MFP warning about eating under BMR

Options
1…6791112…26

Replies

  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    Options
    I'm still learning myself and have never been good with figuring out my diet. So in other words someone like me who's BMR is 2024 at mod active (which is another guess...I'm aiming for cardio about 6 days a week, 20+ mins a day) and TDDE is 2521 at moderate exercise. So I should eat at least 2024 and less than 2521 to loose weight? My goal is 2lbs a week since I have 75 to loose. MFP of course gives me a goal of 1260 then adds in more when I exercise but I haven't seen it go that high yet. So if MFP is wrong I have been under eating quite a bit...I'm so confused... :indifferent:
    Your BMR shouldn't change with activity level?
  • athensguy
    athensguy Posts: 550
    Options
    http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/ is a good one.

    I just want you to know that I put my info in on this page, and it gave me BMRs of 1725 and 1764.

    It says I should eat between 2092 for sedentary to 3312 for extremely active. I eat way more than that.

    Regarding the original topic, I have not seen any legitimate journal entries that concludes eating below your BMR is dangerous. Anyone have any?
    Read the rest of this thread. Today someone gave an example (they had gall blatter attacks eating below)

    That really is extremely far away from a study. A probably unrelated event with a sample size of 1.
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    Options
    http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/ is a good one.

    I just want you to know that I put my info in on this page, and it gave me BMRs of 1725 and 1764.

    It says I should eat between 2092 for sedentary to 3312 for extremely active. I eat way more than that.

    Regarding the original topic, I have not seen any legitimate journal entries that concludes eating below your BMR is dangerous. Anyone have any?
    Read the rest of this thread. Today someone gave an example (they had gall blatter attacks eating below)

    That really is extremely far away from a study. A probably unrelated event with a sample size of 1.

    Sorry, you asked for a journal entry. I've meant to collect all of the articles I've been reading and all the comments from friends, mfp friends and forums on this matter just for you, :flowerforyou: but I forgot :( You seem like a capable human being, I've managed to find them, start looking!
  • saraann4
    saraann4 Posts: 1,312 Member
    Options
    This whole topic is up for debate. It's exactly like politics. Is abortion wrong? well no, but yes. EVERYBODY IS DIFFERENT. Some people don't feel the need to eat 5-6 times a day...wanna know why? BECAUSE THEY AREN'T HUNGRY! Some people feel the need to eat 5-6 times a day...wanna know why? because they exercise and they burn, burn, burn calories. Just my opinion.
  • 2fit4fat
    2fit4fat Posts: 559 Member
    Options
    Like many other good ideas, this one will probably not prosper due to Legal implications.

    The moment that MFP starts giving specific guidelines/advice, they are exposed to lawsuits.
    Sad, but true.
    arent they giving you specific guidelines by telling you 1200 cals?!
  • opus649
    opus649 Posts: 633 Member
    Options
    Just because one person can eat near their (estimated) TDEE and lose weight doesn't mean everyone can do it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with eating below your (estimated) BMR. Nothing bad will happen to you. The metabolism boogie man will not come in the night and eat your liver. You will be just fine. That's why your body stores fat, so that it can use it for energy when it doesn't have enough fuel.

    Did I mention that these BMR equations are just estimates? They can be off as much as 300 calories. (reference: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598419/).
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    Options
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/setting-the-deficit-small-moderate-or-large.html

    The trick with the higher deficit... is that to do it well, you need lots of protein... predominantly protein, low carb, low fat. So... since the calories are so low... you have a very, very limited diet (food choices) at your disposal. And... it's hard to maintain this for a long time. 2-4 weeks is good for this, as you can drop fat quickly.

    If you're going to argue until you're blue in the face about the VLCD and eating under BMR... gonna be stubborn about it... at least do it right... otherwise, you can look forward to hormonal imbalance as well as a lowered metabolism... which, in the end, sorta works against you.
  • JakinsandPeykins
    JakinsandPeykins Posts: 40
    Options
    BUMP...Exactly what was on my mind today. GOOD STUFF!
  • opus649
    opus649 Posts: 633 Member
    Options
    "If you're going to argue until you're blue in the face about the VLCD and eating under BMR..."

    Well for one, I'm hardly blue in the face.

    Second, there is a world of difference between VLCD and eating under BMR. VLCD is typically defined as eating HALF of BMR. I am not advocating eating half your BMR.

    I find this just so interesting. Why is it so hard to accept that different things work for different people, and that some people have lost a lot of weight eating below their BMR without any negative effects to their health??
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    Options
    I find this just so interesting. Why is it so hard to accept that different things work for different people, and that some people have lost a lot of weight eating below their BMR without any negative effects to their health??

    Funny, I've heard my highschool bulimic friend say something along these lines of the last part, and another overweight friend who keeps taking weight loss pills and gaining it back (fourth times the charm) say the first part lol. They never ran into any health problems either. Guess you're right.

    Really though, I'm not saying it's not going to work.
  • opus649
    opus649 Posts: 633 Member
    Options
    Really? Really?? Geez.
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    Options
    Why is it so hard to accept that different things work for different people, and that some people have lost a lot of weight eating below their BMR without any negative effects to their health??

    Did you read the link I left from Lyle McDonald's site?

    It's funny, it seemed to go right over your head... and here you are arguing til you're blue in the face again.
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    Options
    Really? Really?? Geez.

    Still love me MFP buddy? :P
  • aspenwind
    aspenwind Posts: 26 Member
    Options
    So how does this work out for someone who is really heavy?

    I have a BMR of 3098 and a TDEE of 4260.

    Even eating at my calculated BMR seems to be too much. I've been tracking my food for about a week and using the MFP calculated numbers that have me eating about 2650/day. I've felt fine and not really been hungry at all even with increasing the amount of exercise I'm doing.

    I haven't really changed what I'm eating yet since we haven't made a trip to the grocery, just eating a little less and passing on things occasionally.

    I guess my question got lost since it was at the bottom of the page...
  • opus649
    opus649 Posts: 633 Member
    Options
    "It's funny, it seemed to go right over your head... and here you are arguing til you're blue in the face again."

    Ahh.. yeah, ok. Now I see what I'm dealing with.
  • PrincessMom08
    PrincessMom08 Posts: 120 Member
    Options
    I'm still learning myself and have never been good with figuring out my diet. So in other words someone like me who's BMR is 2024 at mod active (which is another guess...I'm aiming for cardio about 6 days a week, 20+ mins a day) and TDDE is 2521 at moderate exercise. So I should eat at least 2024 and less than 2521 to loose weight? My goal is 2lbs a week since I have 75 to loose. MFP of course gives me a goal of 1260 then adds in more when I exercise but I haven't seen it go that high yet. So if MFP is wrong I have been under eating quite a bit...I'm so confused... :indifferent:
    Your BMR shouldn't change with activity level?

    That's what I'm trying to figure out. If I put it in as not active my numbers are 1567 BMR and 2521 TDDE. I have no clue what to go by lol
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Really? Really?? Geez.

    Still love me MFP buddy? :P

    Well I love you......:flowerforyou:
  • CnocNaCu
    CnocNaCu Posts: 536 Member
    Options
    Sorry to interrupt your discussion and verbal fights but THIS is exactly why I didn't post my questions on the boards for the last few months. Whenever I did two or more wannabe dieticians started fighting about who knows what and all those seeking info, advice etc are being left stunned about what there is to be fighting and arguing for...that's not a discussion for me and after reading a few pages it's become rather confusing.
    Honestly MFPals who you are looking for an idea: aren't you more confused than anything?:frown:
  • CaseRat
    CaseRat Posts: 377 Member
    Options
    Would be nice!
  • kym117
    kym117 Posts: 315 Member
    Options

    http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/ is a good one.

    MFP uses good calculations (Mifflin St Jeor, if I'm not mistaken), it just takes out the activity factor and gives you back "exercise calories"... which can be misunderstood, misused, abused, etc.

    wow MFP puts me at 1200 calories a day, which to be fair to MFP has not done me any harm so far but I just checked out that link you gave and according to it my BMR is 1293 and that if I was on a Sedentary lifestyle I should be eating 1511 minimum a day!

Categories