MFP vs. Biggest Loser

Do you think that it depends on what your weight is? If I ate 7 calories for every one pound I would be eating way less than 1200.

I use my BMR as a guideline.
MFP set me at 1200 initially (with the desire to lose 2 lbs a week).
My BMR is 1550, so I upped my calories and not only do I feel better, but I lose weight easier. It just may take me a while longer to lose. Something to consider.

:flowerforyou:

that's bull-i can't live on 960 cals! stick with mfp. if you're hungry up it a couple hundred. i upped it to 1400 and broke my plateau!

So I actually attempt to eat my BMR per what my doctor says it is; which is like 1900 calories. I started my lifestyle change on April 4th and I have seen great results. I fill that 1900 calories with complex carbs and a lot of vegetables. I have noticed slight changes in how I feel especially when I get up in the morning; instead of hitting the alarm five times I only hit it once. :laugh:


Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Easy Calorie Counting

Just remember BMR is the basic basic amount of calories your body NEEDS to function (if you were immobile...aka laying in bed doing nothing but have your organs function).
BMR is NOT taking into account ANY "physical" activity.
So, you really should be eating even MORE then BMR suggests.

For me, it was a middle ground....1200 cals and grouchy OR 1500 cals and tolerable.
Fiddle with it, see what works and what doesn't.

We (generalizing here) are USED to "starving" to lose weight... yet, America is one of the fattest nations. Maybe, just maybe....it's cause we are doing it wrong.

:huh:

Just a thought.

I personally was at 1200 and not eating exercise cals and lost, then I got to eating the cals and lost nothing, went back to 1200 and not eating cals and plataued. It was when I upped my cals to 1450 and exercise cals (1900 some days), that I broke the plateau and started losing again. I have not been real good about exercise these last 3 weeks but still have not gained back, in enough time to still lose. I was still sort of paying attention to what I ate. So rarely over in cals, and if I was it was never above my BMR at rest.

This is not a perfect science, you need to find what is good for you. I was able to stick to 1200 cals without the exercise cals and after about 4 weeks began feeling ill, turns out it was likely not enough to keep me going with all the working out I was doing....the deficit may have been too high. So now that I eat like I said, more and the exercise, I feel great.

Try it

yeah, 7 calories is generic, it's a very loose guideline, it doesn't hold for all ratios. For example, someone with a high muscle to fat ratio will need more per pound (low body fat %)

Remember the basic rule guys, the higher your bmi the bigger the deficit you can afford guys. Someone with a bmi over 30 can afford a 9 or 10 calorie per pound deficit, but someone with a bmi of around 24 needs far lower.

for example, I need 15 calories per pound. but I'm trying to maintain (my BMI is 23.5 and my body fat % is 11.5) but for someone my size with a body fat % (a male) of about 15 would need about 13 calories per pound to keep them at about a 500 calorie a day deficit. calories per pound is a difficult way to look at it because it doesn't hold true for everyone.


FYI BMR is a vaccum number. I wouldn't depend on it for much. It doesn't take into account basic functions. It only takes into account what you need for your organs to function. It doesn't take thermogenesis or nerve function or daily activity. if you want to know your maintenance calories multiply BMR by about 1.3 and that should be pretty close (within 100 calories or so)