MFP has me eating below my BMR

I think you'd be very interested in this group: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/forums/show/3834-eat-more-to-weigh-less
It explains and helps you through all of that very well.

I was told that if I eat below my BMR, I will die. or, something like that.

My opinion: Do a little (or a lot of) exercise and eat back those calories

You have 70+ lbs to lose eating below your BMR wont cause you any problems.

I was told that if I eat below my BMR, I will die. or, something like that.

I just laughed so hard. My co-workers think I'm crazy (ier).

I wouldn't worry about it since its such a small amount. My BMR is 1683, MFP gives me 1650 but I usually do about 1500-1550 a day (I'm full at that point) and I've had steady weight loss (with some cardio 3-5x a week).

I went in to check my BMR (out of curiousity) and it says that my current BMR is 1,776 calories. But MFP has me eating 1,710 calories a day. I set the weight loss to one pound a week, so I'm not asking for something extreme. But isn't it bad for me to eat less than my body would need if I was sleeping all day? I'm a little concerned that upping my calories will restrict weight loss....

Great question: Complicated answer.

First I would ask: How are you measuring your BMR/REE?

Suggestion: Go to a facility that actually does a metabolic cart for 75 dollars and have yours measured.

IF you are using a formula to calculate it...which one are you using. Mifflin-St. Joer is the most widely accepted formula right now because it's results are confirmed with a metabolic cart.

My theory - currently being verfied by others - is that as you are dieting your REE (Resting energy expenditure) / BMR goes down for several reasons - loss of FFM (Fat free mass - ie muscle), hormones secreated by the brain, etc.

I believe the formulas for establishing the amount of calories we should take in is based off of weight stable people...not people dieting. So if you were always 140 and wanted to stay 140 this is how many calories you need.

Problem is...that as you diet...your REE/BMR go down...so for a "normal" person to maintain 140 it's X calories..but for someone dieting it is probably less. How much less...don't know yet unless you do a metabolic cart. That number will also change as you diet.

Sad part is that scientists are beginning to recognize this and there are some - probably correct - who suggest that the amount of caloires a dieter burns during any activity - lets say running - is less than what is calculated using HRMs etc that base it off of weight.....because your BMR is slower than normal...so your burn is less that what you would think it is...now how much less is being figured out by some (if interested check out)

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/dieting-vs-exercise-for-weight-loss/

http://www.pbrc.edu/research-and-faculty/calculators/weight-loss-predictor/

So all in all very good question. I don't know why MFP is doing this to you...but it may have to do with the fact of your activity level that is set. However, to answer your question- is eating below your BMR bad....depends on lots of things - are you getting enough of the macro and micro nutrients you need to do what you need to do....are you tired? etc. You lose weight by going under your calorie requirements for a set period of time. PM me if you need more specific info and I'll point you in the right direction.

I have eaten BMR, below TDEE and MFP and still don't lose, so......ready to try the dreaded "starvation mode".

^^^^^^^ (forgot to hit quote)


I like this set-up. It's interesting that it sets my calorie goal at where I already have it manually set. (Which is 600 calories/day higher than MFP originally put me.) I have went through several calculators and came up with my own average that seems to be working for me.

Thanks for sharing this spreadsheet. It's great! :happy:

Thanks everyone, I appreciate the responses.

Yes, I have a lot of weight to lose but that doesn't mean I don't want to do it the right way. I'd prefer not to jack my health up anymore by restricting too much. So...there's that.

And yeah, I'm concerned over the 66 calories because I expect this site to be realistic in what I can eat. If it's not, then regardless of how much it's off it's not what I want to be putting all my expectations on. I'll look into the suggested group and the TDEE thing.

Thanks again.

MFP is not going to be 100% perfect for everyone in every situation. Each day that I log under 1,200 calories, it tells me I am starving, I will not be successful if I eat too few calories, etc, but my dietitian told me that she's not so positive that 1,200 is my magic "OMG YOU ARE GOING TO STARVE" number. She said if I am eating under 1,200 all the time, then yes, I am not probably getting all the nutrition I need, but as long as I am always over 1,000, that is OK with her... so the professional opinion of a trained person who has helped me lose significant weight in a short time and knows my entire medical history disagrees with MFP. Its pretty much a one-size-fits-most type of tool... Its using formulas and figures.

I changed my own goals, my macros, etc. based on the dietitians recommendations, rather than the default for MFP. My dietitian takes in to account my goals, my lifestyle and my medical conditions... so much more thorough than MFP could dream of being. Don't hang your whole heart on the idea that MFP is your perfect tool, figure out what works for you and use it as a part of your journey.

I manually changed mine. Like the previous poster said, this website is not the boss of me. It's my tool!

I changed mine, I run up to 6 miles 4 mornings a week and lift weights 3x a week. My intake is 1,600 and
Works like a charm. Everybody is diffrent it's all about trail and error,what works for some might not work for others.