NOONE can lose 2 lbs per week while Netting BMR...right?

3dogsrunning

Also 2lbs a week is generally recommended for those with more than 100lbs to lose.

aarar

Think your way way way overthinking this weight loss thing

This ^^

jfrankic

Do yourself a favor. Close out the forum post and take 30 minutes to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5C3uqA1yRI&list=FLPbanXUte65g6NKomhmnRlQ&index=1 . This will likely be way better than any info you can get on here. Much better use of your time. I promise.

QuietBloom

I was never that clinical/math-y about it, but I lost 2 pounds a week eating pretty generously. I didn't worry about TDEEs or BMRs or formulas.

I started at 202 pounds (I was 39 at the time.) I'm female and 5'9". I set MFP to sedentary (I have a desk job) and lose half a pound a week. I ate my exercise calories, which meant I was always eating 2000-2200 calories a day.

I should have lost about a half pound a week, but it reality I always lost between 2-3 pounds each week the first few months. Then it slowed down to about a pound a week. All in all, I lost 66 pounds in well under a year.

I've kept it off for almost two years now. I eat anywhere from 2000-2500 calories a day now. I'm not a hardcore exerciser either. I lift weights for 45 minutes 2-3 times a week and go for lots of walks.

Not sure why my weight came off at the rate it did, but it did.

Those calculations are necessarily vague, and assume a lot (such as body fat percent). You may have more LBM than the average woman, thus the higher calorie burns. At any rate, congrats. You did awesome. :drinker:

QuietBloom

"What the heck am I doing wrong???????"

First of all - I smell a troll. First post, been a member since September and starting off with something that is going to be quite contraversial.

Secondly - Relax. This isn't about maths, there are way too many variables to consider other than just calories in and calories out.

Some interesting reading: http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-didnt-get-fat/

Summary: Sam Feltham did a N1 study on eating over 5000 calories a day - 2 versions of the "diet" plan that lasted 3 weeks each. The first time he ate low carb high fat and gained 1.3kg and LOST 3cm off his waist. The second time he ate high carb low fat, gained about 7kg and gained 7cm around his waist.

It's NOT just about the numbers. There is more to it.

An N=1 study is anectodal. Can't even been considered a study, really, as he was the subject, did all the data collection and number crunching. Not much can be concluded from his experience, except maybe that it was interesting. :flowerforyou:

neanderthin

FAt mass should determine deficit imo and if someone has lots of fat to lose then 2 lbs a week is pretty doable and these same people will never be in starvation mode, just can't happen.

Emilie04444

I'm 5 foot 7, I weigh around 230. According to the online calculator I found my BMR is 1758 calories.

Only if you're using them wrong. 1450 is closer to the reality. Eventually, that 300 calorie difference will matter.

I don't think so. I am 5'2 and 189, my BMR is 1532 and it's similar on most calculators..

ThriceBlessed

I'm 5 foot 7, I weigh around 230. According to the online calculator I found my BMR is 1758 calories.

Only if you're using them wrong. 1450 is closer to the reality. Eventually, that 300 calorie difference will matter.

1360 would be my BMR at my ideal weight... so 1758 is about right for my current weight... but regardless, I don't worry about that at all. I eat between 1500-1800 most days. Occasionally more, occasionally less. I exercise a lot, at least 90 minutes a day. I make sure I get enough protein, and the weight is coming off just fine.

And yes, the 300 calories will matter when I lose more weight and my BMR drops. BMR is the calories it takes to maintain your current weight if you do nothing but lie in bed all day... so as a person loses weight their BMR changes.

owlandolive

Thank you for all the responses!


Sorry about the late thanks. Holidays.

owlandolive

Math is incorrect. Your activity multiplier is 1.2 in each of your cases but it can go well above 1.6-1.9.

I can't thank you enough for actually looking at my calculations and answering my question. With math. That's all I wanted...not to start a "starvation mode war" or a TDEE frenzy.

NOW I UNDERSTAND.

owlandolive

Thank you!

owlandolive

I was never that clinical/math-y about it, but I lost 2 pounds a week eating pretty generously. I didn't worry about TDEEs or BMRs or formulas.

I started at 202 pounds (I was 39 at the time.) I'm female and 5'9". I set MFP to sedentary (I have a desk job) and lose half a pound a week. I ate my exercise calories, which meant I was always eating 2000-2200 calories a day.

I should have lost about a half pound a week, but it reality I always lost between 2-3 pounds each week the first few months. Then it slowed down to about a pound a week. All in all, I lost 66 pounds in well under a year.

I've kept it off for almost two years now. I eat anywhere from 2000-2500 calories a day now. I'm not a hardcore exerciser either. I lift weights for 45 minutes 2-3 times a week and go for lots of walks.

Not sure why my weight came off at the rate it did, but it did.

Thank you very much for replying with a real story. Also one that shows MORE loss than predicted.

owlandolive

Also, to those who think "there is more to just numbers," clear up any irrational claims at the link below. There's no mystery ingredients to losing weight, no magic. Only numbers.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1111515-for-the-nerds-in-you-tdee-estimation-with-graphs

Ahhh...thank you. For nerds. Obviously what I need.

owlandolive

Can you cite where you got the information that you can't healthily net under your BMR?

Just MFP forums I read before reaching out with my own question. There seems to be a popular believe that when one nets below BMR for an extended period of time one's metabolism will decrease..."starvation mode."

DamePiglet

First off, starvation mode is not something any dieter in a first world country who is not an anorexic need worry about.

And then...math. Yeah.

yep.

starvation mode. eyeyeyyey

TriShamelessly

Wasn't this same thread posted last week?!

owlandolive

"What the heck am I doing wrong???????"

First of all - I smell a troll. First post, been a member since September and starting off with something that is going to be quite contraversial.

Secondly - Relax. This isn't about maths, there are way too many variables to consider other than just calories in and calories out.

Some interesting reading: http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-didnt-get-fat/

Summary: Sam Feltham did a N1 study on eating over 5000 calories a day - 2 versions of the "diet" plan that lasted 3 weeks each. The first time he ate low carb high fat and gained 1.3kg and LOST 3cm off his waist. The second time he ate high carb low fat, gained about 7kg and gained 7cm around his waist.

It's NOT just about the numbers. There is more to it.

Troll? How?

Because I'm new and don't understand the math of BMR?
Because after reading many forums (as not to waste anyone's time with a question that's been asked), I decided to post because I didn't find my answer?
What am I supposed to do if I'm new, post a series of non-"controversial" questions for a certain amount of time?

Hostile much?

owlandolive

Can you cite where you got the information that you can't healthily net under your BMR?

I wish I could. That's why I put "starvation mode" in quotes. It's something I've only read about here. I've seen some links to a Minnesota VLCD study and some anecdotal evidence here. I don't claim to understand either side well enough to be an advocate or a detractor of this theory.