TDEE: Am I doing this right?

Options
lesliezimmer
lesliezimmer Posts: 85 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I've been logging on MFP for a month now and I just wanted to go back and make sure that the processes I have in place are going to be beneficial for me going forward. If not, I want to make changes sooner rather than later.

I added up the total calories I've eaten every day for the past month and divided by the number of days, on average I eat 2,042 calories a day.

I went to 6 different TDEE calculators online (and I got results ranging from 2101 cals to 2405 cals!) and got every result, added them up and they averaged to TDEE = 2312 cals a day

Stats: 32 yrs old, female, 173 lbs, 5'4" exercise 3-4 times a week very religiously with vigorous effort.

So that means I'm okay with eating ~2000 cals a day until I lose more weight, and then I'll have to lower that number accordingly, correct?

I do minimal cardio (mostly HIIT) and a good amount of weights, and I can *feel* changes in my body already even though I haven't lost much weight and my waist/hip measurements are still the same. I haven't lost any inches.

I'm in it for the long-haul, so I don't care to lose 1 lb a week. I can lose .25lb a week and that's fine with me, because I feel it'll help me stick with the program better. But... does what I'm doing sound correct / effective for the long-term? Am I doing TDEE correctly or do I have something that needs to be corrected?

Thank you o:)

Replies

  • minties82
    minties82 Posts: 907 Member
    Options
    It sounds like you have a fabulous attitude. Well done.

    Getting results that make you happy = doing it right.
  • lesliezimmer
    lesliezimmer Posts: 85 Member
    Options
    minties82 wrote: »
    It sounds like you have a fabulous attitude. Well done.

    Getting results that make you happy = doing it right.

    thank you! honestly i've never been able to stick with an exercise program as well as i am now. i think i was killing myself with trying to do loads of cardio, when in reality doing weights makes me *feel* like a new woman, even though i look like the same ol dumpy woman i looked like a month ago ;)
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    Options
    You have it right. As time goes on, you may eventually take a break from losing weight, at which point you can add back calories bit by bit to attempt to find your true TDEE since the calculators are all estimates. But until then, your method is/was a good one and it looks like you have a healthy attitude about it. I'm always happy to see women eating more while losing rather than cutting down to the bone, calorie-wise.
  • lesliezimmer
    lesliezimmer Posts: 85 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    jemhh wrote: »
    You have it right. As time goes on, you may eventually take a break from losing weight, at which point you can add back calories bit by bit to attempt to find your true TDEE since the calculators are all estimates. But until then, your method is/was a good one and it looks like you have a healthy attitude about it. I'm always happy to see women eating more while losing rather than cutting down to the bone, calorie-wise.

    Thank you for your comments!

    Welllll I'm not so proud to say that at first I *did* cut right down to the 1200 cals/day on recommendation from a friend who lost 80 lbs (and has kept it off for over 10 years, good for him!) by eating 1200 a day and walking 90 minutes a day for like 7 months.

    What I realized is that my body flipped out. I don't know if it was a hormonal thing or something else, but a couple days into eating that low I had intense insomnia and hyperactivity. I've never done speed, but I can imagine that's what doing speed would be like, for three days! It was horrible. I couldn't function, so I was like "screw this, I'M EATING!" I didn't make it more than a week eating that little.

    I am trying to tell myself the story of the tortoise and the hare every day. Slow and steady wins the race!
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    Options
    lesliezimmer wrote: »
    jemhh wrote: »
    You have it right. As time goes on, you may eventually take a break from losing weight, at which point you can add back calories bit by bit to attempt to find your true TDEE since the calculators are all estimates. But until then, your method is/was a good one and it looks like you have a healthy attitude about it. I'm always happy to see women eating more while losing rather than cutting down to the bone, calorie-wise.

    Thank you for your comments!

    Welllll I'm not so proud to say that at first I *did* cut right down to the 1200 cals/day on recommendation from a friend who lost 80 lbs (and has kept it off for over 10 years, good for him!) by eating 1200 a day and walking 90 minutes a day for like 7 months.

    What I realized is that my body flipped out. I don't know if it was a hormonal thing or something else, but a couple days into eating that low I had intense insomnia and hyperactivity. I've never done speed, but I can imagine that's what doing speed would be like, for three days! It was horrible. I couldn't function, so I was like "screw this, I'M EATING!" I didn't make it more than a week eating that little.

    I am trying to tell myself the story of the tortoise and the hair every day. Slow and steady wins the race!

    Very true. There is another poster here who always says that the winner is the person who loses while eating the most and I like that too.
  • ibnfaqir
    ibnfaqir Posts: 139 Member
    Options
    Yes so far you are doing very thing by the book. intelligent post.
  • Amerielle
    Amerielle Posts: 153 Member
    Options
    If you have been keeping super great track of what you have eaten for a month you don't even need a TDEE calculator. Just do the math with what you have lost and you will have your personal numbers.
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    Options
    So let's say you lost 2 lbs. And you ate 2042 on average for a month (and you were as accurate as possible with this number). Math says for the month you had a 7000 calorie deficit. This puts you at a 233 calorie/day deficit. Which means your actual, factual TDEE is about 2042+233=2275.

    But your TDEE will go down, of course, as you lose weight if you don't increase activity to make up for the lower bodyweight.
  • lesliezimmer
    lesliezimmer Posts: 85 Member
    Options
    WBB55 wrote: »
    So let's say you lost 2 lbs. And you ate 2042 on average for a month (and you were as accurate as possible with this number). Math says for the month you had a 7000 calorie deficit. This puts you at a 233 calorie/day deficit. Which means your actual, factual TDEE is about 2042+233=2275.

    But your TDEE will go down, of course, as you lose weight if you don't increase activity to make up for the lower bodyweight.

    Wow! Yes, I was wondering about this too. I'll take the TDEE of 2275 or so. I read that once you lose 5 lbs, you have to re-calculate the TDEE and decrease calories.
  • Bshmerlie
    Bshmerlie Posts: 1,026 Member
    Options
    The real winner of the weight loss race is the one who keeps going. If people cut too drastically they will eventually just give up and resume their normal weight gain routine. If you ever have trouble with a restricted diet just loosen it up a little bit and keep on going. Its always better to do routine that your are comfortable with and you can handle without suffering. If you are hungry...eat...don't starve yourself. When you are feeling sluggish, weak or sore...eat....fuel your body. Know yourself and pay attention to what your body is telling you. Weightloss isn't fun but it doen't have to be hell either.
  • vismal
    vismal Posts: 2,463 Member
    Options
    I'll touch on a couple things here. OP the methods you detailed are correct. I will say that the smaller your deficit, the more of a problem inaccurate counting can be. If your calorie count is off by say 200 calories (extremely easy to do given the myriad of reasons one's calorie count can be off) then you barely have a deficit for the day. Someone with a slightly bigger deficit, say 500 has a little more wiggle room for inaccuracies. If your counting is fairly accurate, this is less of a concern. Check out this post and see if you are doing most of the things in the guide: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1296011/calorie-counting-101. If you are, your number will be pretty decent.

    To those who are saying slow and steady wins the race, and that big deficits lead to quitting, that's not entirely accurate. While I in no way endorse very low calorie dieting I will play devil's advocate and point out that research doesn't necessarily support the slow and steady notion. Studies tend to show success of long term weight loss/maintenace isn't really worse for those who lose quickly, and some studies even show it to be slightly higher. What's important is that you find which method works best for you personally, which it seems that OP has. Again this isn't meant to push people in the direction of "lose faster", just tossing it out there to not discourage others who wish to be a little more aggressive with their rate of loss. Good luck OP and keep up the consistency. No matter how fast you choose to lose, consistency is what I really think separates the success stories from the failed attempts.
  • lesliezimmer
    lesliezimmer Posts: 85 Member
    Options
    vismal wrote: »
    I'll touch on a couple things here. OP the methods you detailed are correct. I will say that the smaller your deficit, the more of a problem inaccurate counting can be. If your calorie count is off by say 200 calories (extremely easy to do given the myriad of reasons one's calorie count can be off) then you barely have a deficit for the day. Someone with a slightly bigger deficit, say 500 has a little more wiggle room for inaccuracies. If your counting is fairly accurate, this is less of a concern. Check out this post and see if you are doing most of the things in the guide: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1296011/calorie-counting-101. If you are, your number will be pretty decent.

    To those who are saying slow and steady wins the race, and that big deficits lead to quitting, that's not entirely accurate. While I in no way endorse very low calorie dieting I will play devil's advocate and point out that research doesn't necessarily support the slow and steady notion. Studies tend to show success of long term weight loss/maintenace isn't really worse for those who lose quickly, and some studies even show it to be slightly higher. What's important is that you find which method works best for you personally, which it seems that OP has. Again this isn't meant to push people in the direction of "lose faster", just tossing it out there to not discourage others who wish to be a little more aggressive with their rate of loss. Good luck OP and keep up the consistency. No matter how fast you choose to lose, consistency is what I really think separates the success stories from the failed attempts.

    I use a food scale, I'm pretty good at calorie counting. Considering I have lost a little over 2 lbs in the last month, I am quite sure that I am counting calories very successfully, but if it turns out that in the next 30 days I don't lose anything or I start gaining, I will definitely take your advice and give myself a little more of a deficit to play with.

    I completely agree with your second paragraph. My friend lost 80 lbs 10 years ago and has kept it off, and he is 6' tall and was eating 1200 calories a day for 7 months. It worked for him. Unfortunately, that kind of low calorie dieting, even having a 500 cal deficit, really messes with my mind/brain. Mathematically I understand it will induce weight loss, but practically it doesn't work for me because I can't live my life the way I want to with that drastic of a deficit.

  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,739 Member
    Options
    An interesting way to look at things is to calculate your TDEE at your goal weight at the lightly active and the active setting.

    To the extend possible I want to lose weight while netting in that range.

    Easy to do when quite far from goal weight. Harder to do as one approaches goal; but, of course, as you get fitter you do have the ability to generate larger exercise burns.

    Addressing the studies that find that it makes no difference in terms of long term maintenance how fast you get to maintenance. What happens when you include the rest of the people (the majority) who do not maintain? Which group spends more total time in a state beneficial to their health (i.e. @ -10% off of initial weight, while not in the process of re-gaining), the turtles or the hares?
  • lesliezimmer
    lesliezimmer Posts: 85 Member
    Options
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    An interesting way to look at things is to calculate your TDEE at your goal weight at the lightly active and the active setting.

    To the extend possible I want to lose weight while netting in that range.

    Easy to do when quite far from goal weight. Harder to do as one approaches goal; but, of course, as you get fitter you do have the ability to generate larger exercise burns.

    Addressing the studies that find that it makes no difference in terms of long term maintenance how fast you get to maintenance. What happens when you include the rest of the people (the majority) who do not maintain? Which group spends more total time in a state beneficial to their health (i.e. @ -10% off of initial weight, while not in the process of re-gaining), the turtles or the hares?

    That's an interesting way to look at it. I calculated that when I reach my goal weight if I continue light activity I'd have to eat 1850-1900 calories to maintain. That sounds like SO much, which is awesome! I remember trying to lose weight last year and going down to eating 1500 calories a day and just feeling starving, cranky and horrible - I wonder why!

Categories