BMR vs. daily target calories

MossiO

According to MFP's BMR calculator, I burn 1657 calories doing nothing. When I enter in my info to lose 1 pound per week, it gives me a target daily calorie goal of 1570. I'm set at sedentary. Doing the math, a deficit of 100 calories per day will take me 35 days to lose a pound. Can anyone explain how this is supposed to work? Should it not be set at a deficit of 500 calories per day from my BMR to lose a pound a week? I mean, I know I shouldn't go below 1200 and I won't, but I just don't understand the math here.

ccsernica

BMR would be your calorie burn from doing ABSOLUTELY nothing. MFP bases its calculations on NEAT, which takes into account your approximate calorie burn from non-exercise activity like the bit of walking around even the most sedentary people usually do. This is going to be notably higher.

Calories burned from exercise are added on top of that as you record them.

malibu927

Your deficit comes from NEAT, which includes general day to day activity, not from your BMR

serindipte

BMR is basically coma. Even awake and lying in bed, you will burn more than BMR. It's what your organs require to function when you're inert.

MossiO

Ok, that makes more sense. I somehow figured being "sedentary" was pretty close to lying in a coma. Some days...

Thanks!

malibu927

MossiO wrote: »

Ok, that makes more sense. I somehow figured being "sedentary" was pretty close to lying in a coma. Some days...

Thanks!

Nope, it still accounts for work (a desk job), cooking, cleaning, running errands, etc.

MossiO

So do I just figure MFP assumes I'm about 2070 cals/day for NEAT since that's 500 more than my daily calorie goal?

rileysowner

Generally sedentary people burn an additional .2 times their BMR. That means if you eat your BMR calories, you would be at probably a 20% deficit with is considered a fairly aggressive deficit. The way MFP figures things, it does not include intended exercise, which raises the calories burned, and thus you eat more.

SusanMFindlay

MossiO wrote: »

Ok, that makes more sense. I somehow figured being "sedentary" was pretty close to lying in a coma. Some days...

Thanks!

Do you ever stand up? Standing up burns more calories than lying down. That's why even "sedentary" calorie burn is higher than BMR.

trigden1991

BMR cannot be measured. You are talking about TDEE

TavistockToad

You're confusing BMR, TDEE and NEAT

StaciMarie1974

By your typing here - it is safe to assume you are not in a coma. You burn 1657 for your bodily functions each day. That is for your organs (heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, etc.) to do their things. To keep your body temperature under control, to pump blood & oxygen thru your body and so forth.

You move thru your day to some extent. Even if you're sedentary you are on your feet occasionally to move around your house, to/thru your work day, errands, hobbies. The acts of physically moving your body: uses energy as well. Its not as much as BMR and is estimated as a % of it. For sedentary I think the assumption is 20 or 25%.

The total of those two energy consumption factors, less 500 for a planned deficit, is what MFP uses to generate your calorie consumption goal.

Then if you exercise, especially for cardio, you're moving multiple major muscle groups for an extended period of time and that burns MORE calories than your activity level.

MossiO wrote: »

According to MFP's BMR calculator, I burn 1657 calories doing nothing. When I enter in my info to lose 1 pound per week, it gives me a target daily calorie goal of 1570. I'm set at sedentary. Doing the math, a deficit of 100 calories per day will take me 35 days to lose a pound. Can anyone explain how this is supposed to work? Should it not be set at a deficit of 500 calories per day from my BMR to lose a pound a week? I mean, I know I shouldn't go below 1200 and I won't, but I just don't understand the math here.