[Snoofie]

So. I'm not exactly new to this rodeo (lost 65 pounds, regained about 25 of those because let's face it, I got slack, now I'm trying to re-lose that.) But believe it or not, the whole "burn more than you eat" thing never actually clicked with me.

Until tonight.

I bought myself a Fitbit One as an early Easter gift. I got it last Wednesday and I have worn it 24/7 ever since. Tonight, just out of curiosity, I sat down and averaged out my daily calorie burn over the past week. Turns out that I burn, on average, 2,691 calories daily. I work part-time at a desk job, but I'm pretty active outside of that. (It helps that I work at the local YMCA and get a fabulous employee rate on my membership, so I work out there at least three days a week.) Plus, I walk an average of 4.5 miles a day over and above my time at the gym.

So, what hit me tonight was that, if I'm burning (on average) 2,600 calories a day, then in theory, if I eat (on average) 2,100 calories a day, I should lose about a pound a week. Right?

I mean, I've heard the whole "burn more than you eat" thing a million times, but it never actually clicked until tonight. I guess that's because I've never before had access to something that gave me a number in terms of what I'm burning daily.

And yes...I know that the Fitbit is probably only giving me an estimate, but considering that the numbers have been pretty consistent day-to-day (there were a couple of lower days in there, but those were days when I either didn't go to the gym or didn't go for my walk.) I'm pretty comfortable in trusting the numbers.

But what I want to know is (and this is why I put a warning on there about the "stupid question"): is my thinking correct on this? Or am I still arse-up on the whole thing?

[luckymommy]

I'm not used to hearing anyone say they eat that many calories when they're in weight loss mode, but the numbers sound accurate, given how active you are. I think it's worth trying, but if you do this for a few weeks and the scale isn't responding (as well as your measurements/clothes) then perhaps it's not an ideal formula to follow.

[Snoofie]

Ah, so 2100 sounds a bit high to you too, eh? Now mind you, I *have* heard of people who have lost weight eating that much, but they are few and far between. What I think I'll try first (because to be honest, the idea of purposely setting out to eat 2,100 calories a day boggles my mind) is trying to hit 1,700 calories a day. If my average daily calorie burn remains around the 2,700 mark, then that would give me a 1,000 calorie deficit, which definitely should result in weight loss of some kind.

Of course, if I see that I'm losing weight too quickly (more than 2 pounds a week) or if I feel tired or weak, I'll obviously up my calories.

Thank you so much, though, for confirming that I am at least using the theory correctly! *L* I'm not a numbers-oriented person, so calorie counting has been overly cumbersome for me.

[Kscott]

Originally Posted by Snoofie

So. I'm not exactly new to this rodeo (lost 65 pounds, regained about 25 of those because let's face it, I got slack, now I'm trying to re-lose that.) But believe it or not, the whole "burn more than you eat" thing never actually clicked with me.

Until tonight.

I bought myself a Fitbit One as an early Easter gift. I got it last Wednesday and I have worn it 24/7 ever since. Tonight, just out of curiosity, I sat down and averaged out my daily calorie burn over the past week. Turns out that I burn, on average, 2,691 calories daily. I work part-time at a desk job, but I'm pretty active outside of that. (It helps that I work at the local YMCA and get a fabulous employee rate on my membership, so I work out there at least three days a week.) Plus, I walk an average of 4.5 miles a day over and above my time at the gym.

So, what hit me tonight was that, if I'm burning (on average) 2,600 calories a day, then in theory, if I eat (on average) 2,100 calories a day, I should lose about a pound a week. Right?

I mean, I've heard the whole "burn more than you eat" thing a million times, but it never actually clicked until tonight. I guess that's because I've never before had access to something that gave me a number in terms of what I'm burning daily.

And yes...I know that the Fitbit is probably only giving me an estimate, but considering that the numbers have been pretty consistent day-to-day (there were a couple of lower days in there, but those were days when I either didn't go to the gym or didn't go for my walk.) I'm pretty comfortable in trusting the numbers.

But what I want to know is (and this is why I put a warning on there about the "stupid question"): is my thinking correct on this? Or am I still arse-up on the whole thing?

It's hard to believe that anyone could burn that many calories without working out 24/7? For instance my Jazzercise class one sweaty hour, burns anywhere from 400 to 600 calories, and there is no way I could do 4 classes on one day without collapsing from sheer exhaustion. A fitness expert told me once that you would have to jog 3 miles just to burn off the calories from a donut.

So I think I would be more than skeptical about how many calories your Fit Bit is telling you that you are burning thru exercise.

[Defining]

I'm ~160lbs at the moment, and I burn 1,700kcal just by breathing/living. I don't think it's a super far stretch to say you're around 2,100 for maintenance/healthy loss. The 'rule of thumb' I often hear is approx. 10x your bodyweight in lbs = estimated kcal requirements. Add in a bit of rigorous activity, and you're hardly pushing it at 2,100.

I would caution you against 'estimating' what you hope to lose in a week though. Fat loss is often 'graded on a curve'; which is to say, it can sometimes be higher at the beginning and lower as time goes on. Your body adapts pretty darned quickly, which is WHY it's so important to aim at gradual body recomposition, not an overnight change.

I'm not a physician, dietitian or fitness pro. But I generally go by the golden rule of 'is it working for YOU?'. That is, are you losing ~1-2lbs/week with your current routine? If yes, then keep on it, you are rocking! If not, ask yourself how long you have been losing 'slower' (if it's just a few weeks, your body might just be adjusting before the next 'whoosh'). Be sure to keep track of your girth measurements (ie. tape measure) in addition to weight, because your body might be changing without necessarily losing 'weight' right away.

If you've been at the same fat % for longer than 1-2 months, then you can gently tweak your nutrition/exercise to try to increase the rate of fat loss. But again, I will caution you against following the numbers too closely. It's a good path to neurotic tracking if you try to predict how your body will react.

Short answer to your question - the 3,500kcal/lb fat number isn't 100% accurate. And weight alone isn't a good indicator of overall body recomposition. But yes, eating at an estimated 500kcal deficit daily should land you around the .5-1lb/week loss schedule.

Congrats on your progress thus far, and best of luck as you continue! *hug*

[Kscott]

Here is a great BMI calculator--along with how many calories you burn on a normal day with our without exercise. Very informative.

http://nutritiondata.self.com/tools/calories-burned

[Valkyrie1]

Congrats on getting your FitBit One.

I got one in March, and I love it.

Did you know that you can synch FitBit with MFP? Go on the FitBit website and allow MFP to synch. It's really cool.

[Pattience]

I'm inclined to give those numbers a chance. But its easy to double check.

All you have to do is figure out your maintenance calories using one of the online calculators. Make a few different calculations based on
a) your life when completely sedentary. See what it comes to.
b) your life when lightly active
c) your life when moderately active
d) you live when doing lots of exercise.

See which one is the closest to the 2100 and ask yourself if you think it matches. If all the recommendations are below 2100 then it could be inaccurate.

A lot of people think you need to eat super low i mean 1200 to lose weight. I think all that achieves is to slow down your metabolism and cause a weight rebound. So i believe the higher you can keep your calories and still lose weight is where you should be. Obviously you will need to reduce those calories as your weight goes down but i think that's better than continuously increasing the amount of exercise.


I can't see what your weight is at a glance so i can't tell whether it sounds right or wrong by looking. Too much mind work for me with your ticker and profile combo. :-)

[Snoofie]

Originally Posted by Kscott

It's hard to believe that anyone could burn that many calories without working out 24/7? For instance my Jazzercise class one sweaty hour, burns anywhere from 400 to 600 calories, and there is no way I could do 4 classes on one day without collapsing from sheer exhaustion. A fitness expert told me once that you would have to jog 3 miles just to burn off the calories from a donut.

So I think I would be more than skeptical about how many calories your Fit Bit is telling you that you are burning thru exercise.

Well, it's strange that it's off every single day, don't you think? Sure, that might seem a bit high, but we're talking about working out at high intensity for an hour at the gym and then walking five miles in about an hour and a half on top of that. Is it really so unbelievable that I might burn more than 2500 calories a day?

Well...maybe I'm wrong, then. But what exactly is the point of having a Fitbit if you can't trust the numbers?

[Snoofie]

Originally Posted by Valkyrie1

Congrats on getting your FitBit One.

I got one in March, and I love it.

Did you know that you can synch FitBit with MFP? Go on the FitBit website and allow MFP to synch. It's really cool.

I'm not a fan of MFP. I like a site where I can participate in the community/message board as well, and from my experience, a *lot* of the people on the MFP boards are absolute asses. Plus, I don't like the way MFP seems to think that *everyone* should be eating only 1,200 calories a day. If I tried to exist on that amount, I'd be too weak to exercise at all. (And yes, I know you can customize your goals, but I hate that "one-size-fits-all" mentality.)

You can sync the Fitbit with Sparkpeople too, and I find the community over there much better. Thanks for the rec, though.

[Snoofie]

Originally Posted by Pattience

I'm inclined to give those numbers a chance. But its easy to double check.

All you have to do is figure out your maintenance calories using one of the online calculators. Make a few different calculations based on
a) your life when completely sedentary. See what it comes to.
b) your life when lightly active
c) your life when moderately active
d) you live when doing lots of exercise.

See which one is the closest to the 2100 and ask yourself if you think it matches. If all the recommendations are below 2100 then it could be inaccurate.

I did the double check. According to the site I used, when exercising every day, my maintenance calories are 2209. When exercising twice a day (which I do three or four days a week; I often go to the gym first thing in the morning for an hour and a half and then walk briskly for an hour and a half in the afternoon on top of that) my maintenance calories are 2327.

Originally Posted by Pattience

A lot of people think you need to eat super low i mean 1200 to lose weight. I think all that achieves is to slow down your metabolism and cause a weight rebound. So i believe the higher you can keep your calories and still lose weight is where you should be. Obviously you will need to reduce those calories as your weight goes down but i think that's better than continuously increasing the amount of exercise.

I refuse -- absolutely *refuse* -- to dip to 1,200 a day. I tried it, and ended up binge eating so badly that it completely counteracted any weight loss effort I ever could have tried. So there is no way I'm going that low ever again. I would much rather exercise as much as I find enjoyable and eat a bit more. Obviously I know that reducing calories will be something I'll need to do as the weight goes down, but at this point with all the exercise I'm doing, there is simply no way I would be able to make it on 1,200 calories a day.

Originally Posted by Pattience

I can't see what your weight is at a glance so i can't tell whether it sounds right or wrong by looking. Too much mind work for me with your ticker and profile combo. :-)

I'm five feet tall and weigh 165 pounds. I'm trying to get to 140 as a starting point and then ultimately trying to reach 125 as my ultimate goal weight. That's what the BMI charts say is on the high end of healthy for me. And that's the thing...I mean, according to just about every chart out there, I'm obese. So I'm not sure why it's so hard for some people to believe I'm able to burn more than usual during the day. I mean, hello. At my height and weight I burn more calories than someone nearer a normal weight.

[Valkyrie1]

I haven't tried Spark People, but if it has just as big a database as MFP, then I'm sure it's great. I don't do the social thing on MFP. I just like its database food.

[Snoofie]

Originally Posted by Valkyrie1

I haven't tried Spark People, but if it has just as big a database as MFP, then I'm sure it's great. I don't do the social thing on MFP. I just like its database food.

From what I can see, SparkPeople has a pretty huge database; I'd say, from my experience with MFP, that the two databases are definitely comparable.

I found MFP useful for tracking food, I have to say. I just made the mistake of venturing onto the message boards. WHOA. Baaaad idea. *L* Maybe if I used it just for tracking, I'd be okay.

[berryblondeboys]

Of course you could be burning that many calories a day. Why do people doubt that?

Just keep watch to see if their "estimated" losses you should be seeing actually add up. Like, if it says you should lose 2.8 pounds in a week and you only lose one - week after week, then you know you need to adjust your gadget sensitivities (if possible) or adjust what it "means" for you. Like, if it says, week after week you should lose 3 lbs and you see that week after week you lose 1 pounds, you know the ratio of your real loss compared to the estimated loss.

[Silverfire]

Originally Posted by Kscott

It's hard to believe that anyone could burn that many calories without working out 24/7? For instance my Jazzercise class one sweaty hour, burns anywhere from 400 to 600 calories, and there is no way I could do 4 classes on one day without collapsing from sheer exhaustion. A fitness expert told me once that you would have to jog 3 miles just to burn off the calories from a donut.

So I think I would be more than skeptical about how many calories your Fit Bit is telling you that you are burning thru exercise.

Fitbit is also calculating the calories you burn just by being alive as well as your added activity. That's why those numbers seem so high.