TDEE/BMR, am I totally doing this all wrong

FWIW - I support it. When I was 200+ I was on a huge deficit and lost an average of 3 pounds per week. I plateaued after a while, which is when I decreased my deficit. Worked for me anyway

How can you survive on 1400 if you work out? (or howcome do you have that high BMR if you don't?)

BMR has nothing to do with workouts. Her BMR is high because she is young and overweight.

The fact that her TDEE is not much higher than her BMR suggests she does not work out much as all..

As to the original question - all you can do is experiment. Try around 1400 to start, eat back exercise cals. If you start feeling hungry, tired, (or stabby - which is my problem when I undereat), then slowly increase till you find a sweet spot. It is not an exact science and the fact you have a bit to lose shows you can operate on a larger calorie deficit that people who only have 20 pounds or so to lose.

Sorry this is off topic but I love this if you start feeling hungry, tired or stabby!! That's so me!! I get absolutely wretched when I don't have enough food. I'm a walking snickers commercial! "Dude, you get a little angry when you're hungry"

[[/quote]
As to the original question - all you can do is experiment. Try around 1400 to start, eat back exercise cals. If you start feeling hungry, tired, (or stabby - which is my problem when I undereat), then slowly increase till you find a sweet spot. It is not an exact science and the fact you have a bit to lose shows you can operate on a larger calorie deficit that people who only have 20 pounds or so to lose.
[/quote]

This is exactly what I had to do to find the happy medium of losing weight and not being "stabby" ( I love that term!!!) due to hunger.

I think it's ok to be under BMR for short periods. It's just important to understand that you shouldn't stay there for long periods as 1) it's not particularly healthy and 2) your weight-loss will eventually slow down or stop entirely.

This is why some people like the idea, some people hate it. Think of eating under BMR as a tool that must be used properly. Misused, it's a very bad thing that can cause frustration and even failure because people can't understand why they aren't losing weight. Eating more calories would seem wrong, but eating fewer calories is unthinkable.

I would recommend working out, though... if you work out, you can eat more and still lose 2 pounds a week. Plus you'll feel better and get all the cardio benefits.

Good luck!

I'm around your height and started around 190 pounds. I was sticking to around 1,200 - 1,500 calories per day and walking at least 2 miles every day, dropped ~30 pounds in about 4 months. I felt very healthy doing that. I substantially increased my vegie intake and upped my protein. Although I didn't swear off breads and starches, I considered them treats and really limited them. And I substantially increased my water intake. Then I stayed there for a while. The next 10 pounds were a little harder to get off, I started doing some weight training and more aerobic exercise - I love ZUMBA.

The key is to listen to your body. If you're too weak to exercise or too hungry to be a civil human being, eat more. If you're feeling healthy and energetic, stick with it. I've got several different calculators and they all give me somewhat different numbers - it can get your head spinning. Use them as a general guide but tweak it to fit your life. Based on what you've put here, I'm guessing your resting metabolic rate is somewhere around 1600 - 1700, then, you have to add to that based on whether you're sedentary (~2,000), lightly active (~2,300), moderately active, etc... to determine what you need to just exist. Then, if you exercise (specific - 1/2 hour run or 60 minutes of ZUMBA), those are additional calories you need to exist. Decrease by 500 calories per day to lose 1 pound per week. So, if you're lighly active and want to lose 1 pound a week, eat about 1,800 and you should lose. If you feel too hungry (not bored or stressed) eat more. If you're not losing after a couple of weeks, try eating a little less but not too much. I'm no expert and you have youth on your side but you can do this thing! Just stick to it! You're worth it!

I totally get the whole eating back your calories and eating at LEAST at my BMR, but I'm getting some conflicting advice.

My BMR is 1700. Which sounds like more than enough calories in a day, this is true. However, given that I am 5'2", 200 lbs, and have PLENTY of body fat that needs to go, am I really doing myself a major diservice if I am eating between 1200-1500 calories a day, at least for now?

If my TDEE clocks in at 2260, is eating 1700 calories a day already creating the 500 calorie a day deficit I need to lose approx 1lb a week...what's the harm in eating about 1400 calories a day and having that number be about 2lbs a week?

Why is this so frowned upon by some, while others are totally supportive?

I've been there. From a 2500 usual I went down to 1300-1600 a day with a lightly active workout. I indeed lost weight at 2 lbs a week. It was good for over a month or so when I came on a plateau. I also was lifting then but was doing a lot lighter weights since I lack energy to do it. So I asked a trainer and he told me that I might have ruined my metabolism by cutting that much just to lose at a faster pace. Now I'm struggling to get back into my usual 2500 and its really hard. My body got kinda used to eating less so I feel bloated most of the time. I'm on my 2nd week in repairing my metabolism and energy and am eating at 2230 cal a day. I add 100 cal every week or so if I see a good rate of loss like .5-1 lb per week. I'm also back to lifting the heavy weights like before but still struggling with it since I'm still rebuilding my strength too.

I guess its really up to you which path you want to take but usually the one that takes longer and is more dedicated will be the better path.

I totally get the whole eating back your calories and eating at LEAST at my BMR, but I'm getting some conflicting advice.

My BMR is 1700. Which sounds like more than enough calories in a day, this is true. However, given that I am 5'2", 200 lbs, and have PLENTY of body fat that needs to go, am I really doing myself a major diservice if I am eating between 1200-1500 calories a day, at least for now?

If my TDEE clocks in at 2260, is eating 1700 calories a day already creating the 500 calorie a day deficit I need to lose approx 1lb a week...what's the harm in eating about 1400 calories a day and having that number be about 2lbs a week?

Why is this so frowned upon by some, while others are totally supportive?

If you are only 5'2" and 200 lbs, unless you are very muscular, then your Body Fat % is probably at least 50% and that would put your BMR around 1350, not 1700. You should try the Katch Mcardle BMR calculator which factors in your BF%.

The calculator on the right side of this site is the KM one.
http://www.cordianet.com/calculator.htm

I agree with Debbie, your RMR is probably closer to 1350 calories and a TDEE of 2100 if working out between 3 to 5 days. And at 200 lbs, you could have a goal to lose about 80 lbs of fat mass. For starters, it would be fine to lose 1.5 lbs per week which would have you eat 1343 calories.

The problem with cutting too large of a deficit to start, is it doesn't allow much flexibility if you wish to reduce caloric intake further, whereas if you start at a higher intake, you can. In the end, you do have enough fat mass to do a large deficit, but I would stick to 1.5 per week to be honest.

I totally get the whole eating back your calories and eating at LEAST at my BMR, but I'm getting some conflicting advice.

My BMR is 1700. Which sounds like more than enough calories in a day, this is true. However, given that I am 5'2", 200 lbs, and have PLENTY of body fat that needs to go, am I really doing myself a major diservice if I am eating between 1200-1500 calories a day, at least for now?

If my TDEE clocks in at 2260, is eating 1700 calories a day already creating the 500 calorie a day deficit I need to lose approx 1lb a week...what's the harm in eating about 1400 calories a day and having that number be about 2lbs a week?

Why is this so frowned upon by some, while others are totally supportive?

Although everyone follows what they like,most people that frown upon creating large deficits have been there and that has backfired for them.Before joining MFP i dint know how much i was eating(but was eating 800 cals a day)-i lost all the weight i wanted to in 4 months(around 40 pounds)-but i hated the skinny fat look,and then a year later anything i eat turned to fat,then hair started falling,brittle nails,PMS.Even when i put on weight i was always eating healthy food,just not the right quantity of macros.The goal here is to minimize the damage to your body-providing it nutrients it wants yet cheating it into losing weight.If you start right away with making it nutritionally deficient it will stop cooperating with you at some point.It took me a whole year to bring back things to normal.I incorporated lots of vegetables and protein and be cautious about breads and sugars now.i have a super sedentary day,the only activity i get is exercise now,im eating 1800-1900 calories and losing inches steadily.my health has never been better in a thousand years and i have so much more energy to workout.This is not a biggest loser race-take it slow,make it healthy,love your body,live life.simple.

What is BMR?

Bump

Do you know your goal TDEE? If it is lower than current BMR I would use that. If not, your actual BMR may be lower if you have very high body fat. You might see what 90% estimated BMR feels like. Just don't get greedy when you get a lower body fat %, lose more gradually as you go.