Very interesting research on weight loss rate

akjmart2002
akjmart2002 Posts: 263 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
From this New York Times article:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/dieting-vs-exercise-for-weight-loss/?src=me&ref=general

Researchers have shed a bit more light on the role that exercise plays in weight loss vs. diet alone. The highlight is that calorie dense foods combined with metabolic rate reductions automatically slow the rate at which pounds can be lost over time. Therefore, if a person only exercises and pays no attention to diet, they are likely to either not lose weight or even put it back on eventually.

Additionally, since the body naturally slows metabolism as pounds are lost, the dieter must recalibrate their caloric needs every so often to account for their reduced RMR. If not, their predicted weight loss will dwindle and they will hit the dreaded plateau.

Here is a fascinating online calculator that illustrates the improved weight loss prediction models from this research.
http://www.pbrc.edu/research-and-faculty/calculators/weight-loss-predictor/
«13

Replies

  • mathiasg
    mathiasg Posts: 32
    Great tool. Thanks for sharing.
  • debrawallin
    debrawallin Posts: 55 Member
    Great article, thanks!
  • taylor5877
    taylor5877 Posts: 1,792 Member
    Maintaining muscle mass with weight loss negates much of if not all of the decrease in metabolism that usually follows weight loss...
  • lambch0ps
    lambch0ps Posts: 79 Member
    This is great - thanks for posting. The only issue with it is that you can't modify the % of non-fat mass vs. fat mass - it assumes a set proportion. So it will not be accurate for someone that has higher than average muscle mass - it is not accurate for me - I plugged in my starting weight, calorie deficit, etc. and it overestimated the rate at which I lost. But its a great tool to illustrate how weight loss will slow down over time.
  • soccermum75
    soccermum75 Posts: 588 Member
    Thanks for sharing
  • michellelhartwig
    michellelhartwig Posts: 486 Member
    bump
  • postrockandcats
    postrockandcats Posts: 1,145 Member
    This is awesome :D
  • Deedles2012
    Deedles2012 Posts: 122 Member
    bump
  • mcmoosehall
    mcmoosehall Posts: 36 Member
    wow, thanks for posting :))
  • mamasmaltz3
    mamasmaltz3 Posts: 1,111 Member
    Bump
  • _beautiful_disaster_
    _beautiful_disaster_ Posts: 182
    bump
  • PrncessBre
    PrncessBre Posts: 444 Member
    Bump
  • Lazygal53
    Lazygal53 Posts: 294 Member
    Bump
  • onyxgirl17
    onyxgirl17 Posts: 1,722 Member
    Good article, and the calculator with my deficit gave me the results I've been getting :)
  • chivalryder
    chivalryder Posts: 4,391 Member
    Maintaining muscle mass with weight loss negates much of if not all of the decrease in metabolism that usually follows weight loss...

    Yes, this is true, but many people do less strength training than cadio. The muscle mass developed from cardio is not significant enough to compensate for the drop in metabolism. Also, when you do cadrio, you are making your body more efficient, therefore, when you are at rest (ie, not working out) you will burn fewer calories per hour than before you had started working out.

    To the OP: Thank you for posting some legitimate information on here. There isn't enough "good" information on these forums.
  • Taryn1627
    Taryn1627 Posts: 118 Member
    bump
  • Goofy076
    Goofy076 Posts: 287 Member
    awesome thanks!!
  • brentdaniels
    brentdaniels Posts: 127
    Thanks for sharing. Great information.
  • VogtAndrea
    VogtAndrea Posts: 236
    That WAS interesting!!! And pretty close to right on the money.
  • taylor5877
    taylor5877 Posts: 1,792 Member
    Maintaining muscle mass with weight loss negates much of if not all of the decrease in metabolism that usually follows weight loss...

    Yes, this is true, but many people do less strength training than cadio. The muscle mass developed from cardio is not significant enough to compensate for the drop in metabolism. Also, when you do cadrio, you are making your body more efficient, therefore, when you are at rest (ie, not working out) you will burn fewer calories per hour than before you had started working out.

    To the OP: Thank you for posting some legitimate information on here. There isn't enough "good" information on these forums.

    Didn't mean to sound like I was arguing with the OP, just saying there are ways to combat the drop in metabolism that is described in the article.
  • dalila747
    dalila747 Posts: 153 Member
    Very interesting, indeed. It flies in the face of the standard MFP advice to eat your exercise calories back, which I've always been a bit leary of anyways. I haven't been losing as fast as I'd like, and my average calorie intake has been 100 calories over my goal. I'm gonna try not eating my exercise calories for a few weeks and see if that works out better.
  • leodru
    leodru Posts: 321 Member
    Great tool but i hate how all of these tools assume that because I'm 185 pounds and that I'm 5'6" therefore I'm obese even though i know my body fat is 22.7%. You would think the scientific community would at least put some time and effort into being better predictors of this.
  • pittskaa
    pittskaa Posts: 319 Member
    bump
  • jennadelane
    jennadelane Posts: 121 Member
    I'm confused by the weight loss predictor. Where is it getting the current calorie intake from? It tells me my current intake is 2445 calories? My TDEE isn't even that high!
  • Klem4
    Klem4 Posts: 399 Member
    Interesting!

    I was wondering what the current calorie intake was about too? I don't see any info explaining that.
  • Mrsbrandnewmeslimandtrim
    Mrsbrandnewmeslimandtrim Posts: 267 Member
    bump
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    The article's conclusion isn't even remotely supported by the data. The male tribesmen were much more active than a typical westerner, walking on average 7 miles per day. The reason their energy expenditure was simliar was simply because they aren't so overweight. It's an interesting finding but it doesn't prove anything whatsoever.
  • athensguy
    athensguy Posts: 550
    Maintaining muscle mass with weight loss negates much of if not all of the decrease in metabolism that usually follows weight loss...

    You'd have to gain about a pound of muscle for every three pounds of fat lost to keep RMR the same. Even if you did that, your exercise calories would still go down because that is mostly affected by overall mass.
  • ahamm002
    ahamm002 Posts: 1,690 Member
    Maintaining muscle mass with weight loss negates much of if not all of the decrease in metabolism that usually follows weight loss...

    You'd have to gain about a pound of muscle for every three pounds of fat lost to keep RMR the same. Even if you did that, your exercise calories would still go down because that is mostly affected by overall mass.

    That depends. If you lose weight while exercising, often you get into good shape and can burn far more calories by exercising longer and harder.
  • athensguy
    athensguy Posts: 550
    Very interesting, indeed. It flies in the face of the standard MFP advice to eat your exercise calories back, which I've always been a bit leary of anyways. I haven't been losing as fast as I'd like, and my average calorie intake has been 100 calories over my goal. I'm gonna try not eating my exercise calories for a few weeks and see if that works out better.

    How does it fly in the face of the advice to eat your exercise calories?

    If your exercise calories are accurate and your net goal is accurate for the weight loss you are seeking, you should eat your exercise calories and you will lose weight at the rate predicted.

    If your net goal is higher than it should be (quite likely for someone who has lost a lot of weight since there appears to be additional metabolic slowdown for those with large losses) or your exercise calories are exaggerated, your weight loss will obviously be less than desired. That, however, is not a problem with eating exercise calories, but rather of inaccuracy.

Categories