Thoughts on Harris Benedict Equation

jbudge1

Do you buy into it? Here is the reason for my doubts on this equation....I am 38, male, 191 lbs, and I exercise 5 days a week. According to this equation I have to eat 2910 calories a day just to maintain my current weight. That seems like an awful lot of calories to me. MFP says I need to eat 1460 per day to lose.

Thoughts?

taso42

Sounds about right. It's an estimate of course. For me, it usually gets me in the right ballpark.

Keep in mind, the number MFP gives you is probably with a deficit factored in, and without exercise factored in.

Mike523

Do you buy into it? Here is the reason for my doubts on this equation....I am 38, male, 191 lbs, and I exercise 5 days a week. According to this equation I have to eat 2910 calories a day just to maintain my current weight. That seems like an awful lot of calories to me. MFP says I need to eat 1460 per day to lose.

Thoughts?

MFP says you need to eat 1460 to lose HOW MUCH? I bet that's for 2 lbs per week, in which case they're subtracting 1000 calories from 2460 maintenance calories. That number is still 450 less than the Harris Benedict number, but that difference is made up by your 5 days a week of exercise.

jbudge1

Do you buy into it? Here is the reason for my doubts on this equation....I am 38, male, 191 lbs, and I exercise 5 days a week. According to this equation I have to eat 2910 calories a day just to maintain my current weight. That seems like an awful lot of calories to me. MFP says I need to eat 1460 per day to lose.

Thoughts?

MFP says you need to eat 1460 to lose HOW MUCH? I bet that's for 2 lbs per week, in which case they're subtracting 1000 calories from 2460 maintenance calories. That number is still 450 less than the Harris Benedict number, but that difference is made up by your 5 days a week of exercise.

You are correct, that is for 2 lbs per week weight loss.

harlanJEN

Do you buy into it? Here is the reason for my doubts on this equation....I am 38, male, 191 lbs, and I exercise 5 days a week. According to this equation I have to eat 2910 calories a day just to maintain my current weight. That seems like an awful lot of calories to me. MFP says I need to eat 1460 per day to lose.

Thoughts?

MFP says you need to eat 1460 to lose HOW MUCH? I bet that's for 2 lbs per week, in which case they're subtracting 1000 calories from 2460 maintenance calories. That number is still 450 less than the Harris Benedict number, but that difference is made up by your 5 days a week of exercise.

You are correct, that is for 2 lbs week

Arrrrgghh! Why does everyone choose that?? Well ..yea... Would be nice, but not realistic.

I'd highly recommend checking out the Eat More to Wigh Less forum group.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/forums/show/3834-eat-more-to-weigh-less

moe0303

The harris benidict formula is based off of body fat percentage. It seems like whatever system you're using is estimating your body fat based on your activity level. This could lead to a wide margin of error. You need to find out your body fat percentage and plug that into the formula.

The other thing to consider is how many calories you burn in your workouts.

EDIT:
FWIW, I pluged the following information into a calculator:

Male
175lbs
68 inches tall
30 years old
18% body fat

I got the resulting BMR

2052

That is just the baseline that you would burn with minimal activity. You would have to add all calories burned during a day's exercise to that number, then subtract the food you eat.

lacroyx

The harris benidict formula is based off of body fat percentage. It seems like whatever system you're using is estimating your body fat based on your activity level. This could lead to a wide margin of error. You need to find out your body fat percentage and plug that into the formula.

The other thing to consider is how many calories you burn in your workouts.

wait isn't it the Katch-McCardle that's based off the BF%?

amyy902

as dumb as this sounds you'll figure out if its right for you. give it say a month or so and if your loosing according to the formula then it works for you, if its not doing what you want it to do, try something differnt. bodies react differntly so its just a guideline

LaMujerMasBonitaDelMundo

I'm not so sure about it but all I can say is that MFP uses another formula to determine your TDEE which for me is very low. According to the Harris Benedict equation, I need to eat 1,800 calories while MFP sets me at 1,650 (both are set to lightly active) to maintain my weight however with the MFP settings, I still keep on losing weight even if I'm only maintaining which why I adjusted my settings from maintain my current weight to gain 1/2 pound a week & I now it says that I need to eat minimum of 1850 calories/day which is more close to the Harris Benedict equation & so far it is working for me.

And keep in mind that in Harris Benedict formula, your workouts are already factored in while in MFP settings are not. Instead the ones that are factored in are your non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) or your daily activities that you do outside of your formal workout.

moe0303

The harris benidict formula is based off of body fat percentage. It seems like whatever system you're using is estimating your body fat based on your activity level. This could lead to a wide margin of error. You need to find out your body fat percentage and plug that into the formula.

The other thing to consider is how many calories you burn in your workouts.

wait isn't it the Katch-McCardle that's based off the BF%?

Yes, you are right. My apologies.

In the case of Harris Benidict formula, like LaMujerMasBonita said, I think the interpretation of the activity level is wrong. The MFP program will add calories to your goal based on the exercise that you are doing. This is considered to be in addition to your normal day's activity.

If you work in a job in which you are doing physical labor constantly, you will have a higher activity level than someone who sits at a desk every day. They could both work out 5 days a week, but the laboror will burn a lot more calories.

The Harris-Benedict result for that same individual would be

2179 based on minimal activity (ie, the desk job).

Using the OP's numbers,
I get 2233 as a baseline BMR (for the desk job type)
and a goal of 1233 calories/day to lose 2lbs a week.

harlanJEN

The harris benidict formula is based off of body fat percentage. It seems like whatever system you're using is estimating your body fat based on your activity level. This could lead to a wide margin of error. You need to find out your body fat percentage and plug that into the formula.

The other thing to consider is how many calories you burn in your workouts.

wait isn't it the Katch-McCardle that's based off the BF%?

Yes ..

cdragon_88

the harris benedict equation is an old outdated formula. It does work but its prone to overcalculating. I would recommend using the mifflin st. jeor method instead. though the mifflin st jeor method is still prone to overcalculating, its certaintly better then the old harris benedict one. Ultimately, its up to the you to eat and find out if you need to increase or decrease as with all methods--its just an estimate and a guess and not a sold factual number.

With both cases (method) don't forget to factor in you activity factor for TDEE. After your TDEE you must still factor in your deficit amount mostly recommended at 20-25%. IMO the MFP system is a little confusing since it really doesn't factor in activity factor correctly instead choosing to use the add cals back in method.