HCG is the Best!

sarahmaryfearnley

I really have nothing to back that statement up and a totally different question that is getting no response even after bumping it myself

So, here's my real question regarding BMR.

I do not think its a good idea to eat below your BMR for long periods of time but is that net or total cals? I don't think it's a big deal if it happens occasionally but not a good long term plan. Netting below your BMR on a regular basis does not sounds like a good plan at all but what about total cals?

For example, for a BMR ~1500cals, ave total cals ~2000/day but burn ~600cals/day so that the Net is ~1400, below BMR. Ok plan? Bad idea?

MB_Positif

lol, I wish that I could answer your question, but I will comment so your post gets bumped up!

Jessb1985

Hi,

Try this link I found yesterday as I asked the same question myself and found this post:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/471769-an-easier-way-to-setup-goal-calories-eating-for-who-you-wi

Hope it answers your questions!

sarahmaryfearnley

Ah, Jess -

That's the post that prompted my question.

NicolioRussell

Lawl Sarah....I laughed at your attempt to get more people to check out your post! :-D

irisheyez718

Interested in a good response too!

psuLemon

you generally want to aim to net above your BMR. If you do it occassionally, it's not a huge issue because there are days you will net over. Just don't consistently eat under.

KareninCanada

Advice I got from someone on here who I respect:

"You'd be safer eating at or slightly above BMR, and add back accurate-as-possible exercise calories."


So in short, keep your NET calories at or slightly above your calculated BMR.

Sl1ghtly

Consider BMR to be the minimum, and TDEE the maximum. It's really quite simple.

ConkreteChic

I would love an answer to this as well, since I've been eating right at my BMR (net) for awhile now, with some days quite a bit lower, and some decent spike days as well (what I thought was "calorie cycling") and I'm not having any great success with pounds lost.

BTW...i like your attention-grabbing headline. I confess, I went a little drama-queen there for a second and was interested to see how the fight would go...:)

sarahmaryfearnley

Consider BMR to be the minimum, and TDEE the maximum. It's really quite simple.

I don't think it's that simple in reality. I totally understand the concept on paper but the issues I have are:

1) Using MFP and other online calculators, I get a differing BMR with a spread of around 300cals. 300cals per day is a lot for me one way or the other. I reckin' I will need to have an acurate BF% measurement done but that is not in my budget presently.

2) I am also not confident in my TDEE number from MFP. I recently got a FitBit and I seem to be a lot more active than I thought I was.

3) Even if I am more active than my MFP settings, I'm not confident in bumping it up from lightly active to active bc my day to day schedule changes.

4) If I keep my activity level where it is and just add in the additional cals burned as exercise, I have to eat lots more some days than others, which doesn't really work for me. I like routine in my food.

5) For the last month, I have been doing what MFP tells me. BMR=1440, TDEE=1900 (lightly active), Net Cals=1500, which I usually hit (or get close to one way or the other) and should be seeing ~0.8lb/wk loss but that is not really happening the way the simple math indicates it should.

psuLemon

Consider BMR to be the minimum, and TDEE the maximum. It's really quite simple.

I don't think it's that simple in reality. I totally understand the concept on paper but the issues I have are:

1) Using MFP and other online calculators, I get a differing BMR with a spread of around 300cals. 300cals per day is a lot for me one way or the other. I reckin' I will need to have an acurate BF% measurement done but that is not in my budget presently.

2) I am also not confident in my TDEE number from MFP. I recently got a FitBit and I seem to be a lot more active than I thought I was.

3) Even if I am more active than my MFP settings, I'm not confident in bumping it up from lightly active to active bc my day to day schedule changes.

4) If I keep my activity level where it is and just add in the additional cals burned as exercise, I have to eat lots more some days than others, which doesn't really work for me. I like routine in my food.

5) For the last month, I have been doing what MFP tells me. BMR=1440, TDEE=1900 (lightly active), Net Cals=1500, which I usually hit (or get close to one way or the other) and should be seeing ~0.8lb/wk loss but that is not really happening the way the simple math indicates it should.

This is why I suggest looking into Katch McArdle and be honest your actively level. You can't be afraid to eat more and vary your calories. For example, based on my body fat and weight, my BMR is 2080. I workout 6 days a week doing P90X2 so I average around 650 calories burned during exercise and i have a sedentary job. My TDEE according to the figures was around 3200 calories a day so I was eating 2750. Recently, I found out I still wasn't eating enough. One day I ate 3400 calories and the next day I lost 2 lbs. That week I upped my calories to 3000 and have been consistent at losing 1 lb per week. All the websites in the world won't give you the exact answer. That is why you should play with your calories till you find that perfect amount. Yes, you might gain a pound or two or five but you can always back 200 calories off until you get tot that point of weight loss. Also, the best thing you can do is monitor your body fat and weight ratio to see if you are losing lean muscle mass as you lose weight. If you aren't or losing less than 10% then you are on the right track.