I Had My BMR Tested - It's 1032 Calories

1456810

Replies

  • norcal_yogi
    norcal_yogi Posts: 675 Member
    bump...
  • kiachu
    kiachu Posts: 409 Member
    Thank you for posting! I have always believed the 1200 calorie thing is untrue. On here I am finding it hard most days to hit 1200-I'm simply not hungry. Whenever I have dieted and exercised and kept my cals between 700-900 per day I have lost weight. Right now I am 5'3 135 pds and trying to drop 25 pds.. I believe with my height and weight 1200 is too high for me to intake to lose any pounds.

    It also depends on how much lean mass you carry, how heavy you are already, what your activity level is. The 1200 calorie "rule" is an average. So while mostly everyone will lose weight eating 700 calories a day (But lunch time I've eaten more than that LOL ) not everyone will lose weight on 1200 calories.

    That is why MFPs generic 1200 calorie setting is ridiculous for everyone is ridiculous regardless of activity level. My BRM is around 1200-1400 calories and my maintenance calories are 2000-2100,
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    Thank you for posting! I have always believed the 1200 calorie thing is untrue. On here I am finding it hard most days to hit 1200-I'm simply not hungry. Whenever I have dieted and exercised and kept my cals between 700-900 per day I have lost weight. Right now I am 5'3 135 pds and trying to drop 25 pds.. I believe with my height and weight 1200 is too high for me to intake to lose any pounds.

    Tell that to your organs.
  • slkehl
    slkehl Posts: 3,801 Member
    I had my tested at a university, and it again tok all day, but to their shock my BMR was 2346, I am 5ft 2 inch

    Jealous!!

    Just a reminder to everyone, BMR needs to be multiplied by an activity factor to give you the calories you need for the day to maintain-

    Sedentary = BMR X 1.2 (little or no exercise, desk job)
    Lightly active = BMR X 1.375 (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk)
    Mod. active = BMR X 1.55 (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk)
    Very active = BMR X 1.725 (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk)
    Extr. Active = BMR X 1.9 (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.)

    So even if you are sedentary, you should still be eating above your BMR to maintain (or cutting calories based on the BMR multiplied by activity factor, rather than straight from the BMR)
  • SuperstarDJ
    SuperstarDJ Posts: 443 Member
    Bump
  • kittuk86
    kittuk86 Posts: 192 Member
    BUMP!
  • I agree that people tend to overestimate their BMR. I used to follow what the generic calculators told me from sites like MFP or any other BMR calculator out there, depending on the formula they used my BMR was estimated to be any where between 1260 and 1400, usually about 1320 was the average. Last year for about 5 weeks I started to track all of my calories, and I was very exact with it, I mostly only ate things that I knew the calories, and I was doing cardio 5x per week. After eating about 1100 calories per day, and burning an extra 2000 calories per week, after 5 weeks I got on the scale and didn't lose one pound. I was so angry, I gave up on the whole thing.

    Last August I went to have metabolic testing done at an athletic club with their dietician using the breathing device. I followed the instructions to not eat 4 hours prior and to not exercise in the last 24 hours. My BMR was 970! And seeing that I didn't lose any weight when I was eating 1100-1200 calories a day, I would have to agree with this calculation. Sometimes I hate typing in my info on these sites, because they don't let you enter in less than 1200 calories a day as a goal, if I were to eat that amount, my weight would stay the same considering I did light exercise, or if I cut back on the exercise, I would GAIN weight if I ate 1200 calories per day! Those online calculators are full of crap! And don't buy into that bull**** about eating TOO LITTLE or "starvation mode", eating more calories will NEVER cause you to lose weight, if you aren't losing weight, that means your consuming too many calories, and not burning enough. I would recommend BMR testing if you want a more accurate reading.
  • stang_girl88
    stang_girl88 Posts: 234 Member
    Bumping to read later when I have more time. Thanks for posting! I dont feel like such a freak lol
  • droneofvelvet
    droneofvelvet Posts: 290 Member
    Now I feel worried about what I am eating :(
  • Now I feel worried about what I am eating :(

    Me too
  • geekyjock76
    geekyjock76 Posts: 2,720 Member
    I agree that people tend to overestimate their BMR. I used to follow what the generic calculators told me from sites like MFP or any other BMR calculator out there, depending on the formula they used my BMR was estimated to be any where between 1260 and 1400, usually about 1320 was the average. Last year for about 5 weeks I started to track all of my calories, and I was very exact with it, I mostly only ate things that I knew the calories, and I was doing cardio 5x per week. After eating about 1100 calories per day, and burning an extra 2000 calories per week, after 5 weeks I got on the scale and didn't lose one pound. I was so angry, I gave up on the whole thing.

    Last August I went to have metabolic testing done at an athletic club with their dietician using the breathing device. I followed the instructions to not eat 4 hours prior and to not exercise in the last 24 hours. My BMR was 970! And seeing that I didn't lose any weight when I was eating 1100-1200 calories a day, I would have to agree with this calculation. Sometimes I hate typing in my info on these sites, because they don't let you enter in less than 1200 calories a day as a goal, if I were to eat that amount, my weight would stay the same considering I did light exercise, or if I cut back on the exercise, I would GAIN weight if I ate 1200 calories per day! Those online calculators are full of crap! And don't buy into that bull**** about eating TOO LITTLE or "starvation mode", eating more calories will NEVER cause you to lose weight, if you aren't losing weight, that means your consuming too many calories, and not burning enough. I would recommend BMR testing if you want a more accurate reading.
    The BMR/RMR formulas predict energy needs for when people are maintaining their weight by eating the maximum amount of calories. Although there will be deviations from the mean for some, your reading in particular is going to be considerably lower if you were eating 1100-1200 calories chronically.
  • hatethegame
    hatethegame Posts: 267 Member
    I knew it! Bump for later
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    Interesting. I can't say I'm completely shocked by it. I've used several online calculators for BMR and TDEE and found that they seemed to overestimate mine since I'd been maintaining for over a year with regular moderate to intense exercise on only slightly more than the number of calories the calculators said was my TDEE at sedentary.

    Yes, I've maintained for years on well below my "Internet estimated" TDEE.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,432 MFP Moderator
    Now I feel worried about what I am eating :(

    Don't stress it. The equations work for 70-80% of the people. The ones that struggle either have a medical condition or have suppressed calories over an extended period of time.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,432 MFP Moderator
    I agree that people tend to overestimate their BMR. I used to follow what the generic calculators told me from sites like MFP or any other BMR calculator out there, depending on the formula they used my BMR was estimated to be any where between 1260 and 1400, usually about 1320 was the average. Last year for about 5 weeks I started to track all of my calories, and I was very exact with it, I mostly only ate things that I knew the calories, and I was doing cardio 5x per week. After eating about 1100 calories per day, and burning an extra 2000 calories per week, after 5 weeks I got on the scale and didn't lose one pound. I was so angry, I gave up on the whole thing.

    Last August I went to have metabolic testing done at an athletic club with their dietician using the breathing device. I followed the instructions to not eat 4 hours prior and to not exercise in the last 24 hours. My BMR was 970! And seeing that I didn't lose any weight when I was eating 1100-1200 calories a day, I would have to agree with this calculation. Sometimes I hate typing in my info on these sites, because they don't let you enter in less than 1200 calories a day as a goal, if I were to eat that amount, my weight would stay the same considering I did light exercise, or if I cut back on the exercise, I would GAIN weight if I ate 1200 calories per day! Those online calculators are full of crap! And don't buy into that bull**** about eating TOO LITTLE or "starvation mode", eating more calories will NEVER cause you to lose weight, if you aren't losing weight, that means your consuming too many calories, and not burning enough. I would recommend BMR testing if you want a more accurate reading.
    The BMR/RMR formulas predict energy needs for when people are maintaining their weight by eating the maximum amount of calories. Although there will be deviations from the mean for some, your reading in particular is going to be considerably lower if you were eating 1100-1200 calories chronically.

    Couldn't agree more. It is not uncommon that a body will adapt to a lower RMR when suppressing calories over an extended period of time. It is rather suggested to eat at an estimated maintenance level to get a good reading. Chronic suppression for an RMR will just lead to falsely low results.
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    I agree that people tend to overestimate their BMR.

    I must be just plain lucky that my BMR is actually way higher than the calculators suggest.
  • Goal_Line
    Goal_Line Posts: 474 Member
    That is why I laugh when I see all these threads talking about BMR and eating more. The BMR is just an estimation. And most equations give you a higher number.

    This is consistent with my personal experience.
  • Diamond05
    Diamond05 Posts: 475 Member
    Bump to read later
  • sigh...

    A test such as this measures oxygen consumption. If your BMR really is that low, eating less (or even slightly more) is a bad idea. If it's a true measure of your metabolism.. you need to figure out how to raise your metabolism. How to do that? Eat more and exercise more. If your bmr is truly this low, you have hormonal issues that are only going to get worse if you don't start eating more. Sadly.. all these threads with people eating 1000 calories a day or less is what causes this.

    Sounds to me like the doc understood the basics of taking a bmr reading but is failing hard as a nutritionist.. which is quite typical.

    Increase your TDEE by adding a lot more exercise.. allowing you to eat a lot more calories and get retested in a year. All of your health markers will have improved and you'll be able to eat a lot more while having a lot more energy.

    If you walk on a treadmill an hour a day, that's another 600 calories to consume. If you brush your teeth, walk around, shop and function like a normal human being, that's several more hundred calories a day, putting your daily energy requirement at over 2000 and making your deficit to lose weight just slightly under that.
  • hsnider29
    hsnider29 Posts: 394 Member
    I do not advocate under eating at all and think everyone that is trying to lose weight should eat as many calories as possible to maintain a small deficit.

    However, I have a 12 year old semi-comatose patient that is fed 600 calories daily by a gastric tube. He doesn't move at all and he is actually taller than me (I'm 5'0). He is growing at a normal rate. I was suprised that we are feeding him so little and he maintains his weight, is growing and all his organs are functioning properly.
  • I totally believe this. I got the Jawbone UP, and was completely surprised when it says my BMR is 890, which is around 200 calories lower than any online calculator. For me to lose, I have to net 1200 calories. I was way over estimating how much I should be eating, until I got the Jawbone UP.
  • PixieAdele
    PixieAdele Posts: 102 Member
    Very interesting thank you for posting this
  • CMorning99
    CMorning99 Posts: 924 Member
    Very interesting OP post! I had a very similar experience (with a much less fancy test) using the BodyMedia and overestimating my TDEE. I was using the calulators and was thinking the "lightly active" range but after 6 months of averages using BM, it turned out my TDEE w/o exercise was about 1650 a day or "sedentary"...I had been way over eating. I have no idea what my BMR is and don't really care as I dont plan on going into a coma anytime soon...

    I am kinda surprised how many people are either confused or having mispeaks...and relating their BMR to maybe TDEE??? I dont think any one should be eating less than BMR unles there is less activity than comatose.
  • I totally believe this. I got the Jawbone UP, and was completely surprised when it says my BMR is 890, which is around 200 calories lower than any online calculator. For me to lose, I have to net 1200 calories. I was way over estimating how much I should be eating, until I got the Jawbone UP.

    So wrong. Learn the difference in BMR and TDEE. If you have to eat that low to lose, you need to increase calories and exercise to raise your metabolism.
  • Lochlyn_D
    Lochlyn_D Posts: 492 Member
    yes. I had my BMR tested as well and it was 811. The online calculators say it is 1500 or more.
  • schaapj2
    schaapj2 Posts: 320 Member
    I had my RMR taken (Resting Metabolic Rate...a more imprecise measurement similar to the BMR) and mine came out to 1860. A lot less than my nutritionist was expecting. For now my nutritionist has me eating at 1800 given my weight-241- and my height-5'5". I actually am eating around 1900-2000 and losing at a pound or so a week-I opted not to drop below my BMR bc I am lifting and trying to preserve the max amount of muscle I can.

    Like others have said before, it's always about trial and error. And it stinks to know that weight loss is not linear as most of us would like it to be.....so many factors involved.

    My biggest thing to remember, is that the number on the scale only tells one small part of the story.
  • jenner1981
    jenner1981 Posts: 12
    I found the post to be very interesting. Thanks for posting it.
  • jenner1981
    jenner1981 Posts: 12
    The thing that worries me about posts like this is the responses like "wow, thanks for this post", you do realise that some people reading this are at their wits end wondering why 1200 isn't helping them to lose weight and after seeing this could drop their calories lower?
    Like you said this is what works for you, but probably not for the majority. I can't understand why you would feel the need to broadcast this to generally impressionable people? It's not like you need to justify what works for you, just get on and do it.
    ETA: I think the majority of the MFP population would know what works and what doesn't, but maybe not everyone, didn't mean to offend!


    I am glad she posted it. I didnt know that actual bmr could vary so much from the online calculators. I personally dont plan to change what I am doing since I am losing weight pretty steadily however I'm still glad I have the information.
  • JAT74
    JAT74 Posts: 1,081 Member
    It's good to finally read some evidence of this from someone who's been tested. I haven't been tested but I suspect my true BMR is around 900-1000 as I maintain at around 1700 including exercise and only lose if I eat 1200-1300 gross as well as lowering my carbs.

    Online calculators have my BMR at 1350 and my TDEE sedentary as 1900 or 2300 with exercise which is just not possible! At one stage after believing this infoI was eating 1900 per day as I burned off around 500 calories per day through exercise but I was gaining weight and didn't start to lose when I cut at least 600-700 calories per day from this figure.
  • pamelak5
    pamelak5 Posts: 327 Member
    Just remember that BMR, RMR and TDEE are all different things. I had mine tested too. My BMR was somewhere around 1600, but TDEE was closer to 2800. (5'11", 210, pretty active).

    And - I thought I was "maintaining" at 1800. No, I was just not as accurate at tracking what I was eating.