Resting Metabolic Rate Testing

Options
124»

Replies

  • glassyo
    glassyo Posts: 7,596 Member
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    glassyo wrote: »
    LPflaum wrote: »
    That calculator is scary accurate. It calc'd my BMR at 1411. Professional test had me a 1424

    It wasn't for me. At 5'2 104 lbs, sedentary most of the day, and all the light walking I do at night, it gave me close to 3000 tdee. I wish!!

    I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest you did something wrong with your inputs...

    I went back and did a bunch of different variations...sedentary and all purposeful exercise (it's A LOT), lightly active and only the times I walk outside, sedentary and the scaled down version of the exercise and I got a range of 2700 to 3500. And my stats definitely were female, 51, 5'2", 105 lbs. (I'm anticipating a weight gain when I weigh tomorrow. :) )
  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    Options
    barefootdahl wrote: »
    Thanks to everyone who has replied concerning my time line, nutrition, weighing food etc, but I am really just looking for input from people who have actually had this done.
    I've been dieting and tracking for YEARS. I gained weight with the birth of child and what always worked for me is no longer the case, so I know what I need to be doing and I am doing it. That is why I say that I'm now tracking faithfully, I took time off of diet and fitness when my son was an infant/ early toddler.

    However, weight loss still alludes me. I understand 20lbs over a year is progress and that nothing is linear, however when tracking fluctuations or lack of movement over a year, I think that these formulas that MFP use may not work for ME. Weight loss is individual to us all, I know that. That is why I am interested in seeing if my RMR is frighteningly low and I need to take time to repair that or if my RMR is in fact average and I need to focus more on fitness or no sugars or paleo etc.
    I just want that base line, but I do not want to waste my time if SOMEONE WHO HAS ALREADY DONE THIS says they did it and it was useless. Hence, why I am asking for that specific insight.
    Again, thank you all for the feedback. I look forward to hearing more from someone who has had this test done.
    This is interesting. I think what you are interested in, and what you need, are not the same. (And that's fine, but focusing on non-useful things won't give you success.)

    If you aren't losing weight, you aren't eating at a consistent calorie deficit. If you aren't tracking your weight correctly, you can't be sure if you are losing weight. If you don't track your intake correctly, you can't be sure if you are in a calorie deficit, until you see it clearly on the scale. If you have dieted for years and not lost weight, your method doesn't work. You have several choices, I'll just mention a couple that are easy and effective: 1) Track intake correctly - weigh everything, check every entry, don't cheat, forget or guess. Weigh yourself reguarly fro at least two months, and calculate your real TDEE from real numbers. 2) Lower your calorie goal by 200 and keep doing what you are doing.

    You can't really "repair" your BMR, and diet composition has little to do with body weight. Of course exercise and strength training is good for you, but it's so much easier to fix the large things first and then look at the finer details. Boring, maybe, but effective.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    Options
    Resting metabolic rate is near useless unless all you do all day is resting. The largest variable in your total energy is how much you move throughout the day, which could add anywhere from zero to thousands of calories over your resting metabolic rate. Personally, I would not drive for an hour nor pay $100 for something that can be so heavily affected by other factors to the point where it's useless.

    If you are curious and don't mind the time/money spent on this, go for it. Not sure what you would do with the number, though.

    In my personal opinion, very consistent tracking of food and activity over a long-ish period of time and comparing that to actual loss has way more practical applications, even if the numbers are not "accurate" per se.
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,752 Member
    Options
    barefootdahl wrote: »
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    yes I have done it; yes I found it useful for me!

    Thanks so much! Did the number they gave you help with setting your calorie intake and did that change how you were losing weight?

    I have had it done, and yes, also found it helpful and helped me set a calorie goal that made me lose weight better. It also helped after weeks of intense dieting to know what my "new" rate was so that I could set an appropriate maintenance level of calories to start my reverse from.

Categories