BMR question

Also - you should not net below your BMR.

Here is a chart that suggests what your weekly weight loss goal should be depending on how much you have to lose.
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.


1 lb a week is 500 calories less per day. So .5 would be 250 less, 2lbs would be 1000 less, etc.

3dogs, why should I not be eating less than my BMR? I'm at a plateau of eating roughly 1,300-1,400 calories (my BMR is 1635) so I'm curious?

Since BMR is the minimum calories you need to simple keep your vital functions . . . well . . . functioning, you should at least eat that much. Remember, you will burn more than your BMR simply by getting out of bed and doing your normal daily activity. Even a sedentary person will burn on after 1.2 times their BMR. So if you ate your BMR, you would lose weight. Having said that, realize that unless you have been tested on an actual machine BMR is an estimate, it will be close (within a couple of hundred calories give of take) unless you have some major metabolic condition like diabetes, thyroid problems, PCOS or others, but it is not exact. If your BMR is 1635 you should probably try eating that for a while. The only people who I know who would really have no problem eating less than their BMR would be those who are obese with lots of body fat to use. Even people who are simply overweight probably would do better in the long run eating at their BMR.

Ok, first I am going to suggest you read the post in this topic by HelloitsDan. Excellent post explains this all although in this he is talking about the 1000-1200 calorie a day diet, which is not exactly the case but it all still applies. In case the link doesn't take you right there, it is on page 3.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/520938-anyone-else-annoyed-by-other-dieters?error_user_id=11867214&error_username=3dogsrunning&page=3

Here is an excerpt
"Physiologically speaking the human body can only lose so much fat in 1 day or 24 hour cycle.
The fatter you are the more fat you can lose.
Once this quota is met the body Hormonally switches to another fuel source.
You work our and damage lean tissue AKA muscle and your body will target that first.
The reason is if it can burn off some lean tissue, its active tissue and uses calories, it can slow you down.
This is why we call the 1200 calorie diet the "Skinny-Fat" diet.
You are making a smaller version of your former fat self.

Another reason why 1k-1200 calories a day, depending on your height, is stupid is because its normally below the BMR.
Eating below BMR slows metabolism and forces the body to slow itself down.
It does this by Hormonally switching gears, preserving fat, catabolizing lean mass and thus...making you a smaller version of your former fat self. "

Hey, I would like to jump in here too.

If my estimated BMR is: 1,625 calories/day*...I should be eating that and I will be shedding the weight?
I need to lose about 65 pounds.

I thought if I ate less calories then that is better to lose more weight.

See this is why I am confused. I Have 60 more to lose and I eat around 1300 calories. My BMR is 1700 calories. I just dont see how I would lose weight still by eating 1700 calories a day?

like I said I do go 5 to 6 times a week to the gym or do some type of work out. I like to do an hour of cardio (zumba, swimming laps, treadmill, bike or eliptical) IDK im just so confused lol

If your BMR is 1700 calories, you still need to factor in the other calories you burn.
This is not the same formula MFP uses. But here is the activity multiplier chart. -
Activity Multiplier
Sedentary = BMR X 1.2 (little or no exercise, desk job)
Lightly active = BMR X 1.375 (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk)
Mod. active = BMR X 1.55 (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk)
Very active = BMR X 1.725 (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk)
Extr. Active = BMR X 1.9 (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.)


So if you work out 5-6 times a week for an hour of cardio, we will go with Moderately active. So your BMR is 1700 x 1.55 = 2635. That is the number you can eat and not gain weight.
You are looking to lose another 60 lbs, so your ideal goal should be 1.5 lbs/week, which is 750 calories less per day.
2635-750 = 1885.

If you follow MFP and select 1.5 lbs a week, your numbers will be different, since it doesn't account for exercise, but suggests you eat the calories back. You will find if you are accurate with logging activity calories, you will pretty much end up in the same place.

Eating too few calories may work in the short term, but has a negative effect in the long term. It isn't just about the number on the scale, it is about the effect we are having on our bodies and our metabolism.

And I would highly recommend adding some strength training into the mix. It will help preserve your lean muscle mass, which helps metabolism. Dieting makes you look good in clothes, lifting makes you look good naked.

Hey, I would like to jump in here too.

If my estimated BMR is: 1,625 calories/day*...I should be eating that and I will be shedding the weight?
I need to lose about 65 pounds.

I thought if I ate less calories then that is better to lose more weight.

Eat less is not better. See the link above for the post by HelloitsDan

BMR is NOT the number you should eat. You need to figure your BMR, then your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure), then create a deficit from that.
Or just let MFP do the math. Just make sure you choose the right weight loss goal. If you want to lose 65 lbs, tell MFP your goal is 1.5 lbs a week.

Awesome, thanks y'all!

Great thread! Thanks to all those that contributed. Been here awhile, but learned something new. Thanks!

Bump

Thank you all. I have been stuck for over a week and I know it's because I am not eating enough.

It's so weird to eat more, but I totally see why it's necessary, thanks to your help.

2 lbs a week sounds good.

bump for future reference...thanks

Hi all and thanks for the nice topic!

I am confused though and I need a little help reading the numbers:

I went for the "guided goal setting" from MFP ->

I want to lose 10 kg (22 lbs) at this moment. (Began at 12 kg = 26 lbs 9 days ago)
I put my height, gender, age and current weight.
I said I have "sedentary" normal daily activity + goal for 3 times/week work out.
I choose the recommended "Lose 1 pound per week" (as some of you also mentioned).

The result is NUTRITIONAL Target: 1,280 Calories / Day

So now at GOALS it says:
Calories Burned - From Normal Daily Activity - 1,780 calories/day
Net Calories Consumed* - Your Daily Goal - 1,280 calories/ day
Daily Calorie Deficit - 500 calories
Projected Weight Loss - 1.0 lbs/ week

Then I go to TOOLS and check BMR: Your estimated BMR is: 1,426 calories/day

I understand how the BMR is multiplied to get the Normal Daily Activity, based on my activity level.
I also understand that -500 calories is equal to -1.0 lbs/week.

Still, MFP recommends that I eat UNDER my BMR, which you all said that is not good!

Is there something I get wrong?


P.S. My fitness instructor recommends a lot lower amount of calories/day - around 1000. I am still confused what to set (manually) for a daily goal, but I think I will take MFP's suggestion for more relevant... sorry to say that my fitness instructor is not so good at diet planing

Finally: Thanks for reading... sorry for the long post!

I understand how the BMR is multiplied to get the Normal Daily Activity, based on my activity level.
I also understand that -500 calories is equal to -1.0 lbs/week.

Still, MFP recommends that I eat UNDER my BMR, which you all said that is not good!

Is there something I get wrong?

This confuses me too! If it is true that people shouldn't eat under BMR, then why are the MFP goals so low?

Hope someone knows the answer.