[bethFromDayton]

I know this question is asked over and over again, but I still feel confused.

Height: 5'2"
Weight: 225
Age: 50

I've lost 5 lbs in the last 3 weeks. I'm using MyFitnessPal to track calories and it has me at a net of 1260. Since I am "eating back" my exercise calories, I eat somewhere between 1200-1500.

I'm walking (about 2.7 mph) almost every day (I've missed one day in the last 3 weeks). I started with two 8 minute walks a day, but I'm mostly at either 32 or 54 minutes on week days and 22 on weekends. (The weird minutes are because it takes 16 minutes to do 2 laps of my building, and 22 minutes to walk around the block.)


I've used several calculators and come up with different numbers for my BMR and TDEE, and all the numbers seem to indicate more calories than the MyFitnessPal suggests I net.

My BMR calculates to 1680-1690.

Depending on how I define "light exercise" (I walk often, but slowly) or moderate exercise, the TDEE calculators put me between 2300 and 2600.

Several sites indicate that the right number of calories is 20% under TDEE, which would put me at 1840 if I use a TDEE of 2300. In that case, of course, one doesn't "eat back" one's exercise.

If I aim for my BMR at my goal weight, that would be 1300 or so, and my TDEE at 1800.

Is there any research to back up the theory of aiming for 20% under TDEE, or that one should always eat at least one's BMR?

I have it in my head that fewer calories are better (aiming for 1200 or so), but I also keep reading that may not be what's best for me. That's why i'm looking for research and studies--to put together with all the anedotes and the published assertions.

Thanks!

[April showers]

I am in the same boat here. awesome job on the lose so far. I was doing 1200 and exercising 4-5 days a week and lost weight but have been stalled for months and now buckling down again. I also use myfitnesspal and it says 1200. I am going to start eating my BMR for a change. I feel a lot better but I haven't weighed in yet so we shall see.
Good luck

[freelancemomma]

Most experts agree that it's safe to eat as few as 1,200 calories, which is lower than most people's BMR. The idea that you need to eat at least your BMR has no scientific basis, as far as I know. (I'm a health/medical writer who has written about weight loss.)

If you eat considerably less than 1,200 calories, your metabolism will slow down a little. You'll still lose weight, but not at the expected rate. You'll also feel sluggish and hungry. That's why it's not a good idea to go much below 1,200. For my part, I've always preferred to eat 1,500 cals during weight loss. It allows me to lose at a reasonable pace while not feeling too hungry.

Freelance
blog: www.englishgrammargripe.com

[PamC]

I go with the idea of eating calories required at your goal weight, that way you'll get used to the idea lose more quickly at first and eventually get there. That's what I am doing.

[bethFromDayton]

Thanks!

There's a "Roadmap" on myFitnessPal that calls for eating 20% under TDEE--but googling has only identified assertions that is the right way--and not any studies.

I'm going to stick with aiming for a net of 1260 that myFitnessPal tells me. That usually means a bit more, since I "eat back" my exercise.

If I end up at 1400-1500 by overcounting exercise and undercounting food, then that'll be okay.

[April showers]

Sounds like a good plan!