Is my deficit too high?

bjkoziara

Hi all. First, I did search the forums but I'm looking for more specific opinions.

I'm a 5'6", 342 pound, 26 year old female. Based on the BMR calculators I've used, my BMR seems to be somewhere in the 2300-2400 range (interestingly, I got different results with each one) but probably closer to 2300.

Up until 2 days ago, I was using an app that had my goal set at 1700 calories for the day. This is about a ~600 calorie deficit depending on my actual BMR.

MFP has my goal set at 2100, which seems to be about a 200 calorie deficit per day. However, I have been pretty happy at around the 1700 mark. I get my fill and I'm not hungry throughout the day. I have been adding some more calorie dense foods in in the last week or so just to reach 1700. I don't want to get in the habit of eating when I'm not hungry, as that's part of the reason I got this big.

That all being said - if I'm eating a net of 1700ish calories per day, is that too much of a deficit? Should I strive to eat closer to 2100? Are the BMR numbers I found wildly inaccurate?

Your opinions are welcome and appreciated.

kimny72

You don't need a deficit from BMR - that's the calories you would burn in a coma. You need a deficit from your TDEE, which is your BMR + the calories you burn moving around during the day + the calories you burn exercising.

How long have you been eating 1700? How much weight have you lost in that time? How do you measure your portions?

Your TDEE if sedentary is @ 2700 calories, so 1700 would be what you need for @ 2 lbs per week. If you exercise, it's more. It's probably fine for you to lose at that pace in the beginning with so much to lose. What rate of loss and activity level did you choose?

kommodevaran

It's not so much about inaccuracy of BMR - a discrepancy of 100 is not much.

It's a lot about understanding what BMR is. It's what you expend in a coma. You're not in a coma.

Then there's proper logging. You have to log correctly (using a food scale) in order to ensure you're not eating more than you think. 1700 calories isn't that much, there isn't much room for calorie dense foods at all. Keep in mind that your idea of normal portions is skewed.

Then there's how long you'll be able to sustain a deficit. You wll have to eat properly, but not too properly, and maybe tolerate mild hunger, and definitely cravings.

bjkoziara

Oooh okay! That makes more sense. I've been eating 1700 for 3 weeks, I've lost just about 8 pounds. I typically weigh things that need to be weighed, but things that come in a package I just add in.

I go hiking once a week, usually for a couple of miles. The hikes vary from beginner to intermediate. Other than that I have a desk job and just try to get 10,000 steps a day. I'm sort of taking things slow at the moment. I believe I chose 1.5lbs a week weight loss.

Thank you for the advice! That's really helpful.

nutmegoreo

Sounds like you're doing fine based on your rate of loss. There will always be inaccuracies in logging, so I find it's best to go off real world numbers. As you get closer to goal weight or if you notice weight loss slowing over several weeks you might need to tighten up the logging (weighing even the packaged items). For now, keep on what you're doing.

kommodevaran

bjkoziara wrote: »

Oooh okay! That makes more sense. I've been eating 1700 for 3 weeks, I've lost just about 8 pounds. I typically weigh things that need to be weighed, but things that come in a package I just add in.

I go hiking once a week, usually for a couple of miles. The hikes vary from beginner to intermediate. Other than that I have a desk job and just try to get 10,000 steps a day. I'm sort of taking things slow at the moment. I believe I chose 1.5lbs a week weight loss.

Thank you for the advice! That's really helpful.

And thank you for giving more, accurate, measurable and really relevant, information. Your weight trend is important feedback, because it tells you how large your calorie deficit has been. 3500 calories equals a pound. You have lost 172 grams per day on average. Or 1209 grams per week. And that's also your daily deficit. If you really eat 1700 calories, it means your real TDEE is 2909. This is a great start. You will have to be more and more diligent as you lose, to continue losing, but this is a really great start. (You may have lost some initial water weight as part of those 8 pounds, but it's still a great start.)

cwolfman13

bjkoziara wrote: »

Hi all. First, I did search the forums but I'm looking for more specific opinions.

I'm a 5'6", 342 pound, 26 year old female. Based on the BMR calculators I've used, my BMR seems to be somewhere in the 2300-2400 range (interestingly, I got different results with each one) but probably closer to 2300.

Up until 2 days ago, I was using an app that had my goal set at 1700 calories for the day. This is about a ~600 calorie deficit depending on my actual BMR.

MFP has my goal set at 2100, which seems to be about a 200 calorie deficit per day. However, I have been pretty happy at around the 1700 mark. I get my fill and I'm not hungry throughout the day. I have been adding some more calorie dense foods in in the last week or so just to reach 1700. I don't want to get in the habit of eating when I'm not hungry, as that's part of the reason I got this big.

That all being said - if I'm eating a net of 1700ish calories per day, is that too much of a deficit? Should I strive to eat closer to 2100? Are the BMR numbers I found wildly inaccurate?

Your opinions are welcome and appreciated.

Your deficit isn't from your BMR...your BMR is the calories you burn merely existing. Your deficit is from your NEAT or TDEE. MFP is a NEAT (Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis) calculator whereby your calorie target is derived from your stats and your day to day activity without exercise. To account for exercise, you log it and get additional calories to compensate for that unaccounted for activity.

This and any other calculator is just giving you an estimate in order to provide for a reasonably good starting point...different calculators use different algorithms and thus provide for different estimates. If you think about it, it would be impossible for one of these very simple calculators to provide an individuals exact calorie requirements. They give you a reasonably good starting point and then you make adjustments per your actual results and rate of loss or lack thereof.

AnnPT77

Your actual average results are the best guide to whether your deficit is too big.

Obviously, anyone who gets weak, fatigued, or has other negative symptoms should eat more (or perhaps eat more nutritiously, if there are problems in that area).

Beyond that, many here consider it a good rule of thumb to avoid losing more than 1% of body weight weekly, unless under close medical supervision. (Slower would be better for most when within 50 pounds of goal, but you're not there yet. Faster could be OK for someone very obese, but the close medical supervision is probably a good plan in that case because of the potential for health complications. Losing slower than those risk-avoidance guidelines is always fine, of course, if going slower makes the process more doable.)

Three weeks' results is a bit short to get a completely valid average weekly loss, especially for a pre-menopausal woman (I'm guessing you're in that demographic): Hormone levels change over the course of a menstrual cycle, and can lead to water weight fluctuations that make things look odd temporarily, but average out once you have a full menstrual cycle of data.

If your current loss rate stays about what it has been so far, you're doing great, as long as you feel fine physically, and the process is sustainable. It's good to pay attention - I lost too fast for a bit, and felt great . . . until I didn't. It's good to notice your energy level, strength, etc., so that you catch any problems quickly, should they occur.

bjkoziara

Thank you, everyone! I have been feeling really great with how I'm eating at the moment. If that starts to change, I will definitely adjust as necessary. I have been avoiding anything with lactose (I'm lactose intolerant but pretty much ignored that before) and have also been eating less fried foods and I feel great so far!

MiaisMIAinMiami

bjkoziara wrote: »

Thank you, everyone! I have been feeling really great with how I'm eating at the moment. If that starts to change, I will definitely adjust as necessary. I have been avoiding anything with lactose (I'm lactose intolerant but pretty much ignored that before) and have also been eating less fried foods and I feel great so far!

As a lactose intolerant person myself, I thoroughly recommend unsweetened Cashew milk for coffee/cooking when you hit that wall. Also, lactase tablets are amazing. Eventually you will want something with milk 😂. Be prepared.