To those of you who REALLY understand TDEE vs NEAT
Replies
-
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.0 -
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.0
-
ive never heard of neat, link to it on here?0
-
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.0 -
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.0 -
0
-
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. : )0 -
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!0 -
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.0 -
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.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.0 -
bump0
-
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.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.
Thats not what I'm talking about, though the end result might be very similar.
If TDEE is 2800 (including exercise), reduce that by 20% to create a calorie deficit, and eat that everyday not logging or eating back exercise cals. Because of the way things balance out, on rest days you'll actually be eating a slight surplus and on exercise days a moderate deficit, such that over time you'll be maintaining a slight deficit.
What I'm considering is basing my calorie goal on my BMR + TEF + NEAT (TDEE - exercise). This is what MFP calculates by default. The difference is that I want to set my daily calorie goal = to that number, not lower than that number as MFP does. That would have me eating at maintenance on rest days. Then on exercise days, exercise would create my deficit for me (I wouldn't eat back any of those cals), and that deficit would vary based on the workout.
It's a subtle difference, but still a difference.0 -
Gotcha. It makes sense now.Thats not what I'm talking about, though the end result might be very similar.
If TDEE is 2800 (including exercise), reduce that by 20% to create a calorie deficit, and eat that everyday not logging or eating back exercise cals. Because of the way things balance out, on rest days you'll actually be eating a slight surplus and on exercise days a moderate deficit, such that over time you'll be maintaining a slight deficit.
What I'm considering is basing my calorie goal on my BMR + TEF + NEAT (TDEE - exercise). This is what MFP calculates by default. The difference is that I want to set my daily calorie goal = to that number, not lower than that number as MFP does. That would have me eating at maintenance on rest days. Then on exercise days, exercise would create my deficit for me (I wouldn't eat back any of those cals), and that deficit would vary based on the workout.
It's a subtle difference, but still a difference.0 -
My NEAT is ~2300. Workout cals on top of that can pretty much run the gammut - a couple hundred when lifting or HIITing to a couple thousand for serious cardio session. I'm thinking about setting my daily calorie goal to = NEAT and letting my exercise create the deficit. So a rest day would basically be eating at maintenance, exercise days would be in deficit.
Thoughts?
Being at a deficit on heavy workout days will tend to increase your LBM loss. Your body will not be able to build muscle since it will be in a caloric deficit, and the loss of LBM will be increased as your body struggles to find calories.
I would suggest that you eat at TDEE on heavy workout days, and at a deficit on your rest days. I think this will better help you preserve LBM while losing fat.0 -
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.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.
Thats not what I'm talking about, though the end result might be very similar.
If TDEE is 2800 (including exercise), reduce that by 20% to create a calorie deficit, and eat that everyday not logging or eating back exercise cals. Because of the way things balance out, on rest days you'll actually be eating a slight surplus and on exercise days a moderate deficit, such that over time you'll be maintaining a slight deficit.
What I'm considering is basing my calorie goal on my BMR + TEF + NEAT (TDEE - exercise). This is what MFP calculates by default. The difference is that I want to set my daily calorie goal = to that number, not lower than that number as MFP does. That would have me eating at maintenance on rest days. Then on exercise days, exercise would create my deficit for me (I wouldn't eat back any of those cals), and that deficit would vary based on the workout.
It's a subtle difference, but still a difference.
Now can you tell me how making this change will effect your total energy intake over the course of a week? And when you average this out, how does it compare to your previous energy intake over the course of the week?
What is this difference in energy intake on a weekly basis and does it coincide with your body composition and performance goals?
(I mean the above quite literally. What is your total caloric increase or decrease over a week by changing methods?)
I think these are the questions that matter and this is what I was getting at with my previous post. You can label it or math it out anyway you prefer but all that matters is your total intake vs your results and how this change may effect that (and of course how this effects performance).0 -
That's pretty much what I did there for a while, but I was hardly exercising at the time. It depends on how much you exercise really. I know some peoples workout schedules can be very...everywhere. If I were you I'd math out an approximate of what your TDEE-whatever% VS NEAT would be. Then it's just going to be a pain if you overdo it on exercise and your body wants that extra energy and you want to deal with those days by not eating as much. If you don't excessively exercise and need the fuel to recharge, why not, particularly if it works out to be about the same...because well it's doing something approximately the same, you're just thinking about it differently. If it is significantly different then that's a different ball game. But it's really up to you.0
-
Thought about all this a bit more overnight and started to think that maybe I was over thinking things (which I have a tendency to do). So I got to work this morning, opened Excel, and started working the numbers.
So lets get our nerds on...
The MFP approach, as it's typically done, has me eating 2171 cals per day (deficit of 500 cals daily). I could play around with that a bit based on weight loss progress and energy levels, but that's the starting point numbers. With this approach, my deficit would be basically fixed and my intake would fluctuate based on exercise, from a low of 1800 cals to a high of 2800 (using fairly typical workouts... no 6 hour races in these calculations)
My proposed approach (fixed intake equal to BMR + TEF + NEAT) has me eating 2300 cals per day with an average daily deficit of 371 calories. Here my intake stays the same but my deficit fluctuates - 0 (maintenance) on rest days to 1000 cals on bigger cardio days.
The TDEE - 20% approach has me at 2137 cals daily for an average deficit of 534 cals. With this my intake stays the same but deficit fluctuates, though those fluctuations are fairly minor - deficits run about 500 to 660 per day depending on the workout.
If anyone cares about the actual numbers...
grrr... stupid thing doesn't fit. Link to see the rest:
http://harvey.binghamton.edu/~jtaylor/pictures/bbs/CalorieChart.jpg
0 -
My NEAT is ~2300. Workout cals on top of that can pretty much run the gammut - a couple hundred when lifting or HIITing to a couple thousand for serious cardio session. I'm thinking about setting my daily calorie goal to = NEAT and letting my exercise create the deficit. So a rest day would basically be eating at maintenance, exercise days would be in deficit.
Thoughts?
Being at a deficit on heavy workout days will tend to increase your LBM loss. Your body will not be able to build muscle since it will be in a caloric deficit, and the loss of LBM will be increased as your body struggles to find calories.
I would suggest that you eat at TDEE on heavy workout days, and at a deficit on your rest days. I think this will better help you preserve LBM while losing fat.
Anyone else believe this? This goes against most everything I've read regarding the role heavy lifting plays in LBM retention as well as the body's ability to shuttle cals based on need.0 -
In for Excel nerdery. Charts and graphs and formulas, oh my!
I think you're less likely to want to murder someone with the NEAT approach. I know being female has something to do with it, but when I was doing the MFP approach, there were days when I supposed to eat 1900 calories and days when I was supposed to eat 1250, and it drove me insane. It wasn't just the planning or the hunger, either. It was what eating vastly different amounts of food from one day to the next did to my mood and my energy levels.
So I think you're on the right track. I also think the NEAT method gives you a more manageable deficit. If you're only trying to lose 10 lbs, I think 1+ lbs per week is too aggressive, personally.0 -
My NEAT is ~2300. Workout cals on top of that can pretty much run the gammut - a couple hundred when lifting or HIITing to a couple thousand for serious cardio session. I'm thinking about setting my daily calorie goal to = NEAT and letting my exercise create the deficit. So a rest day would basically be eating at maintenance, exercise days would be in deficit.
Thoughts?
Being at a deficit on heavy workout days will tend to increase your LBM loss. Your body will not be able to build muscle since it will be in a caloric deficit, and the loss of LBM will be increased as your body struggles to find calories.
I would suggest that you eat at TDEE on heavy workout days, and at a deficit on your rest days. I think this will better help you preserve LBM while losing fat.
Anyone else believe this?
Not I.0 -
Just so you don't confuse people, I think that you should update the bottom section of your chart, so that the TDEE base calories eaten reads 2137 all the way across.
Your chart implies that with the TDEE method you would be eating a different calorie amount each day, but with the TDEE method you would be eating a static 2137 daily and your deficits would range from 363 up to 1163.
Edited for grouchiness (again) and to add:
This static 2137 daily is what what EvgeniZyntx referred to as a fixed TDEE (on a weekly basis). I guess other people follow an unfixed TDEE, so never mind. I guess your chart is fine for what you were describing as TDEE.0 -
Just so you don't confuse people, I think that you should update the bottom section of your chart, so that the TDEE base calories eaten reads 2137 all the way across.
Your chart implies that with the TDEE method you would be eating a different calorie amount each day, but with the TDEE method you would be eating a static 2137 daily and your deficits would range from 363 up to 1163.
Edited for grouchiness (again) and to add:
This static 2137 daily is what what EvgeniZyntx referred to as a fixed TDEE (on a weekly basis). I guess other people follow an unfixed TDEE, so never mind. I guess your chart is fine for what you were describing as TDEE.
I'm with ya. The daily columns serve 2 purposes... they show me daily fluctuations in intake, exercise and deficit, but they also serve as the basis for calculating averages. That's where the 2137 came from... the column on the chart got cut off in the post.
When I talk about the TDEE approach, I'm assuming a fixed TDEE based on averages over time.0 -
The TDEE - 20% approach has me at 2137 cals daily for an average deficit of 534 cals. With this my intake stays the same but deficit fluctuates, though those fluctuations are fairly minor - deficits run about 500 to 660 per day depending on the workout.
I guess what I was trying to point out is that with the fixed 2137 approach, your first statement above is correct (average deficit 534 calories), but your second statement is not correct. The deficits would run from 363 up to 1163 per day depending on the workout, not 500 to 660.
However, if you are not following what EvgeniZyntx referred to as a fixed TDEE (on a weekly basis), then your bottom row is fine and your second statement is correct.
Am I making sense? I have not had my coffee yet and I am indeed grouchy.0 -
I'm intrigued by this method because it sounds as though it takes more time to "set up," but it might save some hassle/headaches down the road. Eating a daily fluctuating amount of calories is somewhat a pain to track.0
-
The TDEE - 20% approach has me at 2137 cals daily for an average deficit of 534 cals. With this my intake stays the same but deficit fluctuates, though those fluctuations are fairly minor - deficits run about 500 to 660 per day depending on the workout.
I guess what I was trying to point out is that with the fixed 2137 approach, your first statement above is correct (average deficit 534 calories), but your second statement is not correct. The deficits would run from 363 up to 1163 per day depending on the workout, not 500 to 660.
However, if you are not following what EvgeniZyntx referred to as a fixed TDEE (on a weekly basis), then your bottom row is fine and your second statement is correct.
Am I making sense? I have not had my coffee yet and I am indeed grouchy.
aaah, ok... I follow you now. I thought it seemed off, but I double checked the math and it was right. Turns out it was a logic fail, lol.
Thanks for pointing that out... chart is updated.0 -
I'm intrigued by this method because it sounds as though it takes more time to "set up," but it might save some hassle/headaches down the road. Eating a daily fluctuating amount of calories is somewhat a pain to track.
Well, there are 3 methods being talked about, 2 of them having you eating the same amount.
Typical TDEE method, normal weekly planned routine that includes exercise averaged out to daily level. That TDEE minus 15-20% deficit, eat that daily. (unless you miss a planned workout or add more than the planned workout)
Great for mostly consistent routines that have not too drastic differences in calorie burn.
Non-exercise TDEE method, normal weekly routine without exercise, same 15-20% deficit. But now you log exercise minus same 15-20% and eat it back when actually done.
Great for mostly variable routines either with getting the workout done or they are big differences in calorie burn.
Non-exercise TDEE maintenance method, normal weekly routine without exercise, eat with NO deficit, at average maintenance level. All activity greater than that creates the deficit. If you log it, you don't eat it back.
Great for consistent exercise routines that hopefully have little variability.
You can also combine a couple of these.
TDEE Deficit method, but only plan on 1 hr of exercise on your workout days, eat-back with deficit anything over the 1 hr.
Great for long training cardio events, where you need the extra food post-workout, not spread throughout the week.
Non-exercise TDEE maintenance method, and only allow exercise to create a deficit of say 500, 750, or 1000 for a day, eat back anything over that deficit amount. Again because after a big workout you probably need more food post workout.
Tons of options, depends on desired effect, ease of use, workout routine and variability, ect.
I like the non-exercise TDEE maintenance method for the fact of eating more each day, and encouragement to do the workout because that is the deficit. I eat anything over 1000 cal deficit.
And while that method may appear to create a huge deficit and leave your net calories really low, some of those calories burned was fat, so who cares about replenishing fat stores. Get enough carbs in before next workout, not a problem. And have some hard days followed by easy days to help balance out those big burns.0 -
For what it's worth, I like your proposed approach. It is more generous on a daily basis than the fixed TDEE approach, it is less hassle than a non-fixed TDEE approach (calculated daily), and it is less variable than the MFP approach.
A static calorie intake certainly makes planning meals much easier.
However, both your approach and a fixed TDEE approach would leave you with the one day (Saturday) of a very large deficit. So perhaps you could modify your proposal to shift the caloric intake downward on non-Saturdays and have a larger intake on Saturday in order to engineer a lower deficit. That would minimize the potential for feeling hungry or deprived, or having lower energy on your heaviest workout day. You would still have an essentially fixed caloric intake, with one exception on a weekly basis.
Good luck with it. I am a number cruncher, too, so I can relate to the desire to analyze. However, in the end, you just don't know how it will work out until you try it out. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.0 -
My NEAT is ~2300. Workout cals on top of that can pretty much run the gammut - a couple hundred when lifting or HIITing to a couple thousand for serious cardio session. I'm thinking about setting my daily calorie goal to = NEAT and letting my exercise create the deficit. So a rest day would basically be eating at maintenance, exercise days would be in deficit.
Thoughts?
Being at a deficit on heavy workout days will tend to increase your LBM loss. Your body will not be able to build muscle since it will be in a caloric deficit, and the loss of LBM will be increased as your body struggles to find calories.
I would suggest that you eat at TDEE on heavy workout days, and at a deficit on your rest days. I think this will better help you preserve LBM while losing fat.
Anyone else believe this? This goes against most everything I've read regarding the role heavy lifting plays in LBM retention as well as the body's ability to shuttle cals based on need.
I don't buy this either.
Unless you are at both a significant calorie and protein deficit - a heavy workout of a few hundred cals will not affect you except at very low bf% where protein availability as an energy source exceeds carbo. and lipid metabolism.0 -
Please don't call TDEE minus exercise "NEAT" - it isn't simplifying, it's just confusing and wrong.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
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.
Whoops. I've been calling it that for a while. We need a name for TDEE - exercise then.0 -
Whoops. I've been calling it that for a while. We need a name for TDEE - exercise then.
TDEEME0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions