Is getting your RMR clinically tested worth it?
Options
Replies
-
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.
Any way you slice it, if she's logging accurately, and not losing, she has a medical problem. After logging accurately for a month if someone isn't losing, they need a specialist. I do understand checking how you log. However I lost several weeks trying to figure why my logging wasn't helping and knowing it wasn't accurate.0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.
Any way you slice it, if she's logging accurately, and not losing, she has a medical problem. After logging accurately for a month if someone isn't losing, they need a specialist. I do understand checking how you log. However I lost several weeks trying to figure why my logging wasn't helping and knowing it wasn't accurate.
Oops lol knowing it was accurate. Logging correctly is not difficult0 -
I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.1
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.
Care to share ? I'm not sure where the "handheld" bit came from. All these devices are flowmeters and gas analysers at the end of the day. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12853896 found a small bias on a cheaper device compared to a more expensive cart from the same supplier but the results were within 2 sd of each other.
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.
Care to share ? I'm not sure where the "handheld" bit came from. All these devices are flowmeters and gas analysers at the end of the day. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12853896 found a small bias on a cheaper device compared to a more expensive cart from the same supplier but the results were within 2 sd of each other.
You have an untrained person testing a person in a gym without a clear pre-test protocol (caffeine consumption, sleep, food ...) and add on top of that inter-client variation. "Hand-held", comes from the unit type named upthread.
Do you think this is significantly better than estimator equations outside of the lab?
Other than the abstract, that article isn't available.
Here is data from another common device.
I wouldn't trust that.
0 -
I have had mine tested about 9 months ago at a performance medicine clinic after losing around 30 pounds. I wanted to get a better benchmark for the number of calories I need to consume a day to maintain my weight loss . I was surprised to find out that at the time, my BMR was 1,450 calories ( I was 5'4.5 and 129 pounds). This also explained why I continued to lose weight while heavily exercising and eating 2,000 calories a day. I gained about 12 pounds in the last 6-7 months mostly through bingeing and not being accountable for my actions, but now that I am back on track I know that I can can eat more (1,600-2,000 calories a day), while exercising 6-7 times a week and still lose weight. Previously I never thought I could eat above 1,500 calories a day and still lose weight.
In addition to having my metabolism tested, I make sure to get a physician once a year and test my thyroid and hormones every 6 months while losing weight. Knock on wood, I am perfectly healthy, but I want to make sure that I don't develop any health issues that would prevent me from either losing or maintaining weight.0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.
Any way you slice it, if she's logging accurately, and not losing, she has a medical problem. After logging accurately for a month if someone isn't losing, they need a specialist. I do understand checking how you log. However I lost several weeks trying to figure why my logging wasn't helping and knowing it wasn't accurate.
Oops lol knowing it was accurate. Logging correctly is not difficult
It actually does seem to be difficult for many people, especially at first.1 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.
Care to share ? I'm not sure where the "handheld" bit came from. All these devices are flowmeters and gas analysers at the end of the day. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12853896 found a small bias on a cheaper device compared to a more expensive cart from the same supplier but the results were within 2 sd of each other.
You have an untrained person testing a person in a gym without a clear pre-test protocol (caffeine consumption, sleep, food ...) and add on top of that inter-client variation. "Hand-held", comes from the unit type named upthread.
Do you think this is significantly better than estimator equations outside of the lab?
Other than the abstract, that article isn't available.
Here is data from another common device.
I wouldn't trust that.
That's all exercise based, when the OP is about resting metabolic rate. I don't know what an aquatrainer is.
I'm not seeing any evidence that portable RMR measurement is inherently unreliable yet. Several institutions offering tests have defined protocols like at http://www.eatfithealth.com/medgem-metabolic-testing/
With 30% of people falling outside of +/- 10% of RMR estimations I would be (and was) in favour of a personal measurement.0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »Also, if this is about that ridiculous Biggest loser RMR article,
Considering OP made the one thread regarding it that I responded to, I'll bet that it is.
0 -
I just had this done this morning, actually. And I was going to post a similar question. I found that my RMR is 1610 calories per day, which isn't horrible. Mine was only 60$ so maybe you want to shop around for other places with the test, like a dietitian or a physical therapist instead of a doctor. I may be able to find the link I used to find this one... it had the ability to search for anyone with the testing machine in your area and give you their emails so what I did was email ALL of them at once and ask for information about their testing and got back several, one of which was right near my office for only 60$.
Anyways, was it worth it? Time will tell. She was a dietitian and a physical therapist so she gave me advice when I showed her my MyFitnessPal account, my diet reports, my history here and she gave me advice on different things to do, different physical activities, based on MyFitnessPal, which she is a big fan of anyways, it turns out. She said that I am not a "slow burner" and that what I thought was a plateau is actually just a normal rate for me to burn when considered over time, and that I need to just be patient and keep at it.
This is a relief even though i gained 2 lbs this week, because knowing that my metabolism is not horrible means that I don't need to invest a bunch of money and time in other tests... I just need patience. Also, if my metabolism was horrible, then she would have given me advice. Also, I could have had more tests. I would have known my next steps. So in summary. It was totally worth the price to me. And I want to compare my RMR to other peoples now. I feel more empowered with knowledge.0 -
Oh, and my appointment was at 9am, so she said don't eat food or exercise or have caffeine or tobacco or anything like that after 10pm the night before...
Also, to add. After having it done, i would say that it was worth 60 to me personally, but it would not have been worth 150... It was really just the satisfaction of knowing a teeensy something about the way my body operates gives me enough peace of mind to have patience, keep at the MFP logging and not give up when I gained 2 lbs this week instead of losing, without doing anything different... That's where I think it will help me. I feel more relaxed even though the scale was high this week. Worth 60 to me personally, but probably not everyone.
0 -
Closerthanthis wrote: »Oh, and my appointment was at 9am, so she said don't eat food or exercise or have caffeine or tobacco or anything like that after 10pm the night before...
Also, to add. After having it done, i would say that it was worth 60 to me personally, but it would not have been worth 150... It was really just the satisfaction of knowing a teeensy something about the way my body operates gives me enough peace of mind to have patience, keep at the MFP logging and not give up when I gained 2 lbs this week instead of losing, without doing anything different... That's where I think it will help me. I feel more relaxed even though the scale was high this week. Worth 60 to me personally, but probably not everyone.
Where are you in your menstrual cycle? I gain at ovulation and right before my TOM. Right now I'm three pounds higher than I was last week, but four pounds lower than what I was when I ovulated last month.0 -
I think I am close to ovulation, actually... but I never thought I would gain at ovulation! I usually gain when I start my period... but that could be it, if that's a thing. Wow. I just googled it. I had only expected weight gain during my period...! Thanks, @kshama2001 you just opened my eyes to a whole new thing!0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »CoffeeNCardio wrote: »@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.
Any way you slice it, if she's logging accurately, and not losing, she has a medical problem. After logging accurately for a month if someone isn't losing, they need a specialist. I do understand checking how you log. However I lost several weeks trying to figure why my logging wasn't helping and knowing it wasn't accurate.
Oops lol knowing it was accurate. Logging correctly is not difficult
It actually does seem to be difficult for many people, especially at first.
Yeah, accurate logging is difficult for many people. On average, people in studies who are keeping food journals under-report intake by a whopping 40%, although there is significant variability.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 959 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions