Myths or Realities
Replies
-
psychod787 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »Nope, your metabolism won't slow, except as part of the natural slowing from losing weight that can't and shouldn't be reversed.
That said, it seems refeed days can help reset your ghrelin/leptin levels, which are the hormones controlling appetite and satiety and which get reduced during dieting. So there is some advantage to it.
Could you please post the research study on this? I would love to read it.
Yes, A.T. is most likely real. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18842775/ This tends to be a small reduction in rmr beyond what would be predicted for your "new" weight. The real decrease in "metabolism" is a reduction in NEAT and changes in skeletal muscle efficiency. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12609816/ Basically, your muscles burn less energy than would be predicted for your new size. One way to maybe counter act this is weight lifting. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/oby.22274
Links!
About ghrelin: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2925100/
About metabolic adaptation: http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2016/11/are-super-obese-ones-who-are.html?m=1#more
More detailed paper: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/oby.22373
Also worth noting from the bottom of the first link you posted:
"No consistent evidence of a disproportionately low resting energy expenditure in long-term successful weight-loss maintainers"
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30321282/
Thanks for the links! Always appreciated!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2925100/ Yes, ghrelin is a hunger hormone. I was asking for a study about refeeds "resetting" leptin and ghrelin lvls. Not sure if this one does.
http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2016/11/are-super-obese-ones-who-are.html?m=1#more Unfortunately, this is an opinion piece. It does not mean the author's opinion is wrong, but we have to cautious when using opinion pieces as evidence. Sometimes, not always, authors cherry pick data to back their opinions. Good article though. Read it when it came out.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/oby.22373 Dr. Hill and Dr Wyatt, look up to them greatly, but look at the end of the article.
"these data should be interpreted with caution, as the lack of REE measurements prior to
weight loss in this group does not allow us to determine whether REE
may have decreased to a greater extent than expected for the amount of
weight lost within a given individual."
Leibel's work in a metabolic ward does. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3673773/
Metabolic ward studies are a gold standard.
also worth noting from the bottom of the first link you posted: ?
Most likely a study that quoted this one.
@psuLemon I know Menno Henselmenn has done some interesting work on AT but i believe it closely aligns to what you are saying. Most of the effects are going to be in leaner individuals, but the individual response can vastly differ. In Mennos case, he maintains at 3000 calories (roughly) but in order to lose 1 lb a week, requires him to cut calories to 1800. Is that all AT? Unlikely, but maybe part of that and transient reductions in NEAT from less food.
Yes, tracks well with the NEAT being the largest component of AT vs the much smaller RMR drop.
@PAV8888 smarter, stronger, and taller twin
But...... not nearly as good looking or charming with the gals as my smaller, needs to lift, just as smart as twin.
I suspect in the case of Menno, and based on some discussions from Helms and others, NEAT are the biggest reductions in EE when lean individuals try to get leaner.0 -
I thought I had read somewhere that metabolic adaption does lessen as the new weight is maintained over time. So in the graphic in a previous post, the woman who loses weight to 160 lbs vs the one who never gained at 160 had a 200 calorie day difference with the one who lost the weight needing 1200 calories to maintain that 160 lbs while the one who never had to lose weight maintaining that 160 lbs with 1400 calories. What had I read was that over time, the 200 calorie difference slowly goes away, so that the person who lost the weight can eventually maintain that 160 lbs on 1400 calories too.
Is that what is being found in studies or just something from the "internetz"? (I can't remember now where I picked that up).2 -
bmeadows380 wrote: »I thought I had read somewhere that metabolic adaption does lessen as the new weight is maintained over time. So in the graphic in a previous post, the woman who loses weight to 160 lbs vs the one who never gained at 160 had a 200 calorie day difference with the one who lost the weight needing 1200 calories to maintain that 160 lbs while the one who never had to lose weight maintaining that 160 lbs with 1400 calories. What had I read was that over time, the 200 calorie difference slowly goes away, so that the person who lost the weight can eventually maintain that 160 lbs on 1400 calories too.
Is that what is being found in studies or just something from the "internetz"? (I can't remember now where I picked that up).
The research is mixed. Though, from the information i have read from metabolic ward studies, it sticks around. There are two models of rmr part of AT. One, the static model. Basically it will adapt to a point and will not adapt more with further weight loss outside predicted for body mass lost. The second is the spring model. The rmr will continue to adapt more with futher weight loss. There is evidence for both.2 -
I'm also interested in evidence for refeeds and leptin/ghrelin impact. (ETA: so thank you psychod787 for asking that!)
As another follower of Lyle McDonald (mentioned upthread), specifically regarding refeeds to quickly reset leptin levels, I thought I remember him saying it would take several weeks to months (not a day or two) at the increased calorie level to make any sustained difference at all. This may offer support for maintenance breaks--not refeeds--for hormone impact. That's not to say refeeds aren't useful for glycogen replenishment or mental aspects, just not for boosting leptin. I'll dig for the ref if anyone interested. Of course, he is also just an opinion writer, a pretty evidence based and experienced study reviewer, but not a study author. Others of you who read more may have better refs at your fingertips.
0 -
psychod787 wrote: »bmeadows380 wrote: »I thought I had read somewhere that metabolic adaption does lessen as the new weight is maintained over time. So in the graphic in a previous post, the woman who loses weight to 160 lbs vs the one who never gained at 160 had a 200 calorie day difference with the one who lost the weight needing 1200 calories to maintain that 160 lbs while the one who never had to lose weight maintaining that 160 lbs with 1400 calories. What had I read was that over time, the 200 calorie difference slowly goes away, so that the person who lost the weight can eventually maintain that 160 lbs on 1400 calories too.
Is that what is being found in studies or just something from the "internetz"? (I can't remember now where I picked that up).
The research is mixed. Though, from the information i have read from metabolic ward studies, it sticks around. There are two models of rmr part of AT. One, the static model. Basically it will adapt to a point and will not adapt more with further weight loss outside predicted for body mass lost. The second is the spring model. The rmr will continue to adapt more with futher weight loss. There is evidence for both.
My decision was too try to minimize it from taking place (as soon as I figured out it may have been a thing). Since aggressive deficits increase the adaptation, has anyone ever heard me argue against them? Of course I still get to lose because length of deficit also impacts. But the studies I saw had sharper drops for large deficits
But, as mentioned before, neat and more so muscle efficiency are the ones that have the mostly impact in terms of total calories. And those can be mitigated with strength training, activity, and changes to exercise.
Also I will argue that most studies have a sub two to five year time horizon.
While many of us report that we are shivering while losing weight, I don't hear this as much three to five years into maintenance (and lower core temperature is one of the adaptations).
Anecdotally there are a few reasons to have hope of some recovery over time, and/or of it becoming your new normal and you not noticing it anymore.
Do remember that under normal circumstances hunger matches TDEE.
After prolonged restriction things are out of whack hormonally and, as my twin provided above, there is evidence of increased hunger commensurate to the weight loss.
But whether through self selection or success the evidence is there that the longer you maintain a loss the easier things get after a length of time (hence my 2-5 year term and frequent discussion of surviving the first couple of years)
My report is that hunger, for me at least (absent emotional component, absent presence of extreme treats, absent over tiredness) after a good two years matched my TDEE. Whether that's from me training me, or hormones rebounding or AT stabilizing (HR data clearly shows at 5 to 10 BPM Fitbit resting hr change when I'm losing maintaining or gaining: gaining when consistently above 65, stable when between 63 and 65, losing when below 62).... I don't really care!
Twin who had a harder time with aggressive loss that overshot to extreme lean-nes had major blow back and had to regain some in an attempt to stabilize. I believe he has done an admirable job on a harder path and i think that now coming to 2-3 years... things are more normal?
So regardless, as long as willingness to manage weight continues...it can be done!1 -
psychod787 wrote: »bmeadows380 wrote: »I thought I had read somewhere that metabolic adaption does lessen as the new weight is maintained over time. So in the graphic in a previous post, the woman who loses weight to 160 lbs vs the one who never gained at 160 had a 200 calorie day difference with the one who lost the weight needing 1200 calories to maintain that 160 lbs while the one who never had to lose weight maintaining that 160 lbs with 1400 calories. What had I read was that over time, the 200 calorie difference slowly goes away, so that the person who lost the weight can eventually maintain that 160 lbs on 1400 calories too.
Is that what is being found in studies or just something from the "internetz"? (I can't remember now where I picked that up).
The research is mixed. Though, from the information i have read from metabolic ward studies, it sticks around. There are two models of rmr part of AT. One, the static model. Basically it will adapt to a point and will not adapt more with further weight loss outside predicted for body mass lost. The second is the spring model. The rmr will continue to adapt more with futher weight loss. There is evidence for both.
My decision was too try to minimize it from taking place (as soon as I figured out it may have been a thing). Since aggressive deficits increase the adaptation, has anyone ever heard me argue against them? Of course I still get to lose because length of deficit also impacts. But the studies I saw had sharper drops for large deficits
But, as mentioned before, neat and more so muscle efficiency are the ones that have the mostly impact in terms of total calories. And those can be mitigated with strength training, activity, and changes to exercise.
Also I will argue that most studies have a sub two to five year time horizon.
While many of us report that we are shivering while losing weight, I don't hear this as much three to five years into maintenance (and lower core temperature is one of the adaptations).
Anecdotally there are a few reasons to have hope of some recovery over time, and/or of it becoming your new normal and you not noticing it anymore.
Do remember that under normal circumstances hunger matches TDEE.
After prolonged restriction things are out of whack hormonally and, as my twin provided above, there is evidence of increased hunger commensurate to the weight loss.
But whether through self selection or success the evidence is there that the longer you maintain a loss the easier things get after a length of time (hence my 2-5 year term and frequent discussion of surviving the first couple of years)
My report is that hunger, for me at least (absent emotional component, absent presence of extreme treats, absent over tiredness) after a good two years matched my TDEE. Whether that's from me training me, or hormones rebounding or AT stabilizing (HR data clearly shows at 5 to 10 BPM Fitbit resting hr change when I'm losing maintaining or gaining: gaining when consistently above 65, stable when between 63 and 65, losing when below 62).... I don't really care!
Twin who had a harder time with aggressive loss that overshot to extreme lean-nes had major blow back and had to regain some in an attempt to stabilize. I believe he has done an admirable job on a harder path and i think that now coming to 2-3 years... things are more normal?
So regardless, as long as willingness to manage weight continues...it can be done!
Well my better looking womb mate, yes, I am having an "easier" time somedays. Shot a 60% lean to 40% fat gain during my, ugh.... 30lb bulk over the last roughly 20 months. Started at 7.1% bf at 180 and had calipers, by same person, same time, and calipers, @ 13.5% bf 209. I have actually maintained my trends at 209.5 over the last six weeks, with maybe a very slight overall weight gain. Just practicing what I preach. Hr at 57. Up from 50 at 180. I still have some to go imho. Just nice to have ladies look good again!2 -
While many of us report that we are shivering while losing weight, I don't hear this as much three to five years into maintenance (and lower core temperature is one of the adaptations).
*yes, I dared to clip you! lol
But I caught this in your response and found it very interesting as I did not know that losing weight affected core temperature. This explains some things for me, though! Because of this Covid thing, any time I need to go into the office for something, I must take my temperature and report it to my boss. I was scratching my head, though, that my consisted temperature is around 96, sometimes a little lower than that. I couldn't figure that out because in the past, it was usually around the typical 98.6. I thought it might be my thyroid, though most of what I had read indicated that low body temperature was an indicator of being hypothyroid which I am most definitely not right now (just had bloodwork done, and all thyroid levels are where they should be and TSH is still below 1).
But I've lost nearly 144 lbs in the last 3 years, with 60 of that being lost this year alone, so perhaps the better explanation for the low base temperature is the weight loss!
huh-ya learn something new every day! lol3 -
bmeadows380 wrote: »
While many of us report that we are shivering while losing weight, I don't hear this as much three to five years into maintenance (and lower core temperature is one of the adaptations).
*yes, I dared to clip you! lol
But I caught this in your response and found it very interesting as I did not know that losing weight affected core temperature. This explains some things for me, though! Because of this Covid thing, any time I need to go into the office for something, I must take my temperature and report it to my boss. I was scratching my head, though, that my consisted temperature is around 96, sometimes a little lower than that. I couldn't figure that out because in the past, it was usually around the typical 98.6. I thought it might be my thyroid, though most of what I had read indicated that low body temperature was an indicator of being hypothyroid which I am most definitely not right now (just had bloodwork done, and all thyroid levels are where they should be and TSH is still below 1).
But I've lost nearly 144 lbs in the last 3 years, with 60 of that being lost this year alone, so perhaps the better explanation for the low base temperature is the weight loss!
huh-ya learn something new every day! lol
Yes, the thyroid does down regulate with weight loss. It is part of the leptin feedback system. It is normal. T3 ratios change. Something having to do with how the cell mitochondria use energy. A lowering of body temp comes as part of it. N=1 here, when I was at my leanest I had a body temp of around 96F. When I was at my largest, 99.3-5. My body cranked up the temp in an attempt to burn off excess energy and keep my weight at a stable rate. Now that I am getting to a healthier weight dt my weight history l, genetics, dietary choices... ect my temp is right at 98.6 all the time.1 -
bmeadows380 wrote: »
While many of us report that we are shivering while losing weight, I don't hear this as much three to five years into maintenance (and lower core temperature is one of the adaptations).
*yes, I dared to clip you! lol
But I caught this in your response and found it very interesting as I did not know that losing weight affected core temperature. This explains some things for me, though! Because of this Covid thing, any time I need to go into the office for something, I must take my temperature and report it to my boss. I was scratching my head, though, that my consisted temperature is around 96, sometimes a little lower than that. I couldn't figure that out because in the past, it was usually around the typical 98.6. I thought it might be my thyroid, though most of what I had read indicated that low body temperature was an indicator of being hypothyroid which I am most definitely not right now (just had bloodwork done, and all thyroid levels are where they should be and TSH is still below 1).
But I've lost nearly 144 lbs in the last 3 years, with 60 of that being lost this year alone, so perhaps the better explanation for the low base temperature is the weight loss!
huh-ya learn something new every day! lol
Yeah, when people here talk about being sooo coooold when they lose weight, and attribute it to "less insulation", I think "uh oh". I lost weight in my late teenager-hood and was cold all the time. I lost way more weight in my semi-near dotage (at 59-60) and wasn't noticeably more cold at all. I think the difference possibly has something to do with life choices that foster or discourage high levels of adaptive thermogenesis, though I can't prove it.
I'm sure psycho either has a study, or disagrees with me, sweet but challenging youth that he is. 2 -
bmeadows380 wrote: »
While many of us report that we are shivering while losing weight, I don't hear this as much three to five years into maintenance (and lower core temperature is one of the adaptations).
*yes, I dared to clip you! lol
But I caught this in your response and found it very interesting as I did not know that losing weight affected core temperature. This explains some things for me, though! Because of this Covid thing, any time I need to go into the office for something, I must take my temperature and report it to my boss. I was scratching my head, though, that my consisted temperature is around 96, sometimes a little lower than that. I couldn't figure that out because in the past, it was usually around the typical 98.6. I thought it might be my thyroid, though most of what I had read indicated that low body temperature was an indicator of being hypothyroid which I am most definitely not right now (just had bloodwork done, and all thyroid levels are where they should be and TSH is still below 1).
But I've lost nearly 144 lbs in the last 3 years, with 60 of that being lost this year alone, so perhaps the better explanation for the low base temperature is the weight loss!
huh-ya learn something new every day! lol
Yeah, when people here talk about being sooo coooold when they lose weight, and attribute it to "less insulation", I think "uh oh". I lost weight in my late teenager-hood and was cold all the time. I lost way more weight in my semi-near dotage (at 59-60) and wasn't noticeably more cold at all. I think the difference possibly has something to do with life choices that foster or discourage high levels of adaptive thermogenesis, though I can't prove it.
I'm sure psycho either has a study, or disagrees with me, sweet but challenging youth that he is.
Actually Aunt Granny... I kind of agree with you. 🤷♂️ I do think lifestyle,food choice, sleep, ect all play into this. I think there is a place where the body sits easier at a lower weight by choices we make. My n=1 experience is that I didn't have any issues with feeling colder until I had already lost close to 160lbs, some quite rapidly. As in have let myself drift back up, I am far less cold these days. Some says, I radiate heat. I have a sinking suspicion, I have about 20lbs to go before I am closer to my level for my chosen lifestyle. I'll have to be my own experiment. 🤟2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions