Metabolism vs Exercise

Options
philsy1
philsy1 Posts: 104 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Hi. I'm a 58 yr old male, and I've been on a weight loss regimen for almost 2.5 months, losing 17 lb. I guess I need to satisfied with that, but I clearly can't lose weight as fast as when I was in my twenties. I was wondering if anyone out there has insight into the likely reason for the decreased weight loss capability. Is it that I don't get as much general activity calories or that my metabolism has slowed, or some combo of the two? I've been doing a lot of elliptical training and yard work, but I've plateaued for the last week and I'm trying to figure it out. Oh, I'm 6'3" tall and have religiously stayed under 1500 calories/day, with lower carbs and fat than suggested by MFP. Thanks for reading

Replies

  • CrystalFlury
    CrystalFlury Posts: 400 Member
    Options
    Hey, so you might not want to hear this and I'm not trying to call you old or anything of the sorts, but when you get older you don't burn calories as fast as you used to. Take a look at this article. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/metabolism/WT00006

    Hope it helps! Good job on the weight loss thus far! Keep up the good work!
  • sexyharleymama
    sexyharleymama Posts: 163
    Options
    muscle is a big part of your metabolism. Strength training is very important for weight loss. The muscles help burn more caleries while exercising or doing nothing. And make sure you are getting lots of water 8+ glasses a day.
  • _GlaDOS_
    _GlaDOS_ Posts: 1,520 Member
    Options
    Is it that I don't get as much general activity calories or that my metabolism has slowed, or some combo of the two?

    Both can contribute to slower weight loss, yes.

    Oh, I'm 6'3" tall and have religiously stayed under 1500 calories/day, with lower carbs and fat than suggested by MFP.

    However, this does not seem like enough calories for someone who is 6'3", even for someone who is 58 and may have a slower metabolism. I could be wrong, but that was likely the reason for my slower weight loss (not eating enough), even though I’m 26.
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    Options
    Are you eating NET 1500 calories? If you are not eating at least some of your exercise calories back - that could be the reason for your plateau.
  • vaderandbill
    vaderandbill Posts: 1,063 Member
    Options
    muscle is a big part of your metabolism. Strength training is very important for weight loss. The muscles help burn more caleries while exercising or doing nothing. And make sure you are getting lots of water 8+ glasses a day.

    I agree. studies show that adding a little more muscle will make your body more efficient.
  • Bellyroll
    Bellyroll Posts: 316
    Options
    More muscle = more burnt cals. more fat = less fat burn. Thats what I learned in my nutrion class.
  • Shanahan09
    Shanahan09 Posts: 97
    Options
    Great job on the loss so far. Hmm, maybe you have to change up your exercise regime. The body can get used to the same exercises, and then plateaus will come into effect. Same with the food. Veggies are great for burning calories for the body has to work harder to process/digest them. I don't believe in the age thing. I think it's just because when one is younger (teens, 20's) we were moving around a lot more. I've known many people over 50 who've lost weight and their age never once came into play with their progress and success. Definitely try to get into some sort of weight bearing exercises, muscle chews up fat incredibly, and the best part is the body will continue to burn calories long after you worked out with weights. Plus the benefits are priceless, stronger muscles, ligaments, bones. Good luck!! :)
  • 8rules
    8rules Posts: 169
    Options
    Be sure you are increasing the intensity of your exercise every week in some manner. For example, your elliptical, you can increase duration, or difficulty. Always be increasing. Never hit a level and then remain their day in and day out, as you will plateau and then regress as your body adapts and this level of work becomes normal.

    Think of your body as a car, and your calories are your gas.

    We want an INEFFICIENT engine so we burn LOTS of gas.

    If you do the same level of intensity on your cardio without increasing it, your body will become more and more efficient working at that intensity as you train it. In other words you will cover the same distance at the same incline burning less calories your 12th week doing it, then in your first week doing it.

    To counter this well known issue, you must always be increasing the work load in some manner as you gain fitness. Every week, a few more pounds, a few more minutes, a few more reps, etc...

    Another approach is to vary your workouts and use other machines. Rowing is a great one.

    And be sure to incorporate strength, flexibility and balance training. I think anyone over 40 should do so.
  • aschultz9
    aschultz9 Posts: 89
    Options
    I agree that 1500 doesn't seem like enough for a tall man? I can barely survive on 1500 and I'm a 5'7 woman.
  • philsy1
    philsy1 Posts: 104 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all your responses. Seems like I need to ramp up my strength training and eat some more. Maybe the latter will give me the energy to do the former, lol.
  • jjs22
    jjs22 Posts: 156
    Options
    Just for comparison, I'm 48, 6'0", and on my way down from 225 lbs. Lifestyle is inactive.

    I told MFP that I wanted to lose 2 pounds per week (the max healthy rate).

    The target Net Calories I got was about 1400.

    So 1500 doesn't sound crazy. But remember that that's NET : total calories eaten minus total calories burnt up by exercise.


    As for the original question, I'm pretty sure that I've read that as we age, we tend to have a lower percent muscle in our bodies, so that alone would indicate a lower metabolism. Then again,every body is different.

Categories