Which to use when you get a "real" metabolism test vs. the online calculator
Options
misskitty0816
Posts: 49 Member
So I went and had a metabolism test with a licensed dietitian, and it calculated my actual BMR at 1050, which she said was about 20% below average. That sounds about right since the online calculator on this site put it at 1226. So which do I use in my meal planning to NOT go below - the 1050 or the 1226 (+ my daily activity) when I get ready to eventually decrease? Still eating at 1450-1500, but now starting to see a few pounds increase 
((. I really hope I can stick with this.
((. I really hope I can stick with this. 0
Replies
-
I had my RMR tested and it had me below as well. After crying and being upset I came here and asked the people here. I used the EM2WL calculator and haven't gained ANY weight increasing slowly.
0 -
And I think I started to get bloated when I started but it sheds after awhile. I feel so much better now. Trust the calculator and do your strength training and eat good food and some treats now and then. I would not advise adding all treats as your extra increase calories.
1 -
Thanks!! I am going to keep with the 1450-1500. My increase has only been about 1 1/2, but some days it is only a pound. I had one day where it went back to 0 gain, so who knows..............I'm going to try and stick it out with 1450-1500 for another few weeks and went to do my first strength training class yesterday (can barely move), so trying to move forward - but slightly anxious
) 0 -
misskitty0816 wrote: »So I went and had a metabolism test with a licensed dietitian, and it calculated my actual BMR at 1050, which she said was about 20% below average. That sounds about right since the online calculator on this site put it at 1226. So which do I use in my meal planning to NOT go below - the 1050 or the 1226 (+ my daily activity) when I get ready to eventually decrease? Still eating at 1450-1500, but now starting to see a few pounds increase((. I really hope I can stick with this.
I might be wrong here, but I would think that the metabolism test is calculating your current BMR. And currently your BMR is diminished from under-eating. What you are trying to do with the reset is get that metabolism working again so that you have a higher burn. With that thought in mind I'd be using the 1226 as your BMR, because that is what you are trying to reset your body to. I hope that makes sense to you.
Try not to focus only on scale numbers. Those numbers are going to fluctuate. I found the first few months to be the most rewarding, yet scariest of the process. I still have days when 1200 calories is a major struggle. Yesterday was one of those days. I finally managed 1300 calories by the end of the day. As I am getting closer to my "true" BMR my weight loss has slowed down, but you can see the differences in the way my body looks and how my clothes fit.3 -
^^^this!0
-
misskitty0816 wrote: »So I went and had a metabolism test with a licensed dietitian, and it calculated my actual BMR at 1050, which she said was about 20% below average. That sounds about right since the online calculator on this site put it at 1226. So which do I use in my meal planning to NOT go below - the 1050 or the 1226 (+ my daily activity) when I get ready to eventually decrease? Still eating at 1450-1500, but now starting to see a few pounds increase((. I really hope I can stick with this.
If they said BMR - then you are dealing with someone being lose with incorrect terms. Hopefully they did test right and had good equipment that is kept calibrated. I wouldn't think a dietitian would, though if part of bigger office doing diet stuff - perhaps.
Did you get up in morning and go straight there, no food or drink - sit in chair resting for 10 min, and then breath into face mask for 5 min or so?
That was Resting (RMR) test, which is higher than Basal (BMR), since awake.
And even if that was really RMR which is tad higher (you can back calculate BMR from it of course) - don't go chasing a lower than estimated RMR into the ground by eating even less.
Part of question though is amount of LBM to Fat Mass too - a lower figure could be right on for amount of BF% you have.
Then again it could still be lower than expected.
It's likely less because of extended dieting - just proves where you are - not where you want to be.
A good BodPod, DEXA, underwater weighing to get good estimate of BF% is better. Calculated BMR from that is usually within 5% unless health issues causing differences.
And that's really only needed if you know you are way off average for weight.
Figured you might want more details if you wanted the test.0 -
Hi, @haybales - what is on the printout she gave me says RMR actual is 960 + 190 for routine daily activity = 1150 actual calories burned (estimated for my height of 5 6" and 130 pound weight is 1240 RMR + 250 for 1490 day total), so she said I am under the estimate by 20%. Yes, I did the test as you described after an overnight fast and rest period in her office. The machine was called "MEDGEM" which she says was one of the best. She is part of a training facility of personal trainers (they have two dietitians there). I can't go there for personal training as its too far, but not too far for an every-now-and-then visit with her. It has been a while since I have had my body fat tested, though two years ago it was around 23%.
Does any of this give more clarity on my situation? I am gaining weight on the 1450-1500 calories and have STOPPED doing the cardio that I have done for years thinking it might be part of the problem slowing my metabolism down even further, but I want to make sure no matter what i do not dip below my RMR (or maybe people here meant BMR) which is what I THOUGHT people here were saying not to do - so if that's the case, do I not dip below my ACTUAL rate or the predicted rate??? I'm just a little confused on this! Any help is greatly appreciated! I've been at the 1450-1500 about two weeks now, up from around 1300 that I typically would eat.0 -
I did the Medgem as well. I ended up going on the numbers on the EM2WL site because their numbers had me at 900-1000 to lose weight and like 1270 to maintain.2
-
Just keep eating what you are eating now. Move up slowly, 50 cals extra a day. Your body adjusts as you go. When your weight stabilizes you've adapted and can move up a smidge. But be aware of normal fluctuations- water stored after weight lifting, monthly cycle stuff, etc. Don't panic when you see that.2
-
So valid test, valid RMR.
The estimate of daily extra calories is just that - estimate, I'd leave that out.
Do you think your BF% is about the same?
Because again, that tested RMR may indeed be 20% less than expected calculated using age, gender, height, weight (I show Mifflin BMR 1226, which has matching RMR of 1372, so 960 is 30% less actually),but nothing about BF% obviously since they didn't have that.
So it could be that if you have burnt up decent amount of muscle mass through years of dieting, that RMR could only be 10% less than a better estimate based on BF% of 23%.
If you think that is still decent estimate (and you'd need to change by 5% to be significant difference) - RMR would be 1499. Meaning 960 is 36% less.
So could be combo as to why measured so much lower than potential, which is likely -
1 - you have less LBM and more FM than 23%, so potential RMR is lower than calculated. And eating more will never change that aspect. Only adding back muscle will, which is slow.
2 - you have a lower suppressed RMR than potential RMR. Eating more can solve that.
So indeed eating more, a few progressions of 100 cal extra daily for a week or two at a time will help body catch up.
Here is a report of someone that had recovery.
To this I'll add that weight wasn't gained because of eating at suppressed level, but rather that makes it easier to gain fat by eating in surplus whenever she probably binged during this long time of stress, besides stress water weight. Also that 3 day diet analysis was probably lower than reality, she wasn't eating that low normally with that RMR, and doing 2 hrs of exercise almost daily.
You can't gain fat eating in deficit or potential deficit.
Also not suggesting the treatment is what you should follow - merely showing it is possible to get out of state by slowly increasing.
But notice how much less stress on body at almost sedentary level, some mere resistance training.
A similar case study was published by Jampolis (2004).
A 51 year old patient complained of a 15 lb weight gain over the last year, despite beginning a strenuous triathlon and marathon training program (2 hours per day, 5-6 days per week).
A 3 day diet analysis estimated a daily intake of only 1000-1200 Calories.
An indirect calorimetry revealed a resting metabolic rate of 950 Calories (28% below predicted for age, height, weight, and gender).
After medications and medical conditions such as hypothyroidism and diabetes were ruled out, the final diagnosis was over-training and undereating.
The following treatment was recommended:
Increase daily dietary intake by approximately 100 Calories per week to a goal of 1500 calories
32% protein; 35% carbohydrates; 33% fat
Consume 5-6 small meals per day
Small amounts of protein with each meal or snack
Choose high fiber starches
Select mono- and poly- unsaturated fats
Restrict consumption of starch with evening meals unless focused around training
Take daily multi-vitamin and mineral supplement
Perform whole body isometric resistance training 2 times per week
After 6 weeks, the patient's resting metabolism increased 35% to 1282 Calories per day (only 2% below predicted).
The patient also decreases percent fat from 37% to 34%, a loss of 5 lbs of body fat.
Jampolis MB (2004) Weight Gain - Marathon Runner / Triathlete. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 36(5) S148.
0 -
So valid test, valid RMR.
The estimate of daily extra calories is just that - estimate, I'd leave that out.
Do you think your BF% is about the same?
Because again, that tested RMR may indeed be 20% less than expected calculated using age, gender, height, weight (I show Mifflin BMR 1226, which has matching RMR of 1372, so 960 is 30% less actually),but nothing about BF% obviously since they didn't have that.
So it could be that if you have burnt up decent amount of muscle mass through years of dieting, that RMR could only be 10% less than a better estimate based on BF% of 23%.
If you think that is still decent estimate (and you'd need to change by 5% to be significant difference) - RMR would be 1499. Meaning 960 is 36% less.
So could be combo as to why measured so much lower than potential, which is likely -
1 - you have less LBM and more FM than 23%, so potential RMR is lower than calculated. And eating more will never change that aspect. Only adding back muscle will, which is slow.
2 - you have a lower suppressed RMR than potential RMR. Eating more can solve that.
So indeed eating more, a few progressions of 100 cal extra daily for a week or two at a time will help body catch up.
Here is a report of someone that had recovery.
To this I'll add that weight wasn't gained because of eating at suppressed level, but rather that makes it easier to gain fat by eating in surplus whenever she probably binged during this long time of stress, besides stress water weight. Also that 3 day diet analysis was probably lower than reality, she wasn't eating that low normally with that RMR, and doing 2 hrs of exercise almost daily.
You can't gain fat eating in deficit or potential deficit.
Also not suggesting the treatment is what you should follow - merely showing it is possible to get out of state by slowly increasing.
But notice how much less stress on body at almost sedentary level, some mere resistance training.
A similar case study was published by Jampolis (2004).
A 51 year old patient complained of a 15 lb weight gain over the last year, despite beginning a strenuous triathlon and marathon training program (2 hours per day, 5-6 days per week).
A 3 day diet analysis estimated a daily intake of only 1000-1200 Calories.
An indirect calorimetry revealed a resting metabolic rate of 950 Calories (28% below predicted for age, height, weight, and gender).
After medications and medical conditions such as hypothyroidism and diabetes were ruled out, the final diagnosis was over-training and undereating.
The following treatment was recommended:
Increase daily dietary intake by approximately 100 Calories per week to a goal of 1500 calories
32% protein; 35% carbohydrates; 33% fat
Consume 5-6 small meals per day
Small amounts of protein with each meal or snack
Choose high fiber starches
Select mono- and poly- unsaturated fats
Restrict consumption of starch with evening meals unless focused around training
Take daily multi-vitamin and mineral supplement
Perform whole body isometric resistance training 2 times per week
After 6 weeks, the patient's resting metabolism increased 35% to 1282 Calories per day (only 2% below predicted).
The patient also decreases percent fat from 37% to 34%, a loss of 5 lbs of body fat.
Jampolis MB (2004) Weight Gain - Marathon Runner / Triathlete. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 36(5) S148.
@heybales , I was hoping you would reply back! I have read several of your posts and what you say always resonates with me - and of course it is evident that you are very knowledgeable like so many other friends on this board.
I enrolled in some group strength training coaching sessions. Went three times this week - OUCH! After 20+ years of being active and what I thought was 'fit' - wow. What a wake-up call! I am guilty of being a cardio-maniac with a smattering of weight machines thrown in for good measure, but nothing strenuous. I truly considered myself to be 'in shape'! Boy did this group session prove me wrong.
So just a few comments/questions/thoughts:
*I am backing off ALL cardio right now. Honestly, the 3X week strength training sessions are HARD! I don't think I could do cardio on those days even if I wanted to! Is this bad that I am dropping cardio completely (I will pick up it up later if I can get my metabolism stabilized) or should I really try to be mixing some of it in on the non-strength training days as I "fix" my metabolism?
*I had the trainer at the strength training place measure my body fat. She used the hand-held bio-impedance machine and it calculated it at 27%. I bought a Homedics scale which also measures body fat. It had me at 25. So not knowing which (if either) is really accurate, I guess I will call it 26%, the average of the two. This is not 5% over the 23% I was a few years ago, so that is not significant, per your statement above, though I suppose it might factor into the lowered RMR. Any thoughts on these BF measures?
*That case study - WOW. That woman sounds so much like me it is scary. I am age 50, also was eating around 1200 calories a day, doing tons of cardio (though not nearly as much as her), and an almost identical RMR. My strategy - so far - has also been to get up to 1500 calories daily, taking a multi-vitamin, increasing protein to 30'ish percent, resistance training 2-3x week, etc. Wow. Sounds soooo much like me. It is encouraging to see that she actually DID change her metabolic rate! Do you feel that there is ever a point when the damage just cannot be undone? I'm so scared I'm going to be THAT person. Also, can you explain what you mean by "But notice how much less stress on body at almost sedentary level, some mere resistance training." What do you mean 'less stress' AND does that mean that me dropping the cardio to the point of being "sedentary" except the resistance training 2=3x a week is legitimately a good strategy?
*My plan: Stay at the 1450-1500 calorie level like I am right now as long as I can. Continue strength training 2-3X a week. Drop ALL cardio for a few months until I get my metabolism under control. Get re-tested in 3 months for RMR. Work towards a body fat of 23%-24% like I was before (which I am actually close to), and keep my BMI at 21. Does this sound reasonable to 'fix' my metabolism and/or is anything missing?
*How can my body fat be somewhat normal (25-27%), weight somewhat normal for someone age 50 and 5'6 (130 pounds), and have such a low RMR with maintenance calories of 1200'ish for that weight and body fat? Should I just be happy with what I have?
Thank you for any insight - I think I am almost to the point of knowing what to do and having some hope, thanks to the awesome people on this board !)) Others please chime in if you have thoughts on this as well! 0 -
Cardio can be done at an Active-Recovery HR level, which does just what the name implies - gets blood flowing and aids healing from prior hard activity.
This level has been recently re-termed the fat-burning level - for which purpose there is much misunderstanding, and backlash from those that know.
It's actually a very useful level for specific purpose, and fat-burning isn't it.
So if you've been doing cardio for years, then walking may not be any kind of workout anymore for aerobic benefit - too easy.
But a slow jog, one where you could sing (not nicely though), or whatever your favorite cardio is - could easily aid recovery, allowing next workout to be better than if you didn't. Not much, 20-30 is it.
As long as you are still eating enough to take it into account, it's not a stress on the body - hence the reason for the original term of the HR zone.
Plus - many find it a good de-stresser for life. Some find lifting can do that, for some not at all.
BF% - handheld worse than scale method. If you have the scale method with hand held combined like mine - better.
Still has big bearing on you presenting a average hydrated body to it to estimate with. Their consistency can be much better than their accuracy. It could be 5% off, but if it always is - at least it's giving you a direction when it changes.
Morning after rest day eating normal sodium levels, not sore from last workout - best valid weigh-in day to avoid known expected water weight fluctuations.
Even using 27%, would give calculated RMR of 1450 - so you are indeed still within the range of the figures I was using based on 23%. It's if you were up around 35% that RMR would be calculated 100 calories lower than even that.
50 calories is less than the inaccuracy in your food labels during the day - so nothing to worry about.
I think you are about average healthy then - not really that much to lose - even if not in areas you'd prefer it. Recomp can help that.
When I was rereading that case study, it did indeed strike me how similar except for amount of exercise.
And indeed, less stress meant her body had little from exercise to be required to recover from - especially compared to before.
Even notice 2 x weekly resistance training - not lifting either. I'd suggest you could move those calories on up 50 if you only did the lifting - if you included some cardio for aerobic benefit - probably 100 more to 1600.
But even if you don't add cardio and calories - still a good plan like it was for her.
As to why everything is so low - because you ate so low for so long while attempting to do so much.
Body is wonderful at adapting - adapting stronger if you put a stress on asking for more - adapting slower if you put a stress on it giving it less. Sadly some adapt well in certain directions mainly - not other directions.
Outside of being lower RMR for genetic reasons (and calculations are for average, usually 10% spread) - that your RMR would be that much lower means first your body tried to slow down daily activities to conserve calories for more important functions that can't be slowed down - your TDEE was slower from less movement.
Either it was unsuccessful in that (you kept just as busy all day long), or it was successful to point and needed to conserve more.
RMR being lower reflects the calories that include optional functions that can be slowed down - healing, fighting infections, keeping warm, growing nail/hair/skin, ect.
That conserves and leaves yet more calories for the basic functions of life. - repairing cells, growing more required ones, cellular water management, ect.
I'd suggest keep moving on up to 1600 after many weeks, I think you've got the ability to support it.1 -
Thank you, @haybales! This helps tremendously. I do think on the days I do the group strength training classes I will bump it up to 1600. I FEEL hungrier on those days anyways! I actually went this morning and after breakfast and a mid-morning snack (spreading my calories out just like in the case study), I am already hungry for lunch. Only question I do have remaining - what is the difference in "resistance training" (i.e., what the person in the case study did) and what I am doing with this hour-long strength coaching session? I know it's hard to tell from a very generic title "("hour long strength coaching session"), but essentially there are small groups of us (no more than 10 usually), led by a coach for a full hour to do a variety of conditioning exercises. Different muscle groups on different days, but always a full hour, starting with some high intensity warm ups (usually 60-90 seconds of intense cardio followed by a brief rest), for about ten minutes, then straight into the conditioning. I am too new to really know how to describe what we do in there, but let's just say I am physically exhausted by the time we are done and usually about a quarter way into the different sets of exercises. But I am starting as a true beginner.
Questions: 1. Do these cardio "intervals" help me with body recomposition or should I sit those out (i.e., are they supporting my damaged metabolism and keeping them damaged because of the stress put on my body - it is only about 10 min total). 2. Is what I describe with my group session the same as "resistance training" in the case study (mine DOES involve heavy weights, no machines, all free weights and using weight of the body), not sure I understand the difference in resistance training and weights - I thought they were the same 3. Definitely I can bump up an extra 100 calories on days I do this routine and not have an overage in calories?
Can I also please say thank you again!?!?!? Everything you described and clarified above makes perfect sense. Your practical help combined with some of the ladies who have given me examples of what THEY have been through with low metabolisms and coming back from it, are leaving me much more hopeful than I have been these last few months. I really, really appreciate your feedback and willingness to help someone that you don't even know. It means a lot! Everyone on this board has been so wonderful 1 -
As long as the macro ratio is applied to each meal/snack, it's usually valid hunger signals.
But be careful of a high carb meal, or carbs eaten first if you know you have problems with that. Having a fast insulin release and the resulting low blood sugar doesn't mean actual hunger, merely feels like it.
So resistance training is anything done that provides resistance, usually figured to be smaller reps than say cardio which means higher weight can then be done.
So moving your weight in walking/running for 4000 reps of steps is not resistance training, but endurance (cardio).
Doing 25 bodyweight squats because that's about all you can do is.
So most of what you are thinking of is some form of resistance training - isometric with no movement (pushing again door frame), resistance bands, machines, free weights, ect. They are all a form of it.
If the movement could have been done for much more time, then probably not resistance - and that's why it's subjective to you.
Someone could do a 100 bodyweight squats and still have ability to go on - that's not resistance at that point for them. Sure they'll get sore if they keep going - same as if they ran some distance. Body's response isn't to get stronger at that point - but to improve endurance ability.
Someone else could get sore from 25 BW squats - and slowly improve because of getting stronger, and need to add weight to keep making 25 feel the same. Body's response there is to get stronger, first by using all the muscle, then by adding more if it can.
So you can think about your workout class routine, and some may be to one side of the range, and some of it to the other side.
Some workouts make you tired by just being anaerobic and moving so fast, but light weight.
Well - holding your breath during it will cause same effect but faster - but that's not getting stronger - that's a stress on the body from being intense anaerobic. You'll get stronger only as much as needed to do the movement.
Zumba has this issue after some period of time - movements are now smooth, you can only move so fast to the beat of the music, and it no longer is a workout. Lose weight doing it - it actually becomes less of a workout.
Intervals no problem if allowing recovery from them, which includes rest and enough food. Daily using the same muscles would be problematic for recovery.
For sure resistance training, better I think, full range of motion compared to no range on isometric.
If 100 more on workout days is better than 50 daily - so be it, especially afterwards - body will know what to do with it.
For those that enjoy more info and want to understand why (which I think is almost required to deal with changes which I'm pretty sure happens to most), I enjoy sharing.
It is interesting how even the basic concept of eating levels isn't known by many that lose weight - they can't go back to old eating level they used to maintain on, they must eat less unless they are doing more to compensate.1 -
This is sooo helpful, Haybales..........doing to read it through and process for a while and then read again. this is all new to me so sometimes I have to think it through. I am very motivated and excited and it's my second full week. I know that isn't very long, but I stuck with my "other" fitness regime for 25 years, so I don't give up easily. Every time I feel a new muscle soreness, I know I have challenged my body in a GOOD way. I will be thrilled if I can eat 1500, 1800, maybe MORE calories and maintain my current BMI, weight, and BF %. We shall see!)) 2
-
Great positive thinking!!1
-
misskitty0816 wrote: »This is sooo helpful, Haybales..........doing to read it through and process for a while and then read again. this is all new to me so sometimes I have to think it through. I am very motivated and excited and it's my second full week. I know that isn't very long, but I stuck with my "other" fitness regime for 25 years, so I don't give up easily. Every time I feel a new muscle soreness, I know I have challenged my body in a GOOD way. I will be thrilled if I can eat 1500, 1800, maybe MORE calories and maintain my current BMI, weight, and BF %. We shall see!))
You've totally got this! You've got the knowledge needed to get there!
We are here to support you get there!
Ichel
EM2WL Ambassador and moderator1
