BMR vs. TDEE

2 pounds per week is a safe goal for people who start out with a lot to lose. The closer you are to your ideal weight, the less you can safely lose per week.

The recommendation that I've seen is TDEE - 20% so that would put you at about 1830 calories per day for your calorie goal. That's about a pound per week.

Your BMR isn't some magical limit that's harmful to cross. Whatever energy your body needs to survive that it isn't getting from calorie intake it will take from fat stores, that's what they're for.

Tiff1124 wrote: »

Mycophilia wrote: »

Your BMR isn't some magical limit that's harmful to cross. Whatever energy your body needs to survive that it isn't getting from calorie intake it will take from fat stores, that's what they're for.

Oh. Because I've always heard that you should never go under your bmr because that is the amount of calories you need just to function

You're right, BMR is a theoretical number that is the best guess of how many calories your body would need to survive if you were in a coma. If you do not ingest that number of calories your body will take it from the calories you already have on board, your fat stores. If you have no fat, your body will metabolize muscle.

Mycophilia wrote: »

Your BMR isn't some magical limit that's harmful to cross. Whatever energy your body needs to survive that it isn't getting from calorie intake it will take from fat stores, that's what they're for.

True.

But undereating can often lead to hangryness and a compulsion to play catch-up and then giving up or gaining it all back before you attain your goal.

A lot of the advice in this thread is good advice.

OP, if I could add, I'd recommend the slow approach to weight loss. I understand the idea behind wanting to meet your goal quicker - don't we all? - but bear with me as I attempt to explain the logic behind a slower approach...

As you probably are aware, your TDEE will begin to drop the further along you are in your deficit, but it will drop in proportion to the size of your deficit. That is to say, the slower/more conservative the deficit, the less of an effect it will have on your metabolism and TDEE. You might say, "but I don't care about the effect it has on my TDEE right now"... but you will eventually.

Let's say you do lose around 2lbs a week for the first 15 or so weeks, eventually that drop in TDEE will slow down the weight loss if calories and activity level all remain the same and if you don't adjust you're weight loss will plateau. This means at some point you will have two options in order to keep loosing weight at the rate you'd like to lose: (1) increase your activity level (cardio much?) or,(2) DECREASE YOUR CALORIES (or both!)... Neither of which will be something you're going to want to do at that point, as you will likely be very hungry and/or very lethargic. It is because of this metabolic adaptation that I always recommend the slower route in a prolonged caloric deficit. You'll have more calories to play with when your weight loss starts to plateau, and you'll have more energy to ramp up the calorie burn side of the equation if you so choose.

Hope that helps!

tk6299 wrote: »

I did not look at any BMR or TDEE. I locked on to 1200 cal a day and stuck to it. Now that that I have reached my goal, I raised my cal intake to work on building muscle. I wish I could help with a good answer, but I cant. I can encourage you to keep at it and know that you have a ton of people here who support you!!!!

Wow for a guy I'm not sure how you managed on 1200 a day.... you could have lost a lot of muscle along with the fat because of a huge deficit (although in your profile pic you look awesome).

OP 1- 1.5lbs a week would mean your deficit wasn't as large - slower loss means less loss of muscle along with the fat.

If I set mine to 2lbs a week, it would still put me at 1200, which in reality is about .2 to .3 pounds a week. So for me to be able to lose 2lbs per week, I basically have to net 500 cals a day or less, which isn't going to happen. Sometimes, you just have to do what you can do. I couldn't even set mine for that much when I started. While it's not going to kill you to under eat your BMR once in a while, doing so several times a week until you reach your goal weight is not a good idea at all.

queenliz99 wrote: »

sjohnson__1 wrote: »

A lot of the advice in this thread is good advice.

OP, if I could add, I'd recommend the slow approach to weight loss. I understand the idea behind wanting to meet your goal quicker - don't we all? - but bear with me as I attempt to explain the logic behind a slower approach...

As you probably are aware, your TDEE will begin to drop the further along you are in your deficit, but it will drop in proportion to the size of your deficit. That is to say, the slower/more conservative the deficit, the less of an effect it will have on your metabolism and TDEE. You might say, "but I don't care about the effect it has on my TDEE right now"... but you will eventually.

Let's say you do lose around 2lbs a week for the first 15 or so weeks, eventually that drop in TDEE will slow down the weight loss if calories and activity level all remain the same and if you don't adjust you're weight loss will plateau. This means at some point you will have two options in order to keep loosing weight at the rate you'd like to lose: (1) increase your activity level (cardio much?) or,(2) DECREASE YOUR CALORIES (or both!)... Neither of which will be something you're going to want to do at that point, as you will likely be very hungry and/or very lethargic. It is because of this metabolic adaptation that I always recommend the slower route in a prolonged caloric deficit. You'll have more calories to play with when your weight loss starts to plateau, and you'll have more energy to ramp up the calorie burn side of the equation if you so choose.

Hope that helps!

Nailed it!!

Well said!!!