Reality Check: Skinny People Must Have Fast Metabolisms

Ibleedlipstick

All of the people I know are very thin restrict their eating even if it is not intentional. They eat much less than me and if they eat the same amount as me ( this was even when I was around 180 lbs) they eat much less later in the day. For example, we may go out to eat for lunch and eat the same amount, but then I will come home and eat something else for dinner and maybe a snack and they won't eat anything the rest of the day. So I know I am eating greater volumes than all of the skinnier people I know.

My fiance is 6'4 and roughly 155lbs. He has always been thin, and when we first started dating I assumed that he had a much faster metabolism, due to the fact that he would eat an entire burger/fries/shake/dessert combo when we went out for lunch. I just thought that he had won the genetic lottery!

I was in for a rather rude awakening when I used mfp to track his calories for a day. See, he forgets to eat, or eats less during the day than I do. So while it looks like he ate a 1,000 calories for lunch when I only ate 800, the difference appears when I eat another 800-1,000 calories for dinner and he has a cheese stick and a peach before bed.

I think that the people we believe have "fast metabolisms" are typically just people with healthier relationships with food.

tigerblue

This really isn't all that shocking to me. I'm fat because I eat too much. My sister is 5'2" and she has always looked healthy. As far as I know, she has never counted a calorie. But she has excellent awareness of how much she needs to eat to feel satisfied. In my whole life, I have never once seen her eat more than half of a meal at a restaurant. She never went back for seconds as a kid. Does she eat what she likes? Yep, absolutely. But she understands her body. Her health is important to her and she takes excellent care of herself. To discount her efforts as "oh she just has a faster metabolism" would diminish her unfairly.

Thank you this is good!

BinaryPulsar

This really isn't all that shocking to me. I'm fat because I eat too much. My sister is 5'2" and she has always looked healthy. As far as I know, she has never counted a calorie. But she has excellent awareness of how much she needs to eat to feel satisfied. In my whole life, I have never once seen her eat more than half of a meal at a restaurant. She never went back for seconds as a kid. Does she eat what she likes? Yep, absolutely. But she understands her body. Her health is important to her and she takes excellent care of herself. To discount her efforts as "oh she just has a faster metabolism" would diminish her unfairly.

This is a very nice way of looking at it and explaining it! :flowerforyou:

EvgeniZyntx

Counter point:

It does require more of a calorie deficit for certain indivduals to lose a sepcific weight. See graph.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1094717-3500-cals-per-pound-is-wrong-but-it-s-good-enough

biosciencegal

need to watch these videos later

QuietBloom

Counter point:

It does require more of a calorie deficit for certain indivduals to lose a sepcific weight. See graph.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1094717-3500-cals-per-pound-is-wrong-but-it-s-good-enough

Thank you for that write up, it was very interesting! :drinker:

bcattoes

At the risk of getting slammed again, I fail to see how weight loss surgery would correct a genetic mutation.

This whole exchange made me laugh ... Thanks for brightening my day ..
P.S. I am also curious as to how weight loss surgery would change ones genetics ... because it won't. It will change that particular person's physiology, but not future generations.

I wonder if the poster mistook gene expression with the presence (or absence) of the gene. :happy:

No, I didn't. It was a gene mutation according to the study.

ETA: A quick internet search found this article (not the actual study) about the genetic differences in children born before and after the mother had weight loss surgery.

Oops, I forgot the link. :blushing:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-57586480/moms-who-had-weight-loss-surgery-may-pass-on-healthier-genes/

This looks like it might be about the study showing altered genes, though 'Cell Reports' doesn't sound like a publication I've seen around here, so it could be a separate study. Still pretty interesting.
http://www.louisianavalenzuelamd.com/weight-loss-surgery-offering-hope-for-genetic-obesity/

dietstokes

bump to watch later

Calliope610

bump for later

etoiles_argentees

Counter point:

It does require more of a calorie deficit for certain indivduals to lose a sepcific weight. See graph.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1094717-3500-cals-per-pound-is-wrong-but-it-s-good-enough

True.

pa_jorg

I enjoy seeing videos and reading about this type of stuff as it can be informative or at the very least get me thinking about the topic. However, I'm skeptical that using 3 subjects (are there more?) and some expensive water (what exactly is that again!?) gives the entire picture on metabolism for all of human kind. Just my two cents...

pcastagner

I enjoy seeing videos and reading about this type of stuff as it can be informative or at the very least get me thinking about the topic. However, I'm skeptical that using 3 subjects (are there more?) and some expensive water (what exactly is that again!?) gives the entire picture on metabolism for all of human kind. Just my two cents...

The competing hypothesis is based on what evidence again?


Doubly labeled water isn't voodoo. It is a way of measuring consumption directly instead of relying on self reporting. In these cases a tiny sample size is used to question and test the accepted theory, not to formulate and prove a new one. This should be enough for anyone to QUESTION the assumptions that lead us to believe metabolism determines body composition. It should also be enough to convince any reasonable person that any studies attempting to answer any of these questions must avoid self reporting of consumption by subjects for the data to be even considered.

etoiles_argentees

"why are thin people not fat?" docu and research. How did Martin add muscle while overeating junk food and not exercising?

Why do I weigh 100 pounds when sedentary and eating 2000 calories daily? RMR tested many times, averaged 1170. Completely sedentary, broken collar bone, shoulder and cracked head, no NEAT.
Why did I only gain 1 pound per month eating over 2500 daily and not exercising? Injured? But those few extra pounds went away as soon as I was able to get out of bed. I didn't gain muscle but I did not gain weight. No food scale and I already know I underestimate calories. ???
Edited by etoiles_argentees On July 03, 2013 4:49

Just curious.

elka67

want to watch later, thanks

djurasmits

While I agree that slow metabolism probably is regularly used as a bad excuse, an experiment done with only people can hardly be called "proof".

CollieFit

While I agree that slow metabolism probably is regularly used as a bad excuse, an experiment done with only people can hardly be called "proof".

Well here is someone who worked in the field and undertook this research on more than one person...

I'm late to this party, but had to add a couple of things.

I used to do metabolic testing in a hospital, and what the videos showed is the absolute truth. We got all kinds of obese people who blamed their weight on slow metabolism, when in fact, only about 3% of the people I tested could be categorized as "slow." Their response was to usually NOT believe the test results.

But like she said.... people chose not to believe it because it's not what they want to hear.

Camera_BagintheUK

I'm interested in the psychology in all this. It's too easy to "blame" "fat" people, accuse them of "lying" or "hiding" what they're eating.

But why would anyone lie about about what harms them? Lie to themselves as well as others?

People do - people with alcoholism and other addictions; people in abusive relationships; people who get into astronomical debt with credit and store cards. They deal with the pain, keep it in check by rehearsing a script that convinces them that it's not so bad. They edit out the worst.

I'm wondering about why it is that food lures people into that same state of denial? We live in a world of abundance. There's more food than we need (not everyone has access to it, I know - that's another discussion though). Food is no longer about nutrition - it's about lifestyle, status, politics, socialising. We don't eat for sustenance alone any more. And yet we deplore gluttony and over indulgence. Eating too much - eating more than you need is not quite taboo, but it's certainly looked down on, it's a sign of weakness. We laugh at it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aczPDGC3f8U But at the same time indulging is a sign of success and the marketing industry does all it can to persuade us to eat more.

I certainly remember getting contradictory messages from my mother about food - on the one had I had to eat everything, waste not, want not, there are starving children in Africa who would love that food (always Africa! there are starving children all over the world!) I was taught that I was fortunate, and should appreciate it by eating up all the food I was given. But on the other hand, I was punished for being greedy if I took too much, told off for eating between meals, made to understand that greed is ugly and eating when you don't need to, or eating certain food (cakes, chocolate) is greed.

So is it any wonder that people deal with this kind of conflict by distorting reality? It's not that people lie or hide what they eat - but their perception is warped and impaired.

And I think over indulgence can creep up on you - like many things. It always takes a little more and a little more and then a little more to achieve the same effect.

I certainly used to wail that I don't eat that much, I don't understand why I'm putting weight on. Logging my food has been a real wake up call! I suspect one reason why people avoid logging their food is that they don't dare face up to the hard truth - that they eat maybe twice as much as they like to believe they eat.

ETA so the magic slow metabolism is your ticket out of it!

pcastagner

I'm interested in the psychology in all this. It's too easy to "blame" "fat" people, accuse them of "lying" or "hiding" what they're eating.

But why would anyone lie about about what harms them? Lie to themselves as well as others?

People do - people with alcoholism and other addictions; people in abusive relationships; people who get into astronomical debt with credit and store cards. They deal with the pain, keep it in check by rehearsing a script that convinces them that it's not so bad. They edit out the worst.

I'm wondering about why it is that food lures people into that same state of denial? We live in a world of abundance. There's more food than we need (not everyone has access to it, I know - that's another discussion though). Food is no longer about nutrition - it's about lifestyle, status, politics, socialising. We don't eat for sustenance alone any more. And yet we deplore gluttony and over indulgence. Eating too much - eating more than you need is not quite taboo, but it's certainly looked down on, it's a sign of weakness. We laugh at it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aczPDGC3f8U But at the same time indulging is a sign of success and the marketing industry does all it can to persuade us to eat more.

I certainly remember getting contradictory messages from my mother about food - on the one had I had to eat everything, waste not, want not, there are starving children in Africa who would love that food (always Africa! there are starving children all over the world!) I was taught that I was fortunate, and should appreciate it by eating up all the food I was given. But on the other hand, I was punished for being greedy if I took too much, told off for eating between meals, made to understand that greed is ugly and eating when you don't need to, or eating certain food (cakes, chocolate) is greed.

So is it any wonder that people deal with this kind of conflict by distorting reality? It's not that people lie or hide what they eat - but their perception is warped and impaired.

And I think over indulgence can creep up on you - like many things. It always takes a little more and a little more and then a little more to achieve the same effect.

I certainly used to wail that I don't eat that much, I don't understand why I'm putting weight on. Logging my food has been a real wake up call! I suspect one reason why people avoid logging their food is that they don't dare face up to the hard truth - that they eat maybe twice as much as they like to believe they eat.

ETA so the magic slow metabolism is your ticket out of it!

Are you seriously asking why people lie? Do you not know that many people? In my experience, lying is the default, not the exception. If I find someone who doesn't lie, THEN I want to know why. Liars get grouped into the "normal human behavior" category.

shadus

Skinny people DO have fast metabolisms... mostly from moving more than fat people.

Although to be fair, there have also been studies that show over long periods the difference between a fat and skinny person is roughly 50 calories a day and skinny people tend to estimate calories better.

Camera_BagintheUK

I'm interested in the psychology in all this. It's too easy to "blame" "fat" people, accuse them of "lying" or "hiding" what they're eating.

But why would anyone lie about about what harms them? Lie to themselves as well as others?

People do - people with alcoholism and other addictions; people in abusive relationships; people who get into astronomical debt with credit and store cards. They deal with the pain, keep it in check by rehearsing a script that convinces them that it's not so bad. They edit out the worst.

I'm wondering about why it is that food lures people into that same state of denial? We live in a world of abundance. There's more food than we need (not everyone has access to it, I know - that's another discussion though). Food is no longer about nutrition - it's about lifestyle, status, politics, socialising. We don't eat for sustenance alone any more. And yet we deplore gluttony and over indulgence. Eating too much - eating more than you need is not quite taboo, but it's certainly looked down on, it's a sign of weakness. We laugh at it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aczPDGC3f8U But at the same time indulging is a sign of success and the marketing industry does all it can to persuade us to eat more.

I certainly remember getting contradictory messages from my mother about food - on the one had I had to eat everything, waste not, want not, there are starving children in Africa who would love that food (always Africa! there are starving children all over the world!) I was taught that I was fortunate, and should appreciate it by eating up all the food I was given. But on the other hand, I was punished for being greedy if I took too much, told off for eating between meals, made to understand that greed is ugly and eating when you don't need to, or eating certain food (cakes, chocolate) is greed.

So is it any wonder that people deal with this kind of conflict by distorting reality? It's not that people lie or hide what they eat - but their perception is warped and impaired.

And I think over indulgence can creep up on you - like many things. It always takes a little more and a little more and then a little more to achieve the same effect.

I certainly used to wail that I don't eat that much, I don't understand why I'm putting weight on. Logging my food has been a real wake up call! I suspect one reason why people avoid logging their food is that they don't dare face up to the hard truth - that they eat maybe twice as much as they like to believe they eat.

ETA so the magic slow metabolism is your ticket out of it!

Are you seriously asking why people lie? Do you not know that many people? In my experience, lying is the default, not the exception. If I find someone who doesn't lie, THEN I want to know why. Liars get grouped into the "normal human behavior" category.

that's so sad :sad:

pcastagner

"why are thin people not fat?" docu and research. How did Martin add muscle while overeating junk food and not exercising?

Why do I weigh 100 pounds when sedentary and eating 2000 calories daily? RMR tested many times, averaged 1170. Completely sedentary, broken collar bone, shoulder and cracked head, no NEAT.
Why did I only gain 1 pound per month eating over 2500 daily and not exercising? Injured? But those few extra pounds went away as soon as I was able to get out of bed. I didn't gain muscle but I did not gain weight. No food scale and I already know I underestimate calories. ???
Edited by etoiles_argentees On July 03, 2013 4:49

Just curious.

You are an outlier. As in, part of a very small minority of people who are on the extreme ends of a spectrum.

It's not inconsistent with what is being said here. The VAST MAJORITY of obese people eat too much.

pcastagner

I'm interested in the psychology in all this. It's too easy to "blame" "fat" people, accuse them of "lying" or "hiding" what they're eating.

But why would anyone lie about about what harms them? Lie to themselves as well as others?

People do - people with alcoholism and other addictions; people in abusive relationships; people who get into astronomical debt with credit and store cards. They deal with the pain, keep it in check by rehearsing a script that convinces them that it's not so bad. They edit out the worst.

I'm wondering about why it is that food lures people into that same state of denial? We live in a world of abundance. There's more food than we need (not everyone has access to it, I know - that's another discussion though). Food is no longer about nutrition - it's about lifestyle, status, politics, socialising. We don't eat for sustenance alone any more. And yet we deplore gluttony and over indulgence. Eating too much - eating more than you need is not quite taboo, but it's certainly looked down on, it's a sign of weakness. We laugh at it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aczPDGC3f8U But at the same time indulging is a sign of success and the marketing industry does all it can to persuade us to eat more.

I certainly remember getting contradictory messages from my mother about food - on the one had I had to eat everything, waste not, want not, there are starving children in Africa who would love that food (always Africa! there are starving children all over the world!) I was taught that I was fortunate, and should appreciate it by eating up all the food I was given. But on the other hand, I was punished for being greedy if I took too much, told off for eating between meals, made to understand that greed is ugly and eating when you don't need to, or eating certain food (cakes, chocolate) is greed.

So is it any wonder that people deal with this kind of conflict by distorting reality? It's not that people lie or hide what they eat - but their perception is warped and impaired.

And I think over indulgence can creep up on you - like many things. It always takes a little more and a little more and then a little more to achieve the same effect.

I certainly used to wail that I don't eat that much, I don't understand why I'm putting weight on. Logging my food has been a real wake up call! I suspect one reason why people avoid logging their food is that they don't dare face up to the hard truth - that they eat maybe twice as much as they like to believe they eat.

ETA so the magic slow metabolism is your ticket out of it!

Are you seriously asking why people lie? Do you not know that many people? In my experience, lying is the default, not the exception. If I find someone who doesn't lie, THEN I want to know why. Liars get grouped into the "normal human behavior" category.

that's so sad :sad:

It's not sad. Deception is an important social skill

FrnkLft

Saving for later.

lindustum

I recommend to those interested in "the psychology of this" to read Daniel Kahnemann's thinking fast and slow book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0141033576

It is very nicely written and basically covers 40 odd years of research in psychology, economics and social science in general- about human behaviour. It includes loads of experiments that have been done, showing that our brains favour the easy, lazy and quick route over the difficult, calculating and demanding way of thinking. We are capable of both, but in most of our lives, the "lazy" system is applied. This for example is often shown when people who are good drivers actually do not notice most of the road signs. It would simply be inefficient to focus 100% on everything on the road, and would actually deteriorate the driving skill.

It is not about dieting or obesity, it is about how we behave- the examples are often drawn from economic studies.

gigglesinthesun

It is true that some people are gifted with fast metabolism, That's why even if they were eating 5 times or more in large servings per day they still look skinny while others who would do that gets the opposite result. I also have slow metabolism and can easily gain weight, luckily my friend told me about this website where she gets tips and advises. I would recommend this also to you.


Here it is feel free to check it:

http://InsaneBodyShape.com

Did you read the entire thread? Or at least watched the videos? Cause on average larger (heavier) people have a faster metabolism then smaller/lighter/skinnier people.

How do you know that you have a slow metabolism or are you just trying to sell something?

ElizabethFuller

I know that it's often used as an excuse for over eating but some skinny people must have a faster metabolism.
My skinny flat mate (many years ago) used to eat three meals a day (and not "healthy choices" either), chocolate on the way home from work, crisps and sweets while watching TV. All in all, I reckoned she ate in excess of 3000 - 4000 calories a day but never gained weight. She's now 60, still eating well and still a size 8. She has a very poor view of overweight people because if she just cuts out her daily chocolate bars she'll lose a pound a week, so why is anyone fat?
Her metabolism must be running hotter than most!

plipsurt

For years I had an over-active thyroid which meant I could eat whatever, I wanted in whatever quantity I wanted and my weight struggled to move above 84lbs. Then this wonderful little organ suffered a complete malfunction and broke down completely in a year I gained 80lbs. I now get my thyroxine artificially and struggle still to keep my weight under control. Do I use this as an excuse? No. They basic formula is the same calories in and calories out. Some people here are very judgemental. Yes people make excuses as to why they are overweight, don't exercise, cheat, lie, take the easy option. None of us is in a position to judge other people so please don't.

ElizabethFuller

For years I had an over-active thyroid which meant I could eat whatever, I wanted in whatever quantity I wanted and my weight struggled to move above 84lbs. Then this wonderful little organ suffered a complete malfunction and broke down completely in a year I gained 80lbs. I now get my thyroxine artificially and struggle still to keep my weight under control. Do I use this as an excuse? No. They basic formula is the same calories in and calories out. Some people here are very judgemental. Yes people make excuses as to why they are overweight, don't exercise, cheat, lie, take the easy option. None of us is in a position to judge other people so please don't.

Me too. I thought that it was impossible to lose weight once my thyroid went kaboom, I cut my calories down and down, I took my 1000 calorie-a-day food diary to my doctor who just told me to eat half as much if I wasn't losing. (She also told me that she'd never seen a fat anorexic. Changed doctors at that point)
Then I found that it's not impossible if I exercise as well, slow, hard work but possible . This site is fabulous.
Slog on fellow hypothyroiders - we can do it!

losing4799

makes me think cal estimates are wrong/too low and that i'm consuming more than i should be.

Donners185

Bump for later viewing