Very slow metabolism (clinically tested)
joeymattluke
Posts: 13 Member
Hello, I had my metabolism checked after meeting with a nutritionist suggested it. History is that I have been steadily gaining weight after weight watchers, cross fit, Keto, etc.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
27
Replies
-
What makes you think that's a very slow metabolism? Depending on your stats, that could be a perfectly norma; RMR. So, what are your stats.
Also, you do not gain weight eating more than your RMR unless you never so much as stand up all day (and even then, you would get a few extra calories to use just from the fact that RMR doesn't even account for the calories used in digesting your food).
In all the things that you've tried (WW, cross fit, keto, etc.), have you ever tried logging everything you eat using a food scale?30 -
Resting metabolic rate is what you use in a coma. If you walk anywhere or do any activity or eat food ever, you'll burn more than that. Depending on how much you move around maybe a lot more. There's no such thing as a person who needs less than 1200 calories to lose weight unless that person should not be losing weight.
My BMR is roughly 1800, but my TDEE is about 2200, which is the number you need to be under to lose weight.20 -
joeymattluke wrote: »Hello, I had my metabolism checked after meeting with a nutritionist suggested it. History is that I have been steadily gaining weight after weight watchers, cross fit, Keto, etc.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
What are your stats? Age, height, current weight, goal weight?6 -
joeymattluke wrote: »Hello, I had my metabolism checked after meeting with a nutritionist suggested it. History is that I have been steadily gaining weight after weight watchers, cross fit, Keto, etc.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
Your RMR is your calorie needs if you were in a coma. You need to eat less than your TDEE to lose weight, which will be quite a bit more than your RMR. I wasn't tested, but my formula RMR is 1350ish and I lost weight eating 1550. If you are shorter than me (I'm 5'4) 1220 isn't really all that a low an RMR. If you legit need to eat under 1000 to lose weight, you need to get to the doctor and get blood work done, not a nutritionist. If your nutritionist is telling you that you need to eat less than your RMR to lose weight, they have a serious misunderstanding of what those numbers mean and I would advise you to not take any more direction from them.
Where did you get your RMR tested, was it through the nutritionist?
While you're waiting, these threads may help:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1080242/a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants/p1
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10634517/you-dont-use-a-food-scale/p119 -
This means your sedentary expenditure (exclusively sitting throughout the day to light day to day movement) is roughly 1450-1550. That can be normal, depending on your stats. This means your expenditure can be even higher, in the realm of around 1800 calories to maintain weight, if you're reasonably active. You could set your calories to 1200 and lose half a pound a week if sedentary, and you can eat even more if you're active and still lose the same. Don't let RMR numbers scare you.14
-
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
9 -
I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
20 -
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
Where are you getting those multipliers? They are slightly high compared to the ones I use. I have sedentary as 1.2 and light active as 1.375.2 -
Well, that sucks. It is kinda low for your stats. Doesn't mean you can't lose weight, you just don't lose it as fast. You would have to set your calories to 1/2-1 pound a week. How did they test your RMR?2
-
joeymattluke wrote: »I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
That is a significantly lower BMR than to be expected at your statistics. Did the physician offer any explanation as to why? Do you have PCOS, or any other medical condition that could cause a lower BMR? Sometimes treating those conditions can help with that.
That being said, if you make it a point to be more active throughout your day, there is no reason you couldn't lose a pound a week. I know that you would rather be losing 2 pounds a week, but that is likely not possible in your situation. But a pound a week is still very good weight loss. Lots of people here have lost a ton of weight doing that.19 -
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
Where are you getting those multipliers? They are slightly high compared to the ones I use. I have sedentary as 1.2 and light active as 1.375.
They are the ones MFP uses.2 -
joeymattluke wrote: »I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
Your numbers just all seem weird to me, and some of this may be over my head, so I'm going to say this...
You posted this because you know it's too much to ask to eat as little as you are being told. Unless you have a medical condition that requires you to lose weight as quickly as possible, I would suggest aiming to start out for a net goal of 1200 cals, using a food scale, logging accurately and consistently. Give it 6-8 weeks and see what kind of results it gives you and go from there. Better to lose more like 1 lb per week and stick with it to the end, rather than lose 2 lbs for a couple of months, hit the proverbial wall, and end up gaining it all back.
If you don't have a food scale, please get one and use it as much as possible. Getting a handle on your real life numbers would seem to be key to me, and accurate calorie intake that you can compare with long term trends on the scale will give you the info you need. Good luck!20 -
And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.11 -
joeymattluke wrote: »I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
Only because there was a misunderstanding about what the numbers meant (you thought RMR was daily burn to eat less than) which I'm thinking means they didn't explain things well.....
What was the exact test for your RMR?
The maintenance zone is totally based on your level of activity. You make it higher, you get more room to take a deficit to have a reasonable amount to eat.
Otherwise probably wiser to make deficit smaller.5 -
-
I am 5’ 10”. Was about 50 when I started, 256 pounds, lost 10 pounds a month for 6 months on 1600 calories a day.
Once I figured it out, it was easy.
My problem was: eat out=gain weight; cook at home=lose weight. Not that easy for everyone, but thank goodness it was for me.11 -
joeymattluke wrote: »And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.
You know what gives you the best results? A diet you can keep up. Eating under 1000 is a hard diet to keep up. I, for one, set my weight loss to slightly less than a pound a week. This IS what gives me the best results. Not everyone should aim for 2 lbs a week. Shorter or thinner people, for example, and people like you, who have been dealt a bad hand (or like me, who choose to lose slower in order to eat more). No, eating under 1000 is not the best course of action unless you have an urgent medical condition that requires you to lose weight as soon as possible.16 -
How do they test for your RMR? What does the test involve?0
-
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
Where are you getting those multipliers? They are slightly high compared to the ones I use. I have sedentary as 1.2 and light active as 1.375.
They are the ones MFP uses.
I see. I go by TDEE at the moment.0 -
joeymattluke wrote: »And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.
Eating under 1000 will certainly make you lose weight faster. But it will also leave you at risk for muscle wasting and malnutrition, and eating a painfully small amount of food. In addition to losing the weight, you want to be able to keep it off. Being miserable for a year to lose weight at a fast pace, will set you up for not being able to moderate once you get to goal. It may also ironically further lower your RMR. Adaptive thermogenesis is basically the Biggest Loser effect, netting very low cals over an extended period of time can cause your body to try to adapt by becoming more efficient. If your numbers are already too low, if it were me I would want to avoid forcing them lower. I'm no doctor, so I'm not sure if that's possible or not, but that's something I would think about!12
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 902 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions