TDEE - Should I use this number?

TakinSexyBack
TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
edited January 2 in Health and Weight Loss
I am on a low carb diet (which may not matter at all for this) and I have seen a lot of posts that suggest that you should take your TDEE and subtract 20% to give you the number of calories you should be eating daily. I did this and that number is 500 calories MORE than what MFP suggests I eat.

Can anyone who has tried both ways or has more knowledge about this than me advise on which number I should be following?? Following MFP guidelines on cals, I tend to lose quick for 4-5 days then gain back or just stall for a few days until I cheat. Then I seem to get back on track. Not sure if it's b/c Im not eating enough or something else like sodium, etc. Please help! :-)

Replies

  • lildebbie
    lildebbie Posts: 2,068 Member
    bump...

    Interested in this answer also.
  • soehlerking
    soehlerking Posts: 589 Member
    I've been doing the TDEE -20% for only a month now, so I can't really say much. It's a lot more manageable though--I haven't gained any weight, despite eating 1700 cal/day (vs 1200). But I used to eat back my exercise calories (1200 + 350ish from exercise) so it's not THAT different. It just means I don't have to starve myself on Rest Days; there's a lot more consistency. You've probably already seen this, but in case you haven't...

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12

    Hope it helps!
  • Sweetsugar0424
    Sweetsugar0424 Posts: 451 Member
    I've been doing the TDEE -20% for only a month now, so I can't really say much. It's a lot more manageable though--I haven't gained any weight, despite eating 1700 cal/day (vs 1200). But I used to eat back my exercise calories (1200 + 350ish from exercise) so it's not THAT different. It just means I don't have to starve myself on Rest Days; there's a lot more consistency. You've probably already seen this, but in case you haven't...

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12

    Hope it helps!

    ^^ this

    Eating at TDEE - 20% allows you to eat the same approximate amount every single day which gives your muscles more to recover with on rest days. MFP has it set up so that you eat a certain number and then eat back your exercise calories which you wouldn't do eating at TDEE - 20%.
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    I've been doing the TDEE -20% for only a month now, so I can't really say much. It's a lot more manageable though--I haven't gained any weight, despite eating 1700 cal/day (vs 1200). But I used to eat back my exercise calories (1200 + 350ish from exercise) so it's not THAT different. It just means I don't have to starve myself on Rest Days; there's a lot more consistency. You've probably already seen this, but in case you haven't...

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12

    Hope it helps!

    So have you LOST any in the past month?
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    I am on a low carb diet (which may not matter at all for this) and I have seen a lot of posts that suggest that you should take your TDEE and subtract 20% to give you the number of calories you should be eating daily. I did this and that number is 500 calories MORE than what MFP suggests I eat.

    Can anyone who has tried both ways or has more knowledge about this than me advise on which number I should be following?? Following MFP guidelines on cals, I tend to lose quick for 4-5 days then gain back or just stall for a few days until I cheat. Then I seem to get back on track. Not sure if it's b/c Im not eating enough or something else like sodium, etc. Please help! :-)

    How did you figure your TDEE?
  • katevarner
    katevarner Posts: 884 Member
    I lost the last 25 lbs. at TDEE-500 calories in 6 months. Worked great for me and I had plenty to eat. I ate relatively low carb (no processed carbs but plenty of fruits and veggies) because that has always worked better for me when I'm trying to lose weight.
  • RobynBourgeois
    RobynBourgeois Posts: 51
    I have been using TDEE since the beginning (150+ days ago). I have lost 19 pounds; 2 shirt sizes (XL to M); 2 pants sizes (14-10). The difference in my overall body is HUGE!! I actually tuck shirts in now!! I calculate by using http://calorieline.com/tools/tdee
  • TakinSexyBack
    TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
    I am on a low carb diet (which may not matter at all for this) and I have seen a lot of posts that suggest that you should take your TDEE and subtract 20% to give you the number of calories you should be eating daily. I did this and that number is 500 calories MORE than what MFP suggests I eat.

    Can anyone who has tried both ways or has more knowledge about this than me advise on which number I should be following?? Following MFP guidelines on cals, I tend to lose quick for 4-5 days then gain back or just stall for a few days until I cheat. Then I seem to get back on track. Not sure if it's b/c Im not eating enough or something else like sodium, etc. Please help! :-)



    The lower your calorie cut, the more likely you'll plateau. The higher your calorie intake, the less likely you'll be in a deficit.

    Thanks Pu. Thats what Im wondering the most.....do I halt and falter after a few days of losing b/c Im really not eating enough? My TDEE - 20% would be 2178 a day where MFP suggests 1680. What would you do with that?
  • Ruthe8
    Ruthe8 Posts: 423 Member
    Sigh. MFP suggests that number based on the rate or weight loss YOU asked for.
  • TakinSexyBack
    TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
    Thats not my point here Ruth. I know how MFP works. I am asking people who follow another method of figuring out calories per day which one seems to work better b/c a lot of people find themselves struggling to lose with the MFP suggested intake per day b/c they actually aren't eating enough. I am trying to get advice from people who have tried both. Thanks for your sigh and comment.
  • geekyjock76
    geekyjock76 Posts: 2,720 Member
    I don't do either, although when I use the Katch-McArdle formula, it's actually slightly lower than my actual TDEE. I finished a leaning down phase a few months ago and went back up to maintenance. I reduced my deficit by upping calories gradually and eliminating all cardio activity until my body weight stabilized and was maintaining weight. I accurately measured food intake and exercise expenditure and logged them daily. I gained a few pounds in water weight in the first 7 days. After that, the water weight was gone and my weight stabilized when I hit my actual TDEE.
  • zaph0d
    zaph0d Posts: 1,172 Member
    MFP's number will always be less because the exercise if factored out; you're expected to add the exercise back in. But 500 seems like a rather large discrepancy, so there may be other contributing factors - namely the activity level you've selected in MFP. Many people choose sedentary, but for many that's a huge underestimate, even if they indeed have sedentary jobs and lifestyles.

    If your activity level is fairly constant, then the TDEE approach is the better approach. After a few weeks you can tune your calorie target up or down accordingly.

    I have come to believe that the MFP approach, while in an ideal world is a superior form of calorie accounting, is too error-prone in the real world.
  • onyxgirl17
    onyxgirl17 Posts: 1,722 Member
    My TDEE is 1802 according to Mifflin BMR calculator x 1.25 (sedentary). I find this to be accurate with my weight loss. a 20% cut from my TDEE is 1440 calories which I think is what I'm netting considering I probably underestimate my calories a bit... I don't have a food scale. :) I've lost 24 pounds in the past 24 weeks so this has worked like a charm. I will work closer to my TDEE as I get closer to my goal weight. I also plan on lifting when my schedule clears in December to preserve more lean muscle mass and to tone.

    I would use the TDEE method if I were you. I don't use MFP's recommendation (which was 1350) because their calculated TDEE for me I felt was off.
  • RunsOnEspresso
    RunsOnEspresso Posts: 3,218 Member
    When I first started MFP had me at 1390 and I ate back about half my workout calories. I lost 5 pounds.

    I then switched to the in place of a roadmap method and increased my calories to 1707 & not worrying about workout cals. I've lost 5 pounds.

    I prefer the 1707 calories because I dont have to worry about if calorie burn is accurate of if I didn't work out that day trying to limit my calories. I feel more full and have less headaches since upping to 1707.

    I prefer the 1707. I don't always eat all 1700 calories since I dont eat when Im not hungry but some days I am so hungry and I need the 1707. It may not work for everyone but it worked for me and may be worth a shot.

    I'm sorry if this makes no sense. I am having a glass of wine and have a fairly low tolerance. LOL
  • HMVOL7409
    HMVOL7409 Posts: 1,588 Member
    I did both; lost at first with MFP but stalled and had no energy and was always hungry despite adjusting my goals. Stalled for almost 2 mths; changed to TDEE with cut and lost the last bit of weight that I tried for 2 mths to lose in 3 weeks. Plus the transition into maintenance was a lot easier with my TDEE. I have been eating at my TDEE for maintenance for 5 mths now and will never do a LCD again. I always suggest the TDEE route if your active. It's easy, simple and don't know why some make it so complicated. No exercise cals to calculate, I don't concern myself with what I burn etc. I workout and eat at or close to that number +\-. When I was training for my 1/2 marathon and had weekly 90+ min runs I adjusted my activity to reflect a higher TDEE bc I started to lose so depending on activity changes and weight changes it will need adjustments as well.
  • TakinSexyBack
    TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
    MFP's number will always be less because the exercise if factored out; you're expected to add the exercise back in. But 500 seems like a rather large discrepancy, so there may be other contributing factors - namely the activity level you've selected in MFP. Many people choose sedentary, but for many that's a huge underestimate, even if they indeed have sedentary jobs and lifestyles.

    If your activity level is fairly constant, then the TDEE approach is the better approach. After a few weeks you can tune your calorie target up or down accordingly.

    I have come to believe that the MFP approach, while in an ideal world is a superior form of calorie accounting, is too error-prone in the real world.

    Good point! Thanks! I have both MFP and the TDEE calculator set at lightly active. I walk a lot everyday normally at work and try to get in some "real" exercise 4-5 days a week that I log. True, MFP doesnt allot for exercise. I guess thats why the people following their own cal goal will sometimes log their exercise but put it as 1 calorie?! So it doesnt add their exercise back in like where the TDEE already has it built in?
  • TakinSexyBack
    TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
    When I first started MFP had me at 1390 and I ate back about half my workout calories. I lost 5 pounds.

    I then switched to the in place of a roadmap method and increased my calories to 1707 & not worrying about workout cals. I've lost 5 pounds.

    I prefer the 1707 calories because I dont have to worry about if calorie burn is accurate of if I didn't work out that day trying to limit my calories. I feel more full and have less headaches since upping to 1707.

    I prefer the 1707. I don't always eat all 1700 calories since I dont eat when Im not hungry but some days I am so hungry and I need the 1707. It may not work for everyone but it worked for me and may be worth a shot.

    I'm sorry if this makes no sense. I am having a glass of wine and have a fairly low tolerance. LOL

    Makes perfect sense!! Thanks!!
  • TakinSexyBack
    TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
    I did both; lost at first with MFP but stalled and had no energy and was always hungry despite adjusting my goals. Stalled for almost 2 mths; changed to TDEE with cut and lost the last bit of weight that I tried for 2 mths to lose in 3 weeks. Plus the transition into maintenance was a lot easier with my TDEE. I have been eating at my TDEE for maintenance for 5 mths now and will never do a LCD again. I always suggest the TDEE route if your active. It's easy, simple and don't know why some make it so complicated. No exercise cals to calculate, I don't concern myself with what I burn etc. I workout and eat at or close to that number +\-. When I was training for my 1/2 marathon and had weekly 90+ min runs I adjusted my activity to reflect a higher TDEE bc I started to lose so depending on activity changes and weight changes it will need adjustments as well.

    Great!!! Thanks for the info!! Makes sense!
  • zaph0d
    zaph0d Posts: 1,172 Member
    I guess thats why the people following their own cal goal will sometimes log their exercise but put it as 1 calorie?! So it doesnt add their exercise back in like where the TDEE already has it built in?

    Exactly right.
  • HMVOL7409
    HMVOL7409 Posts: 1,588 Member
    MFP's number will always be less because the exercise if factored out; you're expected to add the exercise back in. But 500 seems like a rather large discrepancy, so there may be other contributing factors - namely the activity level you've selected in MFP. Many people choose sedentary, but for many that's a huge underestimate, even if they indeed have sedentary jobs and lifestyles.

    If your activity level is fairly constant, then the TDEE approach is the better approach. After a few weeks you can tune your calorie target up or down accordingly.

    I have come to believe that the MFP approach, while in an ideal world is a superior form of calorie accounting, is too error-prone in the real world.

    Good point! Thanks! I have both MFP and the TDEE calculator set at lightly active. I walk a lot everyday normally at work and try to get in some "real" exercise 4-5 days a week that I log. True, MFP doesnt allot for exercise. I guess thats why the people following their own cal goal will sometimes log their exercise but put it as 1 calorie?! So it doesnt add their exercise back in like where the TDEE already has it built in?

    Exactly. I log my workouts but only log "1" bc I don't want my macros changed by the burns nor do I need people to keep telling me to eat them back when I have explained my method more than enough.
  • TakinSexyBack
    TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
    I am on a low carb diet (which may not matter at all for this) and I have seen a lot of posts that suggest that you should take your TDEE and subtract 20% to give you the number of calories you should be eating daily. I did this and that number is 500 calories MORE than what MFP suggests I eat.

    Can anyone who has tried both ways or has more knowledge about this than me advise on which number I should be following?? Following MFP guidelines on cals, I tend to lose quick for 4-5 days then gain back or just stall for a few days until I cheat. Then I seem to get back on track. Not sure if it's b/c Im not eating enough or something else like sodium, etc. Please help! :-)



    The lower your calorie cut, the more likely you'll plateau. The higher your calorie intake, the less likely you'll be in a deficit.

    Thanks Pu. Thats what Im wondering the most.....do I halt and falter after a few days of losing b/c Im really not eating enough? My TDEE - 20% would be 2178 a day where MFP suggests 1680. What would you do with that?

    I would continue what i am doing, calorie cycling. Eat 2,718(your TDEE) one day and eat 1,200 the next day then repeat.

    May try that! I dont stay at 1200 very often! That will be crazy for me at first!!
  • RunsOnEspresso
    RunsOnEspresso Posts: 3,218 Member
    MFP's number will always be less because the exercise if factored out; you're expected to add the exercise back in. But 500 seems like a rather large discrepancy, so there may be other contributing factors - namely the activity level you've selected in MFP. Many people choose sedentary, but for many that's a huge underestimate, even if they indeed have sedentary jobs and lifestyles.

    If your activity level is fairly constant, then the TDEE approach is the better approach. After a few weeks you can tune your calorie target up or down accordingly.

    I have come to believe that the MFP approach, while in an ideal world is a superior form of calorie accounting, is too error-prone in the real world.

    Good point! Thanks! I have both MFP and the TDEE calculator set at lightly active. I walk a lot everyday normally at work and try to get in some "real" exercise 4-5 days a week that I log. True, MFP doesnt allot for exercise. I guess thats why the people following their own cal goal will sometimes log their exercise but put it as 1 calorie?! So it doesnt add their exercise back in like where the TDEE already has it built in?

    Exactly. I log my workouts but only log "1" bc I don't want my macros changed by the burns nor do I need people to keep telling me to eat them back when I have explained my method more than enough.

    Huh, I have not seen that nor had I thought of that. I just stopped logging my workouts when I switched methods. I may try this because I am keeping track of things in like 3 different places.
  • zaph0d
    zaph0d Posts: 1,172 Member
    I would continue what i am doing, calorie cycling. Eat 2,718(your TDEE) one day and eat 1,200 the next day then repeat.

    May try that! I dont stay at 1200 very often! That will be crazy for me at first!!

    But why complicate matters? :)
  • TakinSexyBack
    TakinSexyBack Posts: 300 Member
    I have been using TDEE since the beginning (150+ days ago). I have lost 19 pounds; 2 shirt sizes (XL to M); 2 pants sizes (14-10). The difference in my overall body is HUGE!! I actually tuck shirts in now!! I calculate by using http://calorieline.com/tools/tdee

    Thats awesome Robyn!! I will take a look at that!
  • HMToomey
    HMToomey Posts: 276
    Eating at TDEE - 20% for 2 months lost 12 pounds... Eating between 1700 and 2100 calories a day! I was going crazy with net totals and all that junk (one day I netted 200, it was awful!) I like knowing that I can eat a set amount and that is fine. I also have a fitbit so if that gives me more calories I try to eat them back too (those 2100 days I was really busy!) but for my average lazy Saturday I'll be eating 1700 calories.

    I did as much research as I could then figured I would give it 2 weeks, the first week I lost 2 pounds and it has been steadily lost since. I still don't fully understand it, but it works and until it stops working I'll keep it! I love that I'm not 'hangry' anymore and I have energy. I eat what I want too which really helps. This mornings breakfast is a pumpkin muffin from Dunkin Doughnuts, something I would have denied myself just a few months ago!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories