RMR Tested today :-(

2»

Replies

  • FredDoyle
    FredDoyle Posts: 2,272 Member
    Just eat to maintain your weight. Why is a low BMR bad? I'm not sure. The doctor said it's healthy right?
    It sounds like an evolutionary advantage. You're a cheap date. :wink:
    Does anyone know why needing less energy intake to maintain is bad? Sounds more efficient.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    I don't think everyone can be put in a box, but I would just like everyone to check out what their BMR & TDEE are (there are numerous calculators out there, but I like the ones at scoobysworkshop.com). For some people, again, not in a box, netting 1200 calories is way too low.

    And yes I can lose netting 1200, but the calculators take in your current height, weight, and even body fat% if you know it. I know not everyone is the same, I just don't want someone to end up having to lose 100 lbs like I have to because I yo-yo'd so much since I was 160 lbs (over 20 years). I can eat at that level, but if it is not great for my body, I won't. I have my future health to look at, not just my current weight loss.

    This is an issue though as all calculators online would say I burned anywhere from 1200-1500 cals a day which after having it actually tested is soo far off. Im at 878 not 1300 thats a big difference in my opinion.

    Yeah, people put WAY too much faith in online calculators that can give nothing but population based averages. The funny thing is, it's usually the same people that bash BMI for being based on population based averages.

    If you've had your RMR tested, you don't need an online calculator.

    I've been eating at the level the online calculators say I should lose weight but I maintain at this calorie level. It's not due to metabolic damage. I'm not hungry or lacking energy at this level. This is just me being not average.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Just eat to maintain your weight. Why is a low BMR bad? I'm not sure. The doctor said it's healthy right?
    It sounds like an evolutionary advantage. You're a cheap date. :wink:
    Does anyone know why needing less energy intake to maintain is bad? Sounds more efficient.

    It's bad for those that like to eat a lot. Not unhealthy, just unfortunate that they can't eat as much as some other people.
  • FredDoyle
    FredDoyle Posts: 2,272 Member
    I'd like to see more studies showing BMR vs mortality rate. This one seems to indicate a lower BMR corresponds to a lower mortality rate:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18693224
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    My BMR is about 1094 and I maintain a healthy weight on no more than 1350 a day. I don't eat exercise back either. I also have low blood pressure. My doctor assures me I'll live forever because all my systems work so slowly they'll never wear out!
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    So I had my RMR tested today and although in the back of my head I knew it was low I was hoping it wasnt as bad as it is.

    Im 5'3" ,weigh 126lbs, 23.2% BF, I HAD my diary set at 1200 cals and changed my macros to include more protein. I work out regularly meaning at the very least 3 times a week including cardio, weights, and bootcamp style HIIT.
    I have been just maintaining for a long time now and was wondering why.

    Well just had my RMR tested at Northwestern Hospital and mine is only 878 cals ! This makes sense now looking at why I was only maintaining. I have just lowered my goals to 1000 cals a day and kept my macros the same.

    This stinks :-(
    Anyone else have this prob?

    So based on the amount of Lean Body Mass you actually have, perhaps tested in Bodpod at the least, is that about right?
    That would imply you have less LBM than expected for someone your age, weight, height. Perhaps because the diet so far has burned off a bunch of muscle, or you had less to begin with.

    Or should it be higher based on LBM?
    Because BMR and RMR based on LBM is within 5% if there is no diet suppressing it.

    If it should be higher, that means you have a suppressed RMR - do you really want to chase it into the ground by eating even less?

    Fix it - others have, you can too. And not by eating less.

    A similar case study was published by Jampolis (2004).
    A 51 year old patient complained of a 15 lb weight gain over the last year despite beginning a strenuous triathlon and marathon training program (2 hours per day, 5-6 days per week).
    A 3 day diet analysis estimated a daily intake of only 1000-1200 Calories.
    An indirect calorimetry revealed a resting metabolic rate of 950 Calories (28% below predicted for age, height, weight, and gender).
    After medications and medical conditions such as hypothyroidism and diabetes where ruled out, the final diagnosis was over-training and undereating.
    The following treatment was recommended:

    Increase daily dietary intake by approximately 100 Calories per week to a goal of 1500 calories
    32% protein; 35% carbohydrates; 33% fat
    Consume 5-6 small meals per day
    Small amounts of protein with each meal or snack
    Choose high fiber starches
    Select mono- and poly- unsaturated fats
    Restrict consumption of starch with evening meals unless focused around training
    Take daily multi-vitamin and mineral supplement
    Perform whole body isometric resistance training 2 times per week

    After 6 weeks the patient's resting metabolism increased 35% to 1282 Calories per day (only 2% below predicted).
    The patient also decreases percent fat from 37% to 34%, a loss of 5 lbs of body fat.

    Jampolis MB (2004) Weight Gain - Marathon Runner / Triathlete. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 36(5) S148.

Categories