exercise for a few weeks - it'll tell you what you need to know.

At 120 pounds, your runs are burning ~200 calories. So on those days, your 1200 calories is already only 1000 calories. With so little left to lose, you don't have a lot of reserves to draw on, either. It's going to take a little experimentation to find the right numbers for you, and the margins are so tight at these low…

As a general rule, restaurant salads truly are insane, in size and in calories. I totally avoid them.

There are four peer-reviewed links in your list - and not one of those links supports your position. Not even one. If you think they do, you need to read them more carefully.

HRMs are not suitable for HIIT burn estimates. HIIT is in fact pretty much the worst use-case for them.

A huge proportion of people on MFP are not using accurate burn estimates. Burning 500 calories at that weight is roughly equivalent to running 5 miles. Hope that provides some perspective.

Here's the bottom line. And yes, I know you won't accept this. As long as you continue to believe what you wrote above, you will *never* solve your issues. Literally never. I do wish you the best of luck - but it won't be enough.

Assuming a typical lightly active work life, you'd need to burn about 1400 calories a day in intentional exercise. At your desired size, basically, you'd need to do the equivalent of running a half marathon...every day.