Body Scan Completed - BMR Question
klsn
Posts: 28 Member
I had my first body scan today & it calculated my BMR as being 1404. From my understanding this is the amount of calories my body needs if I was to do absolutely nothing all day. In the analysis afterwards the PT told me that I should stick to 1400-1500 calories per day to lose weight. Does this seem right? I thought I would have more calories on top of the 1404. Generally I burn approximately 600 calories each day through exercise (though I’m looking at changing my exercise routine). Can someone please shed some light on this for me?
0
Replies
-
What is your age, sex and height?
How much would you like to lose?
How are you calculating 600cal burn?3 -
Based on what you state is your BMR next steps would be.
Harris Benedict Formula
To determine your total daily calorie needs, multiply your BMR by the appropriate activity factor, as follows:
If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.2
If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725
If you are extra active (very hard exercise/sports & physical job or 2x training) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.9
I figured out my BMR and did the calculation and it came out pretty close to what I have been using.2 -
I should have stated that I added it in, then took away what is my daily deficit. And by multiplying that out, I am seeing how I am on average losing 2 lbs per week. I have alot to lose still.0
-
Body scans aren't really a way to calculate BMR.7
-
To be fair, the easiest answer would be to put your stats into MFP and see what it gives you...2
-
What is your age, sex and height?
How much would you like to lose?
How are you calculating 600cal burn?
Age 46, female, 171cm.
I only want to lose around 5kg or so, I’m what you’d probably call “skinnyfat”. I’m looking at concentrating on strength training to reach my goals as opposed to mainly cardio which is what I’ve been doing.
600 calories is measured via HRM on my Garmin.0 -
FWIW I would never call anyone skinny fat.
It will prob be a long term change for you which I would imagine to be much more easily managed by trial and error.2 -
I do think 1400-1500 sounds quite low for 171cm, for the sake of 5kgs going ever so slightly under maintenance or even staying at maintenance with strength training might work better long term2
-
FWIW I would never call anyone skinny fat.
It will prob be a long term change for you which I would imagine to be much more easily managed by trial and error.
Yes, trial & error is what I’ve been doing. Long term change is hard to adjust to. Up til recently I’d been hoping for a quick fix *sigh*1 -
FWIW I would never call anyone skinny fat.
It will prob be a long term change for you which I would imagine to be much more easily managed by trial and error.
Yes, trial & error is what I’ve been doing. Long term change is hard to adjust to. Up til recently I’d been hoping for a quick fix *sigh*
That’s probably because you’re human
If you want it to last a lifetime it will prob take more than a few months to achieve. 1 -
While the calculated BMR based on BF% can be potentially more accurate than that based on gender, age, weight, height - it also depends on what formula they are using.
Some have shown in studies to be rather under-estimated, some are decent. Might as well use it if you can.
So you can just take the BF% given - and go check your own Katch or Nelson or Cunningham (for RMR) BMR calculation.
Unless you have just a big difference in BF% compared to average of others same gender, age, weight, height - it's likely to be within 5% of say Mifflin BMR estimate MFP uses.
Oh, the WHO based formula that MFP uses for activity levels is far better than the Harris levels based on 1919 study which is rather outdated.
Oh - HR-based calorie burn for the mainly strength training mentioned as workouts - that is not a good estimate.
600 calories would likely be for 2 hrs for a big guy, a little lady would be no where near that.
You'll have more accurate estimate using MFP database actually - it's low but that is entirely true.3 -
The 600 was tracked using hrm on cardio0
-
I do think 1400-1500 sounds quite low for 171cm, for the sake of 5kgs going ever so slightly under maintenance or even staying at maintenance with strength training might work better long term
Not really that low for a BMR for a 46 year old woman... I'm 48, same height, my BMI is on the lower half of the normal range, and online calculators put me at 1350.0 -
I do think 1400-1500 sounds quite low for 171cm, for the sake of 5kgs going ever so slightly under maintenance or even staying at maintenance with strength training might work better long term
Not really that low for a BMR for a 46 year old woman... I'm 48, same height, my BMI is on the lower half of the normal range, and online calculators put me at 1350.
I think they meant low for intake , not low for her BMR.1 -
In reality you just need a reasonable estimate to get you started - after a month you will have a much better idea and can adjust accordingly. This site (or a TDEE site if you prefer to account for your exercise as an average rather than on the day) can achieve "reasonable" and far easier than doing it yourself.
Do take into account that even if your BMR estimate is accurate, your activity multiplier is accurate, your exercise estimates are accurate there's a very large probability your food logging won't be.
Be consistent, make reasonable estimates and adjust based on long term trends.7 -
I had my first body scan today & it calculated my BMR as being 1404. From my understanding this is the amount of calories my body needs if I was to do absolutely nothing all day. In the analysis afterwards the PT told me that I should stick to 1400-1500 calories per day to lose weight. Does this seem right? I thought I would have more calories on top of the 1404. Generally I burn approximately 600 calories each day through exercise (though I’m looking at changing my exercise routine). Can someone please shed some light on this for me?
It doesn't seem right to me. If your goal is to lose 5kg, then targeting a weight loss rate of around 0.25kg per week would be reasonable. That would be a deficit of about 275 calories off your TDEE (BMR + daily life non-exercise activity + exercise burn).
600 calories from exercise is pretty high; I'm a bit shorter (5'5") and it would take an hour on the rowing machine (at an intensity I can't keep up for a continuous hour despite being moderately fit) to burn that many calories. Devices don't deliver gospel answers (I have a Garmin myself, BTW). You might want to cross-compare with other sources, if you haven't, just to be sure.
Even so, I think 1400-1500 is too low, since you should be losing slowly for best health outcomes, and when you have a goal of improving body composition. If 1408 and 600 is correct, then something even around 2000ish calories of food daily might be more realistic for an appropriately gradual loss rate. (Cross-check against a standard TDEE calculator or MFP guided profile set-up, recognizing that the TDEE calculators will give you a calorie goal that includes exercise, and MFP will give you one that doesn't.)
You might get some good tips from this thread:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10177803/recomposition-maintaining-weight-while-losing-fat
2 -
It doesn't seem right to me. If your goal is to lose 5kg, then targeting a weight loss rate of around 0.25kg per week would be reasonable. That would be a deficit of about 275 calories off your TDEE (BMR + daily life non-exercise activity + exercise burn).
600 calories from exercise is pretty high; I'm a bit shorter (5'5") and it would take an hour on the rowing machine (at an intensity I can't keep up for a continuous hour despite being moderately fit) to burn that many calories. Devices don't deliver gospel answers (I have a Garmin myself, BTW). You might want to cross-compare with other sources, if you haven't, just to be sure.
Even so, I think 1400-1500 is too low, since you should be losing slowly for best health outcomes, and when you have a goal of improving body composition. If 1408 and 600 is correct, then something even around 2000ish calories of food daily might be more realistic for an appropriately gradual loss rate. (Cross-check against a standard TDEE calculator or MFP guided profile set-up, recognizing that the TDEE calculators will give you a calorie goal that includes exercise, and MFP will give you one that doesn't.)
You might get some good tips from this thread:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10177803/recomposition-maintaining-weight-while-losing-fat
Thanks for that, you seem to understand where I’m coming from, as I thought around 2000 calories would be appropriate for a slow loss.
The exercise is spread into two sessions also - 35 mins in the morning & around an hour in the afternoon.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions