Forum menu
So is that where mfp falls down a bit? It only really knows the calorific and fat content of branded food?.
Not quite, data for most ingredients/food is available and used in MFP - eg 100g of lean steak has n calories and x fat, it's never going to be bang though but just as accurate as any other data out there can be when using variable raw ingredients
So is that where mfp falls down a bit? It only really knows the calorific and fat content of branded food?.
It has fields for calories, fat, protein, carbs, sugars, salt, fibre, fat breakdown, vitamin A and C plus calcium and Iron - BUT most foods will not have all of them filled in. Depends on the person that entered them. Pretty much everything has the basics though (calories + macros).
When I add new branded foods I put in everything that's on the standard UK nutritional label, but that doesn't give you Vitamins or fat breakdown.
just put my evening meal in.
homemade chille con carne, made with lean mince which is drained after cooking, 2 chille's, 2 onions, 1 can red beans, 1 can chickpeas, served on grated cauliflower.
i have 1000 calories left after entering it into mfp, however my fat intake is 18 over and my protein is 42 over.
i dont like mfp.
it is telling me that i will weigh 16stone 8lbs in 5 week if i keep eating like i am.
it is telling me that i will weigh 16stone 8lbs in 5 week if i keep eating like i am.
Just forget about all that stuff and use it as a rather good food diary
jota......i have cos it is obviously talking boolax 😆
most of this thread is B/S.
😆
Night, night.
😉
Solo - Member
most of this thread is B/S.
Bacon and Sausages, yes that's the problem.
FWIW I'm with Ton on this one.
If i ate all the carbs that others are suggesting, ie wholemeal bread, bagel etc I'd be 2 stone heavier, tired and have no energy.
Feel much more alert and energised on higher protein diet. Plus my cholesterol and risk of diabetes have dropped significantly since i cut out the carbs.
Guess we are all different.
I found MFP useful to spot high calorific snacks, but i found the weight loss estimates to be very inaccurate and highly variable from day to day.
Carbs...... Did you read the thread ?
Ton - how can you possibly have 1000 kcal left after entering that?
coz he iz giant init?
george, my target is 1900, 80 mins cycling gives me a extra 1088
so 2988 to use.
the breakfast i had was 440
the breakfast for lunch was 713
my dinner was 774
total 1927 calories.
I don't worry about the daily fat recommendations etc TBH, but I find MFP really useful. Lost quite a bit of weight without starving myself or eating excessively healthily. Just mostly homemade meals with lots of veg.
I also reckon the exercise calories it gives are massively optimistic.
The most important thing for long-term weight loss is finding a healthy diet you can live with for the rest of your life. The best thing you can do for this - and for your all-round health - is to get used to eating loads of vegetables. I mean *loads*. And cutting down on fat and sugar.
Ton - I think I can see the problem there. 80 minutes cycling at what I assume would be a fairly easy to moderate pace would come nowhere near 1088kcal - maybe 500-700 kcal at the very most.
Here's a suggestion, do with it as you please. How about forgetting about all the mumbo jumbo fancy diet crap that it looks like you're starting to struggle with a wee bit and just go for a balanced diet that contains all the nutrients and fuel sources that your body needs. Set yourself a calorie goal that doesnt have added extra bonus calories for exercise (to eliminate the huge potential for error through energy use miscalculation) which will let you lose or maintain your weight - I dunno - say 1800kcal/day.
Glumpton, you dont know that. Its hard to tell at the best of times becaue the energy you use is dependant on speed, aero, terrain etc.
I think Ton still weight a fair bit (forgive if i am wrong) So he will use a shed load of energy on a hilly course.
I wouldnt be surprised if he uses close to 1000 cal.
stevewhyte - I wouldnt use that by absolutely burying myself for 80 minutes.
Mfp is about 300 cals OVER estimating according to my Garmin with HRM.
I do pretty much what Glupton says ie yesterday I was an estimated 1112 calories under my goal due to a ride. I ate over my prescribed calories (2300) at 2450, but was full and not hungry.
Don't feel the need to stuff yourself just becuase of what MFP says - listen to your body.
I also reckon the exercise calories it gives are massively optimistic.
Yeah I agree - I tend to take around a third off what either MFP or Endomondo think I have burnt. (Endo gives me 800kcals for my 11 mile fairly flat commute!)
They are working from a very broad estimate and only have time, distance and your weight to work it out from. Heart rate helps get a better estimate - either via heart rate monitor or just taking your pulse at some "average" point during the ride and using that (various online calculators available).
I've started trying to use MFP again since starting keto to make sure I'm eating enough fat but I just find it tedious and makes me feel like I'm obsessing about it again. Guess it works for some people but now I know the rough amount of what I can/can't eat I don't think I'm gonna bother with it. Lost 11 stone without it and just having the rough estimates of calories in my head, so I think I can go without!
I only use MFP as a food diary, the other stuff is just too inconsistent to bother about, it's almost impossible to get an accurate calories burned figure on any of the devices/apps etc. Well, one of them may be accurate but you've no way of knowing which.
Yesterday's run data from my Garmin
[img] 
[/img]
.
The same run entered into MFP
[img] 
[/img]
the other day, i hate poached eggs, veg soup and tinned mackeral"
I imagine the increase in calories on that day was because you hated those things so much that you ate pie instead.
I'm reading through this thread with interest as since the start of jan i've been using MFP to lose weight. I have been quite strict on the calorie intake and only been over a handful of times. I generally run 4 times a week and cycle 1-2 times. I have lost 6 pounds which i was quite gutted about as i wanted to lose a stone. but the biggest thing for me is that i have lost alot of fat and some of my clothes are too big now so it goes to show you can turn fat into muscle but not lose too much weight. I know feel quicker on the runs, better up hill on the bike and feel i look better after shedding the fat. Losing weight and keeping in shape is a lifestyle choice which is a combination of eating well and exercising frequently. The only problem is that if you exercise alot you need fuel so this is where the healhty eating comes in.
The only problem is that if you exercise alot you need fuel so this is where the healhty eating comes in.
He summed it up better than we did.
The only problem is that if you exercise alot you need fuel so this is where the healhty eating comes in.
Fat is a pretty good fuel - so that's where the calorie deficit comes in.
But glupton - fat only comes after carbs. You probably already know (but for the benefit of the audience) carbs get burned first in endurance cycling, then fat whilst trying to avoid muscle metabolism.
You need to carry enough carbs, then some fat reserves, but not so much fat it weights you dowm. And "good" fat too, not chip fat.
to burn fat, eat fat,
i am gonna get a t shirt printed with that on it.
back on the boring good stuff today.
1 slice of flax bread, 2 poached eggs
veg soup for lunch
chicken salad for tea
not much more than 1400 cals today.
IMO opinion ton, and I'm not a qualified professional of any sort, 1400 cals is too little and not healthy for a grown man.
But then, who am I to say.
You say that as if there is no way for the body to turn protein into carbohydrate.
How is 1400kcal not a healthy amount to eat? If there was no other source of fuel available to the body other than food intake on a given day then I'd probably agree with you. BUT and it's a VERY BIG BUT, there is another source of fuel and that's the fat reserves that are stored all over the body. The exact fat reserves that you're trying to use up.
Say you had a whole load of innertubes that you were trying to use up, you wouldn't keep buying replacement innertubes every time you got a puncture would you?
Say you had a whole load of innertubes that you were trying to use up, you wouldn't keep buying replacement innertubes every time you got a puncture would you?
You wouldn't buy half a patch either.
But I don't know the answer - as I mentioned I'm not an expert. But for an average requirement of 2500 as well known and none of ton's circumstances taken into account, losing 1100 calories sounds a lot of a deficit thats all.
I'm happy to be corrected, it just sounds a lot to leave to remain healthy, and have energy to ride.
You wouldn't buy half a patch either.
Why buy patches when you have a cupboard full of innertubes?
As long as the diet is providing all the necessary vitamins, minerals and nutrients that the body needs - why eat anything over and above that?
The only reason that I can see for eating over and above the minimum that the body needs is simply because you like eating. A bit like buying bike parts when you have perfectly working bikes - look at the shiney shiney...
[b]The only reason that I can see for eating over and above the minimum[/b] that the body needs is simply because you like eating. A bit like buying bike parts when you have perfectly working bikes - look at the shiney shiney...
The "generic" requirment is 2500 though Glupton. But I appreciate your comment re Ton's potential "reserves..."
I'm moving on now.... 🙂
That generic requirement is to enable someone of generic height, generic build, generic BMR and generic activity level to maintain their current weight. Want to lose weight - eat less.
How is 1400kcal not a healthy amount to eat?
Not a nurtionalologist but MFP recommend against eating [i]too[/i] low and will actually warn you if you regularly log less than a certain amount.
The theory goes that when you get below a certain level your body assumes that food is getting scarce and reacts by slowing your metabolism and increasing fat storage.
Which leads to plateauing and means that when you return to "normal" calorie intake your weight will yoyo.
That's the theory anyway.
It is (misleadingly) referred to as "starvation mode" and it is HOTLY debated on the MFP forums.
I'm not qualified to comment. All I know is that sticking to the MFP recommendation (which is ~500kcal below TDEE) has worked well for me and hasn't felt that difficult, so I'll keep doing it.
ton IMO the crux of the problem is that you see eating good stuff as boring. Really doesn't have to be.
"Starvation" mode will never catch up with a calorie deficit though. If that were to happen nobody would ever die of starvation.
"Starvation" mode will never catch up with a calorie deficit though.
Course not - otherwise we could survive on zero calories and various laws of physics would be violated. 🙂
However the [i]theory[/i] is that it can slow/damage your metabolism and actually make it harder to lose weight/fat and keep it off.
Hence why the on/off fasting technique seems to work better - reduced calories but your body doesn't try to compensate.
However the theory is that it can slow/damage your metabolism and actually make it harder to lose weight/fat and keep it off.
Yes, it can slow your metabolism a wee bit - why would that be a bad thing? Eating lots of pies and being overweight can damge more than your metabolism.
On/off fasting technique - we all do that every day - it's what happens when we go to sleep at night.
This whole dieting thing is not at all complex - apart from one massive bit. That massive bit is people's idea that it is complex and looking for ways of eating lots but still losing weight. Think about it - stuffing your face and losing weight - that's just daft.
To me this sounds like you don't really know what you're talking about. Oh and it's [i]catabolism[/i] by the way.But glupton - fat only comes after carbs. You probably already know (but for the benefit of the audience) carbs get burned first in endurance cycling, then fat whilst trying to avoid muscle metabolism.You need to carry enough carbs, then some fat reserves, but not so much fat it weights you dowm. And "good" fat too, not chip fat.
If you link MFP with Endomondo the calories from Endomondo transfer across for your exercise direct from the Garmin (other fitness trackers too). This avoids the dodgy MFP estimates for exercise as I discovered the first time I used it.
Ton are you normally very active for your job (builder or similar)? My sedentary job suggests that 1600 calories is all that is required for maintaining weight loss on MFP. 1900 appears a bit high before exercise even though you're a bit bigger than me (height not weight).
If our Base metabolic rate is only 1600 then you must be very lights and do bugger all during the day. Mine is 2500, and i have dropped down to 1500 a day, give me approximatly 2 lbs a week loss.
Are you under 10 stone?
Yes, it can slow your metabolism a wee bit - why would that be a bad thing?
Because a slower metabolism makes weightloss and keeping the weight off much harder than it has to be?
On/off fasting technique - we all do that every day - it's what happens when we go to sleep at night.
I meant "intermittent fasting" which got popular after the Horizon programme last year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19112549
This whole dieting thing is not at all complex
I'm happy to stick to "calories in < calories out" - that's simple and working well for me.
1900 appears a bit high before exercise even though you're a bit bigger than me (height not weight).
My MFP target is 1880kcals so not far off ton - and that fits with various other online BMR and TDEE estimates.
(I'm male, 37yo, 188cm, 87kg)
To me this sounds like you don't really know what you're talking about
Maybe you should have a chat with Matt Fitzgerald, he wrote it.
And if you want to be pedantic, read all of my posts and kindly acknowledge that I was quite open about my level of knowledge on the subject.
Jesus wept.
glupton1976 - Member
Jesus wept.
What?