Depressing TDEE calculation - tell me it's not true!
Replies
-
StaciMarie1974 wrote: »Yes, smaller bodies burn less calories. I am 5'5.5", 135ish and 42 years old. Without intention activity, I'd average about 3000-4000 steps a day due to desk job & commute and my calorie burn would be about 1400-1500 per day. I walk/run daily to push it up to 1800+.maryjaquiss wrote: »I'm short, close to goal and in my healthy weight range (female, 5'3, 134lb - goal 126lb). I've been hovering around the same weight for a couple of weeks so thought I'd calculate my TDEE on IIFYM and it's telling me 1481 with no exercise (I prefer to add that on with accurate-ish calories from HRM - run 30-60 mins 5 times a week and ashtanga yoga 3-4 times a week).
Did some sums and I think based on losing 0.5lb a week I would need to be eating 1231 net. This makes me sad! I have previously been on 1370 but cut that to 1300 recently to try to get closer to goal, always eat back exercise calories, and even this is a bit sad for me. Is it really true? Do I actually have to cut back this much?
(1231 would also put me below my BMR apparently which doesn't seem right?)
Finally someone close to my stats who isn't burning 2200-2500 per day. I always feel so bad about my TDEE.
^^^^^YES-- me too!!!0 -
Yeah that seems about right, I am similar stats to you but I'm active so my TDEE averages 2000-2100 compared to around 1450 if I was sedentary. We can do something about our TDEE just by moving more
0 -
maryjaquiss wrote: »Thanks for your detailed response @b3achy I would definitely consider strength training but balancing family time, exercise and work is so difficult! I think I'm just going to have to grit my teeth and get through the last 8lb as I'm definitely not quite where I want to be, although I do feel so much better!
Just remember the more lean muscle mass you have the more you burn! Sounds like you are on the right track.. nothing beats weighing and logging everything.. You will know what you can and can't do for maintaining and losing.0 -
That's not that bad. I'm eighteen years old, 5'5", 106 lbs., and my TDEE is under 1,400. It sucks.0
-
runningforthetrain wrote: »StaciMarie1974 wrote: »Yes, smaller bodies burn less calories. I am 5'5.5", 135ish and 42 years old. Without intention activity, I'd average about 3000-4000 steps a day due to desk job & commute and my calorie burn would be about 1400-1500 per day. I walk/run daily to push it up to 1800+.maryjaquiss wrote: »I'm short, close to goal and in my healthy weight range (female, 5'3, 134lb - goal 126lb). I've been hovering around the same weight for a couple of weeks so thought I'd calculate my TDEE on IIFYM and it's telling me 1481 with no exercise (I prefer to add that on with accurate-ish calories from HRM - run 30-60 mins 5 times a week and ashtanga yoga 3-4 times a week).
Did some sums and I think based on losing 0.5lb a week I would need to be eating 1231 net. This makes me sad! I have previously been on 1370 but cut that to 1300 recently to try to get closer to goal, always eat back exercise calories, and even this is a bit sad for me. Is it really true? Do I actually have to cut back this much?
(1231 would also put me below my BMR apparently which doesn't seem right?)
Finally someone close to my stats who isn't burning 2200-2500 per day. I always feel so bad about my TDEE.
^^^^^YES-- me too!!!
Add me to the club. And I'm not even remotely sedentary. 15K fitbit steps a day. 20-25 miles a week of that running. Plus heavy lifting 3x times a week. And I know for a fact I gain 2 pounds a month at 1800-2000 a day. Tried it during a "maintenance break" last year and still trying to get back below 140.0 -
I show a BMR of @ 1450 and TDEE of SEDENTARY of @ 20000
-
prattiger65 wrote: »I show a BMR of @ 1450 and TDEE of SEDENTARY of @ 2000
I was wondering if the OP was maybe looking at BMR which sounds more like it...0 -
runningforthetrain wrote: »StaciMarie1974 wrote: »Yes, smaller bodies burn less calories. I am 5'5.5", 135ish and 42 years old. Without intention activity, I'd average about 3000-4000 steps a day due to desk job & commute and my calorie burn would be about 1400-1500 per day. I walk/run daily to push it up to 1800+.maryjaquiss wrote: »I'm short, close to goal and in my healthy weight range (female, 5'3, 134lb - goal 126lb). I've been hovering around the same weight for a couple of weeks so thought I'd calculate my TDEE on IIFYM and it's telling me 1481 with no exercise (I prefer to add that on with accurate-ish calories from HRM - run 30-60 mins 5 times a week and ashtanga yoga 3-4 times a week).
Did some sums and I think based on losing 0.5lb a week I would need to be eating 1231 net. This makes me sad! I have previously been on 1370 but cut that to 1300 recently to try to get closer to goal, always eat back exercise calories, and even this is a bit sad for me. Is it really true? Do I actually have to cut back this much?
(1231 would also put me below my BMR apparently which doesn't seem right?)
Finally someone close to my stats who isn't burning 2200-2500 per day. I always feel so bad about my TDEE.
^^^^^YES-- me too!!!
Add me to the club. And I'm not even remotely sedentary. 15K fitbit steps a day. 20-25 miles a week of that running. Plus heavy lifting 3x times a week. And I know for a fact I gain 2 pounds a month at 1800-2000 a day. Tried it during a "maintenance break" last year and still trying to get back below 140.
A lot of people think they "gain" when they actually achieve their true maintenance...which they do...because when you're truly at maintenance you top of your glycogen...I gained three pounds when I went to my true mainteanance because my glycogen stores were reduced while dieting...it wasn't fat...it's glycogen replenishment and it's a good thing but people are so obsessive about the scale that they freak out about it...1 -
maryjaquiss wrote: »I'm short, close to goal and in my healthy weight range (female, 5'3, 134lb - goal 126lb). I've been hovering around the same weight for a couple of weeks so thought I'd calculate my TDEE on IIFYM and it's telling me 1481 with no exercise (I prefer to add that on with accurate-ish calories from HRM - run 30-60 mins 5 times a week and ashtanga yoga 3-4 times a week).
Did some sums and I think based on losing 0.5lb a week I would need to be eating 1231 net. This makes me sad! I have previously been on 1370 but cut that to 1300 recently to try to get closer to goal, always eat back exercise calories, and even this is a bit sad for me. Is it really true? Do I actually have to cut back this much?
(1231 would also put me below my BMR apparently which doesn't seem right?)
I put your numbers in, and that's what I'm coming up with as a completely sedentary person who basically does nothing...move more in general and do some exercise and it won't be so depressing.
Like literally, this setting is basically you sitting all day and then coming home and just sitting on the couch afterwards and then going to bed0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »runningforthetrain wrote: »StaciMarie1974 wrote: »Yes, smaller bodies burn less calories. I am 5'5.5", 135ish and 42 years old. Without intention activity, I'd average about 3000-4000 steps a day due to desk job & commute and my calorie burn would be about 1400-1500 per day. I walk/run daily to push it up to 1800+.maryjaquiss wrote: »I'm short, close to goal and in my healthy weight range (female, 5'3, 134lb - goal 126lb). I've been hovering around the same weight for a couple of weeks so thought I'd calculate my TDEE on IIFYM and it's telling me 1481 with no exercise (I prefer to add that on with accurate-ish calories from HRM - run 30-60 mins 5 times a week and ashtanga yoga 3-4 times a week).
Did some sums and I think based on losing 0.5lb a week I would need to be eating 1231 net. This makes me sad! I have previously been on 1370 but cut that to 1300 recently to try to get closer to goal, always eat back exercise calories, and even this is a bit sad for me. Is it really true? Do I actually have to cut back this much?
(1231 would also put me below my BMR apparently which doesn't seem right?)
Finally someone close to my stats who isn't burning 2200-2500 per day. I always feel so bad about my TDEE.
^^^^^YES-- me too!!!
Add me to the club. And I'm not even remotely sedentary. 15K fitbit steps a day. 20-25 miles a week of that running. Plus heavy lifting 3x times a week. And I know for a fact I gain 2 pounds a month at 1800-2000 a day. Tried it during a "maintenance break" last year and still trying to get back below 140.
A lot of people think they "gain" when they actually achieve their true maintenance...which they do...because when you're truly at maintenance you top of your glycogen...I gained three pounds when I went to my true mainteanance because my glycogen stores were reduced while dieting...it wasn't fat...it's glycogen replenishment and it's a good thing but people are so obsessive about the scale that they freak out about it...
Yeah, I chalked it up to glycogen and let it go. That's why I gave it 12 weeks. But my average weight trend didn't stabilize and I consistently put on 2 pounds a month and ended up 6 pounds heavier. I did feel better and my lifts all increased dramatically, so I sure some of it was muscle. But and I was edging into the overweight BMI category my pants were getting snug.0 -
maryjaquiss wrote: »Thanks for all the replies. Being short sucks! I have a desk-based office job but I'm going to incorporate more moving so I can eat more cheese.
It's really not the "being short" that's giving you the low numbers though. It's the "being sedentary". 5'3 is actually average height for a woman. Increasing activity level gives you hundreds more calories per day (about 100 calories for every 2000 steps - which is about 1 mile walked).
Also, you didn't post your age but this TDEE calculator ( http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/ ) puts you at just over 1600 cals/day when sedentary if you were 40 years old. Higher than that if younger; lower if older. (But I had to make you 70 years old to get down to 1440 cals/day.)0 -
Try eating back half your exercise calories rather than all of them. Since you have so little to lose, your ideal loss rate is 0.5 lb per week.0
-
maryjaquiss wrote: »maryjaquiss wrote: »Thanks for your detailed response @b3achy I would definitely consider strength training but balancing family time, exercise and work is so difficult! I think I'm just going to have to grit my teeth and get through the last 8lb as I'm definitely not quite where I want to be, although I do feel so much better!
Just remember you can do plenty of resistance/strength training at home without going to a gym. Get some dumb bells or a kettlebell. Do body weight exercises in addition to the yoga. Get some resistance bands. Find exercises you can do lifting your baby. That's why I said you can do more strength training without it being a full on body recomposition, which implies heavy weights, gyms, etc. I only now am using a gym because I had gotten past the capabilities of my personal at home options, and I wanted certain machines for some training I'm doing.
And yea, I thought losing the last bit of weight wasn't going to be any harder than the rest, but it's definitely a game of patience, especially at our size. You can do it!
Ha, I'll be benching my 2 year old later! (If I can catch him)
My little kids love to work out with dad at home. Give your son a little weight of his own and set some goals. Here's something really simple you can do. Grab a can of food, one for him and one for you. Do 10 dumbbell clean and presses with each arm (look it up it's easy), then in 2 days, do 11 of them and increase as you go. Then do 10 squats, you could hold him while you do them. Then do 10 box jumps using a chair while he watches you with a funny look. This just took you 5 minutes, and yes, you will feel it if you adjust the weights to something you feel is heavy So long as you keep increasing the sets or weights you will see progress. Don't forget to write this stuff down or you won't get to 'see' your progress.
I'm actually in favour of body recomp for you. If the last few pounds are difficult, and they are, then it's time to think about an additional measure of progress and change some things up. For me, this is body measurements, waist in particular as it's highly correlated to body fat.1 -
maryjaquiss wrote: »miritikvah wrote: »Seems accurate without exercise added. What lifestyle did u choose? I'm 5'3 110 tdee 1800 with a moderate activity and exercising 4 hours a week or so. My bmr is around 1200-1400. To lose weight I have to eat 1600. If I lowered my exercise/lifestyle is be around there too. Being short and near your goal can suck besides with ur math its 1231 + exercise cals = total cals which should put you above bmr. Try using iifym with exercise added and you could reach the 1370 your used to. If you're seeing results at 1370 then you burn more than it says. Ultimately you know you body the best and these calculators don't take into account some variable so can be slightly off.
I'm not really seeing results at 1370 any more (even accounting for hormonal fluctuations etc) so I do need to cut it a bit but I wasn't happy that it was by so much!RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »That seems about right to me.
But that is with no exercise so once you add those calories on you'll be able to have more.
Have you considered a recomp instead?
Yeah, I'll just have to exercise more so I can keep eating! Haha. Not really considered a recomp - I have a 2 year old and a full-time job which makes it tricky, though I guess not impossible, to get to a gym without severely annoying my husband (running/yoga takes place early morning before everyone gets up and if I had to factor in getting to a gym I'd be sacrificing more sleep than I'd like ideally...
I missed this part...I personally don't know anyone with a two year old who is sedentary...my wife and I have a 4&6 year old and we haven't been sedentary in all those 6 years.
Also, health and fitness is important to both my wife and I...we swap cooking and kid duties throughout the week and make huge efforts to work as a team to get what we need to get done for our family, for each other, and for ourselves individually. I primarily cycle and I lift a couple days per week...she's primarily a runner and lifts one day per week.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions