Confused!

ladyraven68

You're contradicting yourself. Are you saying the KG*20 formula is BMR, sedentary TDEE, or what? You keep saying that KG*20 would "get you through the day" without exercise, so are you trying to say that you would maintain weight without exercise using that formula? Because that grossly underestimates my maintenance needs by almost 1000 calories without factoring exercise into the equation.

Also, the Harris-Benedict equation is not a BMR calculator, it's a TDEE calculator, you need to know your BMR to use it. The Harris-Benedict equation is BMR * Activity Factor = TDEE. Personally I use the Katch-McArdle formula to calculate BMR, as it uses lean mass, and accounts for body fat. Using your estimate gets me somewhat close to my BMR based on the Mifflin-St Jeor formula, but that certainly wouldn't "get me through the day," even without exercising. Also, TEF is included in the Harris-Benedict equation, it's already factored in, and it isn't even close to factored into the formula you gave.

It's not that I don't understand, it's just that you aren't really making much sense. I guess the part I have a problem with is you trying to say your formula is more accurate than these other formulas, when it's not even close.

No, I am not contradicting myself, and no. Harris-Benedict does not - in ANY way - include TEF in its formula. TEF is a completely separate equation from Harris-Benedict or any other equation! The (kg)(20) is, I'll say it again, NOT a BMR calculation. If you are using M-SJ then you are using a formula for an obese person. Are you obese? If your BMI is between 30-39, then yes you are, and the calculations you are using may be somewhat correct for your size. You said my calculation grossly underestimates your needs by a whopping 1000 calories. Wow. Really? 1000?? How many calories did the BMR or M-SJ or H-B formulations put you on for MAINTENANCE that mine underestimated by nearly A THOUSAND CALORIES??

You keep telling me that H-B is not a BMR calculator. In fact, both Harris-Benedict and Mifflin-St Jeor computations are for BMR. The goal is to calculate your energy needs ABOVE that in order to get an idea of the KINETIC kcals needed to get you through a full day. For either equation, you are required to plug-in your stress level and activity level in order to get the calories needed for an entire 24-hour period. 24 hours include sleep (rest), so yes, it calculates BMR.

My BMR calculates to 1390. According to M-SJ, my REE (BMR) is 1359 and my energy needs are a whopping 2174 (keeping in mind that M-SJ is used for obese people, which I am not). H-B calculates my BEE (BMR) at 1397 and calorie needs as an astounding 2236! If I ate that many kcals in a day I'd weigh over 300 pounds! However, my (kg)(20) calories/kg gives me 1320 calories, though I eat more like 1400. Hardly a near-1000 calorie deficit from either BMR estimate!

My averaged BMR is 1382. I ingest 1400 kcals on days I work out, so I am utilizing a total of 2782 kcals in a full 24-hour period. Add about 500 kcals burned from my daily exercise routines and I have utilized 3282 kcals in total. Viola! Negative energy balance and weight loss of 1 pound per week! Not bad.

Not to sound rude but you appear to be a large woman if your kcals needs are estimated as high as you claim in order for my calculation to give you such a deficit! Excessively heavy people will naturally have a much greater BMR because the body requires much greater effort and velocity to move blood and oxygen through that pressing weight while at rest. That uses far more energy than someone with a smaller frame. So if you are a much heavier person than me you should be utilizing far more kcals than me! You should be seeing 2 pounds less of yourself per week on the scale for awhile. If you are not seeing this then your energy need calculations are wrong. If you are seeing more than this, then kudos! You are a Workout Queen! :flowerforyou: Take care, though, to eat enough protein in order to support that rapid rate of loss. Metabolism thrives in muscle tissue. If your protein intake is too little you will lose a lot of muscle to feed your tissues, and your metabolic rate will decrease as you lose mitochondria.

Your first statements said

"If you truly want to know how many calories to eat, take your current weight, divide it by 2.2 kilograms (kg). Take your kg and multiply it by 20. That is your caloric need, leaving exercise out of the equation. If you never exercised, this calculation is what you need to get you through the day. Add exercise on top of this and you go into calorie deficit...ergo, weight loss. Easy as pie. "

If kgx20 = calories to get you through the day with no EXERCISE, then you are saying that it is TDEE.
If it is meant to be BMR, you have missed out the activity multiplier, or you meant daily activity but wrote Exercise.

Just saying.

tigersword

You're contradicting yourself. Are you saying the KG*20 formula is BMR, sedentary TDEE, or what? You keep saying that KG*20 would "get you through the day" without exercise, so are you trying to say that you would maintain weight without exercise using that formula? Because that grossly underestimates my maintenance needs by almost 1000 calories without factoring exercise into the equation.

Also, the Harris-Benedict equation is not a BMR calculator, it's a TDEE calculator, you need to know your BMR to use it. The Harris-Benedict equation is BMR * Activity Factor = TDEE. Personally I use the Katch-McArdle formula to calculate BMR, as it uses lean mass, and accounts for body fat. Using your estimate gets me somewhat close to my BMR based on the Mifflin-St Jeor formula, but that certainly wouldn't "get me through the day," even without exercising. Also, TEF is included in the Harris-Benedict equation, it's already factored in, and it isn't even close to factored into the formula you gave.

It's not that I don't understand, it's just that you aren't really making much sense. I guess the part I have a problem with is you trying to say your formula is more accurate than these other formulas, when it's not even close.

No, I am not contradicting myself, and no. Harris-Benedict does not - in ANY way - include TEF in its formula. TEF is a completely separate equation from Harris-Benedict or any other equation! The (kg)(20) is, I'll say it again, NOT a BMR calculation. If you are using M-SJ then you are using a formula for an obese person. Are you obese? If your BMI is between 30-39, then yes you are, and the calculations you are using may be somewhat correct for your size. You said my calculation grossly underestimates your needs by a whopping 1000 calories. Wow. Really? 1000?? How many calories did the BMR or M-SJ or H-B formulations put you on for MAINTENANCE that mine underestimated by nearly A THOUSAND CALORIES??

You keep telling me that H-B is not a BMR calculator. In fact, both Harris-Benedict and Mifflin-St Jeor computations are for BMR. The goal is to calculate your energy needs ABOVE that in order to get an idea of the KINETIC kcals needed to get you through a full day. For either equation, you are required to plug-in your stress level and activity level in order to get the calories needed for an entire 24-hour period. 24 hours include sleep (rest), so yes, it calculates BMR.

My BMR calculates to 1390. According to M-SJ, my REE (BMR) is 1359 and my energy needs are a whopping 2174 (keeping in mind that M-SJ is used for obese people, which I am not). H-B calculates my BEE (BMR) at 1397 and calorie needs as an astounding 2236! If I ate that many kcals in a day I'd weigh over 300 pounds! However, my (kg)(20) calories/kg gives me 1320 calories, though I eat more like 1400. Hardly a near-1000 calorie deficit from either BMR estimate!

My averaged BMR is 1382. I ingest 1400 kcals on days I work out, so I am utilizing a total of 2782 kcals in a full 24-hour period. Add about 500 kcals burned from my daily exercise routines and I have utilized 3282 kcals in total. Viola! Negative energy balance and weight loss of 1 pound per week! Not bad.

Not to sound rude but you appear to be a large woman if your kcals needs are estimated as high as you claim in order for my calculation to give you such a deficit! Excessively heavy people will naturally have a much greater BMR because the body requires much greater effort and velocity to move blood and oxygen through that pressing weight while at rest. That uses far more energy than someone with a smaller frame. So if you are a much heavier person than me you should be utilizing far more kcals than me! You should be seeing 2 pounds less of yourself per week on the scale for awhile. If you are not seeing this then your energy need calculations are wrong. If you are seeing more than this, then kudos! You are a Workout Queen! :flowerforyou: Take care, though, to eat enough protein in order to support that rapid rate of loss. Metabolism thrives in muscle tissue. If your protein intake is too little you will lose a lot of muscle to feed your tissues, and your metabolic rate will decrease as you lose mitochondria.

Well, first off, I'm a man, not a woman. I weigh 208 pounds with 16% body fat. Katch-McArdle gives me a BMR of 2029 and a maintenance need of 2699, not including exercise. Using your KG*20 formula I'm given 1880, which would cause me to lose almost 2 pounds a week, even without exercise.

Also, where did you get this idea that Mifflin-St Jeor is supposed to be for obese people?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2305711
It has nothing to do with obese or not obese, it was created using a base of normal weight and obese people and is a formula for predicting BMR in healthy people. Are you just making this up as you go along?

As for whether TEF is included in Harris-Benedict, yes it is. It's included in the activity factor. The Activity factor includes all calories for maintenance needs. You multiply your BMR by an activity factor based on your level of daily activity, and it gives you total maintenance calories, which includes TEF.

agthorn

Right. As I said, BMR can over-estimate or under-estimate caloric needs. It is not the best measuring tool available. Having VO2max is really the best tool to use, but it is quite pricey.

Why do you keep referencing VO2max? That has nothing to do with your metabolic needs. It's a measure of fitness: "the maximum capacity of an individual's body to transport and use oxygen during incremental exercise, which reflects the physical fitness of the individual."

And I maintain my weight at 130 at around 1900 NET calories. I've been doing it for 6 months. Telling me to eat 1182 calories and then exercise is insane.