BMR and TDEE Explained for Those Needing a Guide

Options
12357…33

Replies

  • GaJavaGirl
    GaJavaGirl Posts: 25
    Options
    Thanks for the great info!
  • fanceegirl75
    fanceegirl75 Posts: 620 Member
    Options
    Thank you for this post. This has been my big focus the last week. Yesterday I used Scooby's site and thought I had it. This gave me a much clearer understanding.
  • amos481
    amos481 Posts: 92 Member
    Options
    bump
  • Stephiestephs
    Stephiestephs Posts: 132 Member
    Options
    It's was very helpful but fat 2 fit gives two bmr's. Harris said 1505 but katch 1332 that is a huge difference. Also Harris said I had 28% bf but I typed in 40% and the match acknowledged that I was at 40% bf I am so confused

    http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/

    I don't think the Harris-Benedict figure takes into account your body fat %. Try putting any body fat % in the calculator and you'll get the same figure. The trouble is that I believe fat2fitradio uses Harris-Benedict for the TDEE calculation, even though they give you the Katch-McArdle BMR (which does take into account body fat %).

    You can still use the Katch-McArdle figure and multiply by the right amount to find your TDEE. Somebody has helpfully posted the multipliers here:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/921403-yes-you-can-quick-start-guide-to-fat-loss

    For instance, if you were sedentary, you would multiply the Katch-McArdle BMR by 1.2 to find your TDEE. If you have a high body fat %, like me, that gives you a lower TDEE than fat2fitradio gives you, but hopefully it's more accurate!

    The Harris Benedict doesn't take into account the bf% that I typed in so I got inflated numbers. Yesterday thought I could eat 200 more calories than I should be eating all because Harris Benedict bmr was 200 more cal than the katch method.
    I got 1332 bmr mulitplied by 1.375 = 1831 tdee. Minus 20% to lose weight comes to 1464.7

    I think it might be important to point out the difference between he two methods? Or maybe 200 cal difference isn't a big deal?
  • kmcosgrove115
    kmcosgrove115 Posts: 260 Member
    Options
    Glad this is helping most of you - sorry for the length - it was from an email I sent to a friend at work who is on same diet with me - we both read many posts here and had to research and sort it out so we understood it in very plain English so to speak - and yes, print out and read - I actually printed it too and keep at home and at work as I know as weight drops I will re-check TDEE periodically............and for those afraid to eat more, it is weird, it goes contrary to all we learned reg losing weight - but really, when you read the success stories of those who fed their body to burn, and factor in all the info behind why, it just makes sense..........at the minimum, never eat below BMR is the place to start :)
  • smithntuck
    smithntuck Posts: 113 Member
    Options
    bump
  • mira2602
    mira2602 Posts: 78 Member
    Options
    bump for later, great post
  • Stephiestephs
    Stephiestephs Posts: 132 Member
    Options
    I found another bf calculator that takes measurements of wrists and forearm. It's almost 10% less than fat 2 fit. Which should i believe?
  • carolinesparkle
    carolinesparkle Posts: 60 Member
    Options
    Activity Level Daily Calories
    Sedentary (little or no exercise, desk job) 1686
    Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 1932
    Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 2178
    Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 2424
    Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 2670

    Sorry, thicko here I just don't get it.

    I work full time at a desk job, I'm a mom of 3 and endeavour to do a circuit training workout 5 times a week.

    Which level do I pick? Do I deduct and eat back calories burnt?

    I would still go for lightly active. I am very similar to you with my numbers being slightly out from yours above! I worked out that I need to work with these for me:
    Sedentary= 1682*20%= 1346
    Lightly active= 1928*20%= 1543
    depending on what I am doing. There are some weeks I just can't workout 5 times a week so I am aiming to keep my intake between the 2. It may not be the right answer but I will try! I've also just realised that I have been eating back my calories based on other posts whilst these figures take that into account already. This is definitely why I haven't lost anything recently.
    Hopefully that makes sense!!
  • kmcosgrove115
    kmcosgrove115 Posts: 260 Member
    Options
    Yep - unless laying in bed and doing NOTHING all day, pick lightly active at the minimum...............agreed!
  • curlyloca
    curlyloca Posts: 81 Member
    Options
    Very interesting. I walk all day for work (sales) and have lightly active. Seems like I need to change it to highly active ?
  • llanosoul
    llanosoul Posts: 2 Member
    Options
    Thank you for explaining it out! Now I don't feel the need to stick to my 1200. With my tdee being 1823 and your calculations I can eat 1640, which is so much more! :happy:
  • 04ward
    04ward Posts: 196 Member
    Options
    Bump
  • becomingtherealme
    becomingtherealme Posts: 39
    Options
    bump
  • ZETAZEN
    ZETAZEN Posts: 46 Member
    Options
    Simplistic! Love it.
  • pinelakecutie
    pinelakecutie Posts: 28 Member
    Options
    This is such a fantastic post. THANK YOU! I was completely confused by the other threads on this subject. I didn't even want to think about doing the calculations. Easy peesy thanks to you.
  • Vailara
    Vailara Posts: 2,454 Member
    Options
    It's was very helpful but fat 2 fit gives two bmr's. Harris said 1505 but katch 1332 that is a huge difference. Also Harris said I had 28% bf but I typed in 40% and the match acknowledged that I was at 40% bf I am so confused

    http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/

    I don't think the Harris-Benedict figure takes into account your body fat %. Try putting any body fat % in the calculator and you'll get the same figure. The trouble is that I believe fat2fitradio uses Harris-Benedict for the TDEE calculation, even though they give you the Katch-McArdle BMR (which does take into account body fat %).

    You can still use the Katch-McArdle figure and multiply by the right amount to find your TDEE. Somebody has helpfully posted the multipliers here:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/921403-yes-you-can-quick-start-guide-to-fat-loss

    For instance, if you were sedentary, you would multiply the Katch-McArdle BMR by 1.2 to find your TDEE. If you have a high body fat %, like me, that gives you a lower TDEE than fat2fitradio gives you, but hopefully it's more accurate!

    The Harris Benedict doesn't take into account the bf% that I typed in so I got inflated numbers. Yesterday thought I could eat 200 more calories than I should be eating all because Harris Benedict bmr was 200 more cal than the katch method.
    I got 1332 bmr mulitplied by 1.375 = 1831 tdee. Minus 20% to lose weight comes to 1464.7

    I think it might be important to point out the difference between he two methods? Or maybe 200 cal difference isn't a big deal?

    I use my body fat scale measurement in the hope that it's more accurate. It's a difficult call, because I believe that most methods of estimating body fat aren't accurate. There's about a 200 calorie difference for me as well. It's maybe not a big deal in that I'd still lose weight as long as I'm under the lowest TDEE figure, but it would be very slow! (Eating at the fat2fit TDEE - 20% would mean I only have a deficit of 173 calories, if the Katch-McArdle figure is correct).

    The strange thing is that MFP actually gives me more calories than this system. Katch-McArdle BMR x 1.375 - 20% gives me 1422 total calories for the day, whereas MFP gives me 1440 net calories (before exercise!). (With a loss of about 1 lb every 10 days with the first figure and 1lb every 14 days with the MFP one).
  • eejayess
    eejayess Posts: 5 Member
    Options
    Bump

    Thank you.
    :smile:
  • mhorn2142
    mhorn2142 Posts: 319 Member
    Options
    Bumping to read later
  • Treadmillmom1st
    Treadmillmom1st Posts: 579 Member
    Options
    Activity Level Daily Calories
    Sedentary (little or no exercise, desk job) 1686
    Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 1932
    Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 2178
    Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 2424
    Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 2670

    Sorry, thicko here I just don't get it.

    I work full time at a desk job, I'm a mom of 3 and endeavour to do a circuit training workout 5 times a week.

    Which level do I pick? Do I deduct and eat back calories burnt?

    I would still go for lightly active. I am very similar to you with my numbers being slightly out from yours above! I worked out that I need to work with these for me:
    Sedentary= 1682*20%= 1346
    Lightly active= 1928*20%= 1543
    depending on what I am doing. There are some weeks I just can't workout 5 times a week so I am aiming to keep my intake between the 2. It may not be the right answer but I will try! I've also just realised that I have been eating back my calories based on other posts whilst these figures take that into account already. This is definitely why I haven't lost anything recently.
    Hopefully that makes sense!!

    Thank you for taking the time to answer.

    So to be clear I should physically aim to consume 1543 cals whether I exercise or not?

Categories