My TDEE is too low

Sami1601
Sami1601 Posts: 50 Member
My TDEE is coming out at 1,500 how am I meant to drop calories per day if it is coming out that low? I have over 10 pounds to lose at least.
«1

Replies

  • MrsH78
    MrsH78 Posts: 46 Member
    What height are you? What did you put as your activity level?
    Have you tried more than one calculator? Might be worth looking at others and taking an average.
    🤔👍🏻
  • Sami1601
    Sami1601 Posts: 50 Member
    I’m 5’4 and I’ve had a look at a few and they are not much higher than that. My activity level is sedentary because I don’t do much at the moment I have injured my knee ligaments
  • Sami1601
    Sami1601 Posts: 50 Member
    While recovering from an injury is not the ideal time to lose weight, especially vanity weight. Your body needs nutrients to heal itself. It might be better to wait until you are healed, up your exercise, and then work on losing weight.

    It’s not vanity weight, my BMI is over and it’s for health reasons
  • shaf238
    shaf238 Posts: 4,022 Member
    How did you calculate your TDEE?
  • Fuzzipeg
    Fuzzipeg Posts: 2,301 Member
    I agree calorie restriction while healing is not helpful. How about a compromise till you recover from your injury, set yourself to maintenance, both at sedentary and then at your regular activity level to give yourself a better understanding of your usual self, it may help to take notes. You will see how the food groups differ one to the other. If you have not tried to change your dietary regime before, even if you have you can still learn from logging.

    I appreciate your need to loose is for health reasons. Possibly you do not know the calorific value of your previous way of eating so logging even at maintenance could help showing you how your food groups stack up normally. You may find adjusting the way you eat to within the food group improve your balance could make a difference even at maintenance. You've said you have about 10lbs to loose. losing this more slowly is scientifically more helpful. The advice is to set to .5 of a pound per week for those who are close to goal, you are close in the scheme of things. Theoretically you would be talking 20 weeks, you may choose to take yourself to a lower weight simply continue. I think calories automatically reset or you are given the option when you have lost 10lb, smaller you are the fewer you need. One thing to take into account is getting back to your "normal activity level", allow your calories to reflect your increased activity as you go, particularly in the early weeks after you consider yourself well so you do not set your injury back in any way. Logging exercise as additional on sedentary could be a good place to start.

    Wishing you a quick recovery from your injury, when you are on the up please take care so as not to set yourself backwards.
  • MikePTY
    MikePTY Posts: 3,814 Member
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    I’m 5’4 and I’ve had a look at a few and they are not much higher than that. My activity level is sedentary because I don’t do much at the moment I have injured my knee ligaments

    What is your age, gender, and weight?
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?
  • Sami1601
    Sami1601 Posts: 50 Member
    No it was a TDEE calculator.
    MikePTY wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    I’m 5’4 and I’ve had a look at a few and they are not much higher than that. My activity level is sedentary because I don’t do much at the moment I have injured my knee ligaments

    What is your age, gender, and weight?

    In am a 34 year old female at 150lbs.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 6,002 Member
    At your height, sedentary, 1500 sounds about right. If you are healing from an injury I would prioritize protein for recovery. Get rest, recover and add exercise back in when it is safe to do so...
  • sarabushby
    sarabushby Posts: 784 Member
    If you want to increase your calorie burn you could (with approval from your Dr of course) consider some advice about what exercises are safe for you. My local gym has a scheme to help people to exercise even with injuries or medical conditions. I’m sure a good sports physio can advise you properly but things like using the machine that you sit and ‘pedal’ with your arms could work and other upper body weight lifting machines. Or try swimming but with a pull buoy in your legs to isolate them and ensure you’re not kicking.
    I’m sure you could get a little routine that would burn say 200-400 calories that you could repeat 3-5 times a week.
  • Sami1601
    Sami1601 Posts: 50 Member
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 6,002 Member
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    I get 1638 on another 1640 and last one I did was and 1653...I suspect that 1500 is a bit low.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 6,002 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    I get 1638 on another 1640 and last one I did was and 1653...I suspect that 1500 is a bit low.

    Could be. A general range is bodyweight x 10-12 for sedentary. So 1500 - 1800 calorie range.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    https://tdeecalculator.net

    34, 150, 5'4 and sedentary gives me 1638.
  • Lillymoo01
    Lillymoo01 Posts: 2,865 Member
    edited June 2019
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 6,002 Member
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Are you sedentary?
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,089 Member
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Do you weigh yourself in kilos or pounds? I'm pretty sure that BW X 10 to 12 is for weight in pounds. Not that I'm defending the formula in general. I think it's a pretty crude estimate, and if it has to carry the disclaimer "if you're sedentary," it's not much good, is it? I mean, it's like saying to people, "stay sedentary, because we can't be bothered to give you a formula that works if you're not."
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 6,002 Member
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Do you weigh yourself in kilos or pounds? I'm pretty sure that BW X 10 to 12 is for weight in pounds. Not that I'm defending the formula in general. I think it's a pretty crude estimate, and if it has to carry the disclaimer "if you're sedentary," it's not much good, is it? I mean, it's like saying to people, "stay sedentary, because we can't be bothered to give you a formula that works if you're not."

    Not a disclaimer, a question. It's just a place to start.
  • Lillymoo01
    Lillymoo01 Posts: 2,865 Member
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Do you weigh yourself in kilos or pounds? I'm pretty sure that BW X 10 to 12 is for weight in pounds. Not that I'm defending the formula in general. I think it's a pretty crude estimate, and if it has to carry the disclaimer "if you're sedentary," it's not much good, is it? I mean, it's like saying to people, "stay sedentary, because we can't be bothered to give you a formula that works if you're not."

    Nope. That is in pounds. I weigh less than 100 pounds.
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Are you sedentary?

    I am anything but sedentary. My TDEE varies from day to day but little old me never eats under 2000 calories. At sedentary your formula has me at less than the 1200 minimum but I'm actually around 1600 calories instead. As I said it is inaccurate for me and anyone else that is in the very petite category and a healthy weight..

  • magnusthenerd
    magnusthenerd Posts: 1,207 Member
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Do you weigh yourself in kilos or pounds? I'm pretty sure that BW X 10 to 12 is for weight in pounds. Not that I'm defending the formula in general. I think it's a pretty crude estimate, and if it has to carry the disclaimer "if you're sedentary," it's not much good, is it? I mean, it's like saying to people, "stay sedentary, because we can't be bothered to give you a formula that works if you're not."

    Nope. That is in pounds. I weigh less than 100 pounds.
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Are you sedentary?

    I am anything but sedentary. My TDEE varies from day to day but little old me never eats under 2000 calories. At sedentary your formula has me at less than the 1200 minimum but I'm actually around 1600 calories instead. As I said it is inaccurate for me and anyone else that is in the very petite category and a healthy weight..
    If you aren't sedentary and the estimate is for people that are sedentary, how is it inaccurate?
    If you are about 5'0" or less, there will be some slight skewing that happens. People who fall off the bell curve in one area will likely fall off it in something that depends on a something associated with that bell curve.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 6,002 Member
    edited June 2019
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Do you weigh yourself in kilos or pounds? I'm pretty sure that BW X 10 to 12 is for weight in pounds. Not that I'm defending the formula in general. I think it's a pretty crude estimate, and if it has to carry the disclaimer "if you're sedentary," it's not much good, is it? I mean, it's like saying to people, "stay sedentary, because we can't be bothered to give you a formula that works if you're not."

    Nope. That is in pounds. I weigh less than 100 pounds.
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    Sami1601 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Where did you get the 1500 number from? Are you sure it’s TDEE and not a calculator like MFP that includes BMR and daily activity but not purposeful exercise?

    She's calculating it with no exercise and at sedentary.

    Even so, I ran the numbers and got over 1600.

    And where did you get over 1600 from? Please tell me.

    Body weight x 10 is a pretty straight forward way to get a ballpark calorie goal of one is sedentary. Provided you are not obese, then the numbers get skewed...

    Holy heck no. That would have me eating less than 1000 calories a day for maintenance! Even x12 has me less than 1200. Numbers get screwed both ways I think.

    Are you sedentary?

    I am anything but sedentary. My TDEE varies from day to day but little old me never eats under 2000 calories. At sedentary your formula has me at less than the 1200 minimum but I'm actually around 1600 calories instead. As I said it is inaccurate for me and anyone else that is in the very petite category and a healthy weight..

    The OP was sedentary due to injury. I also agree that weight (too high and too low) can skew the numbers which is why I prefer to use height as it is way more consistent.

    It's also only an estimate. Just a place to start...
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,227 Member
    J72FIT wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    I get 1638 on another 1640 and last one I did was and 1653...I suspect that 1500 is a bit low.

    Personally I prefer using height. Height in centimeters x 9 - 12 for women which would give a range of 1458 - 1944 since she is 5’4” or about 162 cm...

    Or, you know, you can just plug in the stats in the equations. I mean you're approximating the approximation approximately. Which is approximately good enough anyway most of the time!
  • magnusthenerd
    magnusthenerd Posts: 1,207 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    I get 1638 on another 1640 and last one I did was and 1653...I suspect that 1500 is a bit low.

    Personally I prefer using height. Height in centimeters x 9 - 12 for women which would give a range of 1458 - 1944 since she is 5’4” or about 162 cm...

    Or, you know, you can just plug in the stats in the equations. I mean you're approximating the approximation approximately. Which is approximately good enough anyway most of the time!
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    I get 1638 on another 1640 and last one I did was and 1653...I suspect that 1500 is a bit low.

    Personally I prefer using height. Height in centimeters x 9 - 12 for women which would give a range of 1458 - 1944 since she is 5’4” or about 162 cm...

    Or, you know, you can just plug in the stats in the equations. I mean you're approximating the approximation approximately. Which is approximately good enough anyway most of the time!

    50% of the time, it works every time.