Changing from 1200 to BMR - 20%

heybales

I have been sucessful in losing 51lbs since the beginning of the year on 1200 calories (as recommended by MFP). Weight loss is around 1lb per week now which I know is still good and is what I should be aiming for. As i get closer to goal weight, I am worried weight loss will just halt.

Having read SO many posts that say you should never eat below BMR, I did some calculations.

I'm 5ft 4 and 167lbs. BMR is 1571. I am sedentary so I multiplied 1571 x 1.2 = 1885 cals

I am looking to lose around 20 more pounds so I minused 20% of 1885 = 1508 cals per day.

Obviously, this is a good 300 cals per day over what I have been eating, and to be honest, I would love to have a bit more chicken/rice/noodles/ etc etc on my plate of an evening! I eat low fat meals, wholegrain breads and rice, lots of chicken with peppers and mushrooms.

Do you guys think I should up my calories? Or just keep plodding on with my 1200 cals?

I am looking to start getting more active, walking mainly, do you eat back exercise calories using the BMR - 20% method?

Has anyone sucessfully upped their calories from 1200 and still continued to lose weight?

There is a whole group of those that have increased goal and lost the same or more weight eating more. Eat More (than now but less than previously) 2 Lose Weight.

Excellent job on loss so far.

So just daily activity, you've been good at 1200, and lost usually 1lb weekly. That means 500 cal deficit a day at this point. Actually, it means the whole time if really that consistent.

That means your TDEE is currently 1700 cal day, and has been during this journey.

Sounds like it could be even now a tad more, and in the past it really would have been a bit higher, which means more weight loss faster in the past.
But true, at this point, you just don't have the range for bigger deficit, 20% isn't wise.

But an important factor- it is easier going into maintenance mode with full burning metabolism, rather than suppressed.

So your real TDEE is 1700, so your multiplier is actually 1.08 right now.

This isn't because you are even less active than Sedentary, this is because you've managed to suppress your metabolsm.

So to raise it, you could eat at 1600 for awhile, know you still have a deficit even to current level of 1700, and once the weight loss slowed to 1/2 lb weekly, you know metabolism has gone up.

If you start exercising but it is too variable to just include in your TDEE, then yes you would eat those calories back. If you can include it in the TDEE figure, then you take off 15%.

abbyt1990

If you are feeling like you need to eat more, it may be your body telling you that you need to eat more! Especially if you are wanting to eat more chicken, whole grains, fruits/veggies, etc. Adding 300 cals/day of junk food, not good. Adding 300 cals/day of healthy food, definitely good! You might be surprised once you add these extra calories, you'll probably have more energy! 1200 cals/day is the bare minimum for all women, if you drop below that your body goes into starvation mode. My BMR is 1400/day, but I usually eat 1500-1600 and see 1-2 lbs lost per week. I say add em

zaithyr

I eat my TDEE -15% and I'm losing 1 lb a week steadily. I ate less before and lost weight (for a bit but then started to plateau) and you can lose weight on eating less but I know I felt like crap.

mcarter99

This isn't because you are even less active than Sedentary, this is because you've managed to suppress your metabolsm.

It could also be under-tracked intake (meaning her TDEE is actually higher), which is something nearly everyone does and research has proven it. It also could be that she just is not in the dead-center that the averages are based off of, but is on the slower end all the time. Real humans are in a range around these averages.

heybales

It could also be under-tracked intake (meaning her TDEE is actually higher), which is something nearly everyone does and research has proven it. It also could be that she just is not in the dead-center that the averages are based off of, but is on the slower end all the time. Real humans are in a range around these averages.

I've seen the studies of people recording at days end what they thought they ate, and recording quantities of what they think they are eating, and true, both fail.

I've seen the very opposite of folks on MFP, they weigh and know exactly how much they eat. Only variance would be from the food label amount to what they actually got.

I've never seen a study on folks actually weighing and measuring food and logging it.

Not sure why almost everyone assumes that if metabolism seems to be slower, it's because it just is because of the 10% variance in the studies, and not the equally possible fact it could be higher but it can't reach full burn.
Now if BMR is totally based on age/height/weight and well outside the healthy weight range, than yes that BMR figure is inflated, unless someone somehow get an avg LBM/Fat ratio about them.

Fact is, it's easier to go into maintenance mode from coming on high, than trying to come up from below. The number of failed transitions to maintenance on fad diets proves that.

Besides, what you have to lose from coming down from high burn is a few weeks of less weight loss than expected, then you can drop extra 100 or 200 cals to get there.
But if already slowed metabolism, and it's slower than expected, do you lower more and get more slowdown, or do you raise and have a time of possible weight gain?

ladyraven68

I've been here for almost 6 months now.

I spent my first month at 1200, and then switched up to TDEE - 20%. (1600) Since then I have consistently lost more than 1lb a week. Now down 24lb, and 10% bodyfat.

I need to re-evaluate my calories now, as my BMR will obviously have reduced, and I was supposed to re-evaluate every 10lbs, but forgot - Doh!

mcarter99

I've seen the studies of people recording at days end what they thought they ate, and recording quantities of what they think they are eating, and true, both fail.

I've seen the very opposite of folks on MFP, they weigh and know exactly how much they eat. Only variance would be from the food label amount to what they actually got.

I've never seen a study on folks actually weighing and measuring food and logging it.

Not sure why almost everyone assumes that if metabolism seems to be slower, it's because it just is because of the 10% variance in the studies, and not the equally possible fact it could be higher but it can't reach full burn.

But you don't know if MFPers are measuring correctly unless they live in a lab you supervise. We all think we do. We all say we do. Even us obsessive food scale people have things we conveniently forget to log, or eyeball as "1 T. of frosting" off my daughter's plate, or things we don't log because we didn't realize it was significant, like that splash of milk in the coffee (8 times a day) or how I weighed my mayo on my bread but then licked the spoon it was on.

I'm not saying to assume her metabolism is just naturally lower. You said as a statement that she lowered her metabolism by eating too little, as if it was a provable fact. I was just adding that it's not necessarily so.

heybales

I've been here for almost 6 months now.

I spent my first month at 1200, and then switched up to TDEE - 20%. (1600) Since then I have consistently lost more than 1lb a week. Now down 24lb, and 10% bodyfat.

I need to re-evaluate my calories now, as my BMR will obviously have reduced, and I was supposed to re-evaluate every 10lbs, but forgot - Doh!

But wouldn't you rather lose that 1+ lbs weekly on 1200 calories?

You could have great big vegetable platters that will just leave you stuffed! You might not even reach 1200! :laugh:

You better change that HRM too, just in case curious about calorie burns now. 24lbs would have massive changes on that aspect.

ladyraven68

I've been here for almost 6 months now.

I spent my first month at 1200, and then switched up to TDEE - 20%. (1600) Since then I have consistently lost more than 1lb a week. Now down 24lb, and 10% bodyfat.

I need to re-evaluate my calories now, as my BMR will obviously have reduced, and I was supposed to re-evaluate every 10lbs, but forgot - Doh!

But wouldn't you rather lose that 1+ lbs weekly on 1200 calories?

You could have great big vegetable platters that will just leave you stuffed! You might not even reach 1200! :laugh:

You better change that HRM too, just in case curious about calorie burns now. 24lbs would have massive changes on that aspect.

Now don't be naughty or I'll go back to 1200 and being cranky - you wouldn't like me when I'm cranky

Yes, I probably could have lost on 1200, but why would I want to when I can lose on 1600, and have cake!

yarwell

I've never seen a study on folks actually weighing and measuring food and logging it.

I've seen a TV programme, when they put a head cam on her the 1900 logged calories turned out to be about half of reality.

BMR estimates only catch about 70% of people in the +/- 10% band, so it's amusing to see them quoted to 4 significant figures. Always worth playing around with +10 and -10% to see what that would mean, as you say it goes both ways.

WendyFlynn

Thank you so much everyone, all input has been great and we all need to make our own decisions, probably through trial and error.

I know I am not as active as most you peeps, but I will try to get there.... one step at a time.

Hearing of people being in starvation mode at 1200 cals, and then reading posts of people upping calories and eating 1800 cals a day can get a bit confusing!

Now, I tell ya, I'm not daft, I now it's all maths, and I'm good at maths (UK)! I seriously just want to eat a bit more. I can feel my body telling me this, I've lost 51lbs in less than 5 months. I know some peeps will be screaming at me.... 'just carry on because it works for you'....... but, why can't I have that extra spoon of rice, or the extra 50g of chicken? This is where a low cal low fat change of life has got me to lol.

Exercise, I know.... then the guilt may 'go' away x

yarwell

I really hate the Eat More To Weigh Less group because they boot members who don't follow their philosophy like religion and the group leader cannot handle civil debate or criticism.

Perhaps it's a branch of the Scientology movement ?

heybales

I've never seen a study on folks actually weighing and measuring food and logging it.

I've seen a TV programme, when they put a head cam on her the 1900 logged calories turned out to be about half of reality.

BMR estimates only catch about 70% of people in the +/- 10% band, so it's amusing to see them quoted to 4 significant figures. Always worth playing around with +10 and -10% to see what that would mean, as you say it goes both ways.

Was trying to watch the British show Secret Eaters someone said was folks either purposely hiding or total absent-mindedly eating much more than they think/know.

But Channel 4 won't let across the pond watch it.