Beginning to think it's Calories consumed vs. NET instead

Options
12357…17

Replies

  • analubobadilla
    analubobadilla Posts: 30 Member
    Options
    What TDEE stands for????
  • zukkiz
    zukkiz Posts: 362 Member
    Options
    Okay so I figure things out a little differently, since I am a breastfeeding mommy.

    I calculate my BMR just as anyone else does and it comes to 1499.

    I then do the Fat2FitRadio idea of eating the TDEE of my goal weight, which is 150 lbs. So that TDEE is 1696. This is all set towards sedentary. Trust me I am not sedentary I am a mom of 6 (5 of which are boys).

    I have to add in only 300 calories for breastfeeding since my little one is 10 months old.

    My TDEE would be 1996, basically 2000.

    This week I started to eat about that much daily and net around 1700-1800. I haven't exercised this week really, but when I do I eat a lot of them back. (I use a HRM)

    I weigh in "officialy" tomorrow, but this week I am already down 2.5 pounds. That will make 32 pounds lost since January.

    You see though we all have different genetics, and what works for me might not work for others.

    I don't believe in going to far from your BMR or under 1200 just because I would not be able to function.

    I like your thought process, and eating for "the future you"

    Thanks. It's working for me.

    For everyone out there, I just hope you all find what works for you. For the most part we are all here trying to become healthier, I wish that for everyone!
  • gypsybug
    gypsybug Posts: 106 Member
    Options
    I've started navigating these waters myself and about two weeks ago I bumped up my daily calories to my BMR (1460) and I endeavor to eat at 15-20% off my TDEE (2270). I have been trying to net my BMR on days I do heavy cardio. Now, my head has been scrambling all over the place trying to wrap around all the numbers and the acronyms and the PLETHORA of opinions....it's quite exhausted.

    I have a BodyMedia Fit. Last night I finally got around to reformulating my goals on there (that I never met because I was not losing at 1200 a day). I have almost a year of data on there to go by.

    When I plugged in the goals I have decided to go for ... .my eventual goal weight, a 1/2 lb a week loss and that I intend to be Very Active (defined on body media as 60 minutes of moderate activity such as walking, 30 minutes of vigorous activity like jogging and 10,000 steps a day, general movement) it told me to burn 2315 and consume 2065. Period.

    No BMR no NET no strength vs cardio no macros tweaking. It does not care HOW I get there, as long as 30 minutes of it is vigorous (over 6 METS), 60 of it is moderate (3-6 METS) and to get the steps, keep my butt moving throughout the day doing my chores, walking to stores, taking care of life.

    I think the TDEE is the starting point. Once you have that you can find a good cut amount. Your macros should be tweaked according to your activity or personal needs or whatever it is you want to go for.

    I have found that I can have a day where I do such intense cardio, that I NET under my BMR. KNOWING EXACTLY how much I have burned for the day, I can say that if I had eaten the extra in order to NET my BMR, I would in fact have gone over my TDEE for that day. Would it have really mattered in the long run? No. Because there were plenty of days where my deficit would have been a bit larger and would cover that difference.

    So.....this is where my logic is at this moment. Is it right? I dunno. And I'll likely change my mind tomorrow. This was just last night's revelation lol......
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    The issue is people not understanding the terms they are using. Or, they are underestimating the calories they are actually eating, or overestimating their burn.

    For example, just in this thread someone said they don't know why anyone would eat over BMR.

    BMR means basal metabolic rate. It is the number of calories they would feed you if you were in a coma, just to keep you alive.

    I said that and I know perfectly well what it means. Once you take activity calories earned and eaten back out of the equation, if you eat over your BMR you will gain weight. If you lose, that would just mean that the calculated BMR isn't correct for you (which it often isn't). You have to consume (absorb) less calories than your body will use in order to lose weight.

    People on this site rely very heavily on BMR and TDEE calculation formulas when those are just formulas for the average person. It's only going to be a rough estimate on a personal level.


    I hate to say this but no.....you totally do not get what BMR is if this is your explanation.

    Agreed...BMR is not have many calories you burn in a day w/out any exercise, it is how many you burn if you are not functioning at all (like someone else said...in a coma). If you get out of bed you have already used more calories than your BMR. Eating between BMR and TDEE will allow you to lose weight.

    Did I say "exercise"?
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    What TDEE stands for????

    Total daily energy expenditure. A fancy way to say "calories out".
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    What about a marathon runner? Net comes into play there. What about if you want to keep your muscle mass? Your body will eat away at your muscles if you dont feed them. You will loose, but will it be fat or muscle? Never net under 1200 (give or take 100, depending on the person). Do you want to be skinny or healthy....I vote for healthy.

    I like being both skinny and healthy. They are not mutually exclusive terms.
  • deksgrl
    deksgrl Posts: 7,237 Member
    Options
    What TDEE stands for????

    Total Daily Energy Expenditure. Also known as "Maintenance" calories. You wouldn't gain any or lose any, you would stay the same weight if you ate that much.
  • lorierin22
    lorierin22 Posts: 432 Member
    Options
    The issue is people not understanding the terms they are using. Or, they are underestimating the calories they are actually eating, or overestimating their burn.

    For example, just in this thread someone said they don't know why anyone would eat over BMR.

    BMR means basal metabolic rate. It is the number of calories they would feed you if you were in a coma, just to keep you alive.

    I said that and I know perfectly well what it means. Once you take activity calories earned and eaten back out of the equation, if you eat over your BMR you will gain weight. If you lose, that would just mean that the calculated BMR isn't correct for you (which it often isn't). You have to consume (absorb) less calories than your body will use in order to lose weight.

    People on this site rely very heavily on BMR and TDEE calculation formulas when those are just formulas for the average person. It's only going to be a rough estimate on a personal level.


    I hate to say this but no.....you totally do not get what BMR is if this is your explanation.

    Agreed...BMR is not have many calories you burn in a day w/out any exercise, it is how many you burn if you are not functioning at all (like someone else said...in a coma). If you get out of bed you have already used more calories than your BMR. Eating between BMR and TDEE will allow you to lose weight.

    Did I say "exercise"?

    It just doesn't seem to make sense what you are saying...yes, if you were in a coma and you were getting more than your BMR in a feeding tube you would gain weight...but it has no real life application. Everyone on these boards are using more than their BMR calories because they are awake and typing...so I guess I just don't get the purpose of what you are saying...
  • tabinmaine
    tabinmaine Posts: 965 Member
    Options
    What about a marathon runner? Net comes into play there. What about if you want to keep your muscle mass? Your body will eat away at your muscles if you dont feed them. You will loose, but will it be fat or muscle? Never net under 1200 (give or take 100, depending on the person). Do you want to be skinny or healthy....I vote for healthy.

    I am not advocating eating under 1200 calories at all....... I am saying that many eat their TDEE and don't eat back what they exercise off...... even if it's under their BMR..... 1200 calories is just simply a #, it could be someone's BMR or it could be 400 calories below
    TDEE includes exercise calories. The confusion is in the formulation of the calorie out side of the equation which would look something like this BMR/RMR + TEF + TEA + SPA/NEAT) + Change in Body Stores. Trying to figure that out on paper is impossible on an individual basis and why multiple posts trying to figure it all out. The easiest way is to record what you eat for 2 or 3 weeks while your living your life (which includes everything, yes exercise too) and average your daily calories and when your weight becomes stable from calorie adjustment then divide to give you your daily average calorie consumption, create a deficit from there.

    I know that TDEE includes your exercise.... Total Daily Energy Expenditure ( everything you do in a week )
  • katscoots
    katscoots Posts: 255 Member
    Options
    It depends on how honest you are with your tracking and it probably depends on a lot of different factors for different people. I always eat back my exercise calories. I am a religious logger of what I eat. I weigh and measure my food. Also, you have to be honest about your activity level when setting up the "net" requirements. I have a desk job - yes, I move around a little and I exercise about an hour a day - but for most of the day - i am sitting at a computer or in a meeting or in a car. I'm constantly moving at home, but i still consider my daily life only lightly active.

    The way MFP has it set up has worked for me. I'm down 20 lbs since December.

    My TDEE is higher than my "net", but all in all I probably end up eating that many calories when I exercise and eat back my exercise calories regardless of the "net"

    After researching TDEE - if i understand it correctly - it includes exercise expenditure in the total calorie calculation, so you wouldn't log your exercise and eat those calories back so to speak if just aiming to eat the calories at the TDEE level...
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,017 Member
    Options
    The issue is people not understanding the terms they are using. Or, they are underestimating the calories they are actually eating, or overestimating their burn.

    For example, just in this thread someone said they don't know why anyone would eat over BMR.

    BMR means basal metabolic rate. It is the number of calories they would feed you if you were in a coma, just to keep you alive.

    I said that and I know perfectly well what it means. Once you take activity calories earned and eaten back out of the equation, if you eat over your BMR you will gain weight. If you lose, that would just mean that the calculated BMR isn't correct for you (which it often isn't). You have to consume (absorb) less calories than your body will use in order to lose weight.

    People on this site rely very heavily on BMR and TDEE calculation formulas when those are just formulas for the average person. It's only going to be a rough estimate on a personal level.


    I hate to say this but no.....you totally do not get what BMR is if this is your explanation.

    Agreed...BMR is not have many calories you burn in a day w/out any exercise, it is how many you burn if you are not functioning at all (like someone else said...in a coma). If you get out of bed you have already used more calories than your BMR. Eating between BMR and TDEE will allow you to lose weight.

    Did I say "exercise"?

    It just doesn't seem to make sense what you are saying...yes, if you were in a coma and you were getting more than your BMR in a feeding tube you would gain weight...but it has no real life application. Everyone on these boards are using more than their BMR calories because they are awake and typing...so I guess I just don't get the purpose of what you are saying...
    A defence is in the works....wait for it.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    It just doesn't seem to make sense what you are saying...yes, if you were in a coma and you were getting more than your BMR in a feeding tube you would gain weight...but it has no real life application. Everyone on these boards are using more than their BMR calories because they are awake and typing...so I guess I just don't get the purpose of what you are saying...

    Agreeing with the OP. That if your NET is below BMR it's not a problem. Going to happy hour now so that's all the explanation I can give for now. :drinker:
  • ElaineWL
    ElaineWL Posts: 7
    Options
    math is hard :/

    I hear this! my head hurts..... :smile:
  • ElHombre23
    ElHombre23 Posts: 126 Member
    Options
    It just doesn't seem to make sense what you are saying...yes, if you were in a coma and you were getting more than your BMR in a feeding tube you would gain weight...but it has no real life application. Everyone on these boards are using more than their BMR calories because they are awake and typing...so I guess I just don't get the purpose of what you are saying...

    Agreeing with the OP. That if your NET is below BMR it's not a problem. Going to happy hour now so that's all the explanation I can give for now. :drinker:

    LMAOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
  • dlwyatt82
    dlwyatt82 Posts: 1,077 Member
    Options
    The more I watch people's weight loss journey's the more I am convinced that as long as your "calories consumed" is over your BMR it does not matter what you burn off.....

    I have tried all methods, eating 1200 and excercise cal back, eating my BMR plus exercise calories, eating TDEE -15%, and the people I see with the greatest results and consistant weight losses are the ones who regularily eat over their BMR, closest to maintenance and don't bother with worrying about their net calories even if they are UNDER their BMR...

    Could it be that eating back what you burn off is the reason people are not losing weight ? Maybe our body's do not care if we net below our BMR as long as we EAT/CONSUME over BMR's ????

    I think the word NET is what is screwing everyone up on here.....just eat over your BMR and leave it at that !

    Thoughts ???

    I posted very similar thoughts about a week ago. A couple people got it, most didn't. As far as I can tell, "netting BMR" can mean one of two things:

    If you ignore the MFP interface (which treats calories from your activity level and calories from exercise differently), then "netting BMR" means the same as "eating TDEE", which would result in no weight gain or loss.

    If you use MFP's display of calories, then people who set a higher activity level in their profile can eat more calories while still looking like they "net their BMR", even if they have identical caloric intake and TDEE as someone who set their activity level to Sedentary and just logged more exercise. In other words, what MFP shows as your Net Calories for the day are completely meaningless when compared to your BMR.

    It may be a good thing to consume more calories (gross, not net) than your BMR. I don't know that for certain one way or another, but beyond that, the only thing that matters is TDEE. Eat less than TDEE, lose weight over time.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/566837-exercise-calories-versus-daily-activity-eating-bmr
  • tabinmaine
    tabinmaine Posts: 965 Member
    Options
    It just doesn't seem to make sense what you are saying...yes, if you were in a coma and you were getting more than your BMR in a feeding tube you would gain weight...but it has no real life application. Everyone on these boards are using more than their BMR calories because they are awake and typing...so I guess I just don't get the purpose of what you are saying...

    Agreeing with the OP. That if your NET is below BMR it's not a problem. Going to happy hour now so that's all the explanation I can give for now. :drinker:


    have fun !! :drinker:
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    You should eat back half of how many calories you burn during exercise. NOT ALL. So if your goal is 1500 and you burn 500 calories your net would be 1,000 so you need to eat back 250 calories at a minimum. If you don't eat within 30 minutes of working out you lose half of your workout. I think it's more of what type of calories and foods people are putting into their bodies then eating back exercise calories. It also depends on a million different factors, age, gender, etc.

    Sorry, I hate to potentially start another sub-thread here, but there is no evidence to suggest eating 30 minutes after a workout is better than eating say 4 hours after a workout (unless you are hungry of course!). Also, the only reason why you should not eat all your exercise calories back, assuming you already have an appropriate deficit built into your base and your base target does not include exercise, is really because of the fact that MFP and the exercise machines usually over-estimate them.
  • maggie16sweetxoxo
    maggie16sweetxoxo Posts: 314 Member
    Options
    I am just so confused by all this :p
  • tabinmaine
    tabinmaine Posts: 965 Member
    Options
    You should eat back half of how many calories you burn during exercise. NOT ALL. So if your goal is 1500 and you burn 500 calories your net would be 1,000 so you need to eat back 250 calories at a minimum. If you don't eat within 30 minutes of working out you lose half of your workout. I think it's more of what type of calories and foods people are putting into their bodies then eating back exercise calories. It also depends on a million different factors, age, gender, etc.

    Sorry, I hate to potentially start another sub-thread here, but there is no evidence to suggest eating 30 minutes after a workout is better than eating say 4 hours after a workout (unless you are hungry of course!). Also, the only reason why you should not eat all your exercise calories back, assuming you already have an appropriate deficit built into your base and your base target does not include exercise, is really because of the fact that MFP and the exercise machines usually over-estimate them.

    That's ok, it was so far off the chart that I just decided to let it go....... :wink:
  • maggie16sweetxoxo
    maggie16sweetxoxo Posts: 314 Member
    Options
    :huh:


    THIS yay!

Categories