Why is MFP different than BMR/TDEE calculations?

Ok, I know I am missing something here, but would appreciate some clarity. When I set up MFP to lose 2 lbs a week at the most sedentary lifestyle, it says I am to eat 1,340 Calories per day. BUT, when I do Scooby's calculator/the IF calc, it gives me a BMR of 877 and a TDEE of 2252 (again, sedentary lifestyle). And even if I were to do the TDEE-25%, that still leaves me with 1689 calories per day (I do NOT want to factor in any workouts I do, so I can eat those calories back if I want).

Just by looking at the raw numbers (1689 calories per day vs. MFP's of 1340), I want to go with the first one, but why are these so different, because I tried to make them both as "baseline" as possible.

Any clarification anyone could provide would be great. THANKS!! :bigsmile:

The TDEE just doesn't work that way, you don't get to leave off exercise then calculate it back in. The algorithm is more complex than that. Do it appropriately, then take your MFP number and add in your average calories burned per day. For most people, those two calculations are very similar. In my case, within about 100 calories of each other. And I only calculate TDEE-20%.

You can set TDEE to sedentary and then factor in exercise. That's how I get my number for maintenance. I don't eat back exercise so I don't factor it into my TDEE and it has worked fine for me for 2 years.

So, you aren't calculating back in exercise, then. The original poster was trying to use it to eat back those calories. You don't eat them back.

Ok, I know I am missing something here, but would appreciate some clarity. When I set up MFP to lose 2 lbs a week at the most sedentary lifestyle, it says I am to eat 1,340 Calories per day. BUT, when I do Scooby's calculator/the IF calc, it gives me a BMR of 877 and a TDEE of 2252 (again, sedentary lifestyle). And even if I were to do the TDEE-25%, that still leaves me with 1689 calories per day (I do NOT want to factor in any workouts I do, so I can eat those calories back if I want).

Just by looking at the raw numbers (1689 calories per day vs. MFP's of 1340), I want to go with the first one, but why are these so different, because I tried to make them both as "baseline" as possible.

Any clarification anyone could provide would be great. THANKS!! :bigsmile:

MFPs daily calorie calculation has a calorie deficit already built into it and does not take exercise into consideration for a loss. In other words, you will lose weight without exercise at the rate you entered (2 pounds per week) going by the MFP number. If you exercise, you need to add those calories back in and eat them or you will run a significantly higher calorie deficit each day.

For example - my daily MFP calorie net is 1,400 (light active, 1 pound/week of loss). On a day when I don't exercise, I eat 1,400. On a day when I do, I eat 1,400 + all the exercise calories I earn (today that number is 350). So today, I'll eat 1,750 calories. Which, is coincidentally pretty darn close to my TDEE - 20%. I don't do TDEE - 20% because my activity level is not consistent enough yet for me to feel comfortable with that number on a daily basis.

I think you should be realistic with the calculation and start by eating as many calories as you can while still seeing a loss. In the long run, it's much better to fuel your weight loss with more calories.

The TDEE just doesn't work that way, you don't get to leave off exercise then calculate it back in.

From what I have read on the boards here, can't I set up my TDEE for a sedentary lifestyle, then eat

TDEE-20% on a non-workout day

and

TDEE-20% (plus burned calories) on a workout day, if I wanted?

I realize to lose more you don't have to eat back the burned calories, but is my statement above accurate or way off?

Try this: calculate TDEE at sedentary. Then do the same calculations at your actual activity level.

can somebody please PM me the link to this scooby doo website everyone's always talkign about? unless it's part of dan's roadmap thingie in which case I already have it.

My short answer to OP is MFP is easier and I have LOTS of weight to lose and lots of time to figure everything else out and that's why i'm sticking with that for the time being until i"m strong enough/light enough to do serious workouts where my muscle mass will be an issue. I personally don't care if I get skinny fat along the way (in the cosmetic sense, not the clinical one). I plan too and will hopefully be able to correct for it. If of course, if I notice any real health problems or indicators thereof like fatigue, headaches, crankiness, skin problems, food fixations etc. etc. etc. I will certainly correct for that immediately no matter how far along I am to goal weight/size/bmi.

I hope you find what works for you and I am in no way promoting my choices for anyone else as I am in a unique health situation but am NOT a special snowflake, just have certain factors to consider that others may not. The numbers are the key which is why like you I hope to find the right things I need when I need them and have already made fantastic friends here with wealths of information to count on along the way. I beleive in the simple calories in calories out which is why these numbers are important to me and I hope to someday make sense of the whole thing. OP pm me if you ever get the clear answer in easy to understand terms, and add me if you like friends who are full of confusion, but also love, commitment to weight loss, and a big heart and fun.

Search this topic in the forum, also there is the ever famous "in place of a roap map" post that sort of helps explain what both mean, do some research on your own try both methods (each one for a month) and see which one best fits your lifestyle and goals. There isn't one way to do it, it's just a matter of finding the way that works for you.

Im still a bit confused but Im getting there, lost over 5 pounds already : )