No More TDEE posts

You're already arguing with a better informed, more articulate person than myself. Nothing I could say to penetrate that she has not already said.
Good on her for having the patience to try to save others from your disinformation. I haven't got it.

So the answer is no.

So far no one has articulated a reason not to go below BMR if TDEE - 20% is below BMR. All we've had is some vague words like "it's what your body needs to survive."

There is absolutely no reason not to go a bit below BMR if you have been fairly inactive on a particular day. There's nothing magic about that number.

If the answer was "no" I would have said "no." But, thanks for demonstrating my earlier statement of "no cure."

Also, please contact the military. I'm sure they'd like to study your brain pan to help in the development of future body armor. Impenetrable is a desireable quality in that line.

You haven't articulated a reason.

BMR is a theoretical value. It's the number of calories your body WOULD use if you stayed in bed all day. We don't stay in bed all day (usually). Therefore, BMR is a theoretical value.

It's not like the body says "ok, these calories I'm burning are for BMR, and these calories I'm burning are for stuff on top of BMR - so I'll take the calorie deficit from the calories on top of BMR but I better have enough calories left over for BMR!" It doesn't work that way.

The calorie deficit comes from actual energy expenditure. Your calorie deficit is a result of calories actually used in a given day minus the calories eaten in a given day. The calories you would have used if you stayed in bed all day are irrelevant.

BMR is useful as a starting point for determining TDEE. There's nothing magic about the number. There's absolutely no reason in the world not to dip below it slightly on days you weren't very active.

We already have the term "broscience." I think I'm going to coin a new term: "MFPscience." The definition is "common knowledge on MFP that has no evidentiary or logical basis."

I thought BMR was constant, and TDEE was the variable. BMR doesn't vary does it?

In other words, given an individual, their BMR is always the same, correct?

The other thing I want to point out is one of the diseases people suffer from is not thinking long term. No one does it. Example, "I eat below BMR and I'm fine". Another example, "they say smoking causes cancer, but I've been smoking for years, and I'm fine." There can be long term effects from bad decisions that don't seem to have any effect on you now. If you're curious, talk to someone with an ED.

I'm not suggesting your occasional dip below BMR is causing any harm at all, but the comment you made about, "I eat below BMR on some days and I'm fine" reminds me of what I said above.

However, what you didn't say initially that you are now saying is that your average is at or above BMR. You could have said that earlier and avoided pages and pages of silly back and forth. Nice trolling though. Good job dragging everyone through unneeded arguments.

Also, BMR is an estimate. Online calculators don't really know your BMR. maybe it is lower than you think.

I thought BMR was constant, and TDEE was the variable. BMR doesn't vary does it?

In other words, given an individual, their BMR is always the same, correct?

No, BMR depends on weight so as you loose weight/fat your BMR sinks. Although of course, generally BMR calculators don't take into account body fat which makes a differences as muscle uses more energy. So as your weight or body composition changes, your BMR changes.

Does anyone know what the average loss would be if you aim for TDEE-20%? How about if you aim for 2 lbs. a week? Wouldn't you be under BMR? I've seen people losing that much so I'm curious.

It depends on your size, activity level etc as to whether you will be under. Generally TDEE - 20% is about 1lb a week.

Right but then 2 lbs a week would put you below BMR. Am I correct? I am thinking that would get you arrested on the MFP forums?