TDEE-20% for one month = I found my maintenance?

CassieLeigh86

Hello all,

So I've been eating at "TDEE-20%" for the month of May, which for me has meant 1900 cals/day. I figured out my TDEE using the Fat 2 FIt Radio tools...using the mean average of all three body fat percentage calculators as my body fat percentage.

On May 1st, I weighed 159.6 pounds, and had a body fat percentage of 25.9.

Today, I weigh 159.6 pounds and have a body fat percentage of 25.9.

I am 5' 6", and I work out 3-5 times a week. 2-3 of those workouts are strength training, 2-3 are cardio (spin class, running, cardio circuits). Although I have a desk job, I used the "moderately active" multiplier since I workout hard several days a week. My diary is open if you care to look.

Based on these numbers, does it seem like I have actually found my TRUE TDEE, at 1900 cals, and should therefore recalculate my calorie needs based on 1900 being my maintenance? Do I need to give it more time? Or was I completely off in calculating the numbers the first time?

My first thoughts are that 1) Yes, this is probably my maintenance, and I should recalculate and 2) Damn, I really liked eating 1900 cals a day haha.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance.

anemoneprose

Hunh! Confusing. Some of your days aren't complete; are they definitely 1900 or maybe a bit more? Maybe try logging absolutely everything and see if it for sure adds up to 1900?

Because your 1900 days look pretty balanced overall. Idk, you could cut alcohol and any dessert/treat type things altogether.

yarwell

Agreed, your average TDEE is the average of what you ate last month.

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

Your diary isn't complete so it's hard to say that 1900 calories is your TDEE. However, whatever the number of calories is that you've been eating this month, that is your maintenance.

Trilby16

That does not seem to be a calorie level that would lead to weight loss for you. When you calculated your TDEE, perhaps some inaccuracy crept in. The proof is in the pudding. If you're stable at 1900 and want to lose, go lower.

I use the rule of thumb, # of cals / 10 = goal weight. So if I wanted to weigh 190, I would eat 1900 per day. PS, I am a woman, 5'5" and don't want to weigh 190!

Another thought, are you eating back exercise calories? I think you're not supposed to do that with TDEE, but don't quote me.

anemoneprose

That does not seem to be a calorie level that would lead to weight loss for you. When you calculated your TDEE, perhaps some inaccuracy crept in. The proof is in the pudding. If you're stable at 1900 and want to lose, go lower.

I use the rule of thumb, # of cals / 10 = goal weight. So if I wanted to weigh 190, I would eat 1900 per day. PS, I am a woman, 5'5" and don't want to weigh 190!

Another thought, are you eating back exercise calories? I think you're not supposed to do that with TDEE, but don't quote me.

Your rule of thumb doesn't apply in practice. I weigh 129(5'7) and I average something like 2300. I lost all my weight on 1800-2000 (from 178), with activity, probably not as much as the OP's.

Yeah OP I would work harder at being precise with 1900 - log it all,& don't eyeball portions if you are.

wild_wild_life

That does not seem to be a calorie level that would lead to weight loss for you. When you calculated your TDEE, perhaps some inaccuracy crept in. The proof is in the pudding. If you're stable at 1900 and want to lose, go lower.

I use the rule of thumb, # of cals / 10 = goal weight. So if I wanted to weigh 190, I would eat 1900 per day. PS, I am a woman, 5'5" and don't want to weigh 190!

Another thought, are you eating back exercise calories? I think you're not supposed to do that with TDEE, but don't quote me.

That rule or thumb does not seem very accurate. I'm 5'4" and want to weigh 125, so I'm only allowed to eat 1250 cals per day? It doesn't take into account how much a person already weighs, their activity level, etc. Seems like it is estimating quite low.

OP, the calculators are estimates so I would believe your own results over any calculator. Nice job finding your maintenance! To confirm, you could try eating 250 cals less and see if you lose 0.5 lbs/week (or adjust it for however much you want to lose).

missemmapeel

My suggestion would be to try and eat 1700-1800 for a month and see what happens. It may take some finesse to find what works for you. And personally, I was losing for a month at 1700 and have now plateaued. I think I need fewer calories now that I weigh less, so I'm planning on dropping down to 1600 and seeing how that works.

Don't get discouraged, you sound fit and active and that is half the battle.

concordancia

Before you can start playing with numbers, you have to be consistent and accurate with your numbers.

I plugged your numbers into Scooby and came up with 1800, so 1900 should still be a considerable loss, but you can't expect the math to work if you aren't logging everything.

Trilby16

That does not seem to be a calorie level that would lead to weight loss for you. When you calculated your TDEE, perhaps some inaccuracy crept in. The proof is in the pudding. If you're stable at 1900 and want to lose, go lower.

I use the rule of thumb, # of cals / 10 = goal weight. So if I wanted to weigh 190, I would eat 1900 per day. PS, I am a woman, 5'5" and don't want to weigh 190!

Another thought, are you eating back exercise calories? I think you're not supposed to do that with TDEE, but don't quote me.

Your rule of thumb doesn't apply in practice. I weigh 129(5'7) and I average something like 2300. I lost all my weight on 1800-2000 (from 178), with activity, probably not as much as the OP's.

Yeah OP I would work harder at being precise with 1900 - log it all,& don't eyeball portions if you are.

You must have one hell of a metabolism! Nice!

This rule of thumb --which I didn't make up, btw-- is just about right for me so it doesn't strike me as ridiculous. I would like to get to 140 and I set my cal. goal at 1400. I would go nowhere but UP on any more than that!

There is much to wonder about in the OP's post. Like how much does she really burn in exercise? Did she happen to weigh herself on one of those days where the scale goes a little crazy? How accurate is her logging overall? Also, no loss of pounds in one month? Who hasn't been there? I've been stuck at the same weight for 6 weeks. I'm just trying to stick with the program. My metabolism stinks (I am old) and I don't have that much to lose. These factors play a part.

Jennacita

HI. Check out coachcalorie.com. He has on article on finding your true TDEE. Basically you take your current weight x 12. You eat that amount for two weeks straight. If you gain weight then you start to lower from there until you stabilize. If you stay the same or lose weight you increase your number by 100. You continue to do this until you find a number where you begin to gain weight consistently from week to week.

CassieLeigh86

There is much to wonder about in the OP's post. Like how much does she really burn in exercise? Did she happen to weigh herself on one of those days where the scale goes a little crazy? How accurate is her logging overall? Also, no loss of pounds in one month? Who hasn't been there? I've been stuck at the same weight for 6 weeks. I'm just trying to stick with the program. My metabolism stinks (I am old) and I don't have that much to lose. These factors play a part.
[/quote]


I would say my logging is pretty accurate. I weigh my food 90% of the time, and the other 10% is using measuring cups and things of that nature. Obviously 100% weighing would be ideal, but sometimes that's just not an option. There were 5 days in May when I didn't complete my diary, so obviously those days could play a roll in this too.

This also isn't just one month of no loss...I've been hovering between 157 and 162 for at least six months. This is just the first month where I've been following the TDEE-20% method. Before I tried this, I was eating 1500-1600 cals a day and sometimes (but not always) eating back exercise cals. I don't use a heartrate monitor, so I have to estimate calories burned. I try to underestimate, since I am pretty active consistently, so I know my body is "used to" exercise. For example: If I run for 3 miles at 5.5 miles per hour, I usually allowed myself 250-300 cals for that workout.

I'm also 26, so I don't think my metabolism should be slowing down from age too much yet.

Thanks for all the replies...I'm really not too upset or frustrated about it, since I'm ok with taking time to really figure out my cal needs appropriately...just wanted to see what others thought!

anemoneprose

That does not seem to be a calorie level that would lead to weight loss for you. When you calculated your TDEE, perhaps some inaccuracy crept in. The proof is in the pudding. If you're stable at 1900 and want to lose, go lower.

I use the rule of thumb, # of cals / 10 = goal weight. So if I wanted to weigh 190, I would eat 1900 per day. PS, I am a woman, 5'5" and don't want to weigh 190!

Another thought, are you eating back exercise calories? I think you're not supposed to do that with TDEE, but don't quote me.

Your rule of thumb doesn't apply in practice. I weigh 129(5'7) and I average something like 2300. I lost all my weight on 1800-2000 (from 178), with activity, probably not as much as the OP's.

Yeah OP I would work harder at being precise with 1900 - log it all,& don't eyeball portions if you are.

You must have one hell of a metabolism! Nice!

This rule of thumb --which I didn't make up, btw-- is just about right for me so it doesn't strike me as ridiculous. I would like to get to 140 and I set my cal. goal at 1400. I would go nowhere but UP on any more than that!

There is much to wonder about in the OP's post. Like how much does she really burn in exercise? Did she happen to weigh herself on one of those days where the scale goes a little crazy? How accurate is her logging overall? Also, no loss of pounds in one month? Who hasn't been there? I've been stuck at the same weight for 6 weeks. I'm just trying to stick with the program. My metabolism stinks (I am old) and I don't have that much to lose. These factors play a part.

Yup, individual differences matter for sure.. I've been pretty lucky that way I guess? I don't know. Always had a healthy appetite, probably should have weighed more than I did at any time, based on just mathy calculations..

anemoneprose

There is much to wonder about in the OP's post. Like how much does she really burn in exercise? Did she happen to weigh herself on one of those days where the scale goes a little crazy? How accurate is her logging overall? Also, no loss of pounds in one month? Who hasn't been there? I've been stuck at the same weight for 6 weeks. I'm just trying to stick with the program. My metabolism stinks (I am old) and I don't have that much to lose. These factors play a part.

I would say my logging is pretty accurate. I weigh my food 90% of the time, and the other 10% is using measuring cups and things of that nature. Obviously 100% weighing would be ideal, but sometimes that's just not an option. There were 5 days in May when I didn't complete my diary, so obviously those days could play a roll in this too.

This also isn't just one month of no loss...I've been hovering between 157 and 162 for at least six months. This is just the first month where I've been following the TDEE-20% method. Before I tried this, I was eating 1500-1600 cals a day and sometimes (but not always) eating back exercise cals. I don't use a heartrate monitor, so I have to estimate calories burned. I try to underestimate, since I am pretty active consistently, so I know my body is "used to" exercise. For example: If I run for 3 miles at 5.5 miles per hour, I usually allowed myself 250-300 cals for that workout.

I'm also 26, so I don't think my metabolism should be slowing down from age too much yet.

Thanks for all the replies...I'm really not too upset or frustrated about it, since I'm ok with taking time to really figure out my cal needs appropriately...just wanted to see what others thought!
[/quote]

1) I applaud your reasonable attitude

2) Your situation is super confusing, then! Variables might be: the intensity of your workouts (but, 5.5 mph is totally respectable; don't know what you lift?); the food scale could be wrong - not unheard of, mine's been acting up lately; hormonal issues/meds (on any? don't have to answer here, just could be a factor).

3) I guess, try to cut 100 (which is not easy, minor variances in estimations could easily mess that up) for a bit and see where that gets you... could also try Boucher's HIIT protocol:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2991639/

Sorry couldn't be of more help! Good luck, hope you get more views on this.

jfrankic

I use the rule of thumb, # of cals / 10 = goal weight. So if I wanted to weigh 190, I would eat 1900 per day. PS, I am a woman, 5'5" and don't want to weigh 190!

This may work for you, but it isn't a good general statement. I weigh 163 and my goal is 157. I would beat someone up if I could only eat 1570 calories a day!! I lost the majority of my weight eating 2,000 a day and am currently still losing slowly eating 2,200 a day. And loving it!!

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

1. That "rule of thumb" has been posted here before but it doesn't work for many many people. I eat 1900 calories right now and I'm 125. I'd be very unhappy on 1250.

2. OP I'd try 1700 accurately logged for awhile and see where that gets you. Good luck, sometimes it's a process.

LaurenAOK

That's quite baffling as I've never seen a TDEE calculator be THAT wrong, but the fact is, if you ate 1900 for a month and didn't gain or lose, 1900 is your maintenance!

Perhaps you overestimated how much you exercise when you calculated your TDEE? That's the only thing I can think of that makes sense. Perhaps you think you're "active" when really you're "lightly active."

Who knows. The good thing is, you've learned and now you can adjust your calories to lose weight. You don't have to adjust them drastically . If you're getting close to your goal, you can do TDEE - 10% which would still have you eating about 1710 calories a day to lose. That's not too bad!

mmddwechanged

I think you've got it op! That's about my TDEE too at 5'7".
We will all vary because of muscles, age, NEAT, exercise, etc.

bumblebums

You are fairly lean, which makes weight loss much slower. Lyle McDonald says that for women, you're lucky if you can lose 0.5 lb a week at that point--that's 2 lb a month, which is well within the margin of error of a household weigh-in. So I would give it another month and be diligent about weighing the food you eat... You might get a whoosh soon anyway.

Also, were you eating a lot less before you started this? If you were, it might take some time for your metabolism to catch up to the new regimen.

mmddwechanged

You are fairly lean, which makes weight loss much slower. Lyle McDonald says that for women, you're lucky if you can lose 0.5 lb a week at that point--that's 2 lb a month, which is well within the margin of error of a household weigh-in. So I would give it another month and be diligent about weighing the food you eat... You might get a whoosh soon anyway.

Also, were you eating a lot less before you started this? If you were, it might take some time for your metabolism to catch up to the new regimen.

I agree with this. I lost my last five pounds at a rate of about .3 of a pound a week on average.

CassieLeigh86

Yea, I've definitely accepted that whatever weight/body fat I have to lose is going to be slow going. My goal weight is 145...but I'm really not attached to that number at all. I'd really just like to shrink in size a bit...nothing too drastic, as I'm not a petite woman whatsoever...I've got a nice sturdy frame to work with haha. I think I was just hoping that I'd get to eat 2000 cals a day and lose weight like some of you other lucky MFPers! Alas, I'll be cutting back a bit and see where I end up in another month or so!

Thanks for everybody's input...I know all of these TDEE posts can get repetative!