NEW SYSTEM

benjamin380
benjamin380 Posts: 30 Member
edited 10:03AM in Goal: Maintaining Weight
May I propose a new system? :smile:

( f = female / m = male ) (numbers = calories)

BMR BY AGE AND GENDER
AGE / F / M
20: 2500, 3000
30: 2250, 2700
40: 2025, 2430
50: 1822, 2187
60: 1639, 1968
70: 1475, 1771
80: 1327, 1593
90: 1194, 1433
100: 1074, 1289

THAT is how it SHOULD be. IMHO.

Replies

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    benjamin380 wrote: »
    Almost everyone can lose weight on 2000 calories a day, sometimes I eat 2500 calories a day, and still lose weight, even without doing so much exercise.

    Well, this should be interesting.

    Too lazy to find a popcorn gif. Imagine your favorite here.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    benjamin380 wrote: »
    Almost everyone can lose weight on 2000 calories a day, sometimes I eat 2500 calories a day, and still lose weight, even without doing so much exercise.

    Well, this should be interesting.

    Too lazy to find a popcorn gif. Imagine your favorite here.


    Got your back!

    y01yggm40hqh.gif

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • seska422
    seska422 Posts: 3,217 Member
    This explains why there aren't any young obese people.

    Oh, wait.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    May I ask where you got all these random numbers from? Besides pulling them out of your *kitten*?
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    benjamin380 wrote: »
    If 2000 calories is enough for most people to lose weight on, then 2500, and 3000, must be at least closer to the truth. If you didnt notice the pattern, your daily calorie needs drop by 10% every 10 years

    Again, where are you getting this information?
  • seska422
    seska422 Posts: 3,217 Member
    edited September 2015
    nm
  • JamestheLiar
    JamestheLiar Posts: 148 Member
    I've never heard the 2000 calorie rule. Is it a religious thing?
  • mirrim52
    mirrim52 Posts: 763 Member
    Wait...BMR? So you are saying that these are the calories just to exist lying in bed all day?
    And a 5'0" 100 lb woman has the same BMR as a 5'10" 200 lb woman as long as they are in the same decade?
    I have to work my butt off (literally) to be able to maintain at 2000 calories.
  • seska422
    seska422 Posts: 3,217 Member
    r96tblrdp6no.jpg
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    mirrim52 wrote: »
    Wait...BMR? So you are saying that these are the calories just to exist lying in bed all day?
    And a 5'0" 100 lb woman has the same BMR as a 5'10" 200 lb woman as long as they are in the same decade?
    I have to work my butt off (literally) to be able to maintain at 2000 calories.

    Right? I'm 32, 5'8" and my TDEE (as determined through good logging, trial & error, and math) is right about where this chart predicts my BMR to be. Even if I assume that @benjamin380 has BMR and TDEE confused, a smaller woman of my age isn't going to burn the same amount.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Ya, the whole idea falls apart rather quickly, starting with misuse of term BMR when TDEE or actually the deficit eating goal was meant.

    2nd post proclaiming experiment of N=1 should apply to everyone kind of seals the deal that this isn't for everyone.
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Cool story Bro.

    I'm a 5'4 FEMALE and 24 years old.

    My BMR as measured in a clinical setting (you know, not just pulled out of a random poster's @ss) Is 1356.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    Cool story Bro.

    I'm a 5'4 FEMALE and 24 years old.

    My BMR as measured in a clinical setting (you know, not just pulled out of a random poster's @ss) Is 1356.

    Just FYI - if hooked up to gas exchange mask while sitting there - that was RMR test, not BMR - they are different.

    BMR would have been sleeping overnight in research facility- they would have snuck in to room, possibly waked you a tad while they put a hood over your head, and let you go back to sleep, while they measured your O2 CO2 levels.

    RMR can be effected by eating too little, people cause it to adapt slower all the time - BMR not so much.
    Both of course effected by amount of LBM.

    Your results certainly do highlight though why he can't be talking about BMR really, way too off.
  • mirrim52
    mirrim52 Posts: 763 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    BMR would have been sleeping overnight in research facility- they would have snuck in to room, possibly waked you a tad while they put a hood over your head, and let you go back to sleep, while they measured your O2 CO2 levels.
    OMG this sounds like the things nightmares are made of!
  • rosehips60
    rosehips60 Posts: 1,030 Member
    edited September 2015
    I think that happened to me the time I was abducted by aliens
    mirrim52 wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    BMR would have been sleeping overnight in research facility- they would have snuck in to room, possibly waked you a tad while they put a hood over your head, and let you go back to sleep, while they measured your O2 CO2 levels.
    OMG this sounds like the things nightmares are made of!

This discussion has been closed.

Categories