Calculating TDEE & macros --- whaaaaat?

Your Fitbit is already calculating your TDEE. You can manually log your combat workouts on there and get the true number you burn.

Calculators just give estimates based on formulas that have been derived from research on large groups of people. Strictly speaking, they're not "accurate" for anyone - because they're statistical estimates - but they're pretty close for most people. However, they can be quite wrong for a few. Don't expect more of them than they're capable of.

Just pick one, and follow it for 4-6 weeks, then adjust based on your actual results. (If you get weak or fatigued (or have other bad symptoms) during that trial time, eat a bit more, otherwise stick with it.) That process is how you find out what's right.

Since you're looking at TDEE calculators, I'm wondering why you're not including the exercise facor? Incorporating that, and eating constant calories daily, is kind of the point of the TDEE approach to weight loss. If you're not going to include exercise in your daily base, why not just keep things simple, and get a NEAT estimate from MFP that has your weight loss deficit built into it, eat to that level, log exercise, and eat the exercise? (Not fueling exercise in some way would be a mistake for someone who burns 600-800 calories per session, if that's an accurate estimate.) You shouldn't try to lose more than 1% of your body weight per week, less if within 25-50 pounds of goal weight, to avoid health risks, unless morbidly obese or under close medical supervision.

The calorie counting process really is a fun personal science-fair project that lets you accomplish your weight goals in a straightforward way: Get an estimate, make measurements, track results, adjust based on results, track again, etc.

As far as macros, it's likely that bodybuilding.com is giving you a protein recommendation on the very high side, unnecessarily high IMO for people who are not already quite lean and hitting weights hard and consistently. They probably think you should get 1+ grams of protein daily for each pound of current weight. You don't need extra protein to maintain your fat mass; it's only needed to maintain lean tissue. So, if one is overweight, estimates based on current weight tend to be unnecessarily high. Ideally, therefore, you base it on your lean body mass, but most of us don't know our lean body mass with any accuracy (the scales that "measure" it are very inaccurate). Estimating the requirement based on a healthy goal weight is kind of a practical compromise.

Extra protein, within reason, won't hurt a healthy person, but it makes things more difficult logistically for some, unless they love the protein foods a lot. ("Within reason" means a level that lets you still get other necessary nutrition - fats, veggies/fruits - within your calorie goal.)

There's a lot of "discussion" around here about how much protein is necessary, and you'll see figures as low as 0.4g/pound of bodyweight, to 1.2 or even 1.5g/pound. It's like arguing about religion!

Personally, I targeted 0.6-0.8g per pound of goal weight (roughly equivalent to 0.8-1g per pound LBM) all through weight loss, while active, trying to hit the upper end of that as often as possible on reduced calories (while vegetarian ). Now, in maintenance, I target 100g daily (slightly over goal), and exceed it when possible. (For context, I'm 5/5", active, female, 62 years old, and currently weigh in the low 130s, which is about 10 pounds over my actual goal weight, to which I'm trying to very slowly reduce again. I also find protein satiating.)

I like 0.35-0.45g fat per pound of goal weight, and you see recommendations in that general region a lot around here, sometimes toward the lower end for men and the upper for women, but close. I try to get a fair amount of it from sources like olive oil, nuts, seeds, avocados, etc.

Both protein and fats are essential nutrients. Everyone sane agrees that if you want to be healthy, you need to eat some.

Carbs are different. Nutritionally, strictly speaking, you don't need any: Your body will make them (or make up for them) out of other nutrients. Under some circumstances, some people find low carb or even ketogenic eating helpful. This includes various medical conditions like epilepsy, T2 diabetes, insulin resistance, and probably some others I'm forgetting. Other people, including some without medical conditions, find that low-carb eating helps them avoid cravings and feel more satiated. On the flip side, some people find that unless they eat a certain higher level of carbs, their energy level suffers, or they can't feel satiated. So, bottom line, carb level is a matter of personal preference, unless you have a medical condition that makes it potentially helpful.

THere's a good thread around here somewhere about setting macro goals. Sadly, I never can find it when I want it. I hope someone else will post it.

Best wishes!

Kim_S_G wrote: »

VelveteenArabian wrote: »

I tried to calculate my TDEE and got *three different responses* from three different calculators! How in the world is a person supposed to know what is correct?

I input the same metrics into each calculator and set each to the lowest activity level option (I'm not sedentary but I didn't want a calculator assigning a random number to my workouts when it doesn't have any information about my workouts).

Bodybuilding.com (Mifflin-St Jeor) said my TDEE is 1699.
TDEEcalculator.net (Mifflin-St Jeor) said my TDEE is 1853.
IIFYM said my TDEE is 1778.


When I look at macros...

Bodybuilding.com said 234 g carbs / 195 g protein /59-117 g fat for fat loss, and to drop to 1529 calories for fat loss.
TDEEcalculator.net doesn't calculate macros.
IIFYM said 49 g carbs /108 g protein /72 g fat for "reckless" fat loss and to drop to 1249 calories.

These are HUGE differences in macros!

According to my Fitbit, I burn anywhere from 1500-3300 calories per day, most often in the 2100-2300 range. I cannot wear my Fitbit through all of my workouts because I engage in combat sports and the Fitbit isn't allowed so there are days where I have another 600-800ish calories of exercise that is not tracked (possibly more? 2 hours of training, including several rounds of sparring).


Why is this so complicated! I'm a female endomorph type and have an easier time bulking than cutting. Are any of these calculators even remotely correct? What I've been doing hasn't been working so far for fat loss so I was trying to see if I went with a more precision approach it might help, but this is not as straight forward as I would have thought.

What have you been doing? Do you use a food scale to weigh everything you eat?

^^This. You still haven't answered this.

VelveteenArabian wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Just pick one, and follow it for 4-6 weeks, then adjust based on your actual results. (If you get weak or fatigued (or have other bad symptoms) during that trial time, eat a bit more, otherwise stick with it.) That process is how you find out what's right.

I was trying the MFP suggestion and lasted about 2 weeks because I felt terrible. It recommended high carb, mod-low protein and mod-low fat. It made me feel like a ham to have all those carbs. I went to a more carnivore diet and feel way better!

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Since you're looking at TDEE calculators, I'm wondering why you're not including the exercise facor? Incorporating that, and eating constant calories daily, is kind of the point of the TDEE approach to weight loss. If you're not going to include exercise in your daily base, why not just keep things simple, and get a NEAT estimate from MFP that has your weight loss deficit built into it, eat to that level, log exercise, and eat the exercise? (Not fueling exercise in some way would be a mistake for someone who burns 600-800 calories per session, if that's an accurate estimate.) You shouldn't try to lose more than 1% of your body weight per week, less if within 25-50 pounds of goal weight, to avoid health risks, unless morbidly obese or under close medical supervision.

I've only lost 10 pounds in 7 months I didn't include the exercise factor since it's so easy to underestimate exercise and overestimate calories it seemed better to just not eat that deficit back. 600-800 calories is an estimate based on the few times I've been able to wear the Fitbit during training sessions. If it matters, I'm doing 1 hour of Muay Thai followed immediately by 1 hour of Krav Maga, three times per week. I'm also sparring in both classes. Additionally on other days I'll do something like Zumba or BodyCombat. My job is also physical (I work with horses) and outdoors so I have a lot of sustained bodyweight exercises as part of my job.

AnnPT77 wrote: »

The calorie counting process really is a fun personal science-fair project that lets you accomplish your weight goals in a straightforward way: Get an estimate, make measurements, track results, adjust based on results, track again, etc.

I haven't found the fun part yet It's just been frustrating since I don't know how to adjust when I'm getting very little in terms of results.

AnnPT77 wrote: »

As far as macros, it's likely that bodybuilding.com is giving you a protein recommendation on the very high side, unnecessarily high IMO for people who are not already quite lean and hitting weights hard and consistently. They probably think you should get 1+ grams of protein daily for each pound of current weight. You don't need extra protein to maintain your fat mass; it's only needed to maintain lean tissue. So, if one is overweight, estimates based on current weight tend to be unnecessarily high. Ideally, therefore, you base it on your lean body mass, but most of us don't know our lean body mass with any accuracy (the scales that "measure" it are very inaccurate). Estimating the requirement based on a healthy goal weight is kind of a practical compromise.

Extra protein, within reason, won't hurt a healthy person, but it makes things more difficult logistically for some, unless they love the protein foods a lot. ("Within reason" means a level that lets you still get other necessary nutrition - fats, veggies/fruits - within your calorie goal.)

There's a lot of "discussion" around here about how much protein is necessary, and you'll see figures as low as 0.4g/pound of bodyweight, to 1.2 or even 1.5g/pound. It's like arguing about religion!

Personally, I targeted 0.6-0.8g per pound of goal weight (roughly equivalent to 0.8-1g per pound LBM) all through weight loss, while active, trying to hit the upper end of that as often as possible on reduced calories (while vegetarian ). Now, in maintenance, I target 100g daily (slightly over goal), and exceed it when possible. (For context, I'm 5/5", active, female, 62 years old, and currently weigh in the low 130s, which is about 10 pounds over my actual goal weight, to which I'm trying to very slowly reduce again. I also find protein satiating.)

I like 0.35-0.45g fat per pound of goal weight, and you see recommendations in that general region a lot around here, sometimes toward the lower end for men and the upper for women, but close. I try to get a fair amount of it from sources like olive oil, nuts, seeds, avocados, etc.

Both protein and fats are essential nutrients. Everyone sane agrees that if you want to be healthy, you need to eat some.

Carbs are different. Nutritionally, strictly speaking, you don't need any: Your body will make them (or make up for them) out of other nutrients. Under some circumstances, some people find low carb or even ketogenic eating helpful. This includes various medical conditions like epilepsy, T2 diabetes, insulin resistance, and probably some others I'm forgetting. Other people, including some without medical conditions, find that low-carb eating helps them avoid cravings and feel more satiated. On the flip side, some people find that unless they eat a certain higher level of carbs, their energy level suffers, or they can't feel satiated. So, bottom line, carb level is a matter of personal preference, unless you have a medical condition that makes it potentially helpful.

THere's a good thread around here somewhere about setting macro goals. Sadly, I never can find it when I want it. I hope someone else will post it.

Best wishes!

The nutrition is going to be kind of a hot topic but I am not a fruit/veggie person. I'm mostly carnivore. Mostly, because I do have days where I cheat and have a slice of pizza, because honestly, sometimes I just want some freaking pizza! When I moved to a more protein-based diet, I felt way better and one of the most amazing flavors in the world is that of freshly grilled meat. Mmmmm! I do often go days without eating any carbs at all, but I do find that when I do eat carbs, I am more hungry, feel bloated, and mentally feel the carbs calling me. With their siren song. When I buckle down and stick to mostly meat, eggs, and cheese, I have less cravings, I want less food.

Thank you for the information, it's been helpful!

OK, so eat relatively more protein, enough fats, and try to get enough fruits or veggies to cover the micronutrients if at all possible, and hit your calorie goal. If you feel better on low carb, be low carb . . . but eat pizza sometimes within your calorie goal, because happiness is important, too.

You can set any calorie goal you like in MFP - you don't have to take its estimate, and even free MFP will let you set your own macro percent targets, in 5% increments. If you manually log exercise, you can log any number of calories you think are more accurate, assuming you don't want to link your Fitbit. That's where the science fair part comes in (I guess not everyone thinks it's fun ). Set your goals, comply, track, adjust.

If you're tracking carefully and not losing what you expect, that would argue for eating less or moving more, unless it's time for a diet break. Given what you've said about what you're doing, I'd advocate for using your food scale more for a while, logging in detail for a couple of weeks, just to make sure your 1500 intake truly is accurate.

VelveteenArabian wrote: »

Kim_S_G wrote: »

What have you been doing? Do you use a food scale to weigh everything you eat?

I've cut out 99.9% of fast food (I've had less than 5 fast food meals in 7 months), don't eat boxed meals, drink tons of water, and workout pretty hard on top of having a very physical job. I've been doing intermittent fasting and doing 1-2 meals a day, with smaller meals and way more activity than prior. I'm not weighing/measuring everything, but my diet is not very varied most of the time. I'm eating at least 500 calories per day less than I was before based on what I'm no longer consuming, and am working out more frequently and at higher intensities than before.

Most of the things you list frankly make zero difference to weight loss. Eating less and working out more is good, but it has to be enough of some combination of those to put you into an actual calorie deficit, or it won't work.

Specifically, fast food, boxed meals, meal timing/schedule and number of meals are purely a matter of personal preference, and affect weight loss success only through satisfaction/satiation. Eating less than before, and moving more than before, may not be enough: It has to be the right amount to create a deficit. I failed to lose weight several times by eating less than before (even hundreds of calories less) and moving more (even became a competing athlete while remaining obese). I joined MFP when I stalled out on my latest attempt, recognizing that I needed to log/track more meticulously in order to succeed in my goals. That worked.

Best wishes!