NEED HELP WITH THE BMR.....

ninerschick

Ok so im confused ive been doing this for about 118 days now and im lost on this BMR thing and how to see how much or less calories i should eat right now MFP gots me on a 1410 calories a day and im at 197lbs and i see everyone's success stories and saying how much calories they take in a day and that they upped they calories and all that....and that they ate back there exercise calories so am i supposed to eat what i worked out and what should my calorie tracker be at im so lost....i feel like im wasting my time and not losing nothing even though i have 18lbs so far pls i need help i will take any kind of advice anything....pls...thanks for ur time

lisa28115

http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/

go here and find out your BMR
add 20% to th at number and get your TDEE

eat between your BMR and TDEE

never eat below your BMR

set your macros to 40% carb, 30% fat and 30% protein

hope this helps:bigsmile:

Jade17694

http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/

go here and find out your BMR
add 20% to th at number and get your TDEE

eat between your BMR and TDEE

never eat below your BMR

set your macros to 40% carb, 30% fat and 30% protein

hope this helps:bigsmile:

Sorry to cut in, why set them to this?

lisa28115

helps you eat clean
and it is good for helping you to build lean muscle mass

are u doing any strength training???

its important to build muscle...muscles burn calories
fat is fat:bigsmile:

ninerschick

Ok im so lost my BMR says 1527....so what is the best way to lose weight ? Right now im doing the 30DS

lisa28115

Ok im so lost my BMR says 1527....so what is the best way to lose weight ? Right now im doing the 30DS

you weigh about what i do
i am only 5'1"

on this advise of some wise MFPers here i am set up this way

1800 calories no matter what
on days i do alot of exercise i may eat 1900

macro set to 30% protein and 30% fat

try this for a couple weeks and see if your scale moves

Awkward30

I don't get why people think the bmr is a magic number. Especially for women that aren't obese. I say especially this population because the numbers are so much lower. I still have almost 40 pounds of fat on my frame, I can handle more than a 200 cal deficit!

The whole point is to force your body to use fat stores because you are not providing it with enough energy.

Also, fat is metabolically active, albeit not very, and the effect of adding muscle is pretty negligible. On the order of tens of calories per day. Definitely not enough to make up for the loss of overall mass from fat loss.

ninerschick

So on that note im soooo lost yes i know "damn its so easy" but not when u dont know what ur really looking at im so confused i dont want to eat so much and eat so lil...

heybales

I don't get why people think the bmr is a magic number. Especially for women that aren't obese. I say especially this population because the numbers are so much lower. I still have almost 40 pounds of fat on my frame, I can handle more than a 200 cal deficit!

The whole point is to force your body to use fat stores because you are not providing it with enough energy.

Also, fat is metabolically active, albeit not very, and the effect of adding muscle is pretty negligible. On the order of tens of calories per day. Definitely not enough to make up for the loss of overall mass from fat loss.

BMR is a magic number, whether the estimated healthy BMR is your real actual one or not. But at least it's a place to start.

Because that is your metabolism. If you manage to suppress it greatly, then ALL your activity calories burn less.

You have just slowed your weight loss potential.

And usually no one wants to lose weight slower than possible. Why else would so many women chose 2lb weekly weight loss goal and cause the daily goal to actually be under their BMR?

lisa28115

I don't get why people think the bmr is a magic number. Especially for women that aren't obese. I say especially this population because the numbers are so much lower. I still have almost 40 pounds of fat on my frame, I can handle more than a 200 cal deficit!

The whole point is to force your body to use fat stores because you are not providing it with enough energy.

Also, fat is metabolically active, albeit not very, and the effect of adding muscle is pretty negligible. On the order of tens of calories per day. Definitely not enough to make up for the loss of overall mass from fat loss.

BMR is a magic number, whether the estimated healthy BMR is your real actual one or not. But at least it's a place to start.

Because that is your metabolism. If you manage to suppress it greatly, then ALL your activity calories burn less.

You have just slowed your weight loss potential.

And usually no one wants to lose weight slower than possible. Why else would so many women chose 2lb weekly weight loss goal and cause the daily goal to actually be under their BMR?

thank you ...heybales:bigsmile:

ninerschick

Ok so i should set my calorie intake to what my BMR says than and dont eat any higher than that?...and still do my regular exercises?

heybales

So on that note im soooo lost yes i know "damn its so easy" but not when u dont know what ur really looking at im so confused i dont want to eat so much and eat so lil...

So what exactly with the instructions that were given are getting your lost?

Did you actually go and calculate your bodyfat%, And then enter in current weight, goal weight, height, age, gender, and click Submit?

Did you read the whole 2 paragraphs under How many calories I should eat? Did you look at the activity levels and descriptions?
30DS every single day? Is that 30 minutes the extent of your daily activity, or do you actually walk around for other things?
Sounds like at the least the 3-5 day level, if not rounding up to nearest 100 value towards higher level.

Don't want to eat too much - but do you know how many calories you used to eat that maintained you at the weight you no longer want to be at?
Then how could you possibly think the number shown there to eat is high if you have nothing to compare it too?

You'll need to slow down and understand if you don't want to repeat this effort in the future. No one can hold your hand ALL the time. The sooner you can do a few things for yourself, the better in the long run you'll be.

ninerschick

Im lost at how much i should take in a day because i have been taken in less than my bmr says thats what im confused i have been eating around 1410 what mfp put me at.....lately i have been doing the 30DS but b4 all that i was doing tae bo and circuit training and the wii active sports im not saying i want someone to hold my hand ALL the way i just wanted to know that lil thing thats it..other than that i can do it all on my own just like i said i have seen other stories that said they ate closer or around the bmr and i just wanted a lil more info on that thats it....

juliekaiser1988

I have set my number at 1500 cals per day and eating back my exercise calories. Been working well for me.

I just looked up the whole "fat2fit" thing and in reality, I'm pretty close to being dead on doing it my way.

heybales

Im lost at how much i should take in a day because i have been taken in less than my bmr says thats what im confused i have been eating around 1410 what mfp put me at.....lately i have been doing the 30DS but b4 all that i was doing tae bo and circuit training and the wii active sports im not saying i want someone to hold my hand ALL the way i just wanted to know that lil thing thats it..other than that i can do it all on my own just like i said i have seen other stories that said they ate closer or around the bmr and i just wanted a lil more info on that thats it....

Ah, understood, being very smart since you've seen those success stories in other topics.
Well, that is indeed the idea.

If you have accurate estimates of your exercise calories, and don't mind eating them back the day they are credited, then you indeed select a daily NET goal slightly above your current BMR.
Then you eat back your exercise calories.

Or you do the process mentioned in above post, and in that case you do NOT eat it back. That above process gives you an eating goal based on your goal weight, not current weight. And it already includes exercise calories, but you have to select the correct activity level.

And to be clear, it's not eating slightly above BMR, it is NETTING above BMR.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/518533-major-sucess-with-higher-calories

If you do eat back exercise calories, you can also setup MFP to make your goal slightly above.

Go to MFP Settings - Diet/Fitness profile
enter activity level of lightly active
Enter weight loss goal of 1lb weekly

The net daily goal set should be about 1561, slightly above BMR of 1527.

Then this way, as your weight drops, MFP will adjust the daily goal, and for a long time should always be above your BMR.

Will you only lose 1 lb weekly?
No. Do you know how many calories you burn everyday in your non-exercise calories?
How could MFP know then?
You'll burn more than that, especially if your metabolism isn't slowed down.

lisa28115

Ok so i should set my calorie intake to what my BMR says than and dont eat any higher than that?...and still do my regular exercises?

set yourself at 1800 per day

and go from there....see how u feel
see if the scale moves
don't worry about eating back calories
and take 2 rest days

do that for a few weeks and if you have to tweak things again

try it ..might surprise u:bigsmile:

ninerschick

Ok i will try this and thanks to all who has helped me and if there is any other advice i will take....thanks again...love u all

Awkward30

I've abused my free pub med to no end and there really is no magic reason to eat above your bmr. Evidence supports that the more dramatic your deficit, the more lean mass losses... But even figure competitors cut 500+ cals a day, which for a fit woman would be for sure below bmr on none workout days and probably close on workout days, depending on the cardio.

My point isn't that it is bad advice, I just take issue with the calorie fear mongering in these forums. "you MUST eat 1200 cals or you will mess your body up for life!" "you MUST eat at least your bmr or you will gain 10 lbs a week." there is a lot of room for trial and error. See what works for you and change things that aren't working!

heybales

I've abused my free pub med to no end and there really is no magic reason to eat above your bmr. Evidence supports that the more dramatic your deficit, the more lean mass losses... But even figure competitors cut 500+ cals a day, which for a fit woman would be for sure below bmr on none workout days and probably close on workout days, depending on the cardio.

My point isn't that it is bad advice, I just take issue with the calorie fear mongering in these forums. "you MUST eat 1200 cals or you will mess your body up for life!" "you MUST eat at least your bmr or you will gain 10 lbs a week." there is a lot of room for trial and error. See what works for you and change things that aren't working!

Here are the studies that shows what can happen - plateauing as your metabolism slows down - because your eating level becomes your maintenance level and so no deficit anymore.

showing the predicted changes in metabolic rates decline sharply in individuals undergoing adaptive thermogenesis which does lead to plateauing.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11430776
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19660148
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20054213
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17260010

Figure competitors are still working out a lot. Most people have an easy 500 cal's worth of daily activity outside exercise, as they probably do. And their TDEE is going to be very healthy.
I doubt greatly that dropping 500 would put them anywhere near their BMR, I'll bet they are still in the clear by a good 500.

Regarding the eating 1200 or netting above your BMR, there are some very good reasons totally related to just how the body uses energy, and what it does if it doesn't get enough of the right kind combined with the amount/type of workouts you are doing.

But these recommendations are coming from mainly women that have "trialed and errored" on the more aggravating potentially dangerous side of the equation. So they are recommending doing it on the safe side, which still causes weight loss, usually more.

Not really sure how women explaining what happened to them personally is fear mongering. And if people looked at their own history along with those comments, they would probably realize that the success/fails they had in the past are totally for the same reason.

People trying to help others view their own history or at least someone else's for a purpose of not repeating it.