TDEE and activity level question....

Options
2»

Replies

  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    Options
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-to-estimate-maintenance-caloric-intake.html/
    The website is titled "body recomposition" which implies it's aimed at people who are in the normal weight range but who'd like to appear more muscular. No one is saying your rule of thumb isn't a starting point, it's just wildly inaccurate for some people. And we want to make sure people who read this post (but who aren't commenting) understand the limitations of your rule of thumb calculation.
  • scottwilson16
    scottwilson16 Posts: 71 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-to-estimate-maintenance-caloric-intake.html/
    The website is titled "body recomposition" which implies it's aimed at people who are in the normal weight range but who'd like to appear more muscular. No one is saying your rule of thumb isn't a starting point, it's just wildly inaccurate for some people. And we want to make sure people who read this post (but who aren't commenting) understand the limitations of your rule of thumb calculation.

    The website is run by one of the most knowledgable people in the world with regard to nutrition and weight management. I would say that myfitnesspal is the one that's wildly out with its energy requirement estimations. Seeing so many people on here on 1,200kcals because of a myfitnesspal estimation and scared to eat more because it will estimate they will gain weight week in week. It throws out estimations with no education behind it.
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-to-estimate-maintenance-caloric-intake.html/
    The website is titled "body recomposition" which implies it's aimed at people who are in the normal weight range but who'd like to appear more muscular. No one is saying your rule of thumb isn't a starting point, it's just wildly inaccurate for some people. And we want to make sure people who read this post (but who aren't commenting) understand the limitations of your rule of thumb calculation.

    The website is run by one of the most knowledgable people in the world with regard to nutrition and weight management. I would say that myfitnesspal is the one that's wildly out with its energy requirement estimations. Seeing so many people on here on 1,200kcals because of a myfitnesspal estimation and scared to eat more because it will estimate they will gain weight week in week. It throws out estimations with no education behind it.

    I agree that most people could still lose weight eating much more than 1200 calories per day. I think you'll find that most experience posters here also question generic 1200 for women and 1500 for men goals and often tell people they're eating too little. I didn't mean to offend you or say the information wasn't a starting point. But obese 65 year old, post menopausal women with hypothyroidism need different nutrition than people who are at a healthy weight and are trying to build muscle. You understand what I'm saying, yes?
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-to-estimate-maintenance-caloric-intake.html/
    The website is titled "body recomposition" which implies it's aimed at people who are in the normal weight range but who'd like to appear more muscular. No one is saying your rule of thumb isn't a starting point, it's just wildly inaccurate for some people. And we want to make sure people who read this post (but who aren't commenting) understand the limitations of your rule of thumb calculation.

    The website is run by one of the most knowledgable people in the world with regard to nutrition and weight management. I would say that myfitnesspal is the one that's wildly out with its energy requirement estimations. Seeing so many people on here on 1,200kcals because of a myfitnesspal estimation and scared to eat more because it will estimate they will gain weight week in week. It throws out estimations with no education behind it.

    I agree that most people could still lose weight eating much more than 1200 calories per day. I think you'll find that most experience posters here also question generic 1200 for women and 1500 for men goals and often tell people they're eating too little. I didn't mean to offend you or say the information wasn't a starting point. But obese 65 year old, post menopausal women with hypothyroidism need different nutrition than people who are at a healthy weight and are trying to build muscle. You understand what I'm saying, yes?

    I understand what you are saying but I also think that Lyle McDonald's general rule of thumb is no less correct as a guideline than is MFP. They are all estimates. You use one for a few weeks and then tweak it. I like Lyle's because it's extremely simple and people don't need to gnash their teeth over their activity levels. If anything, it comes in low for me (14 x 149 = 2086 when my TDEE is more like 2350) which IMO means that it's going to favor post menopausal women with hypothyroidism.
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    jemhh wrote: »
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-to-estimate-maintenance-caloric-intake.html/
    The website is titled "body recomposition" which implies it's aimed at people who are in the normal weight range but who'd like to appear more muscular. No one is saying your rule of thumb isn't a starting point, it's just wildly inaccurate for some people. And we want to make sure people who read this post (but who aren't commenting) understand the limitations of your rule of thumb calculation.

    The website is run by one of the most knowledgable people in the world with regard to nutrition and weight management. I would say that myfitnesspal is the one that's wildly out with its energy requirement estimations. Seeing so many people on here on 1,200kcals because of a myfitnesspal estimation and scared to eat more because it will estimate they will gain weight week in week. It throws out estimations with no education behind it.

    I agree that most people could still lose weight eating much more than 1200 calories per day. I think you'll find that most experience posters here also question generic 1200 for women and 1500 for men goals and often tell people they're eating too little. I didn't mean to offend you or say the information wasn't a starting point. But obese 65 year old, post menopausal women with hypothyroidism need different nutrition than people who are at a healthy weight and are trying to build muscle. You understand what I'm saying, yes?

    I understand what you are saying but I also think that Lyle McDonald's general rule of thumb is no less correct as a guideline than is MFP. They are all estimates. You use one for a few weeks and then tweak it. I like Lyle's because it's extremely simple and people don't need to gnash their teeth over their activity levels. If anything, it comes in low for me (14 x 149 = 2086 when my TDEE is more like 2350) which IMO means that it's going to favor post menopausal women with hypothyroidism.

    I'm neither defending MFP's estimates or deriding Lyle's. I'm saying IMO caveats need to be added when giving rules of thumb when you don't know people's age, body fat levels, medical issues, etc.

    In case it's getting overlooked, I'll repeat it: I'm not discounting MFP's or Lyle's method of determining calorie intake estimates for people.
  • scottwilson16
    scottwilson16 Posts: 71 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    WBB55 wrote: »
    scottwilson16 wrote: »
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-to-estimate-maintenance-caloric-intake.html/
    The website is titled "body recomposition" which implies it's aimed at people who are in the normal weight range but who'd like to appear more muscular. No one is saying your rule of thumb isn't a starting point, it's just wildly inaccurate for some people. And we want to make sure people who read this post (but who aren't commenting) understand the limitations of your rule of thumb calculation.

    The website is run by one of the most knowledgable people in the world with regard to nutrition and weight management. I would say that myfitnesspal is the one that's wildly out with its energy requirement estimations. Seeing so many people on here on 1,200kcals because of a myfitnesspal estimation and scared to eat more because it will estimate they will gain weight week in week. It throws out estimations with no education behind it.

    I agree that most people could still lose weight eating much more than 1200 calories per day. I think you'll find that most experience posters here also question generic 1200 for women and 1500 for men goals and often tell people they're eating too little. I didn't mean to offend you or say the information wasn't a starting point. But obese 65 year old, post menopausal women with hypothyroidism need different nutrition than people who are at a healthy weight and are trying to build muscle. You understand what I'm saying, yes?

    Yes of course - everyone needs dialled in bespoke nutrition. That obvious they would. The site deals in scientific facts, not solely in adding lean mass and is a library of debunking the nutritional myths out there (the site name may be slightly misleading). He is bringing out a book purely for women which will probably be the most comprehensive book ever written with regards women's nutrition.
  • scottwilson16
    scottwilson16 Posts: 71 Member
    Options
    HappyCampr1 wrote: »
    The reason, as I see it, that so many people get 1200 calorie goals is because they're impatient and they don't realize that they're supposed to eat back any exercise calories they earn. So, in a lot of cases, they shouldn't just be consuming 1200 calories. With your recommendation, you're discussing using a TDEE method and MFP isn't set up as TDEE. This confuses a lot of people. I used MFP's goals and ate back my exercise and managed to lose 70+ pounds. When I hit maintenance, I switched to TDEE. I've done and seen both sides and the benefit to either side is just personal preference. Some people have steady exercise habits and prefer to eat the same amount of calories every day. Some people prefer to "earn" their calories because they feel that helps keep them active. It all works out the same in the end. If both methods start as estimates and need tweeking based on real-life results, why should someone using MFP not just stick with using MFP as designed and tweek as needed?

    I actually think that eating back exercise 'could' lead to a unhealthy relationship with food and dieting in general. But that's just personal preference and how I would coach someone and educate them on the way. Delighted that it's worked for you!

Categories