Eat BMR vs NET BMR
Options
ladyace2078
Posts: 460 Member
Maybe I've missed it, but it seems like we should eat our BMR at a minimum while I see people advocating for netting BMR rather than just eating BMR. For me personally I just make sure I eat BMR. I guess I don't understand the logic of worrying about netting BMR.
Say BMR is 1500 cal. If a person eats 1500 cal, they have basic functions covered.
Say TDEE cut is 2000 cal. If that same person eats 2000 cal, they still have basic functions covered, plus 500 cal of exercise.
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores?? Why worry about netting above BMR? Maybe just to prevent cutting too much? In that case I think the person hasn't calculated TDEE correctly if they are consistently having too large of a cut.
Also TDEE is based on an average activity level, so to manage it on a daily basis of trying to net BMR doesn't make sense to me. Help me understand?
(My TDEE is 2750, I eat 2400 and sometimes drop to 1500 net. My BMR is 1600. I consistently lose 0.5 lb per week, and if I'm having a hungry day I'll eat closer to 2600 calories.)
Say BMR is 1500 cal. If a person eats 1500 cal, they have basic functions covered.
Say TDEE cut is 2000 cal. If that same person eats 2000 cal, they still have basic functions covered, plus 500 cal of exercise.
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores?? Why worry about netting above BMR? Maybe just to prevent cutting too much? In that case I think the person hasn't calculated TDEE correctly if they are consistently having too large of a cut.
Also TDEE is based on an average activity level, so to manage it on a daily basis of trying to net BMR doesn't make sense to me. Help me understand?
(My TDEE is 2750, I eat 2400 and sometimes drop to 1500 net. My BMR is 1600. I consistently lose 0.5 lb per week, and if I'm having a hungry day I'll eat closer to 2600 calories.)
0
Replies
-
I'd like to know better as well. I have been netting BMR because I thought we should but I also understand where you are coming from. Its always been very confusing on which to do. I always eat my maintence (or TDEE) but would always net 300 below BMR if i didnt try to net bmr.0
-
Maybe I've missed it, but it seems like we should eat our BMR at a minimum while I see people advocating for netting BMR rather than just eating BMR. For me personally I just make sure I eat BMR. I guess I don't understand the logic of worrying about netting BMR.
Say BMR is 1500 cal. If a person eats 1500 cal, they have basic functions covered.
Say TDEE cut is 2000 cal. If that same person eats 2000 cal, they still have basic functions covered, plus 500 cal of exercise.
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores?? Why worry about netting above BMR? Maybe just to prevent cutting too much? In that case I think the person hasn't calculated TDEE correctly if they are consistently having too large of a cut.
Also TDEE is based on an average activity level, so to manage it on a daily basis of trying to net BMR doesn't make sense to me. Help me understand?
(My TDEE is 2750, I eat 2400 and sometimes drop to 1500 net. My BMR is 1600. I consistently lose 0.5 lb per week, and if I'm having a hungry day I'll eat closer to 2600 calories.)
If you were in a coma and doing absolutely nothing, then just eating your BMR would be enough. But I imagine you get up off of the couch to cook, go to work, exercise etc. Just eating your BMR is not enough then for your body to properly function because the calories burned doing regular activity will be taken from the calories needed for your BMR....if you do this consistently you are putting your body in starvation mode.0 -
Maybe I've missed it, but it seems like we should eat our BMR at a minimum while I see people advocating for netting BMR rather than just eating BMR. For me personally I just make sure I eat BMR. I guess I don't understand the logic of worrying about netting BMR.
Say BMR is 1500 cal. If a person eats 1500 cal, they have basic functions covered.
Say TDEE cut is 2000 cal. If that same person eats 2000 cal, they still have basic functions covered, plus 500 cal of exercise.
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores?? Why worry about netting above BMR? Maybe just to prevent cutting too much? In that case I think the person hasn't calculated TDEE correctly if they are consistently having too large of a cut.
Also TDEE is based on an average activity level, so to manage it on a daily basis of trying to net BMR doesn't make sense to me. Help me understand?
(My TDEE is 2750, I eat 2400 and sometimes drop to 1500 net. My BMR is 1600. I consistently lose 0.5 lb per week, and if I'm having a hungry day I'll eat closer to 2600 calories.)
If you were in a coma and doing absolutely nothing, then just eating your BMR would be enough. But I imagine you get up off of the couch to cook, go to work, exercise etc. Just eating your BMR is not enough then for your body to properly function because the calories burned doing regular activity will be taken from the calories needed for your BMR....if you do this consistently you are putting your body in starvation mode.
Right, but isn't all that activity included in TDEE? So I still don't understand why netting BMR is important. I do understand why eating BMR is important, as well as not eating too large a deficit from TDEE.0 -
All of your activity is included in your TDEE, but if you net below BMR then you are not eating enough to fuel your body.
I'm not great at explaining it or maybe I don't understand the question.
Netting below bmr puts you into starvation mode, that's why it is important.0 -
And the only time you should be going below your BMR is if you do some exercise that you don't normal do, or workout harder than you normally do which wasn't factored in to your TDEE.0
-
And the only time you should be going below your BMR is if you do some exercise that you don't normal do, or workout harder than you normally do which wasn't factored in to your TDEE.
You would then EAT UP to NET your BMR.0 -
And the only time you should be going below your BMR is if you do some exercise that you don't normal do, or workout harder than you normally do which wasn't factored in to your TDEE.
You would then EAT UP to NET your BMR.
ooops forgot to include that. Yes you then just eat up to your BMR.0 -
Let me ask you this since i'm confused by your question. If your bmr is 1500 and you burned 1500 on a long workout would you consider that healthy if you didn't eat those calories back and netted zero for the day?Maybe I've missed it, but it seems like we should eat our BMR at a minimum while I see people advocating for netting BMR rather than just eating BMR. For me personally I just make sure I eat BMR. I guess I don't understand the logic of worrying about netting BMR.
Say BMR is 1500 cal. If a person eats 1500 cal, they have basic functions covered.
Say TDEE cut is 2000 cal. If that same person eats 2000 cal, they still have basic functions covered, plus 500 cal of exercise.
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores?? Why worry about netting above BMR? Maybe just to prevent cutting too much? In that case I think the person hasn't calculated TDEE correctly if they are consistently having too large of a cut.
Also TDEE is based on an average activity level, so to manage it on a daily basis of trying to net BMR doesn't make sense to me. Help me understand?
(My TDEE is 2750, I eat 2400 and sometimes drop to 1500 net. My BMR is 1600. I consistently lose 0.5 lb per week, and if I'm having a hungry day I'll eat closer to 2600 calories.)0 -
Let me ask you this since i'm confused by your question. If your bmr is 1500 and you burned 1500 on a long workout would you consider that healthy if you didn't eat those calories back and netted zero for the day?Maybe I've missed it, but it seems like we should eat our BMR at a minimum while I see people advocating for netting BMR rather than just eating BMR. For me personally I just make sure I eat BMR. I guess I don't understand the logic of worrying about netting BMR.
Say BMR is 1500 cal. If a person eats 1500 cal, they have basic functions covered.
Say TDEE cut is 2000 cal. If that same person eats 2000 cal, they still have basic functions covered, plus 500 cal of exercise.
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores?? Why worry about netting above BMR? Maybe just to prevent cutting too much? In that case I think the person hasn't calculated TDEE correctly if they are consistently having too large of a cut.
Also TDEE is based on an average activity level, so to manage it on a daily basis of trying to net BMR doesn't make sense to me. Help me understand?
(My TDEE is 2750, I eat 2400 and sometimes drop to 1500 net. My BMR is 1600. I consistently lose 0.5 lb per week, and if I'm having a hungry day I'll eat closer to 2600 calories.)
Hmmm, maybe I'm not asking my question well enough. Why is it important to NET BMR as opposed to making sure you EAT BMR? If you eat BMR+ extra calories (since you base it on a cut from TDEE), how is it possible to go into starvation mode? If you are eating too high a deficit from TDEE I can see it being to big a shock for your body, but then I think it's important to manage it from a TDEE and what your cut is, instead of worrying about netting BMR. Perhaps netting BMR is just an easy/safe way to make sure your deficit isn't too large? Maybe I'm arguing for the same thing as netting BMR, just saying 'don't have too large a deficit from TDEE'?
If my BMR was 1500 and I exercised 1500 on a long workout, I would probably be eating a ton of calories since my TDEE would be so high (3000+, so eat probably at least 2700 if not more depending on the rest of the activity in my normal day to day). If it was unusual for me to burn that much, then I would probably be more hungry that day and would eat more food. I guess I wouldn't worry about netting BMR is my point because I don't understand how that is critical or related to starvation mode.0 -
All of your activity is included in your TDEE, but if you net below BMR then you are not eating enough to fuel your body.
I'm not great at explaining it or maybe I don't understand the question.
Netting below bmr puts you into starvation mode, that's why it is important.
How is that possible though? If you are netting BMR then you are eating enough calories to cover BMR and some of your activity (so a cut below TDEE). My understanding is that EATING below BMR is starvation mode?
Are there any sources that will help me understand where the NETTING BMR came from?0 -
And the only time you should be going below your BMR is if you do some exercise that you don't normal do, or workout harder than you normally do which wasn't factored in to your TDEE.
You would then EAT UP to NET your BMR.
Yes, but why? To prevent your cut on TDEE from being too large?0 -
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores??
The calorie deficit would make your body burn calorie-consuming muscle tissue and store fat for an emergency. The goal is to eat enough calories to feed your muscles and metabolism.0 -
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores??
The calorie deficit would make your body burn calorie-consuming muscle tissue and store fat for an emergency. The goal is to eat enough calories to feed your muscles and metabolism.
Yes but starvation mode doesn't happen at ANY deficit from TDEE. We all eat at a modest deficit from TDEE to lose fat stores. Again my understanding is that your body using muscle/going into starvation mode happens when you EAT below BMR not NET below BMR.
Maybe a better question is how big a deficit from TDEE is too big? I think we can all agree that if you eat below BMR then the deficit is much too large and is detrimental to losing weight in a healthy manner. Take me for example:
TDEE = 2750
BMR = 1600
If I EAT 1600 calories a day that would be eating right at BMR and at an 1150 calorie a day deficit from TDEE. I only have 10 lbs to lose and I've done trial and error to know that I don't lose weight quickly when I eat 1600 calories. In fact I don't lose weight as quickly unless I stay above 2300 calories. But if I end up working out twice in one day and burn 3000 calories instead of only 2750, I don't HAVE to eat more than 2300, but I'll probably want to because I'll be more hungry.
For me an average deficit larger than ~500 calories a day is too large, but if I worry about netting BMR then I'm focusing on making sure that my deficit is not larger than 500 calories. IMO that would be like saying if I chose to eat 2600 calories one day, that I would need to work out more so that I made sure I had a 500 calorie day deficit.
Like I said, I'm thinking that netting BMR is a quick/easy way to make sure your daily deficit isn't too large. I think that can be safe to make sure your average daily deficit is reasonable. I just think it has absolutely no bearing on starvation mode.0 -
If said person exercises 800 calories, then wouldn't the other 300 calories for that activity come from body fat stores??
The calorie deficit would make your body burn calorie-consuming muscle tissue and store fat for an emergency. The goal is to eat enough calories to feed your muscles and metabolism.
Yes but starvation mode doesn't happen at ANY deficit from TDEE. We all eat at a modest deficit from TDEE to lose fat stores. Again my understanding is that your body using muscle/going into starvation mode happens when you EAT below BMR not NET below BMR.
Maybe a better question is how big a deficit from TDEE is too big? I think we can all agree that if you eat below BMR then the deficit is much too large and is detrimental to losing weight in a healthy manner. Take me for example:
TDEE = 2750
BMR = 1600
If I EAT 1600 calories a day that would be eating right at BMR and at an 1150 calorie a day deficit from TDEE. I only have 10 lbs to lose and I've done trial and error to know that I don't lose weight quickly when I eat 1600 calories. In fact I don't lose weight as quickly unless I stay above 2300 calories. But if I end up working out twice in one day and burn 3000 calories instead of only 2750, I don't HAVE to eat more than 2300, but I'll probably want to because I'll be more hungry.
For me an average deficit larger than ~500 calories a day is too large, but if I worry about netting BMR then I'm focusing on making sure that my deficit is not larger than 500 calories. IMO that would be like saying if I chose to eat 2600 calories one day, that I would need to work out more so that I made sure I had a 500 calorie day deficit.
Like I said, I'm thinking that netting BMR is a quick/easy way to make sure your daily deficit isn't too large. I think that can be safe to make sure your average daily deficit is reasonable. I just think it has absolutely no bearing on starvation mode.
The reason so we say to net your BMR is because not everyone uses the correct activity multiplier so in many regards they will use the wrong multiplier take a 20% reduction of that and then burn calories until they are now not getting enough fuel to even sustain their normal body needs. Here is an example:
I work out 6 days a week for an hour burning 400-500 calories each time. But I sit at a desk most of the day for work so instead of using the moderate or very active multiplier (because I am afraid to eat to much) I use lightly active or even sedentary. This then gives me a TDEE-20%(because I want to lose fat as fast as possible) of 1750 but my BMR is 1500. So now every day I am eating 1750 but burning 500 calories so now I am only netting 1250 which is below my BMR. Now you or I or even Kiki or Lucia would say they used the wrong activity level since they are consistantly netting below BMR but not everyone realizes this at first which is why we always say to NET your BMR so that if they used the wrong activity level they aren't hurting themselves in the end. Does this makes sense? We hope that eventually they will think about it and realize they just calculated their TDEE wrong and recalculate but if they don't at least they are getting enough food to feed their body functions.
Here is another scenario I have the correct TDEE calculated and normally I only burn 200-300 calories 4-5 days a week but today I went hiking and ended up burning 700 calories it is important for me to Net my BMR and eat back how ever many calories I need to, to reach my BMR.0 -
Great topic! Want to read more later - bump0
-
The reason so we say to net your BMR is because not everyone uses the correct activity multiplier so in many regards they will use the wrong multiplier take a 20% reduction of that and then burn calories until they are now not getting enough fuel to even sustain their normal body needs. Here is an example:
I work out 6 days a week for an hour burning 400-500 calories each time. But I sit at a desk most of the day for work so instead of using the moderate or very active multiplier (because I am afraid to eat to much) I use lightly active or even sedentary. This then gives me a TDEE-20%(because I want to lose fat as fast as possible) of 1750 but my BMR is 1500. So now every day I am eating 1750 but burning 500 calories so now I am only netting 1250 which is below my BMR. Now you or I or even Kiki or Lucia would say they used the wrong activity level since they are consistantly netting below BMR but not everyone realizes this at first which is why we always say to NET your BMR so that if they used the wrong activity level they aren't hurting themselves in the end. Does this makes sense? We hope that eventually they will think about it and realize they just calculated their TDEE wrong and recalculate but if they don't at least they are getting enough food to feed their body functions.
Here is another scenario I have the correct TDEE calculated and normally I only burn 200-300 calories 4-5 days a week but today I went hiking and ended up burning 700 calories it is important for me to Net my BMR and eat back how ever many calories I need to, to reach my BMR.
I hear you on the first part--it's a good way to make sure the deficit from TDEE isn't too large or that you are calculating your TDEE right.
I lose you on the second part--what does it matter if I do a little more exercise one day? Just like what does it matter if I eat a little more one day? It's only if you are consistently doing it that I would argue it's important to pay attention. Goes back to the first point.0 -
It's really hard to actually answer your question because you are jumping all over the place. But from what I can tell you are basically asking why should someone eat back exercise calories if they go below their bmr ie net bmr. Well the simple reason is if you have to big of a deficit you end up slowing the metabolism and end up plateauing which is why most people are in this group. Most professionals will tell you not to eat less then 20% below your tdee. Well not everyone knows their tdee and probably most people either under or over estimate it. But if you make sure you don't go below your net bmr then that protects you from all of that. It's pretty much that simple, hope that helps,,,if not im going to bed:drinker:0
-
It's really hard to actually answer your question because you are jumping all over the place. But from what I can tell you are basically asking why should someone eat back exercise calories if they go below their bmr ie net bmr. Well the simple reason is if you have to big of a deficit you end up slowing the metabolism and end up plateauing which is why most people are in this group. Most professionals will tell you not to eat less then 20% below your tdee. Well not everyone knows their tdee and probably most people either under or over estimate it. But if you make sure you don't go below your net bmr then that protects you from all of that. It's pretty much that simple, hope that helps,,,if not im going to bed:drinker:
Yep that answers my question! I thought it was probably that simple. And sorry for jumping all over...I was sort of 'typing out loud' in hopes of stumbling onto the answer.
Thanks for the discussion and helping me understand!0 -
Whew, just read all of this...lol.
That was a good explanation...bottom line, I see it all the time, people tend to underestimate when choosing an activity level...so when they do workout their cut value eaten - burn takes them below their BMR....that is the problem...
So if correct activity level is chosen then you shouldn't have to eat back anything.0 -
This is a great topic, can I just double check that I understand?
I have a BodyMedia FIT, so for me I know my TDEE (between 2600 and 3000 depending on day), and my BMR ~ 1560 or something close to that.
Using my BodyMedia FIT I have no concept of "exercise calories" as I wouldn't know what to count (e.g. I walk 4 miles a day to and from work, it's not "exercise" but it obviously burns a lot of calories, however I also do exercise DVD'S which actually burn less calories than my walk, but are more like "exercise").
Would it be safe for me to aim for a 500 cal deficit (I still have 40 odd lbs to lose, so I think 1lb a week deficit is suitable) on the basis that this will be between 500 and 900 cals above my BMR?
Thanks0
