Extra cals not working despite patience= hmmmm!
Replies
-
*snip*
I suppose you equate "exercise" with "working out in a gym"? Or are you saying that all forms of movement are "boring and tiresome"?
I...I just...
*sigh*
I would say more...but I'm so dumbfounded that someone would be averse to *all* forms of "exercise" that...I have nothing more to say to you...
...and will instead focus on the other 98.44% of people who haven't concluded that all forms of exercise are too "boring and tiresome" regardless of the many benefits it provides (and that most find a form of exercise that is not boring or tiresome).
Hmmm, I think your math is off. 98.44% think exercise is fun and So Worth It? Then why is obesity such an epidemic?
My point is, you don't HAVE to exercise to lose weight. You don't HAVE to adhere to "clean eating" or "healthy eating" or anything like that. Making the decision to lose weight is hard enough, without piling a newfound dedication to exercise and completely changing the foods you eat on top of that. I changed ONE thing when I decided to lose weight—my daily calorie total. That's it. I didn't do anything else differently. And I've been losing weight for two months straight without a "plateau". Thirteen pounds in two months isn't an unhealthy rate, and I haven't been hungry or tired or anything like that. People are always trying to "scare straight" people, but I'm here to say that one simple change can be enough to effect the desired loss of weight. And without that one simple change, all the exercise and "clean eating" in the world won't help you. I think we can all agree on that last point, at least? :drinker:
That's true just changing your cal intake can help you loose weight, but I think others want more than just to lose weight.
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
Never said they didnt want to loose weight just want more that working out gives. That is all.
Yeah, I hear it gives you "in dolphins" or something. I don't have anywhere to keep all those dolphins, so that's another reason not to exercise. :bigsmile:
*Throws in the towel* No use bothering with someone like u. Laters!
0 -
Clean eating? Not so much. But I enjoy exercise well enough. Stats: I would maintain at 2200ish without getting off the couch, but I lift three days a week, walk 3 big dogs randomly and have two kickboxing classes a week, mostly because I like to eat more, and can lose .5 to 1lb per week on 2000-2200 cals a day if I'm even half assed active. (45, 5'11" 177lbs down from 300lbs). I also enjoy having fitness goals, rather than just weight loss gols, but each to their own. *shrugs*
0 -
*snip*
I suppose you equate "exercise" with "working out in a gym"? Or are you saying that all forms of movement are "boring and tiresome"?
I...I just...
*sigh*
I would say more...but I'm so dumbfounded that someone would be averse to *all* forms of "exercise" that...I have nothing more to say to you...
...and will instead focus on the other 98.44% of people who haven't concluded that all forms of exercise are too "boring and tiresome" regardless of the many benefits it provides (and that most find a form of exercise that is not boring or tiresome).
Hmmm, I think your math is off. 98.44% think exercise is fun and So Worth It? Then why is obesity such an epidemic?
My point is, you don't HAVE to exercise to lose weight. You don't HAVE to adhere to "clean eating" or "healthy eating" or anything like that. Making the decision to lose weight is hard enough, without piling a newfound dedication to exercise and completely changing the foods you eat on top of that. I changed ONE thing when I decided to lose weight—my daily calorie total. That's it. I didn't do anything else differently. And I've been losing weight for two months straight without a "plateau". Thirteen pounds in two months isn't an unhealthy rate, and I haven't been hungry or tired or anything like that. People are always trying to "scare straight" people, but I'm here to say that one simple change can be enough to effect the desired loss of weight. And without that one simple change, all the exercise and "clean eating" in the world won't help you. I think we can all agree on that last point, at least? :drinker:
That's true just changing your cal intake can help you loose weight, but I think others want more than just to lose weight.
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
Never said they didnt want to loose weight just want more that working out gives. That is all.
Yeah, I hear it gives you "in dolphins" or something. I don't have anywhere to keep all those dolphins, so that's another reason not to exercise. :bigsmile:
*Throws in the towel* No use bothering with someone like u. Laters!
Are we really going to just leave our sweaty towels laying around? Seriously? :grumble:
Lighten up, humans. Life is a sexually transmitted condition that is always fatal. Live the life that makes you happy! :drinker:0 -
It has more to do with the fact that nearly 90% of women who start their journey on MFP are given a 1200 calorie net intake regardless of their actual starting weight and goals. Statistically speaking, this implies that there is a good portion of the population pursuing deficits larger than needed. When 9/10 women are given a 1200 net intake, it doesn't exactly support the mantra, "Everyone is different."I'm 44, and 5'8", and for me 1600 calories is MAINTENANCE TDEE at my goal weight. And if I miscalculate by even 50 calories, I'm at calorie surplus. Not doing it.
Honestly, why do people act like 1200 calories is starvation? I'm not starving.
Ah, you must be male.
Guess what? Women tend to be shorter and less massive than men. Women have slower resting metabolism than men. Women can't eat as many calories as men if they want to lose weight, not unless they want to run themselves ragged with exercise. So yeah, if you're a woman who is a) on the short side, or b) on the more mature side) or c) on the sedentary side, MFP is probably going to throw you into the 1200 calorie end of the pool. And if you meet more than one of those criteria, well, you're definitely going to be Team Twelve Hundred. Why? Probably because that's the arbitrary lower limit allowed by the software. It's not terribly mysterious. I know people would love the fantasy of being able to lose weight while eating massive quantities, but isn't that how we all ended up needing to lose weight in the first place? :huh:
<----woman.5'9. 145. Maintains on 2400/day. Would kill and eat the neighbors at 1200/day.
Ah, so you're on the tall side. And you're not exactly thin as a rail if you're 145 lbs. You're an inch taller than me, and 6 pounds heavier, so we're probably similar enough at the moment. And if you're maintaining at 2400 a day, you're either young, or you exercise a fair amount, or both. How am I doing with my precognition?
31 and in maintenance. I go up to 2700+ when I'm in training. Your precog skills kind of suck.
Also 22% body fat, so lol at the whole 'not thin' part.0 -
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
No. This is where you come for an argument.
'No it isn't'. '
'That's not an argument that's just a contradiction'.
'No it isn't'.
etc... apologies to Monty Python :bigsmile:
You're my new best friend. :flowerforyou: :drinker:
No I'm not.
0 -
Clean eating? Not so much. But I enjoy exercise well enough. Stats: I would maintain at 2200ish without getting off the couch, but I lift three days a week, walk 3 big dogs randomly and have two kickboxing classes a week, mostly because I like to eat more, and can lose .5 to 1lb per week on 2000-2200 cals a day if I'm even half assed active. (45, 5'11" 177lbs down from 300lbs). I also enjoy having fitness goals, rather than just weight loss gols, but each to their own. *shrugs*
I can haz popcorn?
0 -
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
No. This is where you come for an argument.
'No it isn't'. '
'That's not an argument that's just a contradiction'.
'No it isn't'.
etc... apologies to Monty Python :bigsmile:
You're my new best friend. :flowerforyou: :drinker:
That speaks volumes.0 -
Ah so many people who don't actually understand the concept of "eat more to lose weight" :noway:
So, the OP needs to eat even MORE calories, is that is? Gee, you'd think every morbidly obese person would be a skinny as a rail, with all the calories they eat.
Just because someone is morbidly obese doesn't mean they have to eat a severely restrictive caloric intake to lose weight....
Well, people don't become morbidly obese by eating 1200 calories a day either. You can't break the laws of thermodynamics. :smokin:
Good lord, is it really that hard.
Read this
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants
Eat more doesn't mean eating over your maintenance calories - it's about finding a middle ground between stupidly restricting to 1200 when you don't have to.
I'm 5'2 and lose on 1600 a day. I started on 1200 but hated it - so I'm eating more to lose weight.
It's not rocket science - yes of course I can lose on 1200 - but I'll lose muscle and be bloody miserable. Eat more to lose weight is about finding a healthy balance for losing weight that is sustainable for the long term and doesn't screw up your metabolism and cause you to yo-yo diet.
If you don't understand it - then I can't help you.
EDIT - you'll note I told the op to buy and use scales. Tracking correctly first - then work out what works.
This!!! Now where's that dead horse, so I can beat it???0 -
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
No. This is where you come for an argument.
'No it isn't'. '
'That's not an argument that's just a contradiction'.
'No it isn't'.
etc... apologies to Monty Python :bigsmile:
You're my new best friend. :flowerforyou: :drinker:
No I'm not.
But, but...oh, I see what you did there. Well played, madame, well played. :bigsmile:0 -
*snip*
I suppose you equate "exercise" with "working out in a gym"? Or are you saying that all forms of movement are "boring and tiresome"?
I...I just...
*sigh*
I would say more...but I'm so dumbfounded that someone would be averse to *all* forms of "exercise" that...I have nothing more to say to you...
...and will instead focus on the other 98.44% of people who haven't concluded that all forms of exercise are too "boring and tiresome" regardless of the many benefits it provides (and that most find a form of exercise that is not boring or tiresome).
Hmmm, I think your math is off. 98.44% think exercise is fun and So Worth It? Then why is obesity such an epidemic?
My point is, you don't HAVE to exercise to lose weight. You don't HAVE to adhere to "clean eating" or "healthy eating" or anything like that. Making the decision to lose weight is hard enough, without piling a newfound dedication to exercise and completely changing the foods you eat on top of that. I changed ONE thing when I decided to lose weight—my daily calorie total. That's it. I didn't do anything else differently. And I've been losing weight for two months straight without a "plateau". Thirteen pounds in two months isn't an unhealthy rate, and I haven't been hungry or tired or anything like that. People are always trying to "scare straight" people, but I'm here to say that one simple change can be enough to effect the desired loss of weight. And without that one simple change, all the exercise and "clean eating" in the world won't help you. I think we can all agree on that last point, at least? :drinker:
That's true just changing your cal intake can help you loose weight, but I think others want more than just to lose weight.
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
Never said they didnt want to loose weight just want more that working out gives. That is all.
Yeah, I hear it gives you "in dolphins" or something. I don't have anywhere to keep all those dolphins, so that's another reason not to exercise. :bigsmile:
*Throws in the towel* No use bothering with someone like u. Laters!
Are we really going to just leave our sweaty towels laying around? Seriously? :grumble:
Lighten up, humans. Life is a sexually transmitted condition that is always fatal. Live the life that makes you happy! :drinker:
For the record, and only my own personal observation, but...
...you usually don't seem particularly happy.0 -
It has more to do with the fact that nearly 90% of women who start their journey on MFP are given a 1200 calorie net intake regardless of their actual starting weight and goals. Statistically speaking, this implies that there is a good portion of the population pursuing deficits larger than needed. When 9/10 women are given a 1200 net intake, it doesn't exactly support the mantra, "Everyone is different."I'm 44, and 5'8", and for me 1600 calories is MAINTENANCE TDEE at my goal weight. And if I miscalculate by even 50 calories, I'm at calorie surplus. Not doing it.
Honestly, why do people act like 1200 calories is starvation? I'm not starving.
Ah, you must be male.
Guess what? Women tend to be shorter and less massive than men. Women have slower resting metabolism than men. Women can't eat as many calories as men if they want to lose weight, not unless they want to run themselves ragged with exercise. So yeah, if you're a woman who is a) on the short side, or b) on the more mature side) or c) on the sedentary side, MFP is probably going to throw you into the 1200 calorie end of the pool. And if you meet more than one of those criteria, well, you're definitely going to be Team Twelve Hundred. Why? Probably because that's the arbitrary lower limit allowed by the software. It's not terribly mysterious. I know people would love the fantasy of being able to lose weight while eating massive quantities, but isn't that how we all ended up needing to lose weight in the first place? :huh:
<----woman.5'9. 145. Maintains on 2400/day. Would kill and eat the neighbors at 1200/day.
Ah, so you're on the tall side. And you're not exactly thin as a rail if you're 145 lbs. You're an inch taller than me, and 6 pounds heavier, so we're probably similar enough at the moment. And if you're maintaining at 2400 a day, you're either young, or you exercise a fair amount, or both. How am I doing with my precognition?
31 and in maintenance. I go up to 2700+ when I'm in training. Your precog skills kind of suck.
Also 22% body fat, so lol at the whole 'not thin' part.
Darn it. I was going to get TLC to sponsor a show where I foretell people's futures or talk to the dead or something. Eh, I can probably still fake it well enough, that's what editing is for. :smokin:0 -
*snip*
I suppose you equate "exercise" with "working out in a gym"? Or are you saying that all forms of movement are "boring and tiresome"?
I...I just...
*sigh*
I would say more...but I'm so dumbfounded that someone would be averse to *all* forms of "exercise" that...I have nothing more to say to you...
...and will instead focus on the other 98.44% of people who haven't concluded that all forms of exercise are too "boring and tiresome" regardless of the many benefits it provides (and that most find a form of exercise that is not boring or tiresome).
Hmmm, I think your math is off. 98.44% think exercise is fun and So Worth It? Then why is obesity such an epidemic?
My point is, you don't HAVE to exercise to lose weight. You don't HAVE to adhere to "clean eating" or "healthy eating" or anything like that. Making the decision to lose weight is hard enough, without piling a newfound dedication to exercise and completely changing the foods you eat on top of that. I changed ONE thing when I decided to lose weight—my daily calorie total. That's it. I didn't do anything else differently. And I've been losing weight for two months straight without a "plateau". Thirteen pounds in two months isn't an unhealthy rate, and I haven't been hungry or tired or anything like that. People are always trying to "scare straight" people, but I'm here to say that one simple change can be enough to effect the desired loss of weight. And without that one simple change, all the exercise and "clean eating" in the world won't help you. I think we can all agree on that last point, at least? :drinker:
That's true just changing your cal intake can help you loose weight, but I think others want more than just to lose weight.
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
Never said they didnt want to loose weight just want more that working out gives. That is all.
Yeah, I hear it gives you "in dolphins" or something. I don't have anywhere to keep all those dolphins, so that's another reason not to exercise. :bigsmile:
*Throws in the towel* No use bothering with someone like u. Laters!
Are we really going to just leave our sweaty towels laying around? Seriously? :grumble:
Lighten up, humans. Life is a sexually transmitted condition that is always fatal. Live the life that makes you happy! :drinker:
For the record, and only my own personal observation, but...
...you usually don't seem particularly happy.
Happiness doesn't look the same on everyone. :devil:
Well, I hope you one day find true happiness.
:flowerforyou:0 -
*snip*
I suppose you equate "exercise" with "working out in a gym"? Or are you saying that all forms of movement are "boring and tiresome"?
I...I just...
*sigh*
I would say more...but I'm so dumbfounded that someone would be averse to *all* forms of "exercise" that...I have nothing more to say to you...
...and will instead focus on the other 98.44% of people who haven't concluded that all forms of exercise are too "boring and tiresome" regardless of the many benefits it provides (and that most find a form of exercise that is not boring or tiresome).
Hmmm, I think your math is off. 98.44% think exercise is fun and So Worth It? Then why is obesity such an epidemic?
My point is, you don't HAVE to exercise to lose weight. You don't HAVE to adhere to "clean eating" or "healthy eating" or anything like that. Making the decision to lose weight is hard enough, without piling a newfound dedication to exercise and completely changing the foods you eat on top of that. I changed ONE thing when I decided to lose weight—my daily calorie total. That's it. I didn't do anything else differently. And I've been losing weight for two months straight without a "plateau". Thirteen pounds in two months isn't an unhealthy rate, and I haven't been hungry or tired or anything like that. People are always trying to "scare straight" people, but I'm here to say that one simple change can be enough to effect the desired loss of weight. And without that one simple change, all the exercise and "clean eating" in the world won't help you. I think we can all agree on that last point, at least? :drinker:
That's true just changing your cal intake can help you loose weight, but I think others want more than just to lose weight.
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
Never said they didnt want to loose weight just want more that working out gives. That is all.
Yeah, I hear it gives you "in dolphins" or something. I don't have anywhere to keep all those dolphins, so that's another reason not to exercise. :bigsmile:
*Throws in the towel* No use bothering with someone like u. Laters!
Are we really going to just leave our sweaty towels laying around? Seriously? :grumble:
Lighten up, humans. Life is a sexually transmitted condition that is always fatal. Live the life that makes you happy! :drinker:
For the record, and only my own personal observation, but...
...you usually don't seem particularly happy.
I agree and the towel thrown on the floor is better than where i'd like to leave it. hehe 0 -
*snip*
I suppose you equate "exercise" with "working out in a gym"? Or are you saying that all forms of movement are "boring and tiresome"?
I...I just...
*sigh*
I would say more...but I'm so dumbfounded that someone would be averse to *all* forms of "exercise" that...I have nothing more to say to you...
...and will instead focus on the other 98.44% of people who haven't concluded that all forms of exercise are too "boring and tiresome" regardless of the many benefits it provides (and that most find a form of exercise that is not boring or tiresome).
Hmmm, I think your math is off. 98.44% think exercise is fun and So Worth It? Then why is obesity such an epidemic?
My point is, you don't HAVE to exercise to lose weight. You don't HAVE to adhere to "clean eating" or "healthy eating" or anything like that. Making the decision to lose weight is hard enough, without piling a newfound dedication to exercise and completely changing the foods you eat on top of that. I changed ONE thing when I decided to lose weight—my daily calorie total. That's it. I didn't do anything else differently. And I've been losing weight for two months straight without a "plateau". Thirteen pounds in two months isn't an unhealthy rate, and I haven't been hungry or tired or anything like that. People are always trying to "scare straight" people, but I'm here to say that one simple change can be enough to effect the desired loss of weight. And without that one simple change, all the exercise and "clean eating" in the world won't help you. I think we can all agree on that last point, at least? :drinker:
That's true just changing your cal intake can help you loose weight, but I think others want more than just to lose weight.
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
Never said they didnt want to loose weight just want more that working out gives. That is all.
Yeah, I hear it gives you "in dolphins" or something. I don't have anywhere to keep all those dolphins, so that's another reason not to exercise. :bigsmile:
*Throws in the towel* No use bothering with someone like u. Laters!
Are we really going to just leave our sweaty towels laying around? Seriously? :grumble:
Lighten up, humans. Life is a sexually transmitted condition that is always fatal. Live the life that makes you happy! :drinker:
For the record, and only my own personal observation, but...
...you usually don't seem particularly happy.
Happiness doesn't look the same on everyone. :devil:
Well, I hope you one day find true happiness.
:flowerforyou:
What makes you think I haven't already? What makes you think it isn't chained in my basement at this very moment? :laugh:0 -
Hope you got some good info, OP.0
-
Well, I hope you one day find true happiness.
:flowerforyou:
What makes you think I haven't already? What makes you think it isn't chained in my basement at this very moment? :laugh:
:laugh: :bigsmile: You're not allowed to leave here. Ever.0 -
Well, I hope you one day find true happiness.
:flowerforyou:
What makes you think I haven't already? What makes you think it isn't chained in my basement at this very moment? :laugh:
:laugh: :bigsmile: You're not allowed to leave here. Ever.
I ain't goin' nowheres. :drinker:0 -
Same here but you know how it goes: no uterus, no opinion.
It has more to do with the fact that nearly 90% of women who start their journey on MFP are given a 1200 calorie net intake regardless of their actual starting weight and goals. Statistically speaking, this implies that there is a good portion of the population pursuing deficits larger than needed. When 9/10 women are given a 1200 net intake, it doesn't exactly support the mantra, "Everyone is different."I'm 44, and 5'8", and for me 1600 calories is MAINTENANCE TDEE at my goal weight. And if I miscalculate by even 50 calories, I'm at calorie surplus. Not doing it.
Honestly, why do people act like 1200 calories is starvation? I'm not starving.
Ah, you must be male.
Guess what? Women tend to be shorter and less massive than men. Women have slower resting metabolism than men. Women can't eat as many calories as men if they want to lose weight, not unless they want to run themselves ragged with exercise. So yeah, if you're a woman who is a) on the short side, or b) on the more mature side) or c) on the sedentary side, MFP is probably going to throw you into the 1200 calorie end of the pool. And if you meet more than one of those criteria, well, you're definitely going to be Team Twelve Hundred. Why? Probably because that's the arbitrary lower limit allowed by the software. It's not terribly mysterious. I know people would love the fantasy of being able to lose weight while eating massive quantities, but isn't that how we all ended up needing to lose weight in the first place? :huh:
<----woman.5'9. 145. Maintains on 2400/day. Would kill and eat the neighbors at 1200/day.
Ah, so you're on the tall side. And you're not exactly thin as a rail if you're 145 lbs. You're an inch taller than me, and 6 pounds heavier, so we're probably similar enough at the moment. And if you're maintaining at 2400 a day, you're either young, or you exercise a fair amount, or both. How am I doing with my precognition?
I'm 5'3 and while lifting only 3 days a week (so less than 3 hours of exercise a week) lost over a pound a week at 1725 calories. This puts my maintenance around 2100-2200 calories. I was also sedentary (for real sedentary, as in unemployed and cruising the internet all day.) So I hit 2 of 3 of those points.
I suppose I'm just lucky.
Not lucky, just young. Try doing that 20 years from now. I'll wait. :devil:
So if you're young it cancels out the other two?
And I imagine if I was 45+ but tall you'd point to being tall.
And if I was 45+ and short you'd point to being active.
Even though by your own words having any combo of your 3 factors should have me losing/maintaining on far less than I do. You did say more than one and 'you'll definitely be team twelve hundred' right?
I'm >40, but a man, so my non-exercise TDEE of 2600 (and exercise TDEE of >3000) is meaningless.
:sadface:0 -
Did you get permission from your female guardian before posting? :huh:
Same here but you know how it goes: no uterus, no opinion.
It has more to do with the fact that nearly 90% of women who start their journey on MFP are given a 1200 calorie net intake regardless of their actual starting weight and goals. Statistically speaking, this implies that there is a good portion of the population pursuing deficits larger than needed. When 9/10 women are given a 1200 net intake, it doesn't exactly support the mantra, "Everyone is different."I'm 44, and 5'8", and for me 1600 calories is MAINTENANCE TDEE at my goal weight. And if I miscalculate by even 50 calories, I'm at calorie surplus. Not doing it.
Honestly, why do people act like 1200 calories is starvation? I'm not starving.
Ah, you must be male.
Guess what? Women tend to be shorter and less massive than men. Women have slower resting metabolism than men. Women can't eat as many calories as men if they want to lose weight, not unless they want to run themselves ragged with exercise. So yeah, if you're a woman who is a) on the short side, or b) on the more mature side) or c) on the sedentary side, MFP is probably going to throw you into the 1200 calorie end of the pool. And if you meet more than one of those criteria, well, you're definitely going to be Team Twelve Hundred. Why? Probably because that's the arbitrary lower limit allowed by the software. It's not terribly mysterious. I know people would love the fantasy of being able to lose weight while eating massive quantities, but isn't that how we all ended up needing to lose weight in the first place? :huh:
<----woman.5'9. 145. Maintains on 2400/day. Would kill and eat the neighbors at 1200/day.
Ah, so you're on the tall side. And you're not exactly thin as a rail if you're 145 lbs. You're an inch taller than me, and 6 pounds heavier, so we're probably similar enough at the moment. And if you're maintaining at 2400 a day, you're either young, or you exercise a fair amount, or both. How am I doing with my precognition?
I'm 5'3 and while lifting only 3 days a week (so less than 3 hours of exercise a week) lost over a pound a week at 1725 calories. This puts my maintenance around 2100-2200 calories. I was also sedentary (for real sedentary, as in unemployed and cruising the internet all day.) So I hit 2 of 3 of those points.
I suppose I'm just lucky.
Not lucky, just young. Try doing that 20 years from now. I'll wait. :devil:
So if you're young it cancels out the other two?
And I imagine if I was 45+ but tall you'd point to being tall.
And if I was 45+ and short you'd point to being active.
Even though by your own words having any combo of your 3 factors should have me losing/maintaining on far less than I do. You did say more than one and 'you'll definitely be team twelve hundred' right?
I'm >40, but a man, so my non-exercise TDEE of 2600 (and exercise TDEE of >3000) is meaningless.
:sadface:0 -
Siansonea, I know you aren't a fan of exercise at the present, but you may want to engage in some form as you age to minimize decline in RMR. Although exercise is certainly not required to reduce weight, it's quite beneficial in maintaining weight as we age. To illustrate, below is a study that noted a significantly higher RMR in active women across all age groups compared to sedentary individuals. It is important to note that the older active groups had RMRs comparable to that of their younger counterparts. Thus, exercise can prevent decline in RMR and energy expenditure due to aging which would make maintaining body weight more achievable.
http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/82/10/3208.full?sid=a0421a11-8b3b-4e97-acb1-28dc4a8792f3The differences in RMRadj observed with age in the sedentary and active women in the present study, when viewed over time, may have considerable physiological significance. Using the mean RMRadj values in calories per h for the pre- and postmenopausal women, the net age-related decline in energy expenditure would be approximately 600 Cal/week more in the sedentary compared to the exercising women. Thus, this age-related difference in energy expenditure, if uncompensated completely by a decrease in energy intake, would equate to about a 4 kg/yr greater increase in body weight in the sedentary women.0 -
This argument is played out and boring.
This argument thread is now about Star Wars VS. Star Trek.
Storm Troopers against Klingons, who wins?
Stalemate. Neither of them can hit the broad side of a barn with their laser beam thingies. Eventually they'll both just get bored and leave the Neutral Zone.0 -
Siansonea, I know you aren't a fan of exercise at the present, but you may want to engage in some form as you age to minimize decline in RMR. Although exercise is certainly not required to reduce weight, it's quite beneficial in maintaining weight as we age. To illustrate, below is a study that noted a significantly higher RMR in active women across all age groups compared to sedentary individuals. It is important to note that the older active groups had RMRs comparable to that of their younger counterparts. Thus, exercise can prevent decline in RMR and energy expenditure due to aging which would make maintaining body weight more achievable.
http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/82/10/3208.full?sid=a0421a11-8b3b-4e97-acb1-28dc4a8792f3The differences in RMRadj observed with age in the sedentary and active women in the present study, when viewed over time, may have considerable physiological significance. Using the mean RMRadj values in calories per h for the pre- and postmenopausal women, the net age-related decline in energy expenditure would be approximately 600 Cal/week more in the sedentary compared to the exercising women. Thus, this age-related difference in energy expenditure, if uncompensated completely by a decrease in energy intake, would equate to about a 4 kg/yr greater increase in body weight in the sedentary women.
Oh, I'm spry for an old hag. I always take stairs two at a time. I just get bored stepping on every single one. I mean, why do there have to be so many? Ugh. :grumble:
It also helps that I'm really impatient, so I tend to zip around pretty briskly. I'm not a complete bag of mush. :bigsmile:0 -
Klingons are a type I civilization and Storm Troopers are backed by a type ]I[ galactic civilization. No contest.This argument is played out and boring.
This argument thread is now about Star Wars VS. Star Trek.
Storm Troopers against Klingons, who wins?0 -
V'Ger must join with The Creator now.0
-
This argument is played out and boring.
This argument thread is now about Star Wars VS. Star Trek.
Storm Troopers against Klingons, who wins?
Troopers will win, but the Klingon will die with honor!0 -
V'Ger must join with The Creator now.
Kirk-Unit has the information. V'Ger requires it.0 -
Honor and an empty sack is worth the sack.This argument is played out and boring.
This argument thread is now about Star Wars VS. Star Trek.
Storm Troopers against Klingons, who wins?
Troopers will win, but the Klingon will die with honor!0 -
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
No. This is where you come for an argument.
'No it isn't'. '
'That's not an argument that's just a contradiction'.
'No it isn't'.
etc... apologies to Monty Python :bigsmile:
You're my new best friend. :flowerforyou: :drinker:
That speaks volumes.
glad someone said it0 -
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
No. This is where you come for an argument.
'No it isn't'. '
'That's not an argument that's just a contradiction'.
'No it isn't'.
etc... apologies to Monty Python :bigsmile:
You're my new best friend. :flowerforyou: :drinker:
That speaks volumes.
glad someone said it
Um. Burn? I guess? :drinker:0 -
Hmmm. Isn't this the "diet and weight loss" forum? :huh:
No. This is where you come for an argument.
'No it isn't'. '
'That's not an argument that's just a contradiction'.
'No it isn't'.
etc... apologies to Monty Python :bigsmile:
You're my new best friend. :flowerforyou: :drinker:
That speaks volumes.
glad someone said it
Um. Burn? I guess? :drinker:
You don't seem to be making a lot of fans here.
I can drink to that. :laugh:
:drinker:0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions