CoachCrimson
New member
Hello everyone, need a little help figuring out where to start this time around. Ive always had a real hard time believing the numbers that the various BMR equations put out for me, so im looking for some advice to validate a good starting point. Just for shits and giggles, the Schofield put me at 3712, Harris-Benedict at 3611, Mifflin at 3077, and Mifflin's Fat free mass equation, which was supposed to be the most accurate, is at 2383. The two Mifflin equations are the most recently derived ones (created in the 1990's if i remember correctly), and i only just discovered those a few days ago. in fact, although i estimated my bodyfat percentage, the fat free mass equation seems much more reasonable to me (originally i entered in pounds for the weight part, it did not designate whether it was kilograms or pounds, but the other mifflins used kilos. using pounds put me up near 5k calories a day, lol). all of these are just BMR, no activity modifier incorporated.
On days when i am active, which is most, some of these equations are going to call for me to eat over 5000 calories a day. i cannot imagine eating 5000 clean calories a day... or that that many could really be neccesary for maintenance. even accounting for the deficit (aiming for about 750 calories a day deficit), its still well over 4k in most cases.
I would just go with the fat free mass equation, except i had to estimate my bodyfat, and i tried to estimate high. I really dont have an accurate method of measuring bodyfat at my disposal either.
Any suggestions on where to start? going for low numbers would pretty much guarentee weight loss, but might provoke a quicker stall if the numbers are in fact too low, as well as more muscle loss. going for higher numbers might cause some gain initially, and might take some time to fine tune and tweak to the right amount. maybe there is something i am overlooking while playing with all this math? or perhaps someone else has a better equation/estimation?
last time i lost some weight, i went from 385 to 330 (was in pretty good shape too, throwing some of the farthest i have). However, what i did there doesnt really carry over to this trial. trust me on that, or PM me if you think you really need to know why, lol
leave your thoughts, im starting as soon as i get the next paycheck and can contribute to the shopping budget for my own health's sake. have a couple of days to determine what route i should start down. thanks in advance!
On days when i am active, which is most, some of these equations are going to call for me to eat over 5000 calories a day. i cannot imagine eating 5000 clean calories a day... or that that many could really be neccesary for maintenance. even accounting for the deficit (aiming for about 750 calories a day deficit), its still well over 4k in most cases.
I would just go with the fat free mass equation, except i had to estimate my bodyfat, and i tried to estimate high. I really dont have an accurate method of measuring bodyfat at my disposal either.
Any suggestions on where to start? going for low numbers would pretty much guarentee weight loss, but might provoke a quicker stall if the numbers are in fact too low, as well as more muscle loss. going for higher numbers might cause some gain initially, and might take some time to fine tune and tweak to the right amount. maybe there is something i am overlooking while playing with all this math? or perhaps someone else has a better equation/estimation?
last time i lost some weight, i went from 385 to 330 (was in pretty good shape too, throwing some of the farthest i have). However, what i did there doesnt really carry over to this trial. trust me on that, or PM me if you think you really need to know why, lol
leave your thoughts, im starting as soon as i get the next paycheck and can contribute to the shopping budget for my own health's sake. have a couple of days to determine what route i should start down. thanks in advance!