Calories In Calories out recommendation from FitBit

[AussieFB]

I'm looking for a discussion on peoples thoughts / experience with how useful this tool is. My concern is that my FitBit Blaze is giving me too much to eat. It's calculating that my calorie burn each day is between 3500-4000 calories. I typically eat between 500-1000 calories less than this (calculated using MyfittnessPal). I know ...... he's not including everything he eats! I'm meticulous with logging everything right down to butter on toast and oil in salad dressing. Even if I was missing something it wouldn't make up 500-1000 calories. Here are my specs:

Age 46

Weight 83kg

Body Fat somewhere around 15%

Height 181cm

2-3 Gym (Weights) sessions a week

Steps - 12,000 on average per day.

Why am I not losing weight? I eat clean whole foods with next to no white processed carbs. Anyone else faced this and resolved it?

[J3ff · Accepted solution]

I had a similar question that another forum member was really helpful with:

https://community.fitbit.com/t5/Manage-Weight/Using-calories-in-out-for-weight-loss/m-p/1876821#U187...

The Fitbit has been over-estimating calories burned, which turns out to be pretty common. Being off by 500 calories, when you're burning 4000, is totally possible. The TrendWeight site turned out to give a really helpful ground-truthing to what my *actual* calorie deficit has been averaging based on long-term weight data (it pulls the data directly from Fitbit's cloud). I've been comparing the data more, and sometimes Fitbit overestimates by up to 400 to 500 calories Thinking as a percentage, which seems like the right way to think about it, we're talking 10 to 15% over-estimation.  Everybody's metabolism runs a little differently, and can change. It's still a really useful tool, but I've found that I have to set it to a 1000 cal deficit and then stay in the yellow by about 300 calories to keep up 1.6 lbs / wk weight loss long term. So, that 1300 cal deficit is actually probably about an 800 cal deficit in reality. The estimates it gives you are about the same as me, burning 3500-4000 cal/day. You'll probably have to experiment with it to figure out what kind of measured deficit on the Fitbit app actually gives you results. 

How long have you been monitoring calories in and out? It may take some time to figure it out, and patience with experiments. E.g., if you try to run a 1300 cal deficit on the Fitbit app, that's still eating 2200 to 2700 cal/day based on your cal burn data, you could try that for a few weeks, see what happens weight-wise, and adjust from there.

I definitely notice that on my higher calories burned days, the fitbit is correct in confirming what my body is already feeling, that I'm more hungry, in that tired exhausted kind of hungry, and I'm really happy the app is there to say, "yeah, you should totally eat more today than you normally do!" I really wish, though, that there was some way to tweak the calories burned calibration to set it to a BMR that's more accurate to what I'm actually experiencing.

[AussieFB]

Thank you for your time and answer. It's very helpful to get confirmation from someone who has experienced the same. I think you are absolutely right, with mine I estimate the Fitbit is at least 500 calories over.....even up to 1000 I think is possible. Many say not to add back exercise calories and I think this approach is another way to handle this. I've been experimenting with calories for about 6 months (Initially with a UA Band, and recently with Fitbit). Initially I had then too low (MFP set to 1600) and although had great early results, after a month or two weight loss plateaued and I started to really suffer in the gym. Actually went backwards for a while until I realised I was just too low. Then increased to 1900 and saw some new lows. After that I had a holiday and came back with the FitBit. Started following it instead and was gaining weight. I've just adjusted now back to 2000 calories per day and will see how that goes. Switched the app to "custom" calorie goal so as to remove the "in" vs "out" component. As you mentioned it would be nice to be able to "calibrate" this feature for each person. My sweet spot is somewhere between 2000 and 2500 I believe now and will take a bit more time to feel it out.

[Dominique]

@AussieFB: using the Mifflin St Jeor equation (via this online calculator) your BMR would be 1729 and your TDEE at moderate activity level (3 on a scale of 1 to 5) would be 2680 and at high activity level (4 on said scale) 2982. Based on the info you provided (step count + weight sessions) I would say your activity level is in between these two, but closer to moderate. If your Blaze says you’re burning 3500-4000 in average, it would appear to overestimate your energy expenditure by a large amount.

[SunsetRunner]

Like with all sites/apps saying how much you should be eating, I'd take it with a pinch of salt, they are based on averages for the average person

many argue that men 'need' to eat 1500 minimum to maintain their weight, heck currently in another thread discussing it, eveyone is different thus the needs are different, yet some are so adament that the magical number is 1500 when it clearly is not

site says I need to eat around 2000cal and this is telling it that I sit and do nothing all day, which I do not, if I tell it that I also exercise etc then that goes up to 2600 a day to maintain my weight

If I were to eat that magical number of 1500, I'd gain weight, 2000 a day I'd gain weight quickly, 2600? i be back to being obese very quickly

to be honest, this is probably the reason why so many are overweight/obese, because they base their diets/calorie intake etc solely based on this, what about before computers, mobiles etc and these apps? People ate what their body told them, eat slowly and regularly, not too late, especially not just before going to bed, make sure you eat breakfast, listen to your body and exercise and only use mfp as a guideline

many are telling/argueing with me that my body needs to eat minimum 1500, sorry but this is my body not theirs, I know what it needs, if I were to eat 1500 I would gain weight, heck a certain person asked if I was in a freezer to get my bmr low

[Esya]

@SunsetRunner

I do get your point, however most people do have a (close to) normal metabolism. There will always be exeptions to a rule as we are humans. So advice given to eat around that ballpark (I prefer the calculator as it does take age, height and weight into account) is a good place to start when you have no indication that your metabolism is that different.

I get that it is frustrating for you as people here are giving advice you feel is incorrect as that is not how it works with your metabolism. But you are seeing a doctor and in that case you have confirmation and I agree you should listen to that doctor. Please be aware that your anecdotal evidence is however not the norm.

And just report posts that contain a personal attack on you.

[SunsetRunner]

The problem is that it is based on averages, even a person of the average height, may still need a different amount to someone of the same height

without checking the height, age etc you can not accurately give a number

heck even the race, country that person lives in can change that minimum

according to fitbit 1500, but according to mfp for me 2330....

for me to have a minimum of 1500 I would have to weigh around 135lbs... I wish, well not that light

that is what people need to take into account, 1500 is not the magical number and that you should not eat more or less, by all means start at 1500 and then adjust as needed

when I started, can't remember the weight, but at my heaviest, 236lbs, I used 1500, but now at 184 at least this morning, gained a little 😞 I am using 1200 and then depending on the exercise done eat as required, I suspect when I hit my goal weight of around 140-150, I would need to eat less or exercise more if I want to eat more

as for tomorrow, dreading it, family meal for mothers day!!!!

[Dominique]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

to be honest, this is probably the reason why so many are overweight/obese, because they base their diets/calorie intake etc solely based on this

---

So you’re basically saying that someone in the normal weight range is relying on MyFitnessPal for tracking their intake, but stupid MFP doesn’t realize how special they are (e.g. their metabolism is unusually low) and one day they wake up at BMI 32, which comes as a total surprise? Now, how realistic such a scenario would be? I think a more common scenario (for becoming overweight/obese) is relying on intuitive eating ("surely my body will tell me when I’ve eaten enough and it’s time to stop"), avoiding by all means to step on the scale, buying new clothes that are loose enough to accommodate future expansion in size and only realizing several years later (it’s often a slow and gradual process) something needs to be done. This is usually when MFP, Fitbit etc. come into the equation.

We may like to think we’re "special" and that general formulas (such as those used for BMR, BMI etc.) don’t apply to us, but the truth is they are valid for the vast majority. Yes, there are special medical conditions, genetic factors etc. that may cause some people to be outliers, but they would be a small minority.

[A_Lurker]

The funny thing is if you had talked to me even a decade ago I would have sworn I had a slow metabolism.  I was convinced that I had to do something extreme to lose weight.  Now I'm in my 50s, have been obese all of my life and have finally figured out that I have likely a normal metabolism.  I kept trying to lose weight by eating that magic 1200 calories they recommend for women.  I'd lose some weight, stall, then give up.  Now I eat at least double that, still lose weight, and have maintained that weight loss.

I'm not saying that some people don't have slow metabolisms, but this could be a result of chronic dieting and under eating as well.  From my past experience in dieting I would be eating less than 50% of what I burned and it would lead to fast weight loss to start with.  Then I'd simply stop losing.  I'd try cutting my calories, but that wouldn't work either.  A couple of weeks later I'd eat a little more and gain weight back like a freight train.  If people out there think their metabolism is tanked from years of yo yo dieting you can start to slowly increase your calories.  I'm talking about 50-100 calories a day, one week at a time.

My personal experience is that the HR enabled tracker is off (for me) by about 10%.  For a while, when I was counting calories I'd set the deficit to 1000 calories, but stop eating at about 2500 calories.  If I had a 4000+ calorie burn day I might eat 2750.  This gave me pretty consistent weight loss.

[SunsetRunner]

So you are saying that the minimum resting calorie intake requirement of a male that is 6'3" is the same as a male 5'4"? In that both are required to eat 1500 to maintain their weight

or that a mordibly obese male needs to eat 1500 calories as a male that is healthy to maintain their weight?

what about a body builder that is say 5'8" and a random healthy male that is 5'8"

lets take your pic, if we were to get another male that is the same height but unhealthy, who needs more calories to maintain their weight?

what you are saying is that pretty much every male in the world needs to eat 1500 min and nearly every female needs to eat 1200 min

as for mfp, according to mfp I should be eating around 2300 calories to maintain my weight, telling it I want to lose weight, it stops at 1500 and I have to override it, if I ate 1500 cal I would gain weight

when you enter your details into mfp, all you are doing is telling it whether you are a male or female, how active you are, what you want to do, gain, lose or maintain, what you eat, how old you are, your weight, mfp then tells you how much you need to eat

with those details how does it seperate one person from another?

that is because it is presuming every person with those particular details in the world require the same amount of calories, as in every male in the world that is 5'8", average build, average activity, that is 30 needs to eat the same amount of calories to maintain their weight

I'll just leave it here, we are going around in circles, if it works for you, great, but I know what works for me and that 1500 will just put me back to where I was before I started exercising and dieting

[AussieFB]

This all sounds pretty much what I'm seeing also. Now that I've switched the calories in vs calories out feature off, things have improved. My average daily calorie burn (from FITBIT) is about 3500. My actual calorie intake is about 2100 per day (from MFP). My weight has now stopped increasing and seems to be stable within a range of about 1.5kg. I'm very conciensoius with my diet though and make sure I'm hitting protein macros as well as only eating good whole foods. All my carbs are low GI, no processed foods like bread, pastry rice etc. I suspect I'll need to go sub 2000 calories per day to start lossing further fat while staying above 3500 calories burnt per day.

[elderwanda]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

Like with all sites/apps saying how much you should be eating, I'd take it with a pinch of salt, they are based on averages for the average person

many argue that men 'need' to eat 1500 minimum to maintain their weight, heck currently in another thread discussing it, eveyone is different thus the needs are different, yet some are so adament that the magical number is 1500 when it clearly is not

site says I need to eat around 2000cal and this is telling it that I sit and do nothing all day, which I do not, if I tell it that I also exercise etc then that goes up to 2600 a day to maintain my weight

If I were to eat that magical number of 1500, I'd gain weight, 2000 a day I'd gain weight quickly, 2600? i be back to being obese very quickly

to be honest, this is probably the reason why so many are overweight/obese, because they base their diets/calorie intake etc solely based on this, what about before computers, mobiles etc and these apps? People ate what their body told them, eat slowly and regularly, not too late, especially not just before going to bed, make sure you eat breakfast, listen to your body and exercise and only use mfp as a guideline

many are telling/argueing with me that my body needs to eat minimum 1500, sorry but this is my body not theirs, I know what it needs, if I were to eat 1500 I would gain weight, heck a certain person asked if I was in a freezer to get my bmr low

---

One thing that people sometimes forget to account for is body composition.  Take two 30 year-old men, each 5' 5" and 150 pounds, for instance.  One of them is quite athletic and muscular but has very little body fat.  The other also is not overweight, but he's kind of lacking in the muscle department, so a higher percentage of his body weight is fat instead of muscle.  He probably wears a slightly larger pants waistband size than the other guy, and can't do as many push-ups.  The first guy probably needs more calories to maintain his weight, simply because it takes extra calories to support muscle.  

If I'm not mistaken, I think you said in another thread that you're about 5' or 5' 1", so it makes sense that your calorie needs wouldn't be very high.  But also, I learned from another person here that if you've been in a calorie deficit for many months, your body can get used to that, so its good to periodically eat at maintenance level for a few weeks to reset your metabolism before continuing with weight loss efforts.  I don't know if that would apply to you (I don't recall if you are trying to lose or maintain), but it helped me get out of a plateau.  Ultimately, I think if you feel healthy and satisfied with the food you're eating, then that's what matters.  

(Also, wouldn't living in a freezer make a person need more calories in order to keep warm??)

[SunsetRunner]

Hi

it was someone else saying I slept in freezer, although right now, the weather isn't much different! But going by Top Gear when they went to north pole I think it was, they were stuffing their faces in

That is what I was saying, 2 people exactly the same, 1 that is healthy and 1 not would need different calorie requirements, that is why I said it is an average amount for the average person, you need to dig deeper to get the right amount, to just say to someone that they must eat 1200/1500 with just knowing their age, height, male or female, activity level, in some cases just whether they are male or female and how active they are or they are under eating is just wrong

Maybe being in icu for a few months back in 2010 and had to be kept alive via a feeding tube through the throat and an operation to remove a gall stone has something to do with it, but being 5'7 for a normal average person that would be eating too little

since coming out of icu, i see a nurse whenever I need to and a specialist doctor regularly, so if they thought I was under eating etc, surely they would have said something other than exercise more and lose weight, I have to keep daily entries in a diary

some say that I am under eating, putting my body into starvation/survival, yet if that was the case how am I able to do 30/40k a day when I have time or even that 100k when I was challenged, surely if I was under eating I would have no energy etc not to mention I am losing fat and building up muscle

anyway, thanks, nice to see a reply using some common sense

[Dominique]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

So you are saying that the minimum resting calorie intake requirement of a male that is 6'3" is the same as a male 5'4"? In that both are required to eat 1500 to maintain their weight

or that a mordibly obese male needs to eat 1500 calories as a male that is healthy to maintain their weight?

---

I don’t know where you got the impression that MFP wants every male to eat 1500 calories, regardless of age, size etc.

If/when you create an MFP account, you’re asked about your birthday, height, weight and activity level. Then they ask you about your goal (maintain, lose, gain). If you want to lose, they ask you at what pace (recommended default: 0.5 kg / week). In my case, they suggest I eat 1820 calories (to lose weight at 0.5 kg / week), which sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Yes, I’m not that young (56-yo), I’m not that heavy (63 kg) and not particularly tall (174 cm), yet they want me to eat 1820 calories to lose weight, not 1500. In other words, just like Fitbit, MFP takes into account your personal settings, using a formula that has been proven to be reasonably accurate for the vast majority of people.

You’re barking at the wrong tree if you believe MFP (and other similar apps) are the reason why people get overweight/obese.

[SunsetRunner]

No, the reason why people are overweight is because they eat too much and don't exercise enough

what I am saying is that even though you put in your details and what you want to do, it does not take into account that everyone is different

Every person with same height, age, weight, activity level wanting to lose the same amount of weight, mfp will give the same amount of calories for all of them

if I ate the recommended amount of calories after exercising, even though i told it i want to lose weight, i gain weight

if I told it i want to maintain weight, i would pile on the pounds

for the average person then yes it will probably be correct, but for others they may lose or gain, and that is what I am saying, the amount it gives is for the average person

in my case i need less than what it says, yet somehow people that know nothing about me or my body etc know my body better than I do

[SunsetRunner]

it is like saying an obese person who sits all day watching tv needs the same amount of calories as a professional athlete of the same height, weight age etc

granted we are talking about extreme opposites, but you get the idea, no person is the same, even twins, the calories given is for the average person and needs to be asjusted as needed for each individual, for some the given amount may work fine, doesn't mean it will work for everyone

[SunsetRunner]

Anyway, like the other threads, I'll just leave it here, I know what works for me

[Dominique]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

it is like saying an obese person who sits all day watching tv needs the same amount of calories as a professional athlete of the same height, weight age etc

---

Actually, the obese couch potato and the professional athlete will most likely have a very similar BMR, the one predicted by the equation (Mifflin St Jeor) most apps and trackers use. However, the difference will come from activity: the couch potatoe may only burn 200-300 calories on top of their BMR, while the athlete training hard several hours a day may end up burning more than their BMR (on top of their BMR). If both were wearing a Fitbit, their Fitbit would recognize that at the end of the day: the couch potato would be told he only burned 2500 calories during the day, while the athlete burned 5500. If both were using MFP, they would (or at least should) have chosen a different activity level and would end up with entirely different recommendations regarding their intake.

Now you may argue that the equation used by Fitbit & MFP doesn’t take into account body type, which is true. We know that all things being equal (same age,same weight, same height), a very muscular person will burn more calories than a less muscular one, even when doing nothing (in other words, by simply carrying more muscle). However, even that doesn’t make as big a difference as you think. There is an equation that attempts to take into account body composition in estimating BMR and TDEE: it’s called Katch-Mcardle (here is a link to a calculator). Now let’s consider two extreme opposites: Arnold at his peak (30-yo, 250 lb, 6’2, 10% BF) and an obese guy the same age and size (30-yo, 250 lb, 6’2, 40% BF). BMR predicted by Mifflin St Jeor is 2164 for both for Arnold and the obese guy. BMR predicted by Katch-McArdle is 2580 for Arnold (+416 compared to Mifflin) and 1843 for the obese guy (-321 compared to Mifflin). Arnold could afford to eat a mid-size donut for all the muscle he carried. That’s not much when you think of it.

Now your point is everyone is different. Maybe, but not that different. And that still doesn’t make estimates produced by Mifflin St Jeor, the Fitbit algorithm or MFP’s recommendations worthless: they’re a good starting point and better than nothing. Everyone can make adjustments to them over time, when they see what happens after following the recommendations.

Finally, if you see no value in using a fitness tracker (since it wouldn’t recognize how "special" you are), why do you have a Fitbit in the first place? Wouldn’t it be simpler to just trust your instinct, since no one knows you better than you?

[SunsetRunner]

I never said I see no value in a fitbit, or I would not have originally bought the Zip and then the One, I don't have that much money to waste

not that different is still different

all it does is take into account physical differences, someone who has had an operation on their stomach and had it reduced for example, if they followed what it said could well be fatal, granted we are talking extremes, but it does not take everything into account

I got a FitBit and use MFP to track my steps and ingoing/outgoing calories, just because I use them does not mean I have to follow what they say and suggest to the letter, or is that what you are saying because it sure sounds like it, what, that isn't what you are saying? then don't say that I think I am special 

I spent 1 month in ICU and then 6 months in a hospital bed, I have a scar on my throat from where they shoved a tube down my throat to keep me alive, and scar across my stomach from when they operated on my stomach, I still go to the hospital to see a UK specialist once every 6 months

does MFP or Fitbit take these into account? no

considering I am overweight, just under obese according to the BMI, my heart rate is between 55-60, which apparently is healthy, on some apps very healthy, which I presume I take after my mum as she has a heart condition and has abnormal heart rate, do they take that into account? no

lets take today 29056 steps, 3246 cals burnt, 889 cals in yet I am full, do I do what my body is telling me, or just continue to eat until I eat my allocated calories?

regardless of what you call it and how it tries to calculate it, it is still an average, at the end of the day, every person of the same age, height, weight etc is still going to be different, even if by a little, yet when you take everything into account, then that little bit could end up being alot, plenty of health conditions out there to make it better/worse, a reduced stomach for example

again, say what you like, this is my last post in this thread

I just hope that one day, all those asking for advise etc do not end up seriously hurt because all you people told them to eat a minimum of 1200/1500 without taking everything into account

[EmjayH]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:

No, the reason why people are overweight is because they eat too much and don't exercise enough

what I am saying is that even though you put in your details and what you want to do, it does not take into account that everyone is different

Every person with same height, age, weight, activity level wanting to lose the same amount of weight, mfp will give the same amount of calories for all of them

if I ate the recommended amount of calories after exercising, even though i told it i want to lose weight, i gain weight

if I told it i want to maintain weight, i would pile on the pounds

for the average person then yes it will probably be correct, but for others they may lose or gain, and that is what I am saying, the amount it gives is for the average person

in my case i need less than what it says, yet somehow people that know nothing about me or my body etc know my body better than I do

---

The reason people gain with is because they eat the wrong things. Not that they eat too much. I eat more then I ever have yet I've maintained a sustainable weight loss for over 6 months. With a proper whole food diet with good balance of protein and veges you can still eat plenty and lose weight.