Free tool · runs in your browser
Maintenance calorie calculator
Maintenance calories, also called your TDEE, are what you can eat each day without gaining or losing weight. This calculator uses the 2023 National Academies equations, built from measurements of what people actually burn, and shows the range your true number most likely falls in. Then your own logs narrow it down.
Calculate your maintenance calories
Your estimated maintenance
2,950kcal a day
Likely range 2,610 to 3,290 kcal, where about 2 in 3 people with your numbers land. Your own logs show where in it you sit.
At each activity level
| Inactive | 2,740 kcal |
|---|---|
| Low active | 2,950 kcal |
| Active | 3,140 kcal |
| Very active | 3,490 kcal |
Where it goes (approximate)
| Resting | 1,780 kcal |
|---|---|
| Digesting food | 300 kcal |
| Moving and training | 870 kcal |
For your goal
| Lose 0.9 to 1.8 lb a week | 2,050 to 2,500 kcal |
|---|---|
| Gain 0.45 to 0.9 lb a week | 3,170 to 3,400 kcal |
| Protein, gaining or maintaining | 131 to 180 g |
For the full plan, with protein, fat and carbs and the weeks to your goal, use the cutting calculator or the bulking calculator.
Show the math
- NASEM 2023 equation for men, low active, with age in years, height in cm and weight in kg: 581.47 − 10.83 × 30 + 8.3 × 177.8 + 14.94 × 81.65 = 2,952 kcal, shown rounded to 2,950.
- Typical error (root-mean-square error) for men: 339 kcal. One error either side gives the likely range, 2,610 to 3,290, where about 2 in 3 people land. 1.96 errors either side covers about 95%: 2,290 to 3,620 kcal.
- Resting burn, by Mifflin-St Jeor: 10 × 81.65 + 6.25 × 177.8 − 5 × 30 + 5 = 1,783 kcal, shown as 1,780.
- Digesting food: 10% of the total, the middle of the 5 to 15% measured on a mixed diet, is 300 kcal. Moving and training is what is left: 870 kcal.
- A check for lifters: ten Haaf and Weijs’s resting equation, built for recreational athletes, gives 2,000 kcal, 220 more than Mifflin-St Jeor. Standard equations tend to underestimate the resting burn of muscular lifters, so if you carry more muscle than most people your size, your true number is more likely in the upper half of your range.
For adults 19 and over. Not for pregnancy or breastfeeding, which have their own equations. General information, not medical advice.
How many calories do I need to maintain my weight?
It depends on your size, age, sex and activity. A 30-year-old man who is 5 ft 10 in and 180 lb needs about 2,950 calories a day to maintain weight at the low-active level, and a 30-year-old woman who is 5 ft 4 in and 140 lb needs about 2,210. For about 2 in 3 people, the true number is within 340 calories of the estimate for men and 250 for women (NASEM, 2023).
| Person | Inactive | Low active | Active | Very active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Man, 5 ft 10 in, 180 lb (82 kg) | 2,740 | 2,950 | 3,140 | 3,490 |
| Man, 5 ft 10 in, 200 lb (91 kg) | 2,860 | 3,090 | 3,280 | 3,670 |
| Man, 178 cm, 70 kg (154 lb) | 2,570 | 2,780 | 2,950 | 3,270 |
| Man, 178 cm, 80 kg (176 lb) | 2,710 | 2,930 | 3,110 | 3,460 |
| Woman, 5 ft 4 in, 140 lb (64 kg) | 2,050 | 2,210 | 2,350 | 2,570 |
| Woman, 163 cm, 60 kg (132 lb) | 2,010 | 2,170 | 2,310 | 2,530 |
To adjust a row for yourself: each extra decade of age lowers maintenance by about 110 calories a day for men and 70 for women, at every activity level. At the low-active level, each extra inch of height adds about 21 calories for men and 17 for women (8.3 and 6.6 per cm), and each extra pound adds about 6.8 and 5.5 (14.9 and 12.1 per kg). The calculator above does this exactly.
Maintenance calories by body weight
Heavier bodies burn more at every activity level. At the low-active level, each extra 10 lb adds about 68 calories a day for a 30-year-old man of 5 ft 10 in, and about 55 for a woman of 5 ft 4 in. Find your weight, then read across to your activity level.
Men
| Weight | Inactive | Low active | Active | Very active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 130 lb (59 kg) | 2,420 | 2,610 | 2,780 | 3,060 |
| 140 lb (64 kg) | 2,480 | 2,680 | 2,850 | 3,150 |
| 150 lb (68 kg) | 2,540 | 2,750 | 2,920 | 3,230 |
| 160 lb (73 kg) | 2,610 | 2,820 | 2,990 | 3,320 |
| 170 lb (77 kg) | 2,670 | 2,880 | 3,070 | 3,410 |
| 180 lb (82 kg) | 2,740 | 2,950 | 3,140 | 3,490 |
| 190 lb (86 kg) | 2,800 | 3,020 | 3,210 | 3,580 |
| 200 lb (91 kg) | 2,860 | 3,090 | 3,280 | 3,670 |
| 210 lb (95 kg) | 2,930 | 3,160 | 3,350 | 3,750 |
| 220 lb (100 kg) | 2,990 | 3,220 | 3,430 | 3,840 |
| 230 lb (104 kg) | 3,050 | 3,290 | 3,500 | 3,930 |
| 240 lb (109 kg) | 3,120 | 3,360 | 3,570 | 4,010 |
| 250 lb (113 kg) | 3,180 | 3,430 | 3,640 | 4,100 |
| 260 lb (118 kg) | 3,250 | 3,490 | 3,720 | 4,190 |
| 270 lb (122 kg) | 3,310 | 3,560 | 3,790 | 4,270 |
| 280 lb (127 kg) | 3,370 | 3,630 | 3,860 | 4,360 |
| 290 lb (132 kg) | 3,440 | 3,700 | 3,930 | 4,450 |
| 300 lb (136 kg) | 3,500 | 3,770 | 4,000 | 4,530 |
Women
| Weight | Inactive | Low active | Active | Very active |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100 lb (45 kg) | 1,840 | 1,990 | 2,120 | 2,350 |
| 110 lb (50 kg) | 1,890 | 2,040 | 2,180 | 2,400 |
| 120 lb (54 kg) | 1,940 | 2,100 | 2,230 | 2,460 |
| 130 lb (59 kg) | 1,990 | 2,150 | 2,290 | 2,520 |
| 140 lb (64 kg) | 2,050 | 2,210 | 2,350 | 2,570 |
| 150 lb (68 kg) | 2,100 | 2,260 | 2,400 | 2,630 |
| 160 lb (73 kg) | 2,150 | 2,320 | 2,460 | 2,690 |
| 170 lb (77 kg) | 2,210 | 2,370 | 2,510 | 2,740 |
| 180 lb (82 kg) | 2,260 | 2,430 | 2,570 | 2,800 |
| 190 lb (86 kg) | 2,310 | 2,480 | 2,630 | 2,860 |
| 200 lb (91 kg) | 2,370 | 2,540 | 2,680 | 2,920 |
| 210 lb (95 kg) | 2,420 | 2,590 | 2,740 | 2,970 |
| 220 lb (100 kg) | 2,470 | 2,650 | 2,790 | 3,030 |
| 230 lb (104 kg) | 2,530 | 2,700 | 2,850 | 3,090 |
| 240 lb (109 kg) | 2,580 | 2,760 | 2,910 | 3,140 |
| 250 lb (113 kg) | 2,630 | 2,820 | 2,960 | 3,200 |
How does this calculator work?
It uses the adult equations the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) published in 2023 (NASEM, 2023). They predict total daily burn from sex, age, height, weight and activity level, and they were fitted to doubly labelled water measurements, which track what free-living people burn by following two stable isotopes as they leave the body over a week or two. Digesting food and everyday movement are already inside the result.
| Level | A typical day |
|---|---|
| Inactive | Daily living only: about 30 minutes of walking and 90 minutes of light chores across the day. |
| Low active | Daily living plus 60 to 80 minutes of walking at 3 to 4 mph. |
| Active | Daily living plus 30 to 50 minutes of walking at 3 to 4 mph, 45 minutes of moderate cycling and 40 minutes of doubles tennis. |
| Very active | Daily living plus 45 minutes of moderate cycling, about 25 minutes of jogging and 60 minutes of doubles tennis. |
NASEM drew the four levels from the spread of activity it measured, so each holds roughly a quarter of adults. It also notes that no validated tool can place one person in a level, so treat your choice as a starting point.
Where does lifting fit?
NASEM’s example days don’t include lifting. As a yardstick, six exercises of 4 sets each at a 10-rep-max load took recreationally active young men about 36 minutes and burned about 230 kcal (Kelleher et al., 2010). Count your sessions with the rest of your day, and if you are torn between two levels, pick the lower one: two to four weeks of logs will show if you are higher.
Why you get a range
Even with every input right, NASEM’s equations are off by an average of 9.4% for men and 8.7% for women. Their typical error, the root-mean-square error, is 339 kcal a day for men and 246 for women (NASEM, 2023). The likely range is one typical error either side of the estimate, where about 2 in 3 people land. Show the math, under the result, adds the wider range that covers about 95%.
Why not BMR times an activity multiplier?
Most calculators estimate resting burn with an equation such as Mifflin-St Jeor (Mifflin et al., 1990), then multiply it by a factor from 1.2 to 1.9 for activity. That stacks two errors: the resting equation’s, and the guess behind the factor. NASEM’s equations were fitted directly to measured daily burn, so there is one error, and it is published.
The resting, digestion and movement split
The split under the result is approximate, because NASEM predicts only the total. Resting burn comes from Mifflin-St Jeor, which was unbiased in 337 adults and within 10% of measured resting burn for 82% of them (Frankenfield, 2013). Digestion is set at 10% of the total, the middle of the 5 to 15% of daily burn measured on a mixed diet (Westerterp, 2004). Moving and training is what is left.
How accurate are maintenance calorie calculators?
Good equations land within about 10% for most people, and lifters need extra care. NASEM’s equations are off by 9.4% for men and 8.7% for women on average, and for about 1 in 3 people the true number sits more than 340 kcal (men) or 250 kcal (women) from the estimate (NASEM, 2023).
- Resting equations. Mifflin-St Jeor was within 10% of measured resting burn for 87% of adults without obesity and 75% of adults with obesity (Frankenfield, 2013).
- Lifters and athletes. In 90 recreational athletes, Harris-Benedict, WHO, Schofield, Mifflin-St Jeor and Owen were each accurate for fewer than half, while Cunningham’s lean-mass equation and a new weight-based one did better (ten Haaf and Weijs, 2014). Across 29 studies of 1,430 athletes, that weight-based equation was the most precise of the nine that could be pooled: it put 80.2% of people within 10%, against 40.7 to 63.7% for the others (O’Neill et al., 2023). In 27 muscular physique athletes, nearly all existing equations underestimated resting burn (Tinsley et al., 2019).
- Lean mass. If you know your body fat, Cunningham’s equation (370 + 21.6 × lean mass in kg) explains 65 to 90% of the variation in resting burn (Cunningham, 1991). The calculator shows it, and ten Haaf and Weijs’s version, under Show the math.
- Fitness watches. Seven wrist devices tested against lab measurements in 60 people all estimated calorie burn with an error of 20% or more (Shcherbina et al., 2017).
- Food logs. In 484 adults checked against doubly labelled water, 24-hour food recalls under-reported energy by 12 to 14% for men and 16 to 20% for women (Subar et al., 2003).
So use the estimate to start, then let your weight trend correct it.
How to find your true maintenance calories
Eat normally, log everything, and weigh in most mornings for at least two weeks, ideally four. If your weekly average weight holds steady, your average logged intake is your maintenance. If it moves, adjust by the energy in that change: about 7,700 kcal per kg, or 3,500 per lb.
- Log everything you eat and drink, the same way every day, including cooking oils, sauces and drinks.
- Weigh yourself each morning after the bathroom and before eating, then average each week. Weight tends to run higher after weekends (Orsama et al., 2014; Turicchi et al., 2020), and stored carbohydrate holds three to four parts water (Kreitzman et al., 1992), so single weigh-ins mislead.
- After two to four weeks, enter your average daily intake and your first and last weekly averages below.
Your maintenance, from your logs
2,750kcal a day
Your weight fell 0.5 lb a week: about 250 kcal a day drawn from your body, on top of the 2,500 you logged. Four weeks or more is a dependable read, as long as you logged the same way throughout.
Example: you log an average of 2,500 kcal a day for 4 weeks, and your weekly average falls from 180.0 to 178.5 lb. That is 0.5 lb a week, about 250 kcal a day from your body’s stores, so your maintenance is about 2,750 kcal.
How exact is the 3,500-calorie rule?
It is a rule of thumb. 7,700 kcal per kg (3,500 per lb) fits people with more than about 30 kg of body fat; for leaner people, each kg lost holds less energy, so the rule overstates the deficit behind it (Hall, 2008). Used to project months ahead, the rule overpredicts weight loss (Thomas et al., 2013). Over a few weeks of logs it is close enough, and Top Sets uses the same value.
Logged calories, not eaten calories
The result is in the calories you log, not the calories you eat. Most people under-log (Subar et al., 2003), but if you keep logging the same way, the number still works as your target.
Maintenance calories vs TDEE vs BMR vs RMR
Maintenance calories and TDEE are the same number when your weight is steady. BMR and RMR are only the resting part, about 60% of the total for the example man below; digesting food and moving make up the rest.
| Term | What it means | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Maintenance calories | What you eat to keep your weight steady | 2,950 |
| TDEE | Total daily energy expenditure: everything you burn in a day | 2,950 |
| RMR | Resting metabolic rate: what you burn at rest, here from Mifflin-St Jeor | 1,780 |
| BMR | Basal metabolic rate: resting burn measured under stricter conditions, on waking after an overnight fast | A little under RMR |
| TEF | Thermic effect of food: the cost of digesting it, 5 to 15% of daily burn | 300 |
| Activity | Training plus all everyday movement | 870 |
Does lifting change your maintenance calories?
A little, mostly through the sessions themselves. In one study, about 36 minutes of lifting burned about 230 kcal, and the afterburn added only about 14 kcal over the next hour (Kelleher et al., 2010). Muscle raises resting burn slowly: each kg burns about 13 kcal a day at rest, so 2 kg of new muscle adds about 26 kcal a day (Wang et al., 2010).
- Afterburn is small. Even after long, hard exercise, the extra oxygen used afterwards is only 6 to 15% of the exercise’s own cost, so exercise affects body weight mainly through the energy burned while doing it (LaForgia et al., 2006).
- Muscle against fat. At rest, muscle burns about 13 kcal per kg a day and fat about 4.5; over age 50, about 12.6 and 4.4 (Wang et al., 2010).
- Training can nudge resting burn. In previously sedentary young adults with overweight, six months of minimal training (one set of nine exercises, three days a week, about 11 minutes a session) raised resting burn by 7.4% and sleeping burn by 8.4%. Only the sleeping rise was clearly larger than in the group that did not train (Kirk et al., 2009).
In practice: count your sessions in your activity level, and let your logs catch the rest. To track the strength side, the one-rep max calculator turns any set into an estimated max.
How many calories to lose fat or build muscle
To lose fat and keep muscle, aim to lose 0.5 to 1% of body weight a week (Helms et al., 2014). To build muscle, aim to gain 0.25 to 0.5% of body weight a week as a novice or intermediate lifter (Iraki et al., 2019). For the 30-year-old, 180 lb man above, that is about 2,050 to 2,500 kcal a day to cut and 3,170 to 3,400 kcal to gain.
The cutting calculator and the bulking calculator turn your maintenance into a full plan: calories at each pace, protein, fat and carbs, and the weeks to a goal weight. Not sure which you need? Check whether to cut or bulk.
- Protein. Eat 1.6 to 2.2 g per kg of body weight a day when gaining or maintaining (Iraki et al., 2019): 131 to 180 g for the same man. In a meta-analysis of 49 studies and 1,863 people, protein beyond about 1.6 g per kg a day added no further lean mass from training (Morton et al., 2018). On a cut, protein runs higher: lean lifters deep in a cut may do better at 2.3 to 3.1 g per kg of lean mass (Helms et al., 2014).
- Gaining. Advanced lifters should be more conservative with both the surplus and the rate of gain (Iraki et al., 2019).
- A floor. This page never suggests under 1,500 kcal a day for men or 1,200 for women. Those are the bottom of the daily ranges a US obesity guideline offers as one way to set a diet, not safety limits (Jensen et al., 2014). If the faster rate would go below the floor, the target holds there and you lose more slowly.
- Maintenance falls as you lose. A smaller body burns less, and the body can save around 120 kcal a day more on top, with large differences between people (Müller and Bosy-Westphal, 2013). Weight also responds slowly to a lasting change in intake, with a half-time of about a year (Hall et al., 2011), so recalculate every few weeks rather than projecting months ahead.
Questions
Are maintenance calories the same as TDEE?
Yes, when your weight is steady. TDEE, total daily energy expenditure, is everything you burn in a day: resting, digesting food and moving. Maintenance calories are what you eat to match it. Eat more or less than your TDEE for long enough and your weight drifts until the two meet again.
Are maintenance calories the same as BMR?
No. BMR, basal metabolic rate, is only what you burn at complete rest. Maintenance adds digesting food and all your movement on top. For a 30-year-old man who is 5 ft 10 in, 180 lb and low active, resting burn is about 1,780 kcal of a 2,950 kcal maintenance, so eating at your BMR is a deficit.
How accurate is my smartwatch’s calorie burn?
Treat it as a rough guide. When seven wrist devices (Apple Watch, Basis Peak, Fitbit Surge, Microsoft Band, Mio Alpha 2, PulseOn and Samsung Gear S2) were tested against lab measurements in 60 people, none estimated calorie burn with an error under 20% (Shcherbina et al., 2017). Those were 2017 models, but either way your weight trend against your logged calories is the better measure.
Why am I not losing weight eating below my maintenance calories?
Usually because the estimate or the log is off. For about 1 in 3 people, true maintenance sits more than 340 kcal (men) or 250 kcal (women) from the calculated number (NASEM, 2023), and people tend to under-log what they eat: by 12 to 14% for men and 16 to 20% for women in one large study (Subar et al., 2003). Water can also hide fat loss for a week or two. Track your weekly average weight for 3 to 4 weeks, then work out maintenance from your logs.
What are my maintenance calories after a cut?
Lower than before you started. A smaller body burns less, and after a sustained deficit the body can save around 120 kcal a day more on top, with large differences between people (Müller and Bosy-Westphal, 2013). Recalculate at your new weight, eat at that number, and adjust from your weekly average weight over the next 2 to 4 weeks.
Can you build muscle eating at maintenance?
Yes. A review found a substantial amount of research showing resistance-trained people gaining muscle while losing fat, with progressive resistance training and evidence-based nutrition as the key drivers (Barakat et al., 2020). For the fastest gains, the usual advice is still a small surplus, enough to gain 0.25 to 0.5% of body weight a week (Iraki et al., 2019). Either way, eat 1.6 to 2.2 g of protein per kg of body weight a day.
Why do men and women get different numbers?
Mostly body composition. At the same height and weight, men tend to carry more lean mass, and muscle burns about 13 kcal per kg a day at rest against about 4.5 for fat (Wang et al., 2010). NASEM fits separate equations for men and women: at age 30, 5 ft 7 in and 150 lb, low active, they give 2,690 kcal for a man and 2,310 for a woman.
Who should not use this calculator?
It is built for adults 19 and over. It is not for pregnancy or breastfeeding, which have their own NASEM equations, and it is not meant for anyone with a medical condition that affects weight or appetite, or anyone recovering from an eating disorder. It is general information, not medical advice: in those situations, ask a doctor or registered dietitian.
Sources
- Barakat C, Pearson J, Escalante G, Campbell B, De Souza EO (2020). Body recomposition: can trained individuals build muscle and lose fat at the same time?. Strength and Conditioning Journal 42(5):7-21. doi:10.1519/SSC.0000000000000584
- Cunningham JJ (1991). Body composition as a determinant of energy expenditure: a synthetic review and a proposed general prediction equation. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 54(6):963-969. doi:10.1093/ajcn/54.6.963
- Frankenfield DC (2013). Bias and accuracy of resting metabolic rate equations in non-obese and obese adults. Clinical Nutrition 32(6):976-982. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2013.03.022
- Hall KD, Sacks G, Chandramohan D, et al. (2011). Quantification of the effect of energy imbalance on bodyweight. The Lancet 378(9793):826-837. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60812-X
- Hall KD (2008). What is the required energy deficit per unit weight loss?. International Journal of Obesity 32(3):573-576. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803720
- Helms ER, Aragon AA, Fitschen PJ (2014). Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding contest preparation: nutrition and supplementation. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 11:20. doi:10.1186/1550-2783-11-20
- Iraki J, Fitschen P, Espinar S, Helms E (2019). Nutrition recommendations for bodybuilders in the off-season: a narrative review. Sports 7(7):154. doi:10.3390/sports7070154
- Jensen MD, Ryan DH, Apovian CM, et al. (2014). 2013 AHA/ACC/TOS guideline for the management of overweight and obesity in adults. Circulation 129(25 Suppl 2):S102-S138. doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000437739.71477.ee
- Kelleher AR, Hackney KJ, Fairchild TJ, et al. (2010). The metabolic costs of reciprocal supersets vs. traditional resistance exercise in young recreationally active adults. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 24(4):1043-1051. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d3e993
- Kirk EP, Donnelly JE, Smith BK, et al. (2009). Minimal resistance training improves daily energy expenditure and fat oxidation. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 41(5):1122-1129. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e318193c64e
- Kreitzman SN, Coxon AY, Szaz KF (1992). Glycogen storage: illusions of easy weight loss, excessive weight regain, and distortions in estimates of body composition. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 56(1 Suppl):292S-293S. doi:10.1093/ajcn/56.1.292S
- LaForgia J, Withers RT, Gore CJ (2006). Effects of exercise intensity and duration on the excess post-exercise oxygen consumption. Journal of Sports Sciences 24(12):1247-1264. doi:10.1080/02640410600552064
- Mifflin MD, St Jeor ST, Hill LA, et al. (1990). A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 51(2):241-247. doi:10.1093/ajcn/51.2.241
- Morton RW, Murphy KT, McKellar SR, et al. (2018). A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein supplementation on resistance training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength in healthy adults. British Journal of Sports Medicine 52(6):376-384. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2017-097608
- Müller MJ, Bosy-Westphal A (2013). Adaptive thermogenesis with weight loss in humans. Obesity 21(2):218-228. doi:10.1002/oby.20027
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2023). Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/26818
- O’Neill JER, Corish CA, Horner K (2023). Accuracy of resting metabolic rate prediction equations in athletes: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Medicine 53(12):2373-2398. doi:10.1007/s40279-023-01896-z
- Orsama AL, Mattila E, Ermes M, et al. (2014). Weight rhythms: weight increases during weekends and decreases during weekdays. Obesity Facts 7(1):36-47. doi:10.1159/000356147
- Shcherbina A, Mattsson CM, Waggott D, et al. (2017). Accuracy in wrist-worn, sensor-based measurements of heart rate and energy expenditure in a diverse cohort. Journal of Personalized Medicine 7(2):3. doi:10.3390/jpm7020003
- Subar AF, et al. (2003). Using intake biomarkers to evaluate the extent of dietary misreporting in a large sample of adults: the OPEN study. American Journal of Epidemiology 158(1):1-13. doi:10.1093/aje/kwg092
- ten Haaf T, Weijs PJM (2014). Resting energy expenditure prediction in recreational athletes of 18-35 years: confirmation of Cunningham equation and an improved weight-based alternative. PLoS ONE 9(10):e108460. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0108460
- Thomas DM, Martin CK, Lettieri S, et al. (2013). Can a weight loss of one pound a week be achieved with a 3500-kcal deficit? Commentary on a commonly accepted rule. International Journal of Obesity 37(12):1611-1613. doi:10.1038/ijo.2013.51
- Tinsley GM, Graybeal AJ, Moore ML (2019). Resting metabolic rate in muscular physique athletes: validity of existing methods and development of new prediction equations. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism 44(4):397-406. doi:10.1139/apnm-2018-0412
- Turicchi J, O’Driscoll R, Horgan G, et al. (2020). Weekly, seasonal and holiday body weight fluctuation patterns among individuals engaged in a European multi-centre behavioural weight loss maintenance intervention. PLoS ONE 15(4):e0232152. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232152
- Wang Z, Ying Z, Bosy-Westphal A, et al. (2010). Specific metabolic rates of major organs and tissues across adulthood: evaluation by mechanistic model of resting energy expenditure. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 92(6):1369-1377. doi:10.3945/ajcn.2010.29885
- Westerterp KR (2004). Diet induced thermogenesis. Nutrition & Metabolism 1:5. doi:10.1186/1743-7075-1-5
Each figure quoted from a study was checked against its published abstract, and the equations against the NASEM report itself. Found an error? Email founder@topsets.app and the page will be corrected and its date updated.