RMR Tested today :-(
Bridget0927
Posts: 438 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?
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?
0
Replies
-
Anybody?0
-
Perhaps you should look into the metabolism reset that is often talked about in the Eat More To Weigh Less group.
Seems like maybe you have been underfeeding your body for so long that you have done some serious damage to your metabolism and it is time to feed yourself right and get things working properly.0 -
Bueller?... Bueller?
0 -
Perhaps you should look into the metabolism reset that is often talked about in the Eat More To Weigh Less group.
Seems like maybe you have been underfeeding your body for so long that you have done some serious damage to your metabolism and it is time to feed yourself right and get things working properly.
Thanks I'll check that out!0 -
Yep. My BMR is even lower than yours. I have my goals set to 800 and I lose like 1lb a month. I don't even log/eat back exercise calories either. Damn hypothyroidism.0
-
Yep. My BMR is even lower than yours. I have my goals set to 800 and I lose like 1lb a month. I don't even log/eat back exercise calories either. Damn hypothyroidism.
I don't think i could survive on 800 cals...0 -
Your RMR seems way low, so I agree that it sounds like metabolic damage (How long have you been severely calorie restricted?)
Did the folks at Northwestern Hospital comment on their findings ?0 -
Yep. My BMR is even lower than yours. I have my goals set to 800 and I lose like 1lb a month. I don't even log/eat back exercise calories either. Damn hypothyroidism.
Sucks :-( Im thinking how will I fit it all the nutrients needed :-(0 -
Your RMR seems way low, so I agree that it sounds like metabolic damage (How long have you been severely calorie restricted?)
Did the folks at Northwestern Hospital comment on their findings ?
Funny you ask although I am distraught over it the doctor said it was nothing to worry about. Said that its like the percentiles they give kids for growth, I happen to be in the 36th percentile which although it is on the low side is not unhealthy or uncommon.
Which just made me more sad :-(0 -
Your RMR seems way low, so I agree that it sounds like metabolic damage (How long have you been severely calorie restricted?)
Did the folks at Northwestern Hospital comment on their findings ?
Funny you ask although I am distraught over it the doctor said it was nothing to worry about. Said that its like the percentiles they give kids for growth, I happen to be in the 36th percentile which although it is on the low side is not unhealthy or uncommon.
Which just made me more sad :-(
Thought: Percentiles are based on data collected from lots of people. Just because MOST people have a reported low RMR, and you don't fall below most of them, doesn't mean that it is not unhealthy, just that it is uncommon.
At your height and weight, this is BAD, and I agree that you probably did metabolic damage after calorie restricting for too long, and need to reset. Think about it this way: if your metabolism naturally gets slower as you age... by the time you're 60, 70, 80? What will you eat then? 200, 300 calories a day? NOT okay. Plus, eating that low now, you'll have lost severe muscle mass and bone density by then. While you are young, you should strive to intake the max amount of calories you can to maintain your body composition and health, so you won't be up a creek by the time you're old.
Check out EM2WL as mentioned above, do some research about metabolic reset, be prepared for a temporary gain up-front, and GET HEALTHY! For the sake of your future self....0 -
Your RMR seems way low, so I agree that it sounds like metabolic damage (How long have you been severely calorie restricted?)
Did the folks at Northwestern Hospital comment on their findings ?
Funny you ask although I am distraught over it the doctor said it was nothing to worry about. Said that its like the percentiles they give kids for growth, I happen to be in the 36th percentile which although it is on the low side is not unhealthy or uncommon.
Which just made me more sad :-(
Thought: Percentiles are based on data collected from lots of people. Just because MOST people have a reported low RMR, and you don't fall below most of them, doesn't mean that it is not unhealthy, just that it is uncommon.
At your height and weight, this is BAD, and I agree that you probably did metabolic damage after calorie restricting for too long, and need to reset. Think about it this way: if your metabolism naturally gets slower as you age... by the time you're 60, 70, 80? What will you eat then? 200, 300 calories a day? NOT okay. Plus, eating that low now, you'll have lost severe muscle mass and bone density by then. While you are young, you should strive to intake the max amount of calories you can to maintain your body composition and health, so you won't be up a creek by the time you're old.
Check out EM2WL as mentioned above, do some research about metabolic reset, be prepared for a temporary gain up-front, and GET HEALTHY! For the sake of your future self....
Good point on the getting older factor!, I am looking at some EM@WL stuff online now. Thanks!0 -
People are way too quick to jump to metabolic damage. 1200 calories is not that low for someone of her size. I'm taller, older, and bigger than her and I net 1200. I have had my RMR tested and it came out 10% higher than the online calculators. And EM2LW did NOT work for me (tried it for 3 months).
It sucks for you, but that doesn't mean you can just fix it by eating more. Not saying you can't try, but there may be nothing to actually fix. That said, what are your goals? Are you trying to lose more weight? Because it doesn't seem like you should.0 -
People are way too quick to jump to metabolic damage. 1200 calories is not that low for someone of her size. I'm taller, older, and bigger than her and I net 1200. I have had my RMR tested and it came out 10% higher than the online calculators. And EM2LW did NOT work for me (tried it for 3 months).
It sucks for you, but that doesn't mean you can just fix it by eating more. Not saying you can't try, but there may be nothing to actually fix. That said, what are your goals? Are you trying to lose more weight? Because it doesn't seem like you should.
wow thanks for the different point a view I appreciate it. So EM2WL did not work for you? Did you maintain on it or gain?
I would be ok with losing up to 5lbs from where I am now but Im not after that, Im more looking to lower my body fat percentage wether that be the weight I am now, a little less or a little more.0 -
People are way too quick to jump to metabolic damage. 1200 calories is not that low for someone of her size. I'm taller, older, and bigger than her and I net 1200. I have had my RMR tested and it came out 10% higher than the online calculators. And EM2LW did NOT work for me (tried it for 3 months).
It sucks for you, but that doesn't mean you can just fix it by eating more. Not saying you can't try, but there may be nothing to actually fix. That said, what are your goals? Are you trying to lose more weight? Because it doesn't seem like you should.
But some people are to quick to assume that EM2WL doesn't work if they don't see results right away
There are some members who took a year to fully heal their metabolism. It all depends on how long you've been restricting.
I saw a great quote in an article (not related to EM2WL) recently, about the same scientific principles, though. People assume that everyone's metabolism is different, no matter what their age/height/weight is. But in reality, the BMR or RMR of two people of the same height, age, and ratio of fat to lean muscle will actually be very similar, within 50 calories. You can do serious damage to that, though, by restricting calories for a long time.
*edit* Here's an article that sums it up: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500194_162-578886.html
Also, remember that RMR is the basic amount you need to maintain bodily functions. You need more to even get out of bed.
I do agree with the above—at your height and weight, you probably don't need to lose any more, especially not 7 more pounds, girly! What you could benefit from is heavy lifting, though 0 -
I did still lose on EM2LW, but it was less weight per month - almost exactly by the amount I upped my calories. The math was perfectly clear. Eating at 1200 NET did not damage my metabolism in any way because it was an appropriate amount. I believe I went from losing 4 to 4.5 lbs. per month to 2 to 2.5 lbs. per month. Given my RMR is 1662 instead of the 1450 to 1510 that the online calculators say it should be, there's clearly no reason to assume a much smaller person would be doing damage at netting 1200 a day.
If you're not NETTING 1200 though, I take it all back LOL. For me to net 1200, I eat anywhere from 1500 to 2200 on my workout days (I measure my calories burned with an HRM and subtract my RMR from it, so it's as accurate as it can be).
I don't know what the solution for you would be. It's a tough spot to be in. When I had my RMR tested, I really did think it would be lower than the average, so I was shocked, to say the least! But I do have a fair amount of muscle in there somewhere LOL. I plan on having it tested again in the spring - when I hit my 2 years on MFP mark. At that point, I should be less than 15 lbs. from my goal. I'll have my BF% tested again too.0 -
People are way too quick to jump to metabolic damage. 1200 calories is not that low for someone of her size. I'm taller, older, and bigger than her and I net 1200. I have had my RMR tested and it came out 10% higher than the online calculators. And EM2LW did NOT work for me (tried it for 3 months).
It sucks for you, but that doesn't mean you can just fix it by eating more. Not saying you can't try, but there may be nothing to actually fix. That said, what are your goals? Are you trying to lose more weight? Because it doesn't seem like you should.
But some people are to quick to assume that EM2WL doesn't work if they don't see results right away There are some members who took a year to fully heal their metabolism. It all depends on how long you've been restricting.
I saw a great quote in an article (not related to EM2WL) recently, about the same scientific principles, though. People assume that everyone's metabolism is different, no matter what their age/height/weight is. But in reality, the BMR or RMR of two people of the same height, age, and ratio of fat to lean muscle will actually be very similar, within 50 calories. You can do serious damage to that, though, by restricting calories for a long time.
*edit* Here's an article that sums it up: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500194_162-578886.html
Also, remember that RMR is the basic amount you need to maintain bodily functions. You need more to even get out of bed.
I do agree with the above—at your height and weight, you probably don't need to lose any more, especially not 7 more pounds, girly! What you could benefit from is heavy lifting, though
Not a fan of EM2WL, but I definitely agree with the heavy lifting part. I got through a plateau by lifting and now I'm at 16% body fat which definitely progress. Once I get to like ~13% or so I'll bulk.0 -
Nevermind.0
-
I am doing EM2WL and yes, you don't lose as fast, but I have done the low cal diets before and gained it all back after I stopped (and usually plateauing hard). Tried the low cal (netting 1200 calories) again this time, but when I lost my period for a couple months and was craving red meat like crazy, I knew something was seriously wrong. Researching on MFP I found the "In place of a road map" thread and from there moved to EM2WL.
I would rather lose slow and have it be a maintainable lifestyle rather than the deprivation of a low calorie diet, but that's just me. I want to maintain my bone density and muscle while losing weight too (not getting any younger).
I am currently at a BMR of 1750, recently recalculated TDEE of 2950 and calorie cut of 2560. I don't eat clean, but I am steadily losing (about 1 pound per week).0 -
I suspect my RMR is pretty low too as I am 10 years older than you and the same height. Us shorties are cursed this way, not all but I believe a lot of us are. Eating more is not always the best solution nor does having a smaller RMR mean we are damaged in some way. I tried eating more and it didn't work for me at all. I can maintain just fine but losing is sooo hard for me. I feel better when I eat less. I eat really healthy and exercise a lot and nothing moves my weight at all. It is a real bummer. Nice to know I am not alone. Eating more sounds like a dream, just not a dream I will ever be able to realize lol. At least we will be able to save money on food.
0 -
...you don't lose as fast, but I have done the low cal diets before and gained it all back after I stopped (and usually plateauing hard)....
I would rather lose slow and have it be a maintainable lifestyle rather than the deprivation of a low calorie diet, but that's just me. I want to maintain my bone density and muscle while losing weight too (not getting any younger).
Netting 1200 (while eating 1500 to 2200) is very maintainable. And I don't lose at a "fast" rate by anyone's definition. I lose, on average, .85 lbs. per week. I've also never plateaued in the nearly 2 years I've been doing this (at the beginning, it was a higher net than 1200 - I think it was 1460 at the most).
My entire point isn't that some people netting 1200 aren't eating too little. My point is that blanket statements like it's ALWAYS too little, regardless of the size of the person, are wrong and unhelpful.0 -
I suspect my RMR is pretty low too as I am 10 years older than you and the same height. Us shorties are cursed this way, not all but I believe a lot of us are. Eating more is not always the best solution nor does having a smaller RMR mean we are damaged in some way. I tried eating more and it didn't work for me at all. I can maintain just fine but losing is sooo hard for me. I feel better when I eat less. I eat really healthy and exercise a lot and nothing moves my weight at all. It is a real bummer. Nice to know I am not alone. Eating more sounds like a dream, just not a dream I will ever be able to realize lol. At least we will be able to save money on food.
I really appreciate this Never gives up, was feeling down about it but u know misery loves company so Im glad to suffer right there with you!0 -
...you don't lose as fast, but I have done the low cal diets before and gained it all back after I stopped (and usually plateauing hard)....
I would rather lose slow and have it be a maintainable lifestyle rather than the deprivation of a low calorie diet, but that's just me. I want to maintain my bone density and muscle while losing weight too (not getting any younger).
Netting 1200 (while eating 1500 to 2200) is very maintainable. And I don't lose at a "fast" rate by anyone's definition. I lose, on average, .85 lbs. per week. I've also never plateaued in the nearly 2 years I've been doing this (at the beginning, it was a higher net than 1200 - I think it was 1460 at the most).
My entire point isn't that some people netting 1200 aren't eating too little. My point is that blanket statements like it's ALWAYS too little, regardless of the size of the person, are wrong and unhelpful.
I agree, i dont think everyone can be put into a box0 -
Yep. My BMR is even lower than yours. I have my goals set to 800 and I lose like 1lb a month. I don't even log/eat back exercise calories either. Damn hypothyroidism.
I have hypothyroidism as well and have lost a lot of weight, you should really go to your doctor and get your levels worked out, and check them regularly! I'm eating between 1400 and 1500 calories a day and losing weight, (I don't usually eat back my exercise calories)0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
My doctor doesn't want me on synthroid because I have so many other medical issues that seem to get worse when we change something. She's worried about me having more seizure if I go on it as well as it affecting my heart because the connective tissues are weak. It's much safer for me to just eat a little less. I don't particularly mind it either. I've kind of gotten used to it.Yep. My BMR is even lower than yours. I have my goals set to 800 and I lose like 1lb a month. I don't even log/eat back exercise calories either. Damn hypothyroidism.
I have hypothyroidism as well and have lost a lot of weight, you should really go to your doctor and get your levels worked out, and check them regularly! I'm eating between 1400 and 1500 calories a day and losing weight, (I don't usually eat back my exercise calories)0 -
My doctor doesn't want me on synthroid because I have so many other medical issues that seem to get worse when we change something. She's worried about me having more seizure if I go on it as well as it affecting my heart because the connective tissues are weak. It's much safer for me to just eat a little less. I don't particularly mind it either. I've kind of gotten used to it.Yep. My BMR is even lower than yours. I have my goals set to 800 and I lose like 1lb a month. I don't even log/eat back exercise calories either. Damn hypothyroidism.
I have hypothyroidism as well and have lost a lot of weight, you should really go to your doctor and get your levels worked out, and check them regularly! I'm eating between 1400 and 1500 calories a day and losing weight, (I don't usually eat back my exercise calories)
You are 5"8 and weigh 113 lbs ????? Why the hell are you on a diet ?0 -
Check your thyroid, That was my problem. Digestion was super slow no matter what, Found out years later I had a slow thyroid. has been way better ever since!0
-
Thats what happens when you eat low calorie for long enough. How low are you guys going until you think you need to increase calories and take a weight hit? When your eating a 3 oz serving of carrots for dinner.0
-
I think maintaining at your height/weight is good and that's what you've been doing.
I wouldn't change my calories at all, I'd just do more heavy-ish weight training. That way you'll look tighter and eventually drop body fat/inches.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions