Tested RMR vs. Calculated

husseycd

Couldn't figure out where to stick this so I thought this forum was as good as any.

This is really just a general poll. For those of you who have had your RMR tested, how does it compare to calculated? For example, my numbers:

Tested RMR=1300
Mifflin=1271
Katch-McArdle=1440
Harris-Benedict=1340
Nelson RMR (from BodPod)=1317

The calculations are supposed to be BMR, which from what I've read, is supposed to be lower than RMR. Now, my RMR was tested early in the morning, completely fasted, no coffee, no exercise for 12 hours. I'd be shocked if it wasn't pretty much identical to my BMR.

Supposedly the Katch-McArdle equation is supposed to be the most accurate for lean people. I just had my body fat tested via BodPod, and it came out to 16%, which would make my number of 1300 a little low.

Anyway, just curious what others have found. TBH, it does't matter too much for me since I'm not having any issues, but I think it would be helpful for others to see how the calculated numbers add up.

husseycd

I did just find this online: http://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20833995

husseycd

And lookee here! Amazing what the right Google search gives you. http://synapse.koreamed.org/Synapse/Data/PDFData/0214CNR/cnr-1-66.pdf

kar328

My K-A works out to about 1483. I did my RMR testing sometime in August and it was 1843. I had done it a little over a year ago, when I was first starting out and it was 1710. I'm still in the obese range, so some of these formulas aren't as accurate. I use my HRM, Fitbit and the RMR to keep track of things.