Eating below BMR?

Probably because of the rate of loss you set it to - 2lb/wk I suspect. This rate of loss requires 1000cal a day cut.

I'm sorry, didn't see the answer to my question in your response. Last call for help.

Why does MFP have my calorie goal well below BMR?

BMR (St. Jeor) = 1786

MFP calorie goal = 1480

I chose sedentary as I have desk job..I do move. But figure if I use sedentary and the add calorie burn later it should be more accurate than choosing an activity level multiplier to consider required calories.

MFP "doesn't care" about your BMR, it only "cares" about your particular goal. The only thing MFP won't do is put you under 1200/day. This is why people really should do a little bit of reading and find their own BMR and TDEE and all that jazz, and set their diaries themselves. MFP tells me I can lose .5 lbs a week at 1600/day BUT my diary is set to 1700/day (I'm almost ALWAYS "over") and I've been losing well over .5 lbs a week. Everybody's different, but MFP treats us all "the same".

Thanks folks... My weight loss goal had been set at 1.5 pounds per week. Also I mentioned that I wasn't considering tdee- only interested in the MFP BMR calculator vs. the net calorie goal set for me. The calorie goal assigned is lower than the BMR number.

Thanks again.

BMR = Basal Metabolic Rate

There's no absolute "right" or "wrong" about eating below BMR but always keep in mind that eventually your metabolism will slow down if you continually and habitually underfeed. Longterm thinking required here - do you want a slowed metabolism or a raging fire?

Be smart about it and you can lose lots of weight while eating enough to keep your metabolism humming!

Taking all this into account, would I be better off increasing to my BMR and losing more slowly or keep eating like I am and when I hit a plateau, increase to my BMR? Or something different entirely. Also, I've been actually averaging about 1400 or less, some days around 1200 because I haven't been eating all of my calories.

Thanks for you help so far everyone! I don't want to risk doing this in an unhealthy manner and am definitely willing to lose at a slower rate if it means that I will be healthier while doing so. Right now I'm set to lose 1.5 pounds a week.

If you're willing to go at a slower rate, eat at least your BMR. Why do you want to ruin what is a pretty great metabolism by training your body to run on fewer calories? When you do finally hit your goal weight, your maintenance calories will be so much lower than they would have been otherwise, and you'll have to be very careful to keep from re-gaining the weight. The "in place of a road map" post someone else linked to is a great way to explain it.

Good luck!

My final thoughts are is that there is something wrong with the MFP calculations and if there is a way to contact these folks who created this app I'd love too.

Again the MFB BMR calculator indicates my BMR (coma required calories) is 1,777.

When I set up the goals I set the activity level at sedentary (which I would assume MFP uses the 1.2 multiplier)

Then I selected to lose 1.5 pounds per week.

the MFP Calorie goal was calculated at 1480! If I choose 1 pound per week I am still under the BMR. Unless I am doing something wrong I think there is a calculation issue.

This goes against all I read and find it rather confusing. I will set my own calorie goal WHICH defeats the purpose of the app.

Thanks again

MFP will allow you to go below your BMR but not below 1200 which is considered the minimal amount of calories that can provide enough micronutrients (vitamins, minerals, etc) to keep you healthy. The calculations are fine. It is a problem of wrapping your head around all of this which is to be expected in the beginning

EXACTLY !!!!!! Which is putting me at 1,480 net calorie goal which is below my BMR of 1,777 calories ( in a coma ) -calculated using the MFP BMR calculator.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/tools/bmr-calculator


- Whcih I am told a net calorie intake of less than your BMR is NOT recommended by any fitness site.

I am confused now reading these posts. I thought this was all so simple. I calculate my BMR and select sedentary( even though I am not). Then I deduct 500 calories per day from that. That's my calorie intake if I want to loose 1 pound per week.

Then , if I exercise I add those lost calories, or parts of them, to my daily calories I am allowed to eat.

Lets pretend my BMR is at 1800..."in a coma"...lol....
I deduct 500 from that. Then I exercise and burn 500. Than I can still eat 1800 per day and still lose one pound per week.

Hi,

Yes I'm going to start some of my own tweaking as I have plateaued now for 2 months and stuck at 204.4. Did have some good holiday food though but perervered and stayed mainly on track.

I'm going to use the BMR calculation as my baseline - then pick a moderately active multiple and then subtract 750 from that. That should put me at 2004 calories per day --above the BMR

Cheers

I am confused now reading these posts. I thought this was all so simple. I calculate my BMR and select sedentary( even though I am not). Then I deduct 500 calories per day from that. That's my calorie intake if I want to loose 1 pound per week.

Then , if I exercise I add those lost calories, or parts of them, to my daily calories I am allowed to eat.

Lets pretend my BMR is at 1800..."in a coma"...lol....
I deduct 500 from that. Then I exercise and burn 500. Than I can still eat 1800 per day and still lose one pound per week.

According to the above : 1800 -500 (1 lb/week loss rate) = 1300. 1300 -500 (exercise burn) = 800. If you eat 1800 back thats a total of 2600 net calories for the day... Not sure about that being a pound a week loss.

The main point I was making was that MFP calculated my maintence rate (based on selecting sedintary activity level) at 2200. Thats approximately my BMR plus 20%. Then if I select to lose 1.5 pounds per week- MFP sets my NET Calories at 1480. This is 300 calories below my BMR. Recall I have 46 pounds to lose so a 1.5 lb./week rate loss isnt that extreme.

Just doesnt make sense if the whole purpose of the app & philosophy is to loose weight in a healthy sustainable way AND all I read is to never eat below the BMR - and that is what I would like to have the MFP folks comment on.

Cheers

Well I used this site: http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/bmr-calculator.html

Then I tried this site: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/ and got 1,893.

MFP's calculator says 1,815


Am I doing something wrong?

No, I think that's correct. I got the same thing for you, using the Harris Benedict equation. I would eat at your BMR. You will likely find that your TDEE is higher than that. Log carefully and accurately and see how much you lose after a month. I know that if I eat less than 1500 calories for more than a couple of days, I feel weak and dizzy.

Just doesnt make sense if the whole purpose of the app & philosophy is to loose weight in a healthy sustainable way AND all I read is to never eat below the BMR - and that is what I would like to have the MFP folks comment on.

Cheers

It is just a tool. And like any tool, you have to understand how it works, and apply it accordingly. Most people do not understand what BMR and TDEE are, and they do not understand how choosing "how many pounds a week" you want to lose overrides those numbers. IF you read the materials here in the sticky topics, you can quickly understand how it all works and use the tool accordingly. The problem is, people want a quick fix and there isn't one.

. I walk about 6 miles per day so I get to eat more than 1370 if I want to.

You need to eat all those calories back, that is how MFP is designed to work. Without eating those exercise calories, you are not eating enough. 6 miles a day is probably what, an hour and a half? That could be 600 calories. I'm just guesstimating on that, so your calorie intake would be 1970. Or, don't set yourself at "sedentary" and see what kind of calories it gives you.

Again, on MFP, when you tell it how many pounds per week you want to lose, it will just deduct that amount of calories regardless of what your BMR is. But to a minimum of 1,200, it will not go below 1,200.

For example, if my TDEE is 2,000 and I say I want to lose 1 pound a week, it will set me at 1,500, even if my BMR is 1,700. It subtracts 500 calories for 1 pound a week.

If I set it to 1.5 pounds a week, it will subtract 750 calories for a goal of 1,250.

If I set it to 2 pounds a week, it will try to subtract 1,000 calories a week. Since that would put me at 1,000 calories, it sets it at the default minimum of 1,200.

Now, If I do my TDEE - 20%, that would be 2,000 - 400 or 1,600 calories. This is pretty near MFP's calculation for 1 pound a week.

BMR is not the most important number, TDEE is. Because that is your total daily energy need for all of your activity from sleeping to working out and everything in between.

MFP sets you low so that you would lose weight with no added exercise. And it is why you need to eat more when you exercise using their method.

Admittedly, 'starvation mode' is a misnomer, and I'm guilty of using it inappropriately myself. But what most people on this site term as 'starvation mode' is the reaction that I just described. Normally, I don't even use the terminology that way, but I did this time for simplicity's sake. I'll be sure not to make that mistake twice.

Doesn't change the facts though.

If you eat below BMR, eventually your body will release hormones that hinder weight loss.

apology accepted. :flowerforyou:

seriously though, in the short time i've been here, i've seen that term thrown around so often and so erroneously that i try to chime in when i can. it's crazy that people are deathly afraid of eating less than their BMR for fear that doing so for even one day will put them in starvation mode. it's not logical and it doesn't match anybody's real world experience.

Correct. It takes weeks below BMR to get to this point. I chimed in only because I experienced this myself and I am 200+ lbs still.

Thank you for these posts, my weight loss plateau now makes total sense.

I was having 1200 cals per day for a long time thinking I was doing this right and lost about 28lbs. I wracked my brains thinking why have I plateaued I still have at least another 28lbs to go. So I decided to take a different approach to losing weight and followed Slimming World (UK based food optimising) and yes the scales did start moving again and I lost another 14lb. But I have now come to realise that the reason I lost more weight was due to the fact I was eating more calories which would be over my BMR. Now I have hit a plateau, yet again, and low and behold looking back at food diarys is because my calorie intake has slipped again under bmr.

I am now going to eat above my BMR with MFP which I believe is around 1440 and eat back any exercise cals. I have not introduced exercise much through my journey and think now is definately a good time to start strength training, I really hope I do this properly this time. I do only have about 10lb to go and realise it is going to be about .5lbs per wk which I'm fine with.

So hear is to my road to maintenance and hopefully I have it all figured out correctly by the time I get there and I can continue my new way of understanding for the rest of my life :0)

You need to figure out your TDEE, that is your maintenance calories and begin raising slowly to that level.