i just dont get it?

You don't subtract from your BMR, you subtract from your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). Ideally you should net your BMR at least. BMR is what you need in a coma. You don't subtract from it.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/713460--eating-back-exercise-calories-simple-breakdown?hl=the+simple+break+down

do you really need to lose weight!??

I'd love to be at that weight as I'm your same height. I'd be looking at toning and maintaining with your weight, just an idea.

Simply put, MFP already calculates what you need to eat to lose that amount per week, so their calorie goal they set is geared toward that. Eating what they recommend still gives you the 500 deficit, which is why you need to be as close to that at the end of the day as possible.

I would say only eat back your exercise cals once you have hit goal weight

no

NO.

I would say only eat back your exercise cals once you have hit goal weight

no

NO.

NO!

Plus this

Personally, at your weight, I would aim for a half-pound per week.

And this

Gotta say, if you're 5ft 1 and 112 pounds - why are you still trying to lose weight? Sounds pretty spot on to me.

I'm going to agree with others that at your weight, you can only lose a half pound a week (so a smaller deficit is better). And you do not subtract your deficit from your BMR. You subtract from TDEE. So, you can probably eat 1800 or more and still lose weight (especially being younger means a faster metabolism). Go ahead and exercise for fitness, and don't worry too much about the calories burned. For calorie calculating you can use Scooby's Workshop or Fat2Fit Radio.

http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/

And I agree with others that weight lifting will help you a lot.

I am also small like you and I never ate less than 1800 calories and I am older than you (I'm 34).

I have been so confused about all of this. The below link was simple and will give you your calculations. Good luck
http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/

I'm 5'1 and 92lbs... weight really means nothing. My bones aren't as dense as they should be which means I weigh less than I look, if you get what I mean. I also don't have much muscle mass. However, I don't want to build muscle - just lose fat, so I see where this girl (im being sexist and assuming the OP is a woman) is coming from.

I thought that I would also add that I recently had a doctor's check up and I'm perfectly healthy.

I would say only eat back your exercise cals once you have hit goal weight

no

NO.

NO!

Plus this

Personally, at your weight, I would aim for a half-pound per week.

And this

Gotta say, if you're 5ft 1 and 112 pounds - why are you still trying to lose weight? Sounds pretty spot on to me.

Here is why you must eat -

Your brain
Your lungs
Your heart
Your liver
Your kidneys
Your pancreas
Your veins
Your skin
Your immune system
Your speech
Your hearing
Your wanting to change the channels on the tv
Your not being able to find the controller
Your crossing the floor to try to figure out how to do it from the screen
Your accusing your wife/husband/partner of hiding the controls
Your walking on the remote in bare feet
Your loud cursing
Your eventually changing the channels on the tv
Anything else I left out

..... this all takes fuel to run. Like a car engine needs petrol, diesel or electricity when it is in motion, 'uman beans (us) need a minimum amount of calories to function. Except we need it all the time, not just when we are hopping around the front room in agony cos we stepped on the sharp edged remote with our little tootsies.

You must burn about approximately 3500cals to lose a lb. A 1000cal a day (7000cal a week) difference between calories burned by living and exercise will mean you lose around 2lbs a week.

So if it takes 2200 cals to keep your engine ticking over, eating 1200 with no exercise will mean you lose 2lbs a week.


If you exercise, you use up your cals that your body needs to keep the engine running so you have to eat those to keep you in peak condition. So eating your engine ticking over level + your exercise cals burned keeps your body in tip-top condition and makes you fitter too. WIN.

You need to work around with the figures and find out what works for you.
Some people need more cals than this, some need less. However in the majority of cases, the actual difference will not be wildly outside of the MPF ranges.
Some have to eat more protein to keep them fuller for longer.
Some have to eat more carbs as they already have very active lives outside of exercising to lose the weight.
Some have to take a serious look at their sodium levels

..... and that's kind of it.

I'm 5'1 and 92lbs... weight really means nothing. My bones aren't as dense as they should be which means I weigh less than I look, if you get what I mean. I also don't have much muscle mass. However, I don't want to build muscle - just lose fat, so I see where this girl (im being sexist and assuming the OP is a woman) is coming from.

I thought that I would also add that I recently had a doctor's check up and I'm perfectly healthy.

Maybe it just me but it sounds like you might have an ed so please see a doctor hun.

Agree

I'm 5'1 and 92lbs... weight really means nothing. My bones aren't as dense as they should be which means I weigh less than I look, if you get what I mean. I also don't have much muscle mass. However, I don't want to build muscle - just lose fat, so I see where this girl (im being sexist and assuming the OP is a woman) is coming from.

I thought that I would also add that I recently had a doctor's check up and I'm perfectly healthy.

Considering your height and weight, as well as the fact more than half your friends have names indicating possible disordered eating, I think it really is all about weight or a distorted body image for you. You shouldn't be looking at losing more fat at 92 lbs.

What is your goal body fat percentage? And why don't you want to replace the lean body mass you've lost through calorie restriction?