Interesting things about AMR, and caloric relation.

registers

AMR, TDEE, they're both synonymssynonyms for how many calories you burn a day. I'll use the AMR instead of TDEE.
AMR = Active Metabolic Rate
TDEE = Total Daily Energy Expenditure.

My philosophy is pretty much simple for weight loss. Eat below your AMR, and you will lose weight and of course exercise to prevent your metabolism from slowing down. I remembered an old book by some great nutritionist who has worked with top celebrities, he says to eat more... He says if you're not eating at your AMR your metabolism is suppressed. The formula is pretty simple,

A = your daily caloric intake
B = your AMR
C = how efficient your metabolism is (goal is to be at 100 or above)
(A / * 100 = C

Lets say that my AMR is 2000 calories, and I eat 1500 Yes, that's a given. What if I ate 2000 calories and my AMR was at 2000 calories, can i lose weight? No, I'll maintain my same weight. I was thinking about this for a few hours. I went to go refernece another book i had by some one with a phD in nutrition. Their formula on how many calories to consume was

kg = weight in kilograms (2.20 pounds per kilo, divide your weight by 2.20 to get kilos)
kg*40 = calories to consume.
Try this formula and see what you get... My AMR is around 3300, they almost wants me to consume double the calories of my AMR.

After i got past my mood of "I wish this person was in front of me so I can beat them in the head with their book." I started to think, this person did make some very valid points about carbohydrates... They go against what I say, "lower your carbs" They say to "increase your carbs." They talk about eating a carb based meal before you do cardio. Studies have shown that not eating before a workout burns more fat. They talk about your energy for your workout, you need carbs to burn fat, if you don't have much glyocgen in the muscle you won't be able to lift intense. Those are pretty valid points.

The first book i mentioned, says to increase your caloric intake by 10% if you're metabolic efficiency is below 80%(formula above), if it's at 80% or above, eat at your AMR. This makes no sense to increase your caloric intake to lose weight.

So what's with all this stuff, we know we need to reduce our caloric intake to reduce our weight, those are the laws of physics.
They also say "eat more to speed up your metabolism" Where a study opposes this theory. It makes no difference if you eat once a day or 10 times a day. One law of thermodynamics states "energy can't be created or destroyed." Here's the kicker, they said "eat MORE a day" this means MORE CALORIES, not necessarily MORE FREQUENTLY. Can you lose weight on a reduced caloric diet, yes you can. Can you lose weight on a increased caloric diet. Yes you can. What is the one crucial difference, what is metabolism? It's how much energy your body is producing. It all boils down to 1 thing... exercise, exercise, exercise. Can I eat double my calories and still lose weight? Yes... if i exercise enough. The first book i referenced where it says to eat 10% more of your calories if you're metabolism is at 80%. It also has a resistance routine. The one with the person of the PhD is a book for sports performance, its' for athletes of course they work out a lot. Most people who know me, know I am about "eating less." This information puts a new twist on things. This also explains why some people who eat more can lose weight, and why some people who eat less also can lose weight. I still completely believe in IF(intermittent fasting) that hasn't changed, what has changed is the calories consumed and the amount of exercise.

Everytime I think about increasing my caloric intake, I am reminded by how lower caloric diets have been linked to longer life span. This boils down to performance, I do believe this information is accurate for performance(if you're an athlete, or training for something) If you're just losing weight for aesthetic purposes, I still believe in lowering your caloric intake, not increasing it.