BMR: what does it mean?

BenjaminMFP88

All of these acronyms make me think I just need to go see a nutritionist and be done with internet guess work.

Sorry, didn't mean to inundate you with mumbo jumbo, but you did ask what BMR meant I thought a more indepth explination would help answer as many questions at once.

Seeing a nutritionist when you first get started is always a wise decision. However, unless you are willing to fork over a significant amount of $$, there are basic concepts/principals you will need to comprehend as they will guide you through your fitness goals for the rest of your life. These concepts will help you adjust your needs basid on your situation and desires and it just isn't optimal to visit a nutritionist every time your goals change. Learning things like BMR and TDEE are basic steps into discovering your caloric needs. From there it's learning how to fill up those Calories and how to efficiently burn them in the way you want to.

Goal175lbs

Your BMR is the amount of calories you burn if you slept all day. In reality, if you are a sedentary person, you still do more than sleep all day, so to get an accurate estimate of the amount of calories you burn in a day, multiply your BMR by 1.2. Yes, you can eat below your BMR number, people do it all the time, this is not starving yourself. Your body will simply use the fat off your *kitten* as calories. I eat below my BMR and have been losing between 2 to 3 pounds a week on average. Currently, at 5'10" and 241lbs, my BMR is 2266 calories per day. You better believe I eat less than that. I eat less than 1630 a day. Using the Harris-Benedict equation and multiplying my BMR by 1.2, I burn approximately 2,720 calories a day. I'm running a deficit of just over 1000 calories a day leading up to a theoretical 2 pounds of fat lost per week. I eat below my BMR and I'm losing weight at a reasonable pace, and I feel fine.

WalkingAlong

All of these acronyms make me think I just need to go see a nutritionist and be done with internet guess work.

They try to make it into rocket science here. The vast majority of people will lose weight on 1500 calories a day.

Or even simpler-- are you maintaining? Eat less, move more. Are you gaining? Eat a lot less, move more.

*sigh*

Sigh all you want, it's true. Let me guess... you think 1500 is unsafe because it's below BMR for some? Show me any book or authoritative article that says it is unsafe to eat below one's BMR (not 'VLCD') and I will never post that here again.

Cedura

Well for those concerned I have no interest in learning for myself how to set my goals, rest assured that is not the case. The reason I said "maybe I should just see a nutritionist" is because, in my opinion, it is their JOB to understand, and help me understand all these numbers. They can TEACH me how to set my own goals (similar to my personal trainer at the Gym teaching me how to use all the machines- now I have learned and no longer feel the need to have a trainer).

My Body fat is over 37%- so yes I have a LOT to lose. Long term, I have over 80 lbs to lose.

I have a desk job where I sit in a chair for 8 hours a day. When I am not at work, I am in school (or doing homework) where I also sit. My life is constant sitting unless I take a walk on my lunch break- and then I strap a pedometer on and log that activity. I do housework, and log that activity as accurately as possible. Obviously I have been doing a little of something right, because I have lost 14 lbs and an inch or so from my waist line.

Really what I am most concerned about is based on this BMR number, and based on what my allotted calories are for one day, is this sustainable for my body, or am I eating too little.

I am going to check out the TDEE calculator that has been mentioned. It seems like it works for a lot of people.

Mr_Knight

My Body fat is over 37%- so yes I have a LOT to lose. Long term, I have over 80 lbs to lose.

If you have over 80 lbs to lose, your BF% is almost certainly considerably above 37% and more like 50%. In which case, try this calculator, using the Katch-McCardle option...

http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/

ninerbuff

As mentioned, it's better to reduce your moderate deficit from your TDEE. Now just for clarification, if you're sedentary and your TDEE ends up being 2150 and you end up eating 1650 (under your BMR), then you should be fine. It's probably not good if your TDEE is over 3000 (unless of course you're morbidly obese).
Just be safe and smart. Get your TDEE and subtract 500 calories (a pound a week average weight loss).

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

MyChocolateDiet

Basal Metabolic Rate. So yeah you'd probably lose weight if you ate that number since you are probably not in a coma and that has been described as coma status cal burn. like NO MOVEMENT at all the cals it would take to sustain your comatose body at the size it is currently.

Likely you move around to the tune of at least 300 cals per day just with getting up to eat, bathroom breaks, and getting dressed and other incidentals even if you have a sedentary job so yeah, I bet you would lose weight on that. You are supposed to calculate your TDEE though and take a percent off of that to lose weight though. at least that's how I heard it.

Cedura

Using the Catch-McCardle BMR Calculator from the IIFYM website and the BMI-calculator.net (which gives me 37.7 as my BMI)

Inputting my height and weight and age appropriately- and including my desk job, sedentary activity level
My TDEE score is: 2047
My BMR is : 1706

And if I subtract from my TDEE the recommended 20% (409) then I am at 1638 (MFP had given me 1650) And that is STILL below my BMR.

Have I done something wrong? My math makes sense. But I am, indeed, below my BMR. Is that ok?

Mr_Knight

Using the Catch-McCardle BMR Calculator from the IIFYM website and the BMI-calculator.net (which gives me 37.7 as my BMI)

BMI is not the same as body fat %. What you did will inflate your BMR number.

Also, with 80+ pounds to lose, you can safely go a bit below BMR anyway. But I don't think you'll need to, once you see what your BMR (more or less) actually is.

MyChocolateDiet

Using the Catch-McCardle BMR Calculator from the IIFYM website and the BMI-calculator.net (which gives me 37.7 as my BMI)

BMI is not the same as body fat %. What you did will inflate your BMR number.

Also, with 80+ pounds to lose, you can safely go a bit below BMR anyway. But I don't think you'll need to, once you see what your BMR (more or less) actually is.

no pun intended, right?

BenjaminMFP88

Inputting my height and weight and age appropriately- and including my desk job, sedentary activity level
My TDEE score is: 2047
My BMR is : 1706

If you did it right, then you're fine for now. Your fat stores will convert to energy accounting for the caloric deficit. As you get closer to your target, you'll have to adjust all these numbers though.

Cedura

Alrighty Thanks everyone for the help in starting to understand all this.

heybales

Using the Catch-McCardle BMR Calculator from the IIFYM website and the BMI-calculator.net (which gives me 37.7 as my BMI)

Inputting my height and weight and age appropriately- and including my desk job, sedentary activity level
My TDEE score is: 2047
My BMR is : 1706

And if I subtract from my TDEE the recommended 20% (409) then I am at 1638 (MFP had given me 1650) And that is STILL below my BMR.

Have I done something wrong? My math makes sense. But I am, indeed, below my BMR. Is that ok?

So you selected sedentary - you plan on doing no exercise at all?

And truly sedentary, again, 45 hr desk job and commute sitting, sit most of the weekend, no yard care, walking dogs, playing with kids, long walking shopping, ect?

And if you didn't input bodyfat %, you still didn't use best estimate BMR to start the math with.

Try this spreadsheet at bottom of post to get best estimates of everything, and be honest with your activity and planned exercise.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/813720-spreadsheet-bmr-tdee-deficit-macro-calcs-hrm-zones

Read whatever of that topic you don't understand. Stay on the Simple Setup tab, and Progress tab.

heybales

They try to make it into rocket science here. The vast majority of people will lose weight on 1500 calories a day.

Or even simpler-- are you maintaining? Eat less, move more. Are you gaining? Eat a lot less, move more.

*sigh*

Sigh all you want, it's true. Let me guess... you think 1500 is unsafe because it's below BMR for some? Show me any book or authoritative article that says it is unsafe to eat below one's BMR (not 'VLCD') and I will never post that here again.

I think it was the standard advice she was sighing about.

If you'd been on MFP reading the forums for longer than a month - you'd find your advice to eat less and move more rarely works when someone is already stalled in a diet that they already are eating much less and possibly moving a whole lot more than in their previous life, of course that was not mentioned in the OP's comments in this case.

But your advice is usually given to someone NOT doing a diet yet, and it's very true in that case. But it's ill informed unless you are privy to a whole lot more private info from the OP not mentioned in this topic.

So where is a convenient line to draw in the sand that below this might be stressful to you enough that you will be fighting tooth and nail for fat loss (maybe not weight as muscle mass is lost though)?

Your reference to VLCD sounds like you appreciate there is a line somewhere - how does someone on MFP without the lab tests and direct scientist supervision in a study and confirmation of no other issues, and continued testing that none are coming up - determine that line?

Do you think it's better to start on the low side of any estimates and see what happens, or start on the high side and come down?

Because there are some very good studies results of what happens starting on the low side, results that can affect your whole weight loss attempt and negatively on in to maintenance.

Sure, anyone could lose weight of some sort on 1200 calories too, but is that always healthy? If you consider losing muscle mass, gaining the fat and more of it back when trying to maintain, and repeating the cycle through life with a bad relationship with food healthy.
And ya, read the forums a bit more, you will see exactly those realizations from ones.

Cedura

Thanks for the link and help Heybales.

WalkingAlong

If you'd been on MFP reading the forums for longer than a month...

I'm sure you know that one's registration date here doesn't necessarily have any correlation to their knowledge on the subject. And that you're aware that there's a whole bookstore section on weight loss, other web sites, a field of academic study, scholarly journals, etc. It's sad to think that so many people who register here really have so little foreknowledge that one can just assume that they're all clueless.

There's nearly as much misinformation here as good info, in my opinion. And I've read here before. And I commend some set of you here for lowering the BS level from knee-deep last time I read here to only ankle deep now.

But it IS as simple as eat less, move more, and the OP said she was tired of the acronyms and estimates, which is why I mentioned it. No one NEEDS to calc anything to avoid hurting their long term health. I think the fear of hurting oneself makes it more complex here than it needs to be. Most people don't undereat for long term, in my opinion. I'm sure we differ on that belief. I'd like to see studies that show overweight Americans typically damage their metabolism or LBM by undereating. I know there are studies that show that sustained, deep calorie deficits in the lab show reduced LBM, but this is a whole other thing. Even the people who are sure they're eating 1200 underestimate by 20%, studies show.

michellekicks

If you'd been on MFP reading the forums for longer than a month...

I'm sure you know that one's registration date here doesn't necessarily have any correlation to their knowledge on the subject. And that you're aware that there's a whole bookstore section on weight loss, other web sites, a field of academic study, scholarly journals, etc. It's sad to think that so many people who register here really have so little foreknowledge that one can just assume that they're all clueless.

There's nearly as much misinformation here as good info, in my opinion. And I've read here before. And I commend some set of you here for lowering the BS level from knee-deep last time I read here to only ankle deep now.

But it IS as simple as eat less, move more, and the OP said she was tired of the acronyms and estimates, which is why I mentioned it. No one NEEDS to calc anything to avoid hurting their long term health. I think the fear of hurting oneself makes it more complex here than it needs to be. Most people don't undereat for long term, in my opinion. I'm sure we differ on that belief. I'd like to see studies that show overweight Americans typically damage their metabolism or LBM by undereating. I know there are studies that show that sustained, deep calorie deficits in the lab show reduced LBM, but this is a whole other thing. Even the people who are sure they're eating 1200 underestimate by 20%, studies show.

I disagree with you. If what you say were true there would be no such thing as adaptive thermogenesis. This is also not a place filled with typical Americans. There are many people here who have been learning and applying what they're learning in the areas of nutrition, exercise science, sports nutrition etc. for a very long time. Heybales is one of the smartest and most knowledgeable people here on MFP imho; he has helped countless people get the right mix to achieve their goals.

Mr_Knight

Most people don't undereat for long term, in my opinion.

That is indisputable, as the fatness/obesity numbers demonstrate.

Mr_Knight

If what you say were true there would be no such thing as adaptive thermogenesis.

AT is a small number. Eating at a meaningful caloric deficit guarantees weight loss - the human body cannot slow down enough to compensate for that.

Sarauk2sf

Using the Catch-McCardle BMR Calculator from the IIFYM website and the BMI-calculator.net (which gives me 37.7 as my BMI)

BMI is not the same as body fat %. What you did will inflate your BMR number.

Also, with 80+ pounds to lose, you can safely go a bit below BMR anyway. But I don't think you'll need to, once you see what your BMR (more or less) actually is.

^^agreed.