MyFitnessPal makes no sense

[RbSX]

Yeah, I used it, but when a website designed to help you lose weight contradicts what one person posted in a thread on anandtech, I want to make sure I know which is right. I'm new to the "scientific side" of losing weight so I'm making sure I'm learning it correctly.

Thanks for the heads up on the search button; I've never seen that before.

Jackass.

Idiot. Go read the weight loss thread. It covers all of this and is written by someone well educated in this stuff.

 

[QuantumPion]

MFP calculates your weight loss caloric level based on weight, age, and activity level. If you put in sedentary for activity level, it adds about 500 calories to the BMR for your age and weight. To lose 1 lb per week, it then subtracts about 500 calories from this amount, so they cancel out. MFP is accurate enough and works well as long as you don't cheat what you input.

Btw, you'd be better off ignoring most of the advice on weight loss here. They really do not know what they are talking about lol. They just hear some factoid spouted by a self-proclaimed fitness expert and repeat it as gospel truth, like a religion.

 

[QueBert]

I lost 70lbs in the past year, MFP's a great site, I bought a food scale and would weigh out everything to the gram. I had a few "experts" basically tell me that 1390 calories a day was nuts and don't listen to MFP that #'s far too low. But it worked perfectly for me. YMMV but I didn't need tons of info from a sticky somewhere, and outside of caloric intake I didn't watch what I ate at all. I know a few on here said "you have to eat healthier foods, not just less calories" But that definitely wasn't the case for me either *shrug*

 

[KentState]

I lost 70lbs in the past year, MFP's a great site, I bought a food scale and would weigh out everything to the gram. I had a few "experts" basically tell me that 1390 calories a day was nuts and don't listen to MFP that #'s far too low. But it worked perfectly for me. YMMV but I didn't need tons of info from a sticky somewhere, and outside of caloric intake I didn't watch what I ate at all. I know a few on here said "you have to eat healthier foods, not just less calories" But that definitely wasn't the case for me either *shrug*

Exactly what I did, exact I tried to go lower fat/carbs, but calories was my main focus. Heck, I spent the last two months at 1200 calories a day and since then have maintained for 4 months.

 

[z1ggy]

1200?! Net I hope. I just looked online and my BMR is around 1900. I think I have plateaued do to the same effect one gets while weight lifting. Do the same exercises for so long and you will stop getting bigger/stronger. I have been pretty much consitent in my diet for the last 6 months.. Trying to eat around 1600 cals a day and exercise so I can average burning 200-300 a day. Somebody suggested to me that I drastically change my diet for a week, much like you would your weight lifting schedule to shock your body. He suggested eating nothing but potatoes for 7 days, for every meal. The logic being the body will almost go into a carb overload, and then once you switch back to the normal healthy diet one was on, the body will "dump" all the carbs and more..much like your body might dump water if you sit in a steam room. I'm iffy about trying it because it sounds like if it doesn't work I am just going to gain like 10 pounds, but this guy used to be a pro fighter.. he's jacked out if his mind and he knows his shit. Not really sure if he is qualified as a nutritionist per say, but he's been in the game for a long time.

 

[AE-Ruffy]

so much bad information here.

Starvation mode in the form that RbSX is claiming is a myth. You're not going to burn through lean protein(muscle) unless your body fat is stupidly low IE <7% . You are not slowing your metabolism much at all(Think in terms of 10%) You're not going into hibernation. Your BMR will go down as you lose weight. True metabolism changes take months.

If you're eating under your BMR, and your on a diet that keeps you full/satiated. You will lose weight, be it water or fat. If you're eating properly(enough protein and fats) you will not lose much muscle mass. Especially if you work out. The body has no desire to go through gluconeogenesis to cannibalize your bicep when it has a readily available source of energy(fat).

Think of it like this. Once you start dropping weight the body does not need to work as hard as it did in the past to move that limb. If you're 300lbs then your muscles need to be able to move your body. If you drop down 50lbs you're not working those muscle groups the same way. You'll lose that bicep from not using it as much.

http://fitnessblackbook.com/main/starvation-mode-why-you-probably-never-need-to-worry-about-it/

Popular study and audio on starvation mode.

 

[destrekor]

so much bad information here.

Starvation mode in the form that RbSX is claiming is a myth. You're not going to burn through lean protein(muscle) unless your body fat is stupidly low IE <7% . You are not slowing your metabolism much at all(Think in terms of 10%) You're not going into hibernation. Your BMR will go down as you lose weight. True metabolism changes take months.

If you're eating under your BMR, and your on a diet that keeps you full/satiated. You will lose weight, be it water or fat. If you're eating properly(enough protein and fats) you will not lose much muscle mass. Especially if you work out. The body has no desire to go through gluconeogenesis to cannibalize your bicep when it has a readily available source of energy(fat).

Think of it like this. Once you start dropping weight the body does not need to work as hard as it did in the past to move that limb. If you're 300lbs then your muscles need to be able to move your body. If you drop down 50lbs you're not working those muscle groups the same way. You'll lose that bicep from not using it as much.

http://fitnessblackbook.com/main/starvation-mode-why-you-probably-never-need-to-worry-about-it/

Popular study and audio on starvation mode.

Precisely. If you have fat to burn, your body will eat that fat before it cannibalizes its own tissue. That is the sole reason the body saves fat when you are in glutton mode - just in case you find yourself in the middle of nowhere, and can't get enough to eat.


There's also probably a decent "bet" going on with that under-BMR calculation. It is assuming you will be doing more than sitting in a coma-like state all day. Standing, sitting, walking, thinking - every little activity you do requires calories on top of BMR. Think of it this way: BMR is as if every muscle in your body was flaccid, sitting idle, and your brain is almost turned off (like sleep). Flexing/tensing muscles to remain seated upright is burning calories.
Look for an activity caloric calculator to see some basic figures to calculate a rough estimate of your true caloric requirements to maintain your weight "living a sedentary lifestyle."
Now, compare that to a caloric intake budget slightly below BMR.
Sedentary lifestyle "activities" + BMR probably equals around 2000-2100.

As a rough guess, that means a total cut of about 300-400 calories a day, less than pure maintenance. So, if you were to achieve that, to reach what you need for energy purposes on a daily basis, the body will burn about 300-400 calories from the easiest source possible first. It WILL maintain a certain percentage of fat if you allow it to, for some is very much necessary for regular health, organ protection, etc etc etc.
But if you burn, say, 400 calories of stored fat on a daily basis, you will burn about 2800 calories on a weekly basis. I remember being taught that 3500 calories is a pound of fat.

If you live a little more active lifestyle, you will require more calories. Do a good calculator for all activity, and you'll probably reach a good 2500+ calories to strictly maintain. Cut 400-500 calories off of that, and you are no longer below BMR, but still at a deficit between input and output.

Try to cut 3500 calories out of your diet a week, and get a little more active (even walks around the neighborhood, doing some calisthenics, etc will help).


If you don't have much body fat, going below BMR WILL result in the loss of lean muscle mass. If you have ample body fat, combined with PLENTY of water intake (flushing your kidneys is key for abnormal dietary changes, be they low intake or high intake - you get metabolites and toxins that you want to push out), your body will not degrade what you need, rather it will first attack all that stored energy it put there for this very purpose (fat).
Starvation mode truly only happens once your body has burned through its stored energy deposits.

That's a general gist - extreme caloric intake cuts + a lot of glucose requirements (i.e. a lot of activity) probably will result in simultaneous loss of both fat deposits and lean muscle mass - but in early stages, plus with limited caloric cuts (especially with ample fat deposits), will keep any muscle cannibalization to a minimum, if it happens at all.