MFP warning about eating under BMR
Replies
-
Great information. Thanks!0
-
Craaaapppp...so this whole time, I've been eating at 1200 cals (or a little less) thinking that was my customized number...when my BMR is 1372. So if I honestly eat more I will lose weight?? Because right now it doesn't seem to be budging much.0
-
i'm just a bit over 5"8 and my daily cal count is 1200 too?
1200 is as low as it goes, if you give it data and a loss rate that results in a target under 1200 you get 1200 as the target. I got this at 5'10" and 185 lbs.0 -
Totally agree with Riverside comments.0
-
bump0
-
I thought when MFP asked to pick your lifestyle.....sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, etc. it wanted to know what you did most of the day. I have an office job so i chose sedentary. That put my cals too low acording to my BMR and TDEE. I do work out 3-5 days a week. So when MFP asks to pick your lifestyle does it want you to include the exercise you plan to do?0
-
Ughhh...you know what, I'm just going to stay close to my BMR and not over-think it.0
-
Ok, so I went to the Fat 2 Fit Radio website. I entered my current weight and my ultimate goal weight. BMR (using navy body fat%) = 1568. TDEE for Sedentary (I spend 8-10 hours a day sitting) = 1835. I exercise 5-6 days a week for anywhere from 30-75 a day. It varies depending on what I have time to do. My burns and my time spent exercising are not consistent at all, so I don't feel comfortable going with the moderately active number, which is 2370.
I'd also like to lose weight a bit faster. Fat2Fit says I can "eat a few hundred calories less per day (200-300) to speed up your weight loss" since I am close to my goal. If I set MFP to my sedentary TDEE - 200 + actual calories burned from exercise will I be on the right track?
This would mean I set MFP to 1635 and eat back my exercise calories. I calculate my burns using a Polar FT40.
Thoughts?0 -
Ok, so I went to the Fat 2 Fit Radio website. I entered my current weight and my ultimate goal weight. BMR (using navy body fat%) = 1568. TDEE for Sedentary (I spend 8-10 hours a day sitting) = 1835. I exercise 5-6 days a week for anywhere from 30-75 a day. It varies depending on what I have time to do. My burns and my time spent exercising are not consistent at all, so I don't feel comfortable going with the moderately active number, which is 2370.
I'd also like to lose weight a bit faster. Fat2Fit says I can "eat a few hundred calories less per day (200-300) to speed up your weight loss" since I am close to my goal. If I set MFP to my sedentary TDEE - 200 + actual calories burned from exercise will I be on the right track?
This would mean I set MFP to 1635 and eat back my exercise calories. I calculate my burns using a Polar FT40.
Thoughts?
If you use sedentary and then workout, yes, eat them back. Rather than cut another 200 off, I would say just eat back 75% of your exercise calories to account for underestimation on food or overestimation of exercise
0 -
I thought when MFP asked to pick your lifestyle.....sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, etc. it wanted to know what you did most of the day. I have an office job so i chose sedentary. That put my cals too low acording to my BMR and TDEE. I do work out 3-5 days a week. So when MFP asks to pick your lifestyle does it want you to include the exercise you plan to do?
You may have noticed, it's list of activity levels compared to those other sites - have no comments of exercise. You are correct, no workouts included.
MyFitnessPal, I guess, is a pal because it is not holding you to fitness goals. You enter them when you accomplish them. The deficit is already taken off just diet.
Perhaps MyDietPal would be better, since it's great at food logging better than workout logging.
So as many in this thread comment doing - they've made a lifestyle change and will exercise. So they find a TDEE that includes everything, and then take a deficit.
MFP, you find a non-exercise maintenance and take a deficit, and then add on exercise when done.0 -
So when MFP asks to pick your lifestyle does it want you to include the exercise you plan to do?
I think it expects your routine level of activity. If you do something 3 days a week you can add that in as exercise and do what you will with the calorie information.0 -
bump0
-
So with MFP, If I workout 3-5 days and have an office job for 8 hours per day , what should I choose? Should I choose sedentary or the lightly active, or moderate?I thought when MFP asked to pick your lifestyle.....sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, etc. it wanted to know what you did most of the day. I have an office job so i chose sedentary. That put my cals too low acording to my BMR and TDEE. I do work out 3-5 days a week. So when MFP asks to pick your lifestyle does it want you to include the exercise you plan to do?
You may have noticed, it's list of activity levels compared to those other sites - have no comments of exercise. You are correct, no workouts included.
MyFitnessPal, I guess, is a pal because it is not holding you to fitness goals. You enter them when you accomplish them. The deficit is already taken off just diet.
Perhaps MyDietPal would be better, since it's great at food logging better than workout logging.
So as many in this thread comment doing - they've made a lifestyle change and will exercise. So they find a TDEE that includes everything, and then take a deficit.
MFP, you find a non-exercise maintenance and take a deficit, and then add on exercise when done.
[/quote]0 -
So with MFP, If I workout 3-5 days and have an office job for 8 hours per day , what should I choose? Should I choose sedentary or the lightly active, or moderate?
Non-exercise specific daily routine. So sedentary now.
You start walking a dog or kids to the park few days a week, move up to lightly active.
Then log true exercise to feed those workouts and keep the deficit the same safe amount.0 -
What about the following suggestion ...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/567817-ipad-weekly-graph0 -
Bump so i can find later when im on computer. Gotta try these suggestions. Thanks0
-
Anyone who says one size doesn't fit all, well it is actually impossible not to lose weight eating between your TDEE and BMR.
True and very well put. But it's also impossible to eat below your BMR and not lose weight, at least according to every scientific study done on the subject. Despite all of the personal experiences provided on MFP (and I do not doubt any of them), in every controlled study (where every calorie in and calorie out was counted through some scientific method), calorie restriction resulted in fat loss.
What is at issue is the statistical significance of "extra" drops in metabolism the further you restrict. For example, if you cut back 500 calories per day you might lose 1 pound per week, but restricting 1000 per day you might only lose 1.7 instead of the expected 2. However, I still haven't seen a study that actually measured the extent of metabolic adaption based on size of restriction. Maybe we should start one :drinker:
How about this one?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19198647
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18198305
Not sure if I read them right, I read it as -
25%+ calorie restriction will result in lowering of RMR, but a smaller calorie restriction combined with exercise doesn't?0 -
SO im still confusede.. should i be netting my bmr or just eating bmr?0
-
I agree. I thought this site was correct as i've been eating 1200, where can I go to find out my real Cals??
Check out superskinnyme.com. There is a TON of GOOD info on there. I learned so much and feel way better since I increased my calorie intake. Yay for that! Hope it helps
0 -
I'm totally sold on eating way more calories. I consumed 2500 calories yesterday and lost .5 lbs overnight. Crazy, because I've been stuck or gaining a little here and there for the past couple of weeks eating right around my BMR. So yesterday I tracked everything but ate way more than usual. And whoosh! 1/2 lb gone. Nice.0
-
WHY does weightloss have to be so confusing! This is why i never get below 155pounds in any diet ive ever done!0
-
The first one of these looks at free living overweight people for 6 months, with either 25 % calorie reduction, 12.5% calorie reduction and 12.5% more calories by exercise, or a low calorie diet of 890 kcal/day for 3 months followed by 3 months of maintenance.
The biggest weight loss was on the low calorie diet group which also had the biggest fat loss. Both at 3 months. BMR was 1450 - 1600 and the LCD was under this by >37%.
25% calorie reduction was ahead of 12.5 CR + 12.5% exercise in weight loss at month 3, but similar at month 6. Both were less effective than the LCD.
Calorie reduction combined with exercise maintained the TDEE corrected for weight loss. Without exercise the TDEE fell due to a reduction in Sleeping RMR of about 120 calories and a more significant reduction in activity levels. All groups reported improvement in physical functioning with the intervention.0 -
The second paper is an earlier publication possibly from the same data. It also involved 25% calorie reduction, 12.5% CR + 12.5% EX, and 890 calorie LCD groups. The LCD group diet until 15% weight loss then maintain, the others continue for 6 months.
The LCD group lost more fat and more weight by month 3 than the other groups by month 6.
Statistically significant reductions in RMR were seen in the 25% CR group at month 3 and in the LCD and CR + EX groups at month 6. These reductions are comparing measured RMR with expected RMR given the weight losses. Physical activity levels decreased in the CR and LCD groups at month 3.
The LCD was substantially below the lowest average RMR, by at least 25%.
' Men Women
Baseline (Week 0) RMR (kcal/d) 1737 (33) 1407 (27)
Baseline (Week 0) energy requirements (kcal/d) 3248 (72) 2449 (55)0 -
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2680474
A study of 12 obese women over 12 weeks on either diet + exercise (4 h per week on 55 per cent of VO2 max) or diet only (690 - 840 calorie restriction) did not show any statistically significant differences in fat mass or total weight loss between the groups.
The D+E group did lose more weight and fat than the D group, but with only 12 participants the difference was not big enough to be statistically significant.
"The suggestion that a reduction in normal activities of daily life in a diet-exercise group is the explanation for the absence of significant differences in weight and fat loss between a diet-exercise and a diet group is not confirmed in this study. Daily physical activity showed a significantly higher increase for the diet-exercise group than for the diet group, while the decline of SMR and 24-EE tended to be smaller."
The full paper is at http://arno.unimaas.nl/show.cgi?fid=1565 in the first 4 weeks the food intake of both groups was 700 calories a day, rising to 840 a day for the next 8 weeks.
The diet only group had larger reductions in SMR and 12 h overnight energy expenditure.
The two groups were matched for BMI but unfortunately the Diet only group were taller (statistically significant) and had a 6kg / 13 lb higher average weight. The diet only group therefore had a higher energy deficit due to their greater TDEE, sufficient to compensate in part for the other goup's exercise !
Food intake was well below SMR throughout. Extra food was not eaten to compensate for the exercise in the D+E group.0 -
Or short women like me, who choose "Lose half a pound a week" when in fact someone as small as me could get all the nutrition they need on fewer than 1200 calories. My BMR is around 1000 btw.The low 1200 numbers are given to people who choose "Sedentary" and "Lose two pounds a week."
EDITED TO ADD: Before I get the calorie police coming down on me, my actual intake is more like 1400 - 1500 a day.0 -
Bump0
-
I agree. I thought this site was correct as i've been eating 1200, where can I go to find out my real Cals??
http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/ is a good one.
MFP uses good calculations (Mifflin St Jeor, if I'm not mistaken), it just takes out the activity factor and gives you back "exercise calories"... which can be misunderstood, misused, abused, etc.
Thanks! This is great!0 -
Bump0
-
My BMR is 1510.6. So what does that mean??? Do I eat 1510 cals per day to stay at this weight?? Or do I eat that to loose. I'm lost. help!!
I set my calories at my 'GOAL WEIGHT' BMR (1384)...it's working
The best part is that I am learning to eat the right portions for the rest of my life...or untill my BMR lowers.0 -
My BMR is 1510.6. So what does that mean??? Do I eat 1510 cals per day to stay at this weight?? Or do I eat that to loose. I'm lost. help!!
I set my calories at my 'GOAL WEIGHT' BMR (1384)...it's working
The best part is that I am learning to eat the right portions for the rest of my life...or untill my BMR lowers.
^Not this.
You eat around your TDEE to stay at this weight (from what I've found it's usually a bit more then what is calculated)0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions