How to calculate maintenance calories?

ClosetBayesian

I am within five pounds or so of my personal goal weight. Hurrah!

I am happy with what and how much I am eating right now. I don't feel deprived, hungry, etc. Both the Scooby TDEE calculator and the IIFYM calculator indicate maintenance would be roughly 100 - 200 more calories per day than I eat right now.

I just don't want to do that. I'm of the "if it's not broken, don't fix it" mentality. I'm happy with things the way they are now. I'm a creature of habit; the idea of eating more is uncomfortable - not in a more-calories-is-bad sort of way, but in that I'd have to Do Something Different. I don't particularly want eat random calorie-dense stuff just to make up those extra 100-200 cals between my current calories and what I would need to maintain my goal weight.

So... what happens? If I continue eating the calories I am right now.... I suppose I'll lose until I reach the point where my current calories are maintenance for a given weight, right? Trying to reverse engineer what that weight would be is... 20lbs less than what I had originally intended. In terms of BMI, my goal weight puts me at a BMI of 24.8 (yeah, I set the bar low); eating until my current calories are maintenance would put me at a BMI of 21.

Is there something I'm not considering? Is my logic off somehow?

stealthq

Sounds right on*. It's a strategy that others have used here - eat to the TDEE you'd have at your goal weight. Sure, the last bit of loss takes forever, but you don't have to adjust to maintenance because you're already there.

*I'm presuming you factored in the change in TDEE as you lose weight. That'd be the only difference - if you didn't you'd end up a little heavier than you're thinking.

loulamb7

Your logic is fine. Your healthy weight is a range, not a set number, so as long as you're within that range you should be fine. Congrats on your success.

minizebu

You might try utilizing the Body Weight Planner, but don't enter any lifestyle changes to see what weight it ultimately projects for you if you keep your calorie intake at your current level.

This calculator does factor in the change in TDEE as you lose weight, as one of the posters above suggested.

http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-topics/weight-control/body-weight-planner/Pages/bwp.aspx

Christine_72

That's kinda what I'm doing right now. I set my calories to my maintenance weight at sedentary, where as I'm more lightly active/active. I have around the same amount of weight to lose as you.

sijomial

ClosetBayesian wrote: »

Both the Scooby TDEE calculator and the IIFYM calculator indicate maintenance would be roughly 100 - 200 more calories per day than I eat right now.

Are you losing weight at a rate of roughly a pound every 17 - 35 days?
That would be a way of confirming the calculations work for you and compensate for your food logging accuracy.

EvgeniZyntx

depends on a few factors but no - that isn't how this works*.

You'll end up at a higher weight the "reversed engineered" weight because there is a hysteresis effect in weight loss (at least for an extended period), or that is what the studies seem to say - I'm assuming that it is partially that one doesn't actually fully get rid of the "additional scaffolding" in metabolic function, fat cells, etc for quite a while. And as you approach a balance point you'll see an invisible increase in NEAT (leg movements, nervousness, etc...) that the estimator calculators don't take into account. One actually needs to undercut to hit a goal weight and not approach it asymptotically.

Having said that, do what you are doing, it's fine - the weight loss will stop between the 21 and 24.8 BMI and that's fine.

On the other hand, there is an argument that BMR is more a function of lean body mass (LBM) that actual weight (see the Katch McArdle equations) so if you maintained the same LBM you'd continue to see a drop in weight (fat loss) from under-eating while maintaining the same TDEE. Obviously that isn't quite true - there are physiological forces that limit the LBM vs fat ratios during weight loss. But it could be possible argued that if you resistance train significantly you'll keep a larger part of your LBM (and TDEE) during the cut.

Finally, you are making the assumption that you'll have the same activity level as you have now. A few studies have shown that humans have spontaneous higher levels of activity at lower weight. It isn't that you are suddenly going to start running marathons - but there is a hormonal signaling that affects how active we are (this might be part of the whole NEAT thing). This might suggest you'll actually see a small increase in base BMR vs the linear TDEE equations.

tl;dr - *sounds right on - more or less.

ClosetBayesian

sijomial wrote: »

ClosetBayesian wrote: »

Both the Scooby TDEE calculator and the IIFYM calculator indicate maintenance would be roughly 100 - 200 more calories per day than I eat right now.

Are you losing weight at a rate of roughly a pound every 17 - 35 days?
That would be a way of confirming the calculations work for you and compensate for your food logging accuracy.

I'm at roughly a pound or two per month, so that seems about right.

EvgeniZyntx wrote: »

depends on a few factors but no - that isn't how this works*.

You'll end up at a higher weight the "reversed engineered" weight because there is a hysteresis effect in weight loss (at least for an extended period), or that is what the studies seem to say - I'm assuming that it is partially that one doesn't actually fully get rid of the "additional scaffolding" in metabolic function, fat cells, etc for quite a while. And as you approach a balance point you'll see an invisible increase in NEAT (leg movements, nervousness, etc...) that the estimator calculators don't take into account. One actually needs to undercut to hit a goal weight and not approach it asymptotically.

Having said that, do what you are doing, it's fine - the weight loss will stop between the 21 and 24.8 BMI and that's fine.

On the other hand, there is an argument that BMR is more a function of lean body mass (LBM) that actual weight (see the Katch McArdle equations) so if you maintained the same LBM you'd continue to see a drop in weight (fat loss) from under-eating while maintaining the same TDEE. Obviously that isn't quite true - there are physiological forces that limit the LBM vs fat ratios during weight loss. But it could be possible argued that if you resistance train significantly you'll keep a larger part of your LBM (and TDEE) during the cut.

Finally, you are making the assumption that you'll have the same activity level as you have now. A few studies have shown that humans have spontaneous higher levels of activity at lower weight. It isn't that you are suddenly going to start running marathons - but there is a hormonal signaling that affects how active we are (this might be part of the whole NEAT thing). This might suggest you'll actually see a small increase in base BMR vs the linear TDEE equations.

tl;dr - *sounds right on - more or less.

Interesting! Thanks!

AnnPT77

EvgeniZyntx wrote: »

depends on a few factors but no - that isn't how this works*.

You'll end up at a higher weight the "reversed engineered" weight because there is a hysteresis effect in weight loss (at least for an extended period), or that is what the studies seem to say - I'm assuming that it is partially that one doesn't actually fully get rid of the "additional scaffolding" in metabolic function, fat cells, etc for quite a while. And as you approach a balance point you'll see an invisible increase in NEAT (leg movements, nervousness, etc...) that the estimator calculators don't take into account. One actually needs to undercut to hit a goal weight and not approach it asymptotically.

Having said that, do what you are doing, it's fine - the weight loss will stop between the 21 and 24.8 BMI and that's fine.

On the other hand, there is an argument that BMR is more a function of lean body mass (LBM) that actual weight (see the Katch McArdle equations) so if you maintained the same LBM you'd continue to see a drop in weight (fat loss) from under-eating while maintaining the same TDEE. Obviously that isn't quite true - there are physiological forces that limit the LBM vs fat ratios during weight loss. But it could be possible argued that if you resistance train significantly you'll keep a larger part of your LBM (and TDEE) during the cut.

Finally, you are making the assumption that you'll have the same activity level as you have now. A few studies have shown that humans have spontaneous higher levels of activity at lower weight. It isn't that you are suddenly going to start running marathons - but there is a hormonal signaling that affects how active we are (this might be part of the whole NEAT thing). This might suggest you'll actually see a small increase in base BMR vs the linear TDEE equations.

tl;dr - *sounds right on - more or less.

I'm not OP, but thank you. That was a super-pithy summary of a bunch of stuff that's been floating around loose in my head in un-synthesized form, as I'm figuring out how to head into maintenance. (And you're the guy who gave us that swoon-y exporter/spreadsheet, too . . . wow.)

Intellectually nutrition-dense post: Appreciate it!

macchiatto

See how it goes; I'd be curious to hear your results.
For me, my weight loss slowed way down as I got closer to goal weight, despite what simple calculations may have indicated. I'm not sure why but I was already below my original GW and just 1.5 lbs above my revised GW and decided not to fight it any more so I'm gradually increasing calories to maintenance.