Calories in VS calories out

Options
wildwhisper96
wildwhisper96 Posts: 39 Member
in Food and Nutrition
Okay. So I thought I got all this calorie counting down to a science, but now I'm beyond frustrated.

Reading through the forums I see stuff about "starvation mode" and "eating back work out calories"? I thought it honestly was all about calories in vs calories out by working out and your BMR. I thought it was just a big math problem pretty much but now I'm not sure....

Any miracle explanations? Or am I right for the most part?
«1

Replies

  • marinweb
    marinweb Posts: 23 Member
    Options
    Focus on eating better and you should be fine. At 18 you can get away with it. Just mix in some exercise.
  • Spanaval
    Spanaval Posts: 1,200 Member
    Options
    It IS a math problem. You are confused because TDEE is being left out of the equation. What you want to do is eat below your TDEE, but above BMR (that's the amount of energy it takes for your body to function if you were say, in a coma).
  • wildwhisper96
    wildwhisper96 Posts: 39 Member
    Options
    It IS a math problem. You are confused because TDEE is being left out of the equation. What you want to do is eat below your TDEE, but above BMR (that's the amount of energy it takes for your body to function if you were say, in a coma).

    But I thought you eat under the BMR like of it was 1700 you eat 1200 and that 500 is being lost in weight? Haha I'm sorry for the awkward wording there >.< what's TDEE by the way?
  • etherealdoll
    etherealdoll Posts: 25
    Options
    I don't understand why you're supposed to eat above your BMR. My BMR is only 270 calories less than my TDEE, so by that logic I can only lose half a pound a week. That doesn't make any sense.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    Pretty much. But you will run into issues if you chronically under-eat. Things like muscle loss, weight loss plateaus, weakness, irritability. That's why generally 1-2 lbs a week is the recommended. For most people that will be a reasonable calorie deficit and not something extreme.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    I don't understand why you're supposed to eat above your BMR. My BMR is only 270 calories less than my TDEE, so by that logic I can only lose half a pound a week. That doesn't make any sense.

    I'm skeptical of this.

    And the reason you should net above your BMR.. think about it this way - you're BMR is what your body needs to sustain it's regular functions like breathing, keeping the heart beating, brain working. Why would you want to restrict this?
  • wildwhisper96
    wildwhisper96 Posts: 39 Member
    Options
    WHAT'S TDEE?! D: oh my. Now I feel my 20 pounds down was out of pure luck haha

    And as far as under eating, I went three weeks eating less then 1000, felt awful. I learned my
    Lesson and went back to eating 1300+ a day, and gained 5 pounds. Didn't let it discourage me, and started at 1300 as my goal, but I am more worried about being healthy in the long term along with weight loss. I thought weight loss was a trigger off deficits in calories you SHOULD have... But I understand what you mean. I NEED to consume my BMR to BE healthy which is more desirable then a size 4 haha

    But once agin. What's a TDEE?
  • etherealdoll
    etherealdoll Posts: 25
    Options
    Skeptical of what?

    And your body can burn its own calories to take care of regular functions, right? Why does it need calories from food when there are available fat stores? This has always confused me.
  • joejccva71
    joejccva71 Posts: 2,985 Member
    Options
    I don't understand why you're supposed to eat above your BMR. My BMR is only 270 calories less than my TDEE, so by that logic I can only lose half a pound a week. That doesn't make any sense.

    If your TDEE is only 270 cals above your BMR, then you must not do anything all day. I mean if you sat down all day and just ate food, the TEF alone would probably burn roughly 270 calories or so.

    So you do nothing else every day huh?
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    TDEE is everything http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/510406-tdee-is-everything
  • Spanaval
    Spanaval Posts: 1,200 Member
    Options
    It IS a math problem. You are confused because TDEE is being left out of the equation. What you want to do is eat below your TDEE, but above BMR (that's the amount of energy it takes for your body to function if you were say, in a coma).

    But I thought you eat under the BMR like of it was 1700 you eat 1200 and that 500 is being lost in weight? Haha I'm sorry for the awkward wording there >.< what's TDEE by the way?

    BMR is what your body needs to keep itself functioning - to breathe, digest, organ function, etc. TDEE is what you actually expend in a day from stuff you do - like moving around. Using hypothetical numbers, let's say that your BMR is 1200. If you are sedentary, your TDEE will be about 20% above your BMR. If you eat below the TDEE, you will lose weight, because you are consuming less than your body needs.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    Skeptical of what?

    And your body can burn its own calories to take care of regular functions, right? Why does it need calories from food when there are available fat stores? This has always confused me.


    Skeptical that you're only burning 270 calories above BMR, especially as you look fit and most likely exercise.

    Yes you are right, if you are very overweight, you can sustain eating below BMR for some time. But if you're anywhere close to normal, then not so much.
  • ocukor1
    ocukor1 Posts: 66
    Options
    When I was trying to lose weight I saw a video that explained the calorie needs in a simple rule of thumb which was multiplying your weight by ten and adding another 10-50 or more percent depending on level of activity. You can try that for a couple of weeks and then you will see if your weight stays the same, drops a little, or maybe you even gain some. No biggie, just adjust it up or down a hundred or a couple of hundreds of calories and do it for another couple of weeks. It is basically a simple math, calories in - calories out, but there are some variables that can affect the outcome quite a bit. It is important to eat healthy, avoid sugar and simple carbs, and have the right balance of macronutrients. One thing I want to say about exercise is: don't overestimate it, and don't eat back those calories. I've seen people taking a 15 min walk with a dog in a park and call it a 2000 calorie cardio. Unless you run a marathon for 6 hours, chances are, you won't hardly ever burn that many calories in a day. Better yet, don't even account for exercise because you have already accounted for it by calculating your daily calorie requirement by factoring in your activity level. Anyway, long story short...good luck in your endeavor.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    When I was trying to lose weight I saw a video that explained the calorie needs in a simple rule of thumb which was multiplying your weight by ten and adding another 10-50 or more percent depending on level of activity. You can try that for a couple of weeks and then you will see if your weight stays the same, drops a little, or maybe you even gain some. No biggie, just adjust it up or down a hundred or a couple of hundreds of calories and do it for another couple of weeks. It is basically a simple math, calories in - calories out, but there are some variables that can affect the outcome quite a bit. It is important to eat healthy, avoid sugar and simple carbs, and have the right balance of macronutrients. One thing I want to say about exercise is: don't overestimate it, and don't eat back those calories. I've seen people taking a 15 min walk with a dog in a park and call it a 2000 calorie cardio. Unless you run a marathon for 6 hours, chances are, you won't hardly ever burn that many calories in a day. Better yet, don't even account for exercise because you have already accounted for it by calculating your daily calorie requirement by factoring in your activity level. Anyway, long story short...good luck in your endeavor.

    What you are describing is finding your TDEE empirically through trial and error, and eating a deficit to that TDEE. That is a perfectly valid and effective way to go about it.

    But it's also a completely different method than what MFP is attempting to do, which is attempting to factor out exercise from one's TDEE, taking a defict from THAT number, and expecting the exercise to be added back in.

    They are 2 different methods for arriving at the same number.

    Think of it kind of like being paid a flat salary of $75,000 with no taxes vs being paid $100,000 with a 25% tax rate.
  • TheVimFuego
    TheVimFuego Posts: 2,412 Member
    Options
    OK ...

    1) The 3500 calorie deficit to lose 1lb a week has never been proven to work. Never. And it still gets trotted out everywhere. It's like a virus that gives false hope to all who believe it and sets them down a path of nutritional deprivation.

    2) The first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) ALSO works with the second (entropy) for weight loss ... Executive Summary, it's more complex than a maths problem. The human body is not a test tube. We are not raising the temperature of 1kg of water by 1 degree C.

    3) Energy management does not, necessarily, lead to fat loss. Think about it, we have all associated a specific calorie deficit (energy) to being inextricably linked with a specific weight (never mind fat specifically) loss, it just aint that straightforward. What if there are other factors that determine if fat is accumulated or liberated?

    In short, concentrating on using maths to solve a problem of biology just isn't going to get the optimum results and will likely to lead to weight gain in the long term.

    TDR, BMR, TDEE, TVR (yes, the last one is a joke) ... We make life too complicated sometimes.

    If it were a simple maths problem then we all wouldn't be sitting here with some extra fat and MFP would be redundant.

    Most people want to lose fat badly enough that they can follow the maths and stick with the programme ... Watch the calories, do some exercise. And guess what? It doesn't get the results promised.

    Yes, calories will rule weight loss ultimately but:
    1) The 3500 calorie deficit = 1lb loss is a crock, ignore it.
    2) Maybe the hormonal factors that determine fat accumulation or loss are very significant and the focus should start here?

    Hey, don't take my word for it, go do some research.

    And here my weekly calories in/out, a calorie is just a calorie (it isn't, look up the Thermic Effect Of Food for just the start of the argument) rant ends.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    Most people want to lose fat badly enough that they can follow the maths and stick with the programme ... Watch the calories, do some exercise. And guess what? It doesn't get the results promised.

    I'm glad that my MFP friends and I are not affected by this curse you have described.
  • ocukor1
    ocukor1 Posts: 66
    Options
    I think the point of this is not to make a nuclear science out of it, but to find simple ball park figures that work. It is not exact science, and it does not need to be. Adding too much information will just confuse an average person just trying to lose some weight.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    I think the point of this is not to make a nuclear science out of it, but to find simple ball park figures that work. It is not exact science, and it does not need to be. Adding too much information will just confuse an average person just trying to lose some weight.

    That is why, for the average person here, the best thing to do is enter in all their info as accurately as possible, and eat until it says "0 calories remaining".

    The ones that want to take it further and understand BMR, TDEE, RBI, WD40, and R2D2, can do so, and may or may not be able to optimize their program.
  • wildwhisper96
    wildwhisper96 Posts: 39 Member
    Options
    Screw it, I'm just gonna eat right and work out. (I want to ultimately gain muscle too)

    Honestly, my fault in weight loss is always over thinking. MFP took out the over thinking 24/7 and it worked for me. So I won't allow myself to over think it, and just listen to what my body tells me(:

    Oh and I mentioned all this to a family member and they argued the exiatance of a BMR.... Ugh. Haha
  • etherealdoll
    etherealdoll Posts: 25
    Options
    I don't understand why you're supposed to eat above your BMR. My BMR is only 270 calories less than my TDEE, so by that logic I can only lose half a pound a week. That doesn't make any sense.

    If your TDEE is only 270 cals above your BMR, then you must not do anything all day. I mean if you sat down all day and just ate food, the TEF alone would probably burn roughly 270 calories or so.

    So you do nothing else every day huh?

    Pretty much, I sit at a desk all day and I don't run around much when I'm at home. That's not counting exercise, because apparently you're supposed to eat back all your exercise calories, too.

Categories