So this TDEE-20%, does it work?
harrietm127
Posts: 10 Member
I've just been reading the stickied thread about calculating a more manageable goal than MFP's standard 1200 calories.
Based on the calculations in that thread, I need to eat around 1700 calories per day, which seems a lot to me!
I am 5"7 (170cm) and 217lbs, with a goal weight of 150lbs. I have a sedentary/light exercise lifestyle. Does this sound right? I just can't wrap my head around actively losing weight eating that much per day.
Based on the calculations in that thread, I need to eat around 1700 calories per day, which seems a lot to me!
I am 5"7 (170cm) and 217lbs, with a goal weight of 150lbs. I have a sedentary/light exercise lifestyle. Does this sound right? I just can't wrap my head around actively losing weight eating that much per day.
0
Replies
-
Yes TDEE method does work. With the tdee method your exercise calories are already including in your daily deficit. Therefore you would not eat back exercise calories. The reason why the daily caloric intake is higher. Unlike the MFP method, exercise calories are not including, therefore you eat back exercise calories.
It averages out to be the same amount usually between the two methods. However with TDEE you eat the same amount everyday.
ETA: For your height and weight....yes that is about right IF you are not working out. If you are exercising your TDEE would be higher than that.0 -
Try it, yes it works.0
-
Ok, thanks guys! Sounds good (and I'm not complaining about an additional 500 calories).
My level of exercise can vary drastically week to week, so maybe I will put it in as 'light' (the figures I gave above are 'sedentary'...Mon-Fri I walk a cumulative 30+mins just from commuting, so I guess that's not exactly sedentary).0 -
The TDEE method works best with consistency in activity. If it is not so consistent maybe stick with MFP method.0
-
What about calculating the number of calories as sedentary and then using exercise cals from MFP? Sorta like a hybrid?0
-
It works. As long as you eat less than your TDEE and count accurately, you should lose, although you may need to experiment a bit to get your TDEE, as the calculators are just estimates.
You should know that there are two reasons it differs from the MFP recommendation. The first is that it includes exercise calories, whereas MFP expects you to eat back exercise. The difference is much less once you factor that in. The second is that if you ask MFP for a 2 lb loss/week, it will deduct 1000 calories or as close to that as it can without going below 1200. If you deduct 20% from the TDEE of a typical woman, especially one who is not that active, you won't be deducting anywhere near 1000 calories. For example, if your TDEE is 2000 and you deduct 400 for a total of 1600, you are aiming for a loss of just under 1 lb/week. It might end up being higher--IME, more calories can result in bumping up activity and thus overall TDEE--but the weekly goal you are seeking is less than when you ask for 2 lbs/week, the usual reason people get the 1200 recommendation from MFP.0 -
To maintain, depending on all activity/exercise you'd need 2200-2500 so yes, eating 1700 should allow you to lose weight.0
-
I think TDEE works best when you're consistent AND realistic about your exercise.
If you put a higher activity level into the calculator because you really-totally-definitely plan to get to the gym 5 times a week, and then you don't go more than once or twice, then you're definitely going to be overeating with the TDEE method. Whereas the MFP method will give you the extra calories to eat back on the days you actually do work out, and not on the days you don't.
So yeah. Be realistic, not aspirational.
On the other hand, TDEE, when used correctly, does allow you to eat a more consistent calorie level each day, rather than yo-yoing from low to high based on workouts.
Also, this isn't inherent to the TDEE method, but the calculators most commonly used by people on this forum tend to give you a calorie count based on a 15-20% deficit, which is probably more realistic and healthier than the 1-2 pound/week pace that most people target in the MFP calculator. Sure, I'd *like* to lose 2 pounds per week... but realistically, that ain't gonna happen at my height, weight and size. The TDEE calculator tells me I can probably manage to lose about 0.7-0.8/week on average if I stick with it, so that sets up my expectations for a slower, more sustainable pace.
One thing: Recalculate your TDEE calorie goals after every 5 pounds lost. Since it's calculating deficit as percentage of caloric intake, if you want to keep up a 20% deficit, for instance, then you have to reduce caloric intake as you go along.0 -
What about calculating the number of calories as sedentary and then using exercise cals from MFP? Sorta like a hybrid?
You are basically describing NEAT method. Which MFP already does. So if you want to do this method, then either use MFP lgihtly active (or more if you have an active job) and then log exercise cals and set your goal to 1lb/week or 0.5lb/week.0 -
harrietm127 wrote: »I've just been reading the stickied thread about calculating a more manageable goal than MFP's standard 1200 calories.
Based on the calculations in that thread, I need to eat around 1700 calories per day, which seems a lot to me!
I am 5"7 (170cm) and 217lbs, with a goal weight of 150lbs. I have a sedentary/light exercise lifestyle. Does this sound right? I just can't wrap my head around actively losing weight eating that much per day.
Well let's start with the fact MFP does not give 1200 out as standard....that is the lowest it will go based on what you entered...
When I joined I was 178lbs, chose sedentary and 1lb a week (at 5 ft 7) it gave me 1360 calories+exercise calories which ended up being about 1600.
1600 Calories was my TDEE-20%....TDEE is not any different as far as the number of gross calories eaten if you are using MFP correctly....and remember TDEE-20% is probably 1lb a week not 2lbs a week.
Currently I am 146.5lbs exercise 4-5x a week (lifting/HIIT) and my TDEE is 2267 to lose I eat 2k a day and manage to lose about 1/3lb a week...What about calculating the number of calories as sedentary and then using exercise cals from MFP? Sorta like a hybrid?
and this is what MFP does...it's not a hybrid it's called NEAT.0 -
Oh cool
thanks for clarifying! 0 -
harrietm127 wrote: »I've just been reading the stickied thread about calculating a more manageable goal than MFP's standard 1200 calories.
Based on the calculations in that thread, I need to eat around 1700 calories per day, which seems a lot to me!
I am 5"7 (170cm) and 217lbs, with a goal weight of 150lbs. I have a sedentary/light exercise lifestyle. Does this sound right? I just can't wrap my head around actively losing weight eating that much per day.
First of all, 1200 isn't "standard"...you get 1200 calories because you are probably putting sedentary and you probably picked 2 Lbs per week...and basically that's as low as MFP will go. To boot, that 1200 does not include any estimate of your exercise activity ...so you log exercise after the fact and get those calories to "eat back."
TDEE includes and estimate of exercise activity up front in the equation...and TDEE - 20% is generally a slower rate of loss than what most people tend to pick with MFP.
If you're doing them right and comparing apples to apples loss rate goals, the two methods are pretty much 6 of 1, half dozen of the other...they're simply two different methods that result in exactly the same thing. Take a look at what my numbers were just as an example.
MFP net goals was 1,850 calories to lose 1 Lb per week. With regular exercise I was grossing around 2200 - 2300 calories per day.
My TDEE is right around 2,800 calories (that includes an estimate of my exercise in it)...my TDEE - 20% is 2,240 calories per day and resulted in about a 1 Lb per week rate of loss.
As you can see, I was consuming roughly the same total calories with each method to achieve the same goals...the only difference was where I was accounting for my exercise. On the *kitten* end with MFP and on the front end of the equation with TDEE....that's the only real difference.
0 -
Also, the 1200 floor that MFP gives you won't generally amount to 2 pounds per week. If you've input 2 pounds per week, but eating 1200 calories only gives you a ~250/day calorie deficit, then it will tell you that this adds up to more like 0.5 pounds per week.
Sure, you could eat less than that to attempt a 2 pound/week loss, but it probably means that you're a fairly small person, and 2 pounds per week simply isn't realistic given percentage of body weight. But that means that when you 'eat back' your exercise calories, you have to be pretty careful not to overestimate calories burned or underestimate calories consumed, lest you wipe out that pretty small deficit.0 -
I think TDEE works best when you're consistent AND realistic about your exercise.
If you put a higher activity level into the calculator because you really-totally-definitely plan to get to the gym 5 times a week, and then you don't go more than once or twice, then you're definitely going to be overeating with the TDEE method. Whereas the MFP method will give you the extra calories to eat back on the days you actually do work out, and not on the days you don't.
So yeah. Be realistic, not aspirational.
Thanks - this makes a lot of sense. I have always felt fine on a net 1200 calories, but I see a lot of people on here who think it's too little, which is why I was getting a bit confused!
0 -
by definition it will work. The only problem you may have is accurately predicting your TDEE Practice makes perfect though :-)0
-
It makes sense to start as high as you can on calories.
a) it's less of a drastic change from before, therefore more manageable
b) you will get more nutrition
c) you have somewhere to go if your weight loss stalls and you want to cut back
d) you can most easily find out for you where your optimal calories are... after a couple weeks, have you stayed stable? Then cut down by 250 calories... if you've lost 1-2 lbs you are in a good range. If you have lost more than that then up your calories.0 -
I am 5'7" and started here at 245 and have been losing about 1.8 lbs/week on 1500-2300 per day (averaging in the 1800-1900 range).0
-
Can I ask what exercise you do girlviernes? And congrats on your progress!0
-
I lost most of my 80 pounds with TDEE-20%. But it's really not different from MFP... 20% deficit is typically less than 2 pounds a week loss, plus it accounts for exercise calories, which MFP does not, so when you add those up... it's pretty much the same. The reason I like it is that I don't want to have to get my HRM out every time I do something. I can just adjust from month to month if I'm losing too much/too little, as long as I keep my activity level consistent.0
-
herrspoons wrote: »I've always used the sedentary level for calorie calculation and then added exercise back in. This is mainly because the definitions of Light, Moderate and Heavy are so variable as to be pointless.
For example, a lot of people put down Moderate as their activity level because they go to the gym maybe four or five times a week. Unfortunately, that's for an hour a pop, and the other 23 are spent asleep, sitting at a desk, or watching TV.
Choosing Sedentary gives a better baseline figure.
With MFP exercise is not included in activity level...so that shouldn't come into play if you are doing it correctly.girlviernes wrote: »I am 5'7" and started here at 245 and have been losing about 1.8 lbs/week on 1500-2300 per day (averaging in the 1800-1900 range).
At the same height and 146.5lbs I can lose on 2k a day...I lift weights and do HIIT and a lot of walking in the summer. That has gone up since I started MFP...my TDEE last year was 1995...it is now 2267.0 -
-
I switched to the TDEE method when I started lifting, since it's incredibly difficult to calculate how many calories lifting burns. I also felt like I had to work out to be able to eat with the MFP method, and I don't like having that kind of relationship with food. Food is not a prize for working out, it's fuel so you can.0
-
girlviernes wrote: »It makes sense to start as high as you can on calories.
a) it's less of a drastic change from before, therefore more manageable
b) you will get more nutrition
c) you have somewhere to go if your weight loss stalls and you want to cut back
d) you can most easily find out for you where your optimal calories are... after a couple weeks, have you stayed stable? Then cut down by 250 calories... if you've lost 1-2 lbs you are in a good range. If you have lost more than that then up your calories.
^This^This^This^
Whether you use MFP or TDEE correctly, find your optimal (maximum) calories for all the reasons above.0 -
I am also 5'7...I eat about 1700-1800 calories a day...still losing weight! I started at 250lbs and now I am down to 169lbs.0
-
It's been so great reading all this as its explained so much. I have lost 32 kgs just by cleaning up my diet but came to a standstill so started working out and decided to count calories too with this program. I was so confused at first and thought I could only have 1200 and then was confused on whether to eat my exercise calories back etc. after lots of reading I decided to go with my 1490 calls and then use my HRM for exercise and plug those calories in manually then eat them back. This seems sensible as I'm happy with slow steady weight loss. I'm keen on keeping the muscle I'm building! But yes I have gone wahhhhhhh it seems a lot of calories but I'd rather end up keeping this weight off for life by doing it in a sensible fashion :-)
I do understand how so many people are confused though and we all appreciate your patience in explaining :-)0 -
I know this is an old thread, but since I'm switching to TDEE next month, I really appreciate a few of the helpful posts here!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions