Calories in VS calories out

In Sept 2011 I began testing all of these notions empirically, using myself as a test tube. My results have demonstrated a fairly good agreement between theory and practice.

I had my BMR medically tested and used the standard BMR x activity multiplier = TDEE to determine my daily requirements. For my multiplier, I determined that a desk job + burning between 500 and 1500 calories per day 5-7 days per week via intense aerobic and anaerobic exercise meant that I counted as "moderately active". My resulting TDEE roughly agreed with various online calculators, once I accounted for my lower-than-estimated BMR.

I track everything I eat and everything I do. I use a HRM for calculating exercise calories and I tend to stay very close to my goal net daily caloric intake. I weigh and measure body composition every morning and I log all data points in a very comprehensive spreadsheet.

I have had one 6 week plateau where I didn't lose weight. In an attempt to break it, I ate at maintenance for a month and kicked off my loss again.

I follow a comprehensive progressive strength program, rock climb at a very high level, and run 6-7 days per week.

I've set my weight loss goal at 1lb / 3500 cal per week. As of today, Including my plateau my actual weight loss over 211 days has been .75 lbs per week.

So. I have to say that I'm pretty well convinced that all this "math" works very well. If you can offer an alternative methodology, great. Please let us all know how it turns out for you.

And for what it's worth, I haven't really altered my diet much. I typically use caloric density vs. my daily allowance to determine what I can have, plus ensuring that I get plenty of vegetables and fruit. I certainly still consume plenty of beer and pizza.

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.

270/.2 = 1350, so her BMR is around 1350 and she's sedentary. Not unheard of. Mine isn't much higher and according to my Fitbit on my sedentary days I can burn as little as 100 calories over BMR! I don't think that's accurate but that's what it tells me.

So she's right (in my opinion) that the whole idea to eat your BMR plus your exercise leaves some of us losing 1-3 lbs/month, if anything. So I agree with her that we absolutely don't need to follow that plan.

She's 18. She has abs showing. She exercises. She's not sedentary.
Let's say she's 5' tall and weighs 120. BMR is 1374.4. TDEE, using 1.55 multiplier for moderately active gives 2130.32.

By my math and height/weight/activity guesstimates, there's 755.9 calories between her BMR and TDEE, not 270.

Even more conservative, using the lightly active multiplier of 1.375 we get a TDEE of 515.4.

Not sure what your situation is, but for this young lady, there is PLENTY of room for a calorie deficit while still eating above BMR.

Perhaps she was mixing up the MFP niumber with TDEE. The MFP number is not TDEE as it (attempts to) factor out exercise. Whereas actual TDEE includes exercise.

What are you numbers? Let's run them.

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?

I'd just like to add that I'm eating below my BMR and my heart is still beating, brain still working, I'm quite chirpy and as yet I haven't stopped breathing

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?

I'd just like to add that I'm eating below my BMR and my heart is still beating, brain still working, I'm quite chirpy and as yet I haven't stopped breathing

Ok for now. Just make sure to up your intake when your weight loss stalls and your energy levels tank.

My numbers are irrelevant but here you go. My BMR is 1440ish. I'm sedentary except the days I add exercise. So if I have to 'eat back' my exercise, forget that as part of my deficit. It's irrelevant. Whatever I burn I eat back, according to this plan. So I've got 1440 x 1.2 = 1728, and I have to eat at least 1440 (according to this forum). So that leaves me a max deficit per day of 288 calories. I don't have visible abs. I'm 15 lbs. into 'overweight BMI'. I'm not even particularly short, at 5'4".

Your TDEE is conservatively around 1980 (using 1.375, the "lightly active" modifier). You have room for a 540 calorie deficit. You can even increase this a bit if you like, as long as you gradually ramp it up while you lose weight.

My Fitbit has my TDEE (last 30 days average) around 1850, so you're not terribly far off.

But the point is people say you have to eat back your exercise. Your advice isn't 'eating back' any exercise. Though I agree, starting from TDEE is much smarter than the MFP way.

I won't even touch the 'eat over BMR' thing.

Actually I do advocate eating back exercise calories, but that assumes everything is set just right in MFP and that everything is logged accurately (as possible).

Me, I'm sedentary (but I exercise 4-6 times/week), but I have to set MFP to "very active" in order to make the numbers work out. And I do "eat back exercise calories". Go figure.

My Fitbit has my TDEE (last 30 days average) around 1850, so you're not terribly far off.

But the point is people say you have to eat back your exercise. Your advice isn't 'eating back' any exercise. Though I agree, starting from TDEE is much smarter than the MFP way.

I won't even touch the 'eat over BMR' thing.

Actually I do advocate eating back exercise calories, but that assumes everything is set just right in MFP and that everything is logged accurately (as possible).

Me, I'm sedentary (but I exercise 4-6 times/week), but I have to set MFP to "very active" in order to make the numbers work out. And I do "eat back exercise calories". Go figure.

You're right about setting things "just right." There are so many variables. What is a sedentary person? It's not one exact thing - but a range.

Existing muscle mass percentage is an issue too. If you have a high percentage of muscle mass .... you're burning more calories while sitting than the person who has a high percentage of fat.

You really have to "tweek" things as you go. No wonder there are so many different opinions.