So what is all of this TDEE stuff??

groversa

I am 21, my calorie intake is set at 1440 (by mpf) and i keep hearing people saying they find better results when they do something with their tdee?
I typed in google a TDEE calculator, it asked my my height, weight, age, gender and how many times a week I exercise and it says my TDEE is 2873. So now what am I suppose to do with this number? Why is this "better" than how MFP does it? Would I still add my exercises every day to mfp even though the tdee asked me how much i exercise??
Thanks in advance!

Emeener

I've been wondering the same thing. Mine is 2075... but I feel like that would be a lot to eat every day?

groversa

I just tried another site and it said mine is about 2269, I don't know if thats the amount of calories we are suppose to eat or how much we are suppose to take off of it?

JessicaRobin67

I use http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/... I deduct 20%... that is the amount taken from the TDEE. That's what I eat at and am losing about 1.35 pounds a week.

HMVOL7409

Read this thread

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/912920-in-place-of-a-road-map-3-2013?hl=Road+map&page=13#posts-13939819

It really breaks it down for you. TDEE is total daily expenditure including exercise. You would eat at this for maintaining or at a slight cut for weight loss. FYI for a young, active female 2000 cals is not a lot to eat and actually pretty standard. You didn't gain weight eating less than that or at it. I eat 2000-2300 cals just to maintain my weight. I feel it's better as I don't give a hoot as to what I burn, I am fueled properly for my workouts and I aim for one number. Not MFP number than trying to eat back exercise cals that may or may not be a correct burn.

groversa

Read this thread

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/912920-in-place-of-a-road-map-3-2013?hl=Road+map&page=13#posts-13939819

It really breaks it down for you. TDEE is total daily expenditure including exercise. You would eat at this for maintaining or at a slight cut for weight loss. FYI for a young, active female 2000 cals is not a lot to eat and actually pretty standard. You didn't gain weight eating less than that or at it. I eat 2000-2300 cals just to maintain my weight. I feel it's better as I don't give a hoot as to what I burn, I am fueled properly for my workouts and I aim for one number. Not MFP number than trying to eat back exercise cals that may or may not be a correct burn.

I use a heart rate monitor for my exercising, I am on insanity now. Would I still add in my exercising on here for the extra calories or not? And is it bad if I don't eat that much everyday? It just seems like a lot.

karenhray7

The TDEE is "Total Daily Energy Expenditure"; it represents and estimate of how many calories your body burns throughout a day of normal activity. The more active you are, the higher the TDEE. Make sense? Most people here do a TDEE - 20% for weight loss.
It's not that the TDEE is necessarily a "better" may than the MPF, just different, and different things work for different people.

So for you, OP groversa, with a TDEE of 2269, a reasonable goal for net calories (that's what you eat - kcal burned in exercise) would be 1815: 2269 - 453.8 = 1815.2

Some people swear that you need to "eat back" any calories you burn so that your net total would be 1815, but others disagree. You have to find what works for you in regards to eating back what you burn. Make sense?

groversa

The TDEE is "Total Daily Energy Expenditure"; it represents and estimate of how many calories your body burns throughout a day of normal activity. The more active you are, the higher the TDEE. Make sense? Most people here do a TDEE - 20% for weight loss.
It's not that the TDEE is necessarily a "better" may than the MPF, just different, and different things work for different people.

So for you, OP groversa, with a TDEE of 2269, a reasonable goal for net calories (that's what you eat - kcal burned in exercise) would be 1815: 2269 - 453.8 = 1815.2

Some people swear that you need to "eat back" any calories you burn so that your net total would be 1815, but others disagree. You have to find what works for you in regards to eating back what you burn. Make sense?

Thanks for using simple terms. lol

HMVOL7409

Read this thread

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/912920-in-place-of-a-road-map-3-2013?hl=Road+map&page=13#posts-13939819

It really breaks it down for you. TDEE is total daily expenditure including exercise. You would eat at this for maintaining or at a slight cut for weight loss. FYI for a young, active female 2000 cals is not a lot to eat and actually pretty standard. You didn't gain weight eating less than that or at it. I eat 2000-2300 cals just to maintain my weight. I feel it's better as I don't give a hoot as to what I burn, I am fueled properly for my workouts and I aim for one number. Not MFP number than trying to eat back exercise cals that may or may not be a correct burn.

I use a heart rate monitor for my exercising, I am on insanity now. Would I still add in my exercising on here for the extra calories or not? And is it bad if I don't eat that much everyday? It just seems like a lot.

You don't eat back your calories with TDEE. You can add it in but just put 1 cal burned so it doesn't effect your macros or log in your notes. It's not a lot in the grand scheme of things. Sure you can eat less by why? Not eating a sufficient amount can lead to a slower metabolism, low energy, plateaus and stall with weight loss and if you're eating too low possible loss of lean body mass. None of which are things to strive for. If you want simple terms, the thread is pretty fail proof.

groversa

But I am still kind of confused to why I would lose weight from eating more calories (what you're saying around 1800) rather than my current around 1400, I just don't get how that happens.

HMVOL7409

But I am still kind of confused to why I would lose weight from eating more calories (what you're saying around 1800) rather than my current around 1400, I just don't get how that happens.

My link explains it clearly. Not to mention my success as well as a large sum of others on here.

smilingirisheyes

I spent an evening reading up on it this week and decided TDEE sounded better After seeing I should calculate for 2 lbs loss (with over 100 left to lose) and running all the numbers, the result was a 100-calorie difference between the TDEE and MFP number I started with. That was a lot of work for little payoff!
I ended up sticking with the MFP calorie goal, but did alter macronutrients so that the daily goals are really goals - previously, I'd been way over on protein and short on carbs, but with actua target numbers in place I'm more inclined to make choices based on what I really need for the day.

BlueObsidian

But I am still kind of confused to why I would lose weight from eating more calories (what you're saying around 1800) rather than my current around 1400, I just don't get how that happens.

MFP's calculations do not include exercise, so you are supposed to eat those back. When you calculate your TDEE, it does include exercise so you do not eat them back. That makes the gap much smaller for most people.

geekyjock76

But I am still kind of confused to why I would lose weight from eating more calories (what you're saying around 1800) rather than my current around 1400, I just don't get how that happens.

It is quite simple, really. We need to provide a certain amount of energy to maintain weight and body composition. Provide less energy than this, and it leads to loss in fat stores/weight. Eat less than your actual TDEE and you will reduce fat mass. My TDEE is presently about 2700, so if I eat 2650 calories, I will lose weight, albeit slowly.

groversa

But I am still kind of confused to why I would lose weight from eating more calories (what you're saying around 1800) rather than my current around 1400, I just don't get how that happens.

My link explains it clearly. Not to mention my success as well as a large sum of others on here.

Thanks!!

groversa

Thanks for ALL of the responses! You guys are great!

karenhray7

But I am still kind of confused to why I would lose weight from eating more calories (what you're saying around 1800) rather than my current around 1400, I just don't get how that happens.

When you withhold energy (kcal) from your body, it will initially make up for the deficit by using stored energy. But if you constantly withhold the energy, your body will "adapt" to what it perceives as a famine, and stop releasing the stored energy. Its like your body saying "I have no idea when the kcal are going to start flowing freely, so I better hang on to every kcal I can in order to survive". Still with me? When you give your body all the kcal it needs on a regular basis, it's like your body saying "Since I have what I need coming in on a regular basis, there's no famine, and I don't need to hang onto all this stored energy." Make sense? It's a simple analogy, but I think it gets to the heart of the question.

groversa

But I am still kind of confused to why I would lose weight from eating more calories (what you're saying around 1800) rather than my current around 1400, I just don't get how that happens.

When you withhold energy (kcal) from your body, it will initially make up for the deficit by using stored energy. But if you constantly withhold the energy, your body will "adapt" to what it perceives as a famine, and stop releasing the stored energy. Its like your body saying "I have no idea when the kcal are going to start flowing freely, so I better hang on to every kcal I can in order to survive". Still with me? When you give your body all the kcal it needs on a regular basis, it's like your body saying "Since I have what I need coming in on a regular basis, there's no famine, and I don't need to hang onto all this stored energy." Make sense? It's a simple analogy, but I think it gets to the heart of the question.

Yes, that does make sense, thank you!