To those of you who REALLY understand TDEE vs NEAT

Options
245

Replies

  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    If your weight loss goal is set to 0 AND you eat back your exercise cals, then yes... you've been at maintenance.

    If you change the weight loss goal, then MFP will adjust the number so you are in a deficit to reach that goal.
    If you aren't eating back exercise cals, then you are in a deficit.
    If you did both (changed the weight loss goal AND aren't eating back exercise cals), then you're in a big deficit.
  • minizebu
    minizebu Posts: 2,716 Member
    Options
    The only way to know if this will really work out the way you hope for it to is to try it for a week, or two, or three and then reassess. It sounds perfectly reasonable. However, the only way to know how your energy level, loss rate, LBM maintenance will fare on this regimen is to give it a shot and see how you do. Try it and then report your triumph or travails later.

    Edited to remove wise crack. I'm in a grumpy mood. Mea culpa.
  • ItsCasey
    ItsCasey Posts: 4,022 Member
    Options
    I don't think he was asking for permission. I'm pretty sure he was just bouncing thoughts off other people to get opinions on their reasonableness.
  • tomcornhole
    tomcornhole Posts: 1,084 Member
    Options
    I don't think he was asking for permission. I'm pretty sure he was just bouncing thoughts off other people to get opinions on their reasonableness.

    Agree. Based on his join date, number of posts, level of fitness and profile info, he's got this. But it sure helps others (like me) to read through the ensuing discussion. One of the more helpful posts I've seen in a while.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,871 Member
    Options
    on a side note... I'm not overly concerned about LBM loss. Lifting is part of my weekly routine and protein intake is high, so I should be ok there.

    Energy levels on the other hand... that's a concern and has been a problem for me in recent weeks.

    If you're having a low energy day, you could eat some of those calories back...working your way back towards NEAT maintenance...worst case scenario, you end up at your NEAT which would still give you a small loss in my estimation. I gotta say, it's hard for me diet wise when I'm training hard...when I don't eat, I don't kill my workouts...when I do eat, I just maintain and don't lose any weight. I actually never even noticed that aspect until I went to maintenance for a few months and just stated crushing it. Now, it's always a struggle to balance out my desire to lose a few more points in BF and crush my workouts....just thinking out-loud.

    I've noticed the same thing.

    Let me know how it works for you...I'm curious.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    That's exactly what I do. And I know from several measurements that my NEAT level outside exercise is indeed sedentary on MFP.

    I'm at the point I need the loss as encouragement to do the exercise, if I do the exercise I tend to eat better to support that too, so it works out well.

    And if the exercise is for a goal event even better.

    But, I do limit myself to any workout only providing a 1000 cal deficit. So my long bike rides or runs do get some eat back, and I especially watch the carbs so that what I burned is made up for by the eating post workout prior to the next workout.

    And I know those stats and figures from my VO2max test.

    Usually studies show just letting exercise create the deficit doesn't work well, because people eat too much back. But that's because they weren't using MFP to log the eating side of the equation.

    Oh, this does mean I log lawn mowing, ect, anything above a sedentary life. Not for any reason other than to easily see the deficit created.
    You can view my Food Diary to see what I do in the Diary notes for easier review later.
  • michellekicks
    michellekicks Posts: 3,624 Member
    Options
    Your estimated burn on a rest day may be more or less than you think. I'm just throwing this out there... I set mine to "Very Active" and it thinks I burn 2210 daily. I strapped on a Body Media Fit for 3 weeks and my lowest burn day on a rest day was more like 2400. My actual average TDEE over 3 weeks was 2850 and it ranged from 2400 - 3400. I even had a 3000 calorie day without a workout. I tracked my average burn from exercise over that same time and the daily average ended up being 340 or so... I take about 1-2 rest days a week, 1 long run/week, 2 mid length runs and 3 lifting sessions plus the occasional DVD for cross-training. Because it's so varied, I've decided to switch back to MFP's method of adding the exercise back in.

    Try 2300 daily but you may need to go even higher. I ate at 2300 for a long time - basically since October 2012. I didn't lose any weight but my body composition has changed. I dropped down to 2100 daily without adding exercise, then did 2200 because I was starving, then back to 2300... then I did my Body Media experiment and ate at 2650 daily for 3 weeks. Didn't gain a pound.

    Now I'm cutting at 2100 + exercise calories (avg 340 daily) so I'm actually eating more like 2440 daily and I seem to have started losing scale weight again. Weird, I know. I'm just slightly lighter than you but also a girl. I'm very active in general (mom to 5 kids) but I would think you need more fuel than I do just by virtue of being a man.

    I'm only sharing my own experience because our exercise schedules are pretty similar it seems...
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    That's what MFP calculates. Set your weight loss goal to 0lbs lost/gained (or however they word it), and the number it spits back is your NEAT. Or more specifically, your BMR + NEAT + TAF
    Please don't call TDEE minus exercise "NEAT" - it isn't simplifying, it's just confusing and wrong.

    Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (NEAT) is the calories used moving around other than in exercise. It's a few hundred calories a day in most cases.

    TDEE = BMR + NEAT + EAT + TEF

    where EAT is Exercise Activity Thermogenesis and TEF is the Thermogenesis Effect of Food. BMR is usually the biggest, unless you're on Biggest Loser.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    Forgot to mention, to keep the energy levels up, I have to really time the planned snacks and meals I'd eat anyway, with the exercise really well.

    Like try to make the workout end right before I'd eat a meal or snack anyway. Otherwise usually end up getting too hungry, and by the time of the next meal or snack just famished and that meal is shot.

    Of course as long as I don't eat the whole workout burn back, who cares. Actually, while training right now, I actually do eat back the whole lifting workout burn, and a tad more the next day, to get max benefit from the one lifting workout each week. Working fine there, as I've maintained and in fact increased some lifts despite a much harder cardio routine, sometimes the day before.
  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    Options
    I have been debating on switching to this for a while now myself. I used the MFP method and it definitely works its just that non workout days are rough and I think a level daily intake would be better for me.

    This post is just might help me make the change over.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    Your estimated burn on a rest day may be more or less than you think. I'm just throwing this out there... I set mine to "Very Active" and it thinks I burn 2210 daily. I strapped on a Body Media Fit for 3 weeks and my lowest burn day on a rest day was more like 2400. My actual average TDEE over 3 weeks was 2850 and it ranged from 2400 - 3400. I even had a 3000 calorie day without a workout. I tracked my average burn from exercise over that same time and the daily average ended up being 340 or so... I take about 1-2 rest days a week, 1 long run/week, 2 mid length runs and 3 lifting sessions plus the occasional DVD for cross-training. Because it's so varied, I've decided to switch back to MFP's method of adding the exercise back in.

    Try 2300 daily but you may need to go even higher. I ate at 2300 for a long time - basically since October 2012. I didn't lose any weight but my body composition has changed. I dropped down to 2100 daily without adding exercise, then did 2200 because I was starving, then back to 2300... then I did my Body Media experiment and ate at 2650 daily for 3 weeks. Didn't gain a pound.

    Now I'm cutting at 2100 + exercise calories (avg 340 daily) so I'm actually eating more like 2440 daily and I seem to have started losing scale weight again. Weird, I know. I'm just slightly lighter than you but also a girl. I'm very active in general (mom to 5 kids) but I would think you need more fuel than I do just by virtue of being a man.

    I'm only sharing my own experience because our exercise schedules are pretty similar it seems...

    Good stuff.

    Based on past weight loss success I've established my BMR + TEF + NEAT is pretty close to 2300. A week's worth of fitbit use confirms that.
  • maecrocker
    maecrocker Posts: 56
    Options
    I think this is what I have started to do because of lack of time to keep figuring everything out. Going to bump this for careful review in the morning. Thank you.
  • Jerrypeoples
    Jerrypeoples Posts: 1,541 Member
    Options
    ive never heard of neat, link to it on here?
  • cmeiron
    cmeiron Posts: 1,599 Member
    Options
    I have been debating on switching to this for a while now myself. I used the MFP method and it definitely works its just that non workout days are rough and I think a level daily intake would be better for me.

    This post is just might help me make the change over.

    I was so happy to make the switch...the low intake on rest days SUCKED so hard. I love having a consistent daily intake. You definitely have to stay motivated to keep up with your normal workouts though - this can be hard for some people.
  • chrisdavey
    chrisdavey Posts: 9,834 Member
    Options
    Many people are on fixed cal without calculating specific daily TDEE - xx%. I have gone to a fixed cal method as I too was a bit tired of following excercise and the variability.

    However - I've lost one of the incentives for cardio. Getting those numbers.
    And I still guestimate an adjustment of about 50% for anything really high (6 hours hiking/biking, for example)

    Look to http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf and that group for several people that follow a fixed TDEE (what you call NEAT).

    Agreed. For anyone with a consistent exercise schedule, I much prefer working on a fixed gross intake. It only takes a few weeks to determine maintenance and then adjust from there depending on goals.
  • chrisdavey
    chrisdavey Posts: 9,834 Member
    Options
    ive never heard of neat, link to it on here?

    http://cdnutritionandfitness.com/it-pays-to-be-neat/
  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    Options
    I have been debating on switching to this for a while now myself. I used the MFP method and it definitely works its just that non workout days are rough and I think a level daily intake would be better for me.

    This post is just might help me make the change over.

    I was so happy to make the switch...the low intake on rest days SUCKED so hard. I love having a consistent daily intake. You definitely have to stay motivated to keep up with your normal workouts though - this can be hard for some people.

    Not a problem there. I hate rest days and short gym sessions. : )
  • SinomenJen
    SinomenJen Posts: 262 Member
    Options
    I don't think he was asking for permission. I'm pretty sure he was just bouncing thoughts off other people to get opinions on their reasonableness.

    Agree. Based on his join date, number of posts, level of fitness and profile info, he's got this. But it sure helps others (like me) to read through the ensuing discussion. One of the more helpful posts I've seen in a while.

    ^^^ Yep!
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    Options
    Many people are on fixed cal without calculating specific daily TDEE - xx%. I have gone to a fixed cal method as I too was a bit tired of following excercise and the variability.

    However - I've lost one of the incentives for cardio. Getting those numbers.
    And I still guestimate an adjustment of about 50% for anything really high (6 hours hiking/biking, for example)

    Look to http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf and that group for several people that follow a fixed TDEE (what you call NEAT).

    Agreed. For anyone with a consistent exercise schedule, I much prefer working on a fixed gross intake. It only takes a few weeks to determine maintenance and then adjust from there depending on goals.

    ^ I'm in this camp.

    If you have accurate data regarding calorie and macronutrient intake, and you have accurate data on your change in bodyweight, you should be able to take those variables and determine approximately how much you need to eat to meet your goals and that should even out over the course of weeks provided you don't have major swings in activity from week to week or month to month. I wouldn't worry about day to day activity variations as that should even out over time.

    So for example, if you were previously averaging 2600 calories the past month or so, and losing weight at a reasonable pace, and your overall activity is reasonably close to what it was (no major and permanent changes in cardio duration/frequency/intensity/etc), then your solution to eat at 2300 may not be appropriate (could be too big of a deficit). Just stating this for purposes of example.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    Options
    Agreed. For anyone with a consistent exercise schedule, I much prefer working on a fixed gross intake. It only takes a few weeks to determine maintenance and then adjust from there depending on goals.

    ^ I'm in this camp.

    If you have accurate data regarding calorie and macronutrient intake, and you have accurate data on your change in bodyweight, you should be able to take those variables and determine approximately how much you need to eat to meet your goals and that should even out over the course of weeks provided you don't have major swings in activity from week to week or month to month. I wouldn't worry about day to day activity variations as that should even out over time.

    So for example, if you were previously averaging 2600 calories the past month or so, and losing weight at a reasonable pace, and your overall activity is reasonably close to what it was (no major and permanent changes in cardio duration/frequency/intensity/etc), then your solution to eat at 2300 may not be appropriate (could be too big of a deficit). Just stating this for purposes of example.
    Just so I'm clear - we're talking about a fixed daily intake of TDEE-x, based upon your current activity level, with no exercise calories factored in, right? Because that's how I prefer to do it as well. I'm at TDEE-~15% and don't count/eat back exercise calories. The whole NEAT stuff earlier in the thread threw me for a loop, but I think I'm with it now.

Categories