LBM x 15 for TDEE

[adrenaline99]

Do you guys find this formula to be pretty accurate in estimating TDEE?

[tarmyg]

No!

Thanks
~T

---

"I stay mostly by myself, but it's OK, they know me here"
Follow my personal story here: Anabolic Steroids - Steroid.com Forums - An honest journey - Blogs

[gbrice75]

I've used it for myself as well as others I've worked with. Understanding that it's only a very rough starting point and the need to consider factors in the dieters life is the key. Monitor progress (or lack thereof) and adjust. 9 times out of 10, it's gotten me in the ballpark.

[--->>405<<---]

No!

Thanks
~T

---

"I stay mostly by myself, but it's OK, they know me here"
Follow my personal story here: Anabolic Steroids - Steroid.com Forums - An honest journey - Blogs

Hmmm.. Dissatisfied? Thats a first. Mind elaborating?

[Back In Black]

Kind of works. For me I need to add my activity on top of that so my LBM x 15 = 2600 but I maintain my weight with approx 3200 cals.

[--->>405<<---]

Shoot man for me its dang near dead on.. 2600 (this is with little to no cardio)

At 3200 im gaining 1-2lb per week.. (Also no cardio)

It is however an estimate.. Pretty good one imo

[tarmyg]

Hmmm.. Dissatisfied? Thats a first. Mind elaborating?

:-)

If someone asked me before the age of the Internet I would probably have told people to use lbmx15. However, since there are now so many tools to help us out in getting much more accurate values why not use them? I understand that this is just a ballpark value to get something fast but, imho, it is equally fast to hit up any number of websites that will give much more accurate number.

In my case:

15 x 152.2 = 2283

or

Katch-McCardle = 2606

323 calorie difference. Too much to call it ballpark, well, for my anal mind anyhow!

~T

[--->>405<<---]

^^ so youre suggesting the katch/mcardle formula is more accurate than LBM x 15? maybe for you but not for everyone. the thing about maintenance calories is they will never be the same for everyone. this is why we try to get close.

in my experience Katch tends to err to the high side by a significant amount. this is usually due to the inaccuracy of the activity multiplier. they use 1.55 as a multiplier for someone who is "moderately active"..

using katch my BMR is 2120cals. 2120 x 1.55 = 3286cals (maintenance) this is way way way off. those are bulking calories for me...

FYI (LBM x 15) was utilized on this site in light of the error of katch/mcardle.. while it may err to the lower side of required cals, IMO this is better than the high side. instead of gaining unwanted body fat and then having to adjust as well as face losing the fat youve gained, with LBM x 15 you typically are only faced with having to increase calories a little.

from my experience those websites you're referring to are no more accurate than LBM x 15 because there is no accurate way to establish everyone's maintenance cals by formula. it requires trial and error.

believe me, im as anal as you... ive tried

[tarmyg]

405,

Hmm, think I will have to agree with your statement after thinking it over. It's a good starting point and as with more experience one can use their own values/formula that fits them better. For me, as you stated, the Katch-McCardle formula works quite well.

Thanks
~T

[gbrice75]

in my experience Katch tends to err to the high side by a significant amount. this is usually due to the inaccuracy of the activity multiplier. they use 1.55 as a multiplier for someone who is "moderately active"..

Agree. 'Tis the reason I stopped using Katch etc. years ago. The activity multiplier is simply too subjective. In my experience, most people think they're doing way more than they actually are. Katch has almost always put people WAY over their TDEE when I let them work it out for themselves. Hell, it even had me at over 3000kcal and I had a low activity multiplier selected. I'm around 2500, tops.