NOONE can lose 2 lbs per week while Netting BMR...right?

owlandolive
owlandolive Posts: 10
in Health and Weight Loss
Here’s what I don’t get (and I’ve searched a LOT of posts before I bring this tired topic up again)….I don’t get how ANYONE loses more than 1 lbs a week without going into “starvation mode.” Everyone says you can lose 2 lbs safely….but it doesn’t look like it by my calculations. Please help.

As I understand it, if you NET below your BMR, that will put you in “starvation mode”….eventually.

CASE 1:
Woman, 5’9”, 165 lbs, Age 30 (goal: 20lb loss)
BMR: 1,533
TDEE (BMR x 1.2): 1840
Kcal Burned Exercising: 550
Exercise Calories Eaten Back: 550
Calorie NET: 1,533
TDEE-NET: 1840-1,533 = 307
DAILY DEFICIT: 307
MAXIMUM POUND LOSS PER WEEK: .61

CASE 2:
Woman, 5’9”, 205 lbs, Age 30 (goal: 60lb loss)
BMR: 1,714
TDEE (BMR x 1.2) 2057
Kcal Burned Exercising: 550
Exercise Calories Eaten Back: 550
Calorie NET: 1714
TDEE-NET: 2057-1714 =343
DAILY DEFICIT: 343
MAXIMUM POUND LOSS PER WEEK: .67

CASE 3:
Woman, 5’9”, 265 lbs, Age 30 (goal: 120lb loss)
BMR: 1,986
TDEE (BMR x 1.2): 2383
Kcal Burned Exercising: 550
Exercise Calories Eaten Back: 550
Calorie NET: 1986
TDEE-NET: 2382-1986=397
DAILY DEFICIT: 397
MAXIMUM POUND LOSS PER WEEK: .79

CASE 3:
Woman, 5’9”, 345 lbs, Age 30 (goal: 200lb loss)
BMR: 2349
TDEE (BMR x 1.2): 2819
Kcal Burned Exercising: 550
Exercise Calories Eaten Back: 550
Calorie NET: 2349
TDEE-NET: 2819-2349=470
DAILY DEFICIT: 470
MAXIMUM POUND LOSS PER WEEK: .94


So, by these calculations, if your NET BMR you can NEVER lose more than 1 pound. Even the Case Study with 200 pounds to lose still only lost .94 a week.

How is this the case? What am I doing wrong? Why is there even a “2 lb per week” setting and ‘healthy’ guideline.

A lot of people here say it took them 1 month to lose 10 lbs. By my calculation, if my 200 lb Case 4 lost 10 lbs in 1 month she would be netting 755 calories under her BMR EVERY DAY.

So, assuming “safely losing” means “not Netting under BMR.” Then how can anyone “safely lose” 2 lbs per week? Or even 1 pound per week?

What the heck am I doing wrong???????

Thank you!
«1

Replies

  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Where you are going wrong is with your BMR calculation. All your examples have the same amount of lean body mass, but you are treating the added fat as lean body mass, and ending up with inflated BMRs as a result.

    All your cases will have nearly the same BMR. Redo the math from there, and all will come clear.
  • SuperSexyDork
    SuperSexyDork Posts: 1,669 Member
    Can you cite where you got the information that you can't healthily net under your BMR?
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    First off, starvation mode is not something any dieter in a first world country who is not an anorexic need worry about.

    And then...math. Yeah.
  • astartig
    astartig Posts: 549 Member
    what quietbloom said
  • rduhlir
    rduhlir Posts: 3,550 Member
    +1 for math

    Plus, the heavier someone is, the easier it is for them to lose weight, at first. So your 345 lbs person could actually lose +3 lbs a week if it is done in a healthy manner.
  • shawls1
    shawls1 Posts: 10 Member
    You aren't crazy. But.....having a net less than your BMR is NOT necessarily going to put you into starvation mode.

    Bottom line: to lose one pound a week, you need to burn 500 calories a day more than you consume. To lose 2 pounds, you need to burn an extra 1000 calories a day.

    For women, basically no one should go below 1200 calories a day.

    This is why I like FitBit's calorie goals better -- I can set it for a daily caloric deficit.
  • ScottH_200
    ScottH_200 Posts: 377 Member
    What is "Starvation mode"?
  • UpEarly
    UpEarly Posts: 2,555 Member
    I was never that clinical/math-y about it, but I lost 2 pounds a week eating pretty generously. I didn't worry about TDEEs or BMRs or formulas.

    I started at 202 pounds (I was 39 at the time.) I'm female and 5'9". I set MFP to sedentary (I have a desk job) and lose half a pound a week. I ate my exercise calories, which meant I was always eating 2000-2200 calories a day.

    I should have lost about a half pound a week, but it reality I always lost between 2-3 pounds each week the first few months. Then it slowed down to about a pound a week. All in all, I lost 66 pounds in well under a year.

    I've kept it off for almost two years now. I eat anywhere from 2000-2500 calories a day now. I'm not a hardcore exerciser either. I lift weights for 45 minutes 2-3 times a week and go for lots of walks.

    Not sure why my weight came off at the rate it did, but it did.
  • SkimFlatWhite68
    SkimFlatWhite68 Posts: 1,254 Member
    "What the heck am I doing wrong???????"

    First of all - I smell a troll. First post, been a member since September and starting off with something that is going to be quite contraversial.

    Secondly - Relax. This isn't about maths, there are way too many variables to consider other than just calories in and calories out.

    Some interesting reading: http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-didnt-get-fat/

    Summary: Sam Feltham did a N1 study on eating over 5000 calories a day - 2 versions of the "diet" plan that lasted 3 weeks each. The first time he ate low carb high fat and gained 1.3kg and LOST 3cm off his waist. The second time he ate high carb low fat, gained about 7kg and gained 7cm around his waist.

    It's NOT just about the numbers. There is more to it.
  • lydiaannepage
    lydiaannepage Posts: 172 Member
    Ah the start of a good ol' "starvation mode" debate again. *Goes off to get popcorn and grab a good seat* hahaha :laugh:
  • juniperfox
    juniperfox Posts: 127 Member
    Your BMR will gradually decline, yes. But your body won't "freak out" all of a sudden and dramatically change the amount of calories you are burning.

    However, netting BMR will cause you to lose weight, as it's below your TDEE.
  • ThriceBlessed
    ThriceBlessed Posts: 499 Member
    I'm 5 foot 7, I weigh around 230. According to the online calculator I found my BMR is 1758 calories. However, since I exercise a lot every day, I burn around 3200 on average each day (that isn't what I burn through exercise, it is my TDEE). That means I can achieve a deficit of over 1400 calories while eating at my current BMR.

    What will I net then? I have no idea and I don't really care. If I'm hungry, truly hungry, I eat, even if I'm out of calories for the day, but I rarely run out.

    I use my Bodymedia device to track my calories burned, and I aim for a deficit of around 1200 a day, I only use MFP to keep track of my food and for the community. I really don't worry about "net calories". I know that if I eat between 1500-2000 calories a day, I am not going into starvation mode, I may see some metabolic slowing, but there are measures that can be taken to adjust that.

    For the past 5 months I've averaged 2.7 pounds lost each week, in the beginning I usually had larger calorie deficits than I do know, and at first I was losing 3.5 pounds a week, now its slowed down, but I'm still losing.
  • juniperfox
    juniperfox Posts: 127 Member
    Also, to those who think "there is more to just numbers," clear up any irrational claims at the link below. There's no mystery ingredients to losing weight, no magic. Only numbers.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1111515-for-the-nerds-in-you-tdee-estimation-with-graphs
  • _Zardoz_
    _Zardoz_ Posts: 3,987 Member
    I think you need a hobby
  • mmm_drop
    mmm_drop Posts: 1,126 Member
    NOONE?

    Is that like a nooner without the arr? Sounds lame.
  • Whyareyoumad
    Whyareyoumad Posts: 268 Member
    Ah the start of a good ol' "starvation mode" debate again. *Goes off to get popcorn and grab a good seat* hahaha :laugh:

    I will bring the butter!

    But seriously, I dont have the math to define my routine, but I constantly eat below my target and I have been losing weight at about 2 lbs a week. I am not hungry and dont feel like I in starvation mode. It did take me a while to trust what I have set for goals in MFP, but it is working and I dont question it, nor do I always eat back my burned calories, close, but not to target. All I know is it works and I wish I would have started this years ago.
  • p4ulmiller
    p4ulmiller Posts: 588 Member
    First off, starvation mode is not something any dieter in a first world country who is not an anorexic need worry about.

    And then...math. Yeah.

    +1
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    I'm 5 foot 7, I weigh around 230. According to the online calculator I found my BMR is 1758 calories.

    Only if you're using them wrong. 1450 is closer to the reality. Eventually, that 300 calorie difference will matter.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Math is incorrect. Your activity multiplier is 1.2 in each of your cases but it can go well above 1.6-1.9.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Math is incorrect. Your activity multiplier is 1.2 in each of your cases but it can go well above 1.6-1.9.

    This

    TDEE includes your exercise but you are adding exercise separately.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Also 2lbs a week is generally recommended for those with more than 100lbs to lose.
  • aarar
    aarar Posts: 684 Member
    Think your way way way overthinking this weight loss thing :wink:

    This ^^
  • jfrankic
    jfrankic Posts: 747 Member
    Do yourself a favor. Close out the forum post and take 30 minutes to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5C3uqA1yRI&list=FLPbanXUte65g6NKomhmnRlQ&index=1 . This will likely be way better than any info you can get on here. Much better use of your time. I promise.
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    I was never that clinical/math-y about it, but I lost 2 pounds a week eating pretty generously. I didn't worry about TDEEs or BMRs or formulas.

    I started at 202 pounds (I was 39 at the time.) I'm female and 5'9". I set MFP to sedentary (I have a desk job) and lose half a pound a week. I ate my exercise calories, which meant I was always eating 2000-2200 calories a day.

    I should have lost about a half pound a week, but it reality I always lost between 2-3 pounds each week the first few months. Then it slowed down to about a pound a week. All in all, I lost 66 pounds in well under a year.

    I've kept it off for almost two years now. I eat anywhere from 2000-2500 calories a day now. I'm not a hardcore exerciser either. I lift weights for 45 minutes 2-3 times a week and go for lots of walks.

    Not sure why my weight came off at the rate it did, but it did.

    Those calculations are necessarily vague, and assume a lot (such as body fat percent). You may have more LBM than the average woman, thus the higher calorie burns. At any rate, congrats. You did awesome. :drinker:
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    "What the heck am I doing wrong???????"

    First of all - I smell a troll. First post, been a member since September and starting off with something that is going to be quite contraversial.

    Secondly - Relax. This isn't about maths, there are way too many variables to consider other than just calories in and calories out.

    Some interesting reading: http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-didnt-get-fat/

    Summary: Sam Feltham did a N1 study on eating over 5000 calories a day - 2 versions of the "diet" plan that lasted 3 weeks each. The first time he ate low carb high fat and gained 1.3kg and LOST 3cm off his waist. The second time he ate high carb low fat, gained about 7kg and gained 7cm around his waist.

    It's NOT just about the numbers. There is more to it.

    An N=1 study is anectodal. Can't even been considered a study, really, as he was the subject, did all the data collection and number crunching. Not much can be concluded from his experience, except maybe that it was interesting. :flowerforyou:
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,222 Member
    FAt mass should determine deficit imo and if someone has lots of fat to lose then 2 lbs a week is pretty doable and these same people will never be in starvation mode, just can't happen.
  • Emilie04444
    Emilie04444 Posts: 151 Member
    I'm 5 foot 7, I weigh around 230. According to the online calculator I found my BMR is 1758 calories.

    Only if you're using them wrong. 1450 is closer to the reality. Eventually, that 300 calorie difference will matter.

    I don't think so. I am 5'2 and 189, my BMR is 1532 and it's similar on most calculators..
  • ThriceBlessed
    ThriceBlessed Posts: 499 Member
    I'm 5 foot 7, I weigh around 230. According to the online calculator I found my BMR is 1758 calories.

    Only if you're using them wrong. 1450 is closer to the reality. Eventually, that 300 calorie difference will matter.


    1360 would be my BMR at my ideal weight... so 1758 is about right for my current weight... but regardless, I don't worry about that at all. I eat between 1500-1800 most days. Occasionally more, occasionally less. I exercise a lot, at least 90 minutes a day. I make sure I get enough protein, and the weight is coming off just fine.

    And yes, the 300 calories will matter when I lose more weight and my BMR drops. BMR is the calories it takes to maintain your current weight if you do nothing but lie in bed all day... so as a person loses weight their BMR changes.
  • owlandolive
    owlandolive Posts: 10
    Thank you for all the responses!


    Sorry about the late thanks. Holidays.
  • owlandolive
    owlandolive Posts: 10
    Math is incorrect. Your activity multiplier is 1.2 in each of your cases but it can go well above 1.6-1.9.

    I can't thank you enough for actually looking at my calculations and answering my question. With math. That's all I wanted...not to start a "starvation mode war" or a TDEE frenzy.

    NOW I UNDERSTAND.

Categories