5 Tips to Speed Up Your Metabolism

Options
1246

Replies

  • msjessielynn
    msjessielynn Posts: 42 Member
    Options
    Thank you for the article and I agree with some of it, especially eating breakfast.

    Here is an article from Web MD

    http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/increase-your-metabolism-start-losing-fat

    That is basically from the same original source as the article the OP posted an extract of.


    Check this out for one of the studies that indicate intra day meal frequency is irrelevent:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985?

    "There have been reports of an inverse relationship between meal frequency (MF) and adiposity. It has been postulated that this may be explained by favourable effects of increased MF on appetite control and possibly on gut peptides as well. The main goal of the present study was to investigate whether using a high MF could lead to a greater weight loss than that obtained with a low MF under conditions of similar energy restriction. Subjects were randomised into two treatment arms (high MF = 3 meals+3 snacks/d or low MF = 3 meals/d) and subjected to the same dietary energy restriction of - 2931 kJ/d for 8 weeks. Sixteen obese adults (n 8 women and 8 men; age 34.6 (sd 9.5); BMI 37.1 (sd 4.5) kg/m2) completed the study. Overall, there was a 4.7 % decrease in body weight (P < 0.01); similarly, significant decreases were noted in fat mass ( - 3.1 (sd 2.9) kg; P < 0.01), lean body mass ( - 2.0 (sd 3.1) kg; P < 0.05) and BMI ( - 1.7 (sd 0.8) kg/m2; P < 0.01). However, there were NS differences between the low- and high-MF groups for adiposity indices, appetite measurements or gut peptides (peptide YY and ghrelin) either before or after the intervention. We conclude that increasing MF does not promote greater body weight loss under the conditions described in the present study."

    I think my head just exploded
  • tjungkunz
    Options
    Bump
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    Well I am new to trying to get on the healthy side, and searching anywhere and everywhere for help as I dont fully understand how I am suppose to be eating per my doctor. But awaiting for approval to see a nutritionist, so hopefully that will help

    Hope you get to see a nutrionist as everyone is different. Basically, it's taking in less calories than you burn, drinking lots of water (fluids), watching carbs, fats.... and exercise

    I get you're trying to be helpful- but first- everyone's not that different. With the exception of disease and disorders, most people are pretty much the same. Second- not everyone needs to watch carbs or fats. As a matter of fact, most people don't need to specifically limit either. A well balanced diet where you get enough protein, a wide variety of vegetables and fruits, and some healthy fats works for pretty much everyone- as long as you are at an appropriate calorie deficit for your goals. I didn't mention carbs in that list, because it's a matter of preference and satiety. If you don't have a specific condition that requires limiting carbs or fats, and you don't want to, you don't have to. Get the right amount of protein and fat within your calorie limits, and the carbs sort of limit themselves so they're not out of whack.
    No most people aren't the same and yes I neglected to include protein along with the proper amount of carbs, fats ...
    But I disagree with you regarding carbs.
    So everyone's different AND everyone needs to limit carbs?
    Everyone is definitely different and I NEVER said everyone needs to limit carbs.

    Do you like to argue and think in black/white?
    :laugh:
    *eyeroll* semantics.
  • janlee_001
    janlee_001 Posts: 309 Member
    Options
    Thank you for the article and I agree with some of it, especially eating breakfast.

    Here is an article from Web MD

    http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/increase-your-metabolism-start-losing-fat

    That is basically from the same original source as the article the OP posted an extract of.


    Check this out for one of the studies that indicate intra day meal frequency is irrelevent:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985?

    "There have been reports of an inverse relationship between meal frequency (MF) and adiposity. It has been postulated that this may be explained by favourable effects of increased MF on appetite control and possibly on gut peptides as well. The main goal of the present study was to investigate whether using a high MF could lead to a greater weight loss than that obtained with a low MF under conditions of similar energy restriction. Subjects were randomised into two treatment arms (high MF = 3 meals+3 snacks/d or low MF = 3 meals/d) and subjected to the same dietary energy restriction of - 2931 kJ/d for 8 weeks. Sixteen obese adults (n 8 women and 8 men; age 34.6 (sd 9.5); BMI 37.1 (sd 4.5) kg/m2) completed the study. Overall, there was a 4.7 % decrease in body weight (P < 0.01); similarly, significant decreases were noted in fat mass ( - 3.1 (sd 2.9) kg; P < 0.01), lean body mass ( - 2.0 (sd 3.1) kg; P < 0.05) and BMI ( - 1.7 (sd 0.8) kg/m2; P < 0.01). However, there were NS differences between the low- and high-MF groups for adiposity indices, appetite measurements or gut peptides (peptide YY and ghrelin) either before or after the intervention. We conclude that increasing MF does not promote greater body weight loss under the conditions described in the present study."

    I think my head just exploded

    I certainly know that feeling lol :huh:
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Thank you for the article and I agree with some of it, especially eating breakfast.

    Here is an article from Web MD

    http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/increase-your-metabolism-start-losing-fat

    That is basically from the same original source as the article the OP posted an extract of.


    Check this out for one of the studies that indicate intra day meal frequency is irrelevent:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985?

    "There have been reports of an inverse relationship between meal frequency (MF) and adiposity. It has been postulated that this may be explained by favourable effects of increased MF on appetite control and possibly on gut peptides as well. The main goal of the present study was to investigate whether using a high MF could lead to a greater weight loss than that obtained with a low MF under conditions of similar energy restriction. Subjects were randomised into two treatment arms (high MF = 3 meals+3 snacks/d or low MF = 3 meals/d) and subjected to the same dietary energy restriction of - 2931 kJ/d for 8 weeks. Sixteen obese adults (n 8 women and 8 men; age 34.6 (sd 9.5); BMI 37.1 (sd 4.5) kg/m2) completed the study. Overall, there was a 4.7 % decrease in body weight (P < 0.01); similarly, significant decreases were noted in fat mass ( - 3.1 (sd 2.9) kg; P < 0.01), lean body mass ( - 2.0 (sd 3.1) kg; P < 0.05) and BMI ( - 1.7 (sd 0.8) kg/m2; P < 0.01). However, there were NS differences between the low- and high-MF groups for adiposity indices, appetite measurements or gut peptides (peptide YY and ghrelin) either before or after the intervention. We conclude that increasing MF does not promote greater body weight loss under the conditions described in the present study."

    I think my head just exploded

    I certainly know that feeling lol :huh:

    Cliffs: meal timing is irrelevant.
  • slkehl
    slkehl Posts: 3,801 Member
    Options
    Well I am new to trying to get on the healthy side, and searching anywhere and everywhere for help as I dont fully understand how I am suppose to be eating per my doctor. But awaiting for approval to see a nutritionist, so hopefully that will help

    Hope you get to see a nutrionist as everyone is different. Basically, it's taking in less calories than you burn, drinking lots of water (fluids), watching carbs, fats.... and exercise

    I get you're trying to be helpful- but first- everyone's not that different. With the exception of disease and disorders, most people are pretty much the same.

    Actually, diet has a HUGE genetic component. Ever heard of nutrigenomics? It's the next big thing in nutrition science. The recommendations at the moment are general and do tend to work for most people, which is probably why you think people aren't that different. However, ideally, recommendations will get more individualized. We just don't currently have inexpensive or targeted tests to make them that way.
  • smokinjackd
    Options
    Ummmm, I can't be the only person on here that started reading this post and thought, WTF?? You come on here spouting all these "rules" without anybody requesting help or info ( a lot of it incorrect by the way), and talking like some kind of expert. From reading people's journeys on here and from my own, I can tell you with one hundred percent confidance that everyone's journey is unique, and many different paths are taken to achieve similar goals. I appreciate you wanting to help, but this is a community of people helping one another not a site for pontificating.

    Oops, just reread the thread, you were quoting an article, you might have prefaced the whole thing by saying, Hey guys, check out this interesting article I just read, may have saved some confusion.
  • Troll
    Troll Posts: 922 Member
    Options
    Great starting point. After a few months of doing all these get back to us. We'll steer you back in the right direction then.
  • LizAWDavis
    Options
    Eat less, move more that's it!
  • geekyjock76
    geekyjock76 Posts: 2,720 Member
    Options
    When we talk increasing metabolic rate, there really is only one way to increase it.... gain lean body mass. Exercise and foods can increase tdee but its not going to increase the calories burnt if you went into a coma. Either way the article.is off base.
    This is the only response that really matters when the goal is to up Resting Metabolic Rate. Lift weights on a surplus after you've dropped body fat percentage to an acceptable amount.

    Also, maintaining a deficit for too long can lower your RMR considerably, especially the greater the deficit. Thus, doing 4 month cycles of cutting and returning to near maintenance will help return RMR back to optimal levels and ready for another cycle.
  • Perfectdiamonds1
    Perfectdiamonds1 Posts: 347 Member
    Options
    bump to read when I get up from my nap
  • steppingstones
    steppingstones Posts: 569 Member
    Options
    bump for later. thanks
  • Coming4U
    Coming4U Posts: 93 Member
    Options
    When you copy paste an article, it’s good to provide that link to the article so people can check sources. From what I can see it is from an article in Women’s Health magazine…..nuff said.


    Kinda funny. I think that is the magazine I read about and found out about this very sight from. I checked it out, joined and am down 25 pounds and plan on going on and on. Without "Women's Day" this would never have happened. Nuff' Said

    And, were you on a calorie deficit also while doing these wonderful and totally scientific based things?

    As I said previously, I read about this site in one of those magazines. That is all I said. It had nothing to do with the original post that is the hot debate here.
  • yourenotmine
    yourenotmine Posts: 645 Member
    Options
    Well I am new to trying to get on the healthy side, and searching anywhere and everywhere for help as I dont fully understand how I am suppose to be eating per my doctor. But awaiting for approval to see a nutritionist, so hopefully that will help

    Hope you get to see a nutrionist as everyone is different. Basically, it's taking in less calories than you burn, drinking lots of water (fluids), watching carbs, fats.... and exercise

    I get you're trying to be helpful- but first- everyone's not that different. With the exception of disease and disorders, most people are pretty much the same. Second- not everyone needs to watch carbs or fats. As a matter of fact, most people don't need to specifically limit either. A well balanced diet where you get enough protein, a wide variety of vegetables and fruits, and some healthy fats works for pretty much everyone- as long as you are at an appropriate calorie deficit for your goals. I didn't mention carbs in that list, because it's a matter of preference and satiety. If you don't have a specific condition that requires limiting carbs or fats, and you don't want to, you don't have to. Get the right amount of protein and fat within your calorie limits, and the carbs sort of limit themselves so they're not out of whack.
    No most people aren't the same and yes I neglected to include protein along with the proper amount of carbs, fats ...
    But I disagree with you regarding carbs.
    So everyone's different AND everyone needs to limit carbs?
    Everyone is definitely different and I NEVER said everyone needs to limit carbs.

    Do you like to argue and think in black/white?
    :laugh:
    *eyeroll* semantics.

    Um, if everyone were truly different, there would be no point in anyone studying medicine. We'd all just learn as we go.
  • jaxxie
    jaxxie Posts: 576 Member
    Options
    BUMP
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,401 MFP Moderator
    Options
    I can tell you for a fact that for everyone on this board, this is an exact twin. In fact there are threads to finding your twin. Weight loss is the same for everyone but not everyone understands the factors; amount of weight to lose, hormonal issues, calorir requirements, etc... i can tell you i have developed calorie plans for over 250+ people on this site alone and all the women were around 1600-2000 and all the men were 2500-3000. So no, we arent that different. And the fact that therd are so many studies done which each participate having the same results within 5%. And if you want more... read the below link. I know we all want to be special butterflies but many/most of us are the same.

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    When you copy paste an article, it’s good to provide that link to the article so people can check sources. From what I can see it is from an article in Women’s Health magazine…..nuff said.


    Kinda funny. I think that is the magazine I read about and found out about this very sight from. I checked it out, joined and am down 25 pounds and plan on going on and on. Without "Women's Day" this would never have happened. Nuff' Said

    And, were you on a calorie deficit also while doing these wonderful and totally scientific based things?

    As I said previously, I read about this site in one of those magazines. That is all I said. It had nothing to do with the original post that is the hot debate here.

    You indicated that you had subscribed to the magazine, applied the methods and lost weight. My point was, you lost weight because you were at a calorie deficit, not because you ate breakfast or any other pseudo science that is spewed out by those magazines half the time.
  • jojorocksforeva
    jojorocksforeva Posts: 303 Member
    Options
    I Honestly don't beilve in the starvation mode. unless your already thin and your taking things a little to derastic than ill say fine okay. maybe it does exist. but for the most part even if that were true and your metab came to a suddin holt NOT LIKELY go exercise and it will speed it up i do agree on eating breakfast. but I also agree with californiagirl.
  • marlynej
    marlynej Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    my doctor says no such thing as your body going into starvation mode and than u dont lose weight.He says how many fat people came out of the concentration camps?
  • steppingstones
    steppingstones Posts: 569 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the suggestions:smile: