CICO - it’s truly that simple!!!

nooshi713

AnnPT77 wrote: »

nooshi713 wrote: »

I think the difficult part about this is calculating calorie burn. You should be able to get a good estimate of your calorie burn based on activity, age, weight, body fat etc but some people burn significantly less than expected when using calculators.

And some people burn significantly more than expected when using "calculators", because statistics.

So we all start with a calculator estimate, and adjust based on personal results. Pretty simple. Not necessarily easy, but simple.

Yes but if one burns more than expected then weight loss is easier. If someone is active and based on numbers should have a tdee of 1800 but their real tdee is 1400 then that makes it hard to lose weight.

AnvilHead

nooshi713 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

nooshi713 wrote: »

I think the difficult part about this is calculating calorie burn. You should be able to get a good estimate of your calorie burn based on activity, age, weight, body fat etc but some people burn significantly less than expected when using calculators.

And some people burn significantly more than expected when using "calculators", because statistics.

So we all start with a calculator estimate, and adjust based on personal results. Pretty simple. Not necessarily easy, but simple.

Yes but if one burns more than expected then weight loss is easier. If someone is active and based on numbers should have a tdee of 1800 but their real tdee is 1400 then that makes it hard to lose weight.

Hypothetically, yes. But BMR rarely varies more than about 5% from normal/expected, so that's not often going to be the case.

Aaron_K123

nooshi713 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

nooshi713 wrote: »

I think the difficult part about this is calculating calorie burn. You should be able to get a good estimate of your calorie burn based on activity, age, weight, body fat etc but some people burn significantly less than expected when using calculators.

And some people burn significantly more than expected when using "calculators", because statistics.

So we all start with a calculator estimate, and adjust based on personal results. Pretty simple. Not necessarily easy, but simple.

Yes but if one burns more than expected then weight loss is easier. If someone is active and based on numbers should have a tdee of 1800 but their real tdee is 1400 then that makes it hard to lose weight.

Honestly it isn't easier, if you burn more than you think you are you will have a larger deficit and you will likely feel very hungry or deprived after keeping that up for more than a week....you'd still end up having to adjust.

AnnPT77

nooshi713 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

nooshi713 wrote: »

I think the difficult part about this is calculating calorie burn. You should be able to get a good estimate of your calorie burn based on activity, age, weight, body fat etc but some people burn significantly less than expected when using calculators.

And some people burn significantly more than expected when using "calculators", because statistics.

So we all start with a calculator estimate, and adjust based on personal results. Pretty simple. Not necessarily easy, but simple.

Yes but if one burns more than expected then weight loss is easier. If someone is active and based on numbers should have a tdee of 1800 but their real tdee is 1400 then that makes it hard to lose weight.

The process for both is exactly the same. Each starts with a calculator estimate. The one with an unexpectedly low TDEE fails to lose weight. The one with an unexpectedly high TDEE gets weak and fatigued while losing weight unhealthfully fast. Each notices this, and adjusts calorie intake, or activity level, to achieve the desired healthy weight loss results.

In that sense, it's equally complex or simple for both.

If they're both the same size/age/sex with the same healthy goal weight, the one who has an unexpectedly low TDEE has more difficulty fitting in all the nutrients estimated to be needed for his/her goal weight, because s/he has fewer calories to "buy" those nutrients with, at an equal weight loss rate. (Whether equal nutrients are actually needed by both is anyone's guess; I don't have any science for that, except to say that to the extent the difference in TDEE is related to lean body mass differences, then the person with higher LBM, which is probably the high TDEE person, probably needs more protein.)

We have no way, that I can think of, to know which one has more difficulties with appetite or cravings. It's possible that someone gets just as hungry at a calorie deficit that's X% of TDEE regardless of whether their TDEE is high or low. In this realm, though, the low TDEE person does have more social difficulty, as s/he has to watch people around him/her who can eat a bit more.

So, harder nutritionally, and harder socially, for the lower TDEE person.

We should note that TDEE differences in same-characteristics people are likely to be quite small, unless those differences are somehow activity-related (which could be exercise or NEAT). The RMR bell curve is pretty tall and narrow - small standard deviation. Even LBM differences don't make huge calorie differences, as I understand it.