I Had My BMR Tested - It's 1032 Calories

WendyBlendy

Wow...this is sooo helpful and eye-opening! Thank you!!

justlistening

Thank OP for the post. It was very interesting! We always talk about those BMR TDEE etc. calculators being estimates towards averages, but it is good to see the possible extremes that are in the population.

I have read lots of posts where people are trying to estimate the TDEE or BMR using their HRMs. If you have an HRM maybe you could wear it while sleeping and see how well it stacks up to the actual. It will be a one data point in testing if HRMs do a decent job at estimating BMR. Message me if you find out.

californiagirl2012

I'm posting this in the forums after receiving several requests to do so by my friends here at MFP.

This is just my experience, I do not claim to be an expert and I'm not suggesting anybody change their diet - So PLEASE try and resist ripping this thread apart to shreds.

When I was 17 I was diagnosed with having narcolepsy and I have been taking prescription Adderall (20mg/3x day) since then. The soul-suckers running my health insurance company require testing to 'reconfirm' a diagnosis every 5 years in order to be eligible for prescription coverage so last night I had a panel, cardiac stress test, sleep study, body fat measurement, and CT scan with iodine contrast done.

When the doctor was filling out the order to have my tests done, there was an option to also have my BMR tested and I elected to do so. These were my results:

The testing took a little over 20 hours. They had wake me up every 4 hours, walk on a treadmill for 10 minutes, stay awake for an additional 30 minutes, and repeat (it royally sucked). My BMR was tested immediately when I woke up from each interval and right before I started the next one. The stress test and CT scan were performed that next morning.

(Note: Normally sleep studies have you sleep throughout the night. However, I have had SEVERAL of these tests performed and my diagnosis has been reconfirmed a dozen times. So to demonstrate my narcolepsy eloquently, they studied my sleep in intervals. In 'normal' individuals it takes anywhere from 2-4 hours after they fall asleep to reach REM sleep - the deepest and most restful stage of sleep (you know, when you're drooling so much you start to form a puddle on your pillow) - but people with narcolepsy reach REM sleep almost IMMEDIATELY after they fall asleep. This makes for a rather 'colorful' and dynamic sleep report when you keep waking these individuals several times throughout the night, the kind of report sure to keep the insurance trolls off my back, at least temporarily.)

my BMR fluctuated from 1101 to as low as 899 for an overall average of 1032 calories.

Initially, I was SHOCKED after I learned how low it was. I told the technition who was administering the BMR test that I thought my BMR would be around 1400 calories, not 1000, and he said, "Yeah, that's what most people think their BMR is. I would say that the majority of people VASTLY overestimate it, probably one of the reasons so many people have such a hard time losing weight, but having a BMR of around 1000 calories is absolutely normal for a woman your age and build (23-years-old, 5'7", 145 pounds, 30% body fat)." He went on to tell me that the entire staff working on that floor in the hospital has had their BMR tested and the highest BMR came out to be around 1600 calories...on a male who weighed 220 pounds!

Mix that with a sedentary lifestyle and a poor diet and it's EASY to see why so many people are overweight.

He also said that from an evolutionary perspective a low BMR makes sense, it implies a longer lifespan and survival advantage (obviously not today with our abundant food supply), and our friends who seem to have a freakishly high metabolism would be the first to die if a famine were to hit. However, living in America that's probably not going to happen... at least not anytime soon...

( Check out this: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=194713753973311&set=pb.137541376357216.-2207520000.1351022016&type=1&theater Brad Pilon, who if you didn't already know is one beefy fellow, had his BMR measured at about 1650. In retrospect, to think that I need only 200 or so calories less than this guy to survive is absolutely obsurd, now I know better.)

Anyways, I guess the moral of the story is that one size does not fit all. I've been struggling to lose weight becaues I've been consuming too many calories, it's as simple as that.

I once beleived that My Fitness Pal's recommendation of 1200 net calories was completely bogus, but now I've changed my mind.

I'm SO GLAD I elected to have my BMR tested along with my other tests. Other than having glue stuck in my hair now for probably the next week or so, I'd say it was a good experience. I feel as if I know my body that much better.

Cheers!

I LOVE THIS POST!!!! And I love Brad Pilon! He is brilliant. I owe my success with achieving my goals to him, along with John Barban who he works with.

Anyway, my RMR/BMR is very low as well. Mostly because I'm short. Because I'm so active and have been all my life it's actually higher than most people my height, mainly because my lean body mass is heavy for my height (not so much from muscle but from bone density). My DXA scan confirmed that my RMR is 1380. I would love to have BMR tested, not that I would love that process, but just to have the data.

Good for you!!!!!!!!

LuluProteinFueled

Thank OP for the post. It was very interesting! We always talk about those BMR TDEE etc. calculators being estimates towards averages, but it is good to see the possible extremes that are in the population.

I have read lots of posts where people are trying to estimate the TDEE or BMR using their HRMs. If you have an HRM maybe you could wear it while sleeping and see how well it stacks up to the actual. It will be a one data point in testing if HRMs do a decent job at estimating BMR. Message me if you find out.

Great idea, but I believe that HRMs are very inaccurate worn for non-aerobic activity and long periods of time. A BodyMedia Fit perhaps is a better device for that longer-term type measurement. Fairly accurate for TDEE and more accurate for strength-training burns than HRMs or FitBits.

zyxst

I found OP really interesting. I like to get tested for my BMR just to satisfy my curiosity.

It's good to know your insurance company can keep sucking it. :drinker:

norcal_yogi

....plus this calls into question (again) the accuracy of BMFs/BodyBuggs/Fitbits. i gained almost 5lbs using a BMF...and my average daily burn was 2750+.... yet ate up to only 2000 (usually less).

CATindeeHAT

Thank OP for the post. It was very interesting! We always talk about those BMR TDEE etc. calculators being estimates towards averages, but it is good to see the possible extremes that are in the population.

I have read lots of posts where people are trying to estimate the TDEE or BMR using their HRMs. If you have an HRM maybe you could wear it while sleeping and see how well it stacks up to the actual. It will be a one data point in testing if HRMs do a decent job at estimating BMR. Message me if you find out.

Wow. I never looked into that. I do have a heart rate monitor, but how would I go about testing my TDEE with it? Just wear it all day long?? But then I assume I would have to do it over multiple days being that it fluctuates right?

CATindeeHAT

It's good to know your insurance company can keep sucking it. :drinker:

Probably why I am one for ObamaCare, but that's a completely different topic

slays1415

Fascinating, Cat! You see tons of people not losing a thing on 2000+ cals per day, even though the calculators, hrm, fitbit, etc say they should. I like the SWAG approach mentioned above too. With so many variables, calculators can only get you so far. Nicely done!

ObtainingBalance

Extremely interesting! Thank you:)

CATindeeHAT

Thank OP for the post. It was very interesting! We always talk about those BMR TDEE etc. calculators being estimates towards averages, but it is good to see the possible extremes that are in the population.

I have read lots of posts where people are trying to estimate the TDEE or BMR using their HRMs. If you have an HRM maybe you could wear it while sleeping and see how well it stacks up to the actual. It will be a one data point in testing if HRMs do a decent job at estimating BMR. Message me if you find out.

Great idea, but I believe that HRMs are very inaccurate worn for non-aerobic activity and long periods of time. A BodyMedia Fit perhaps is a better device for that longer-term type measurement. Fairly accurate for TDEE and more accurate for strength-training burns than HRMs or FitBits.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but does anyone know why HRMs are inaccurate when worn for non-aerobic activity? Is it because your heart is not beating as 'hard'?

Mads1997

I just had mine tested also. Every BMR calculator I used on the internet all told me my BMR was 1677-1690. I found out yesterday mine is actually a lot lower at 1548. I was eating 1600, 1700 and 1800 and not losing, probably the reason why.

justlistening

I have read that the 'equation' that HRMs use to calculate your calories burned are for moderate exercise. I even saw somewhere that they are not that accurate for strength training. But just how inaccurate are they?

This would just be a test for your BMR since that is the only number you have. Wear your HRM to sleep. See what it says when you are awake and then adjust it for the number of hours in the day. E.g. if you sleep for 8 hrs and it says 400 then multiply it by 3 and that would be your estimated BMR from our HRM. For the example it would say 1200 vs. 1032 actual.

disasterman

I guess all i would say is why don't people just play around with their calories and figure out if they're losing weight. I lost 60 pounds in the past before people even used the internet and/or talked about BMR. We just did it the old fashioned way: SWAG (scientific wild-*kitten* guess).

Best post of the thread!

PS - Thanks OP for sharing your experience and information.

professorRAT

....plus this calls into question (again) the accuracy of BMFs/BodyBuggs/Fitbits. i gained almost 5lbs using a BMF...and my average daily burn was 2750+.... yet ate up to only 2000 (usually less).

Again, based on averages from the general population...

marieautumn

Thank you for posting this!

pickledginger

I find that any coal tar shampoo does a very good job of getting the glue out of your hair after a sleep study.

THANK YOU! Where do I get it?

Half the dandruff shampoos are coal-tar based. If those will do it, almost anywhere! Just read the labels.

The tech told me she recommends applyong a lot of cream rinse - before anything else - and leaving it on for five minutes before rinsing and shampooing. Sadly, she said this as I was leaving ... with wet, gluey hair.

love4fitnesslove4food_wechange

I just had mine tested also. Every BMR calculator I used on the internet all told me my BMR was 1677-1690. I found out yesterday mine is actually a lot lower at 1548. I was eating 1600, 1700 and 1800 and not losing, probably the reason why.

if a bmr was 1550 then you'd lose at 1600, 1700, and likely 1800.

MoreBean13

I don't use the online calculators, or a BMR guess, or activity levels at all anymore. Too much guesswork for my taste. My method is that every month I review my data, I add up the total NET calories for 30 days. I'll call it NET30.

Day1(1607)+Day2(1705)+Day3(1647).........+Day30(1568)= NET30

Add to NET30 Total weight loss in 30 day period multiplied by 3500, so say it was 5.4 lbs:
NET30+(5.4*3500) = NETtdee30

Divide NETtdee30 by 30 = NET TDEE for past 30 days.
Take your deficit (500 calories, 20%, whatever you use) from the Net tdee for the past 30 days.

This method has a few assumptions that are likely somewhat false, most notably that 100% of your weight loss was fat. I would say that it has a lot less assumption than any of the online calculators have, though. In my experience, and that of my friends that have tried out this method, my calculations holds true enough to get a really good estimate of your caloric needs, and produce predictable weight loss results. Give it a try!

*Note- this won't work if you're stuck at a plateau, or if you're brand new and losing mostly water weight, or if you've been SIGNIFICANTLY undereating such that you're slowing down your metabolism, or if you've recently made a big switch- like going to ketosis for example, where your water weight would have dropped again. I would recommend waiting until you've been here about 6 weeks, and using the previous 30 days data to start.

kimberliiw

Very interesting post. If she's to be held responsible for everyone that changes their calorie intake to less than 1200 after reading this post, then everyone that posts to eat more to lose should be held responsible for the people that gain upping their intake. I'm not saying that it doesn't work for some people, but it also doesn't work for some. To me this post is just laying to bare how different we all are and one size doesn't fit all. Thanks OP.