Overweight? Maybe You Really Can Blame Your Metabolism

135

Replies

  • librarianjenne
    librarianjenne Posts: 66 Member
    IMHO: Let's assume that not everyone is lying, is unaware of how much they eat, is eating in secret or has an unknown health issue. Two committed people follow the same weight loss and exercise program but have very different results. Is it possible that metabolism played a part in this?!!! The study on the sets of twins demonstrated this very nicely. As the scientific community is fond of saying, more and larger studies need to be done and they will need to understand a lot more, but it does appear to support the premise that metabolisms do differ from one person to another. If the amount of movement and the reduction in calories needed by one person is distinctly greater than what another needs, discounting variations in metabolism and saying that it's just a matter of eating less and moving more is too simplistic and unrealistic. Variety is the spice of life and, evidently, the spice of metabolisms. :wink:

    It is indeed possible that two people with the same measurements will have different metabolisms. But just because my friend can eat 2500 calories a day and maintain her weight doesn't mean I can. Which is to say that if someone is dedicated to losing weight, it will take some experimentation to determine what the calorie range is for that person to lose weight. I have a razor-thin margin for weight loss. Pretty much if I net more than 1200 calories in a day, I will maintain or gain. It probably is genetics and if I'm ever in a famine, I will be grateful for it, but since I want to be thin, I have to work within this margin. It is a matter of burning more than you eat, but it's not a matter of saying a certain number will work for everyone.
  • librarianjenne
    librarianjenne Posts: 66 Member


    Yes you're right food is everywhere especially cheap junk food/fast food. So many people drive from there home to the store where I live when it's right across the road so I ride my bike and bring my backpack, it only takes 2 minutes to get there and it saves me money on gas. I might have to go to the store 2-3 times a week because I can't carry that much but I get more exercise this way and I don't mind.

    I envy you! I always seem to move to right outside safe biking zones for grocery stores, at least, since I moved to the States.
  • jdm_taco
    jdm_taco Posts: 999 Member
    As a former fatty, I blame myself and myself only. Too much food and too little movement. I'd imagine the overwhelming majority of people who are overweight can only blame their poor dietary habits and lack of exercise.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,908 Member
    For the general population not suffering any disease or hormonal issue, being overweight is really just about over consumption. That's pretty much it.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • RobynMWilson
    RobynMWilson Posts: 1,540 Member
    I didn't read the article but let me tell you about my odds:

    1. I was obese as a kid.
    2. I come from a long line of obesity, including most of my aunts, uncle, my dad was an obese child, my brother was an obese child and still is obese. At least 2/3 of my family is obese.
    3. I was raised on slop and was very sedentary as a kid.
    4. Diabetes and hypothyroidism run wild in my family.

    Yet, I eat 2000 cals per day as a 40 year old woman. Because even though genetically I have a slow metabolism, by adding muscle to my body and eating several small meals throughout the day and shrinking my stomach naturally through portion control, I can EAT and of course I exercise! I would NOT have maintained my 70-lb weight loss for the better part of 20 years if I hadn't practiced portion control and exercised!

    Yes, we can blame our metabolisms, or we can take the action steps necessary to speed up our metabolisms as much as possible!
  • Missjulesdid
    Missjulesdid Posts: 1,444 Member
    I have an impaired metabolism. I finally reached the point in my life where I decided to own it. Additionally I had a larger than average stomach that produced a larger than average amount of hunger hormone..This was genetic not because my stomach "stretched" My stomach is actually LONGER than average so I had to eat more than average to get the "full" signal...

    Now.. smaller than average metabolism... larger than average stomach.. more than average hunger hormone... PLUS I absolutely ADORE everything about food with a special weakness for the high calorie variety.. PLUS I did use food as an emotional crutch at times....oh and just to top it all off I also have lipodema which is just a medical way of saying big fat legs that have a special kind of fat that does NOT release like normal fat does.

    So I counted calories, dealt with the mental aspect of eating and relying on food as a stress reliever AND I had 75% of my stomach removed.

    I STILL have the impaired metabolism. I still adore food. I still have lipodema.. BUT I am having success at not eating as a stress reliever, I don't need three sandwiches to fill me up anymore AND I don't feel hungry ALL THE FREAKING TIME!

    So if you fix the things you CAN fix, it's a lot easier to manage those things you can't
  • hookilau
    hookilau Posts: 3,134 Member
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiponectin
    http://www.livestrong.com/article/549960-glycemic-load-adiponectin/
    http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=207088

    I am sharing links to a fraction of the things I have been reading over the last 10 years. A calorie is not a calorie The quality of your nutrition matters MORE.

    Mainstream understanding of nutrition and weightloss must begin to digest current science or it will further resemble "the flat-earth society".

    In sum, the first link will sound like doom--if you are overweight you body makes less of what is needed to burn fat. But the light at the end of the tunnel is that exercise and select nutrients will create an environment where your body will begin making more adiponectin.

    The other links point to the value of a low-glycemic diet for weightloss.

    I began following a low-glycemic diet years ago. It stabilized my weight and although it was not enough for me to have weightloss, my overall health improved dramatically. Naturally, I began following the biological mechanism of cellular energy further back to digestion. I made further dietary forever changes and added moderate cardio to toning and lost 14 lbs & nearly 20" down quickly.

    It would be a whole other post to discuss how hard cardio causes weight gain in me and the few studies I found that proved I am not mistaken!

    Take a look at low-glycemic diet

    Othankgod...someone with a brain! :D ♥♥
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    For various reasons my metabolism has always been slower than normal. It sucks. But it is not an excuse to be obese. I learned early on that to stay within a healthy weight, I had to watch my calorie intake. I simply could not eat like some other people around me could eat. And I had to stay fairly active.

    BUT, that also meant that if I ate the right foods, I would not be hungry on a much lower calorie level than others who have higher metabolisms. It is all relative.
    If your body burns 3000 cals a day, and you eat 3500, you will gain a pound a week.
    If your body burns 1500 cals, and you eat 2000, you will also gain a pound a week.

    The secret that I have found, is finding out the number that is right for me, figuring out the macros that work best for me, and willpower to only eat when I am hungry, and not just because I am bored, or frustrated, or because it just smells so good!
  • geebusuk
    geebusuk Posts: 3,348 Member
    I always thought I had a slow metabolism.

    Nope.

    Best way to increase the calories you burn is to be more active - especially lifting heavy weights, it seems.
    This can generally have a much bigger effect than the differences in your genetics from what I've seen.
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    For the general population not suffering any disease or hormonal issue, being overweight is really just about over consumption. That's pretty much it.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    I agree. SO why are there so many posts and threads telling people to eat MORE???
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    I think that metabolism is a big factor in gaining weight but there are easy cheap ways to speed up your metabolism. For example I have a pretty pants metabolism, I just look at food and put weight on, so I drink green tea a lot. There are supplements out there for metabolism but some are a bit pricey.

    I'm not exactly sure what a pretty pants metabolism is, but none of those supplements makes much of a difference in metabolism. I have an autoimmune disease that causes my metabolism to speed up, and there's a green tea drink that I really like. I asked my doctor if it would compound the problem with my metabolism, and he laughed. He told me to drink as much as I wanted and it wouldn't make much difference. Most studies I've seen on green tea are based on changing from a sugery drink to green tea and losing XXX pounds a year. You could sub water and get the same thing.

    The only thing proven to make a real change in metabolism is exercise, and that effect is temporary. So you gotta hit it all the time. :bigsmile:
    I just came in to say I'm glad you commented here so I don't need to go on a speal about
    GreenTeaMagic1.jpg
    NOTE: In summary, there is none.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    For the general population not suffering any disease or hormonal issue, being overweight is really just about over consumption. That's pretty much it.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    I agree. SO why are there so many posts and threads telling people to eat MORE???
    Two completely separate issues. Over consumption leads to obesity. People come to MFP to lose weight, but cut calories to an extreme and unhealthy amount. The correct way is somewhere between those two extremes. For example, I can lose weight eating 2500 calories a day, due to intense weight training and a very active job (burning between 3000-3500 calories a day.) If I decided to cut my intake to 1500 calories a day or less, that would eventually cause serious health issues, and the correct answer would be to eat more (and still lose weight.) Eating more (for me) would be closer to 2500 calories, it doesn't mean eat 10,000 calories.

    The actual numbers may vary from person to person, but the concept doesn't.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    The article doesn't address the question because the answer has nothing to do with genetics. 40 years ago we ate about 500 calories a day less than we do today, and we were far more active, both at work, and leisure time, due to not having the advanced technology that automates so much of our lives nowadays.

    It's really a simple issue to comprehend. We eat more and move less. To fix the problem everyone needs to eat less and move more.

    40 years ago we ate much less sugar. Open this link to look at the charts,
    http://blog.zestos.co.nz/2010/09/sugar-consumption-been-high-before.html

    Wednesday, September 15, 2010

    Now since the 70's - ie over 40 years, the sugar consumption has continued to rise. As the graph below shows the total sugar intake as gone from 55 kg / person to 69 kg / person. This increase is with line with the trend of the above graph. Also note that the types of sugar have changed from sugar (sucrose) to glucose and high fructose corn syrup. Neither glucose or fructose corn syrup are found in large quantities in nature (or not at all with high fructose syrup).




    Take a look at low-glycemic eating.
    Glucose is found everywhere in nature. And high fructose corn syrup is irrelevant, as it's just a blend of glucose and fructose in a custom mix. You do know that sucrose is made up of glucose and fructose, right? You also know that the glycemic index has been proven as basically useless, also?

    Also, let's put your numbers in perspective (I'm ignoring the blog, just using what you've posted. Different from my numbers, but mine are official US consumption.) You're talking a difference of 100 calories a day in sugar. Now, please find the total difference in caloric Intake from the 70's until today, from all sources, otherwise your argument is completely meaningless.

    Based on USDA data, the average American consumes 500 calories per day more than they did in the 70's, and only about 40 of those 500 calories come from sugar.
  • slim4health56
    slim4health56 Posts: 439 Member
    Our weight is a result of what we consume, multiplied by genetics and disease (feel free to include metabolism in this primordial soup). Ultra thin until my mid thirties, I could eat 3000-4000 calories a day and never exercise AND never gain an ounce (just like my mother, aunts, and cousins). Mid thirties added hypothyroidism to my life, which triggered weight gain, bad diets, more weight, more bad diets...well, you get the 60 pound picture. Denial. I just can't eat the way I ate as a younger person due to the slow metabolism associated with the thyroid disease. HOWEVER - I also know I can't blame the disease. I need to relearn how to eat sensibly - something I didn't learn to do during the first 30 years of my life so add in bad habits to this mix. Geeze, it's hard (my day for a pity party). That's my opinion!:drinker:
  • TheRealParisLove
    TheRealParisLove Posts: 1,907 Member
    Apparently this genetic mutation has only shown up in the last 30 years and only in wealthy cultures? I suppose that is possible, but that is a crazy fast mutation. Usually evolutionary changes take tens of thousands of years, not 30.

    I smell a diet drug marketing opportunity coming.
  • I think there are definitely genetically different metabolic rates.

    Having a fast metabolism is nice because you can eat like **** and stay lean, but bad because you have to eat a whole lot to build and keep muscle.

    Having a slow metabolism is nice because it's pretty easy to build muscle, but bad because to be lean you have to eat very carefully.

    I think they key is tracking your diet and adjusting on a monthly basis based on how your body is responding.
  • ...the only diet drugs that work are illegal without prescriptions.
  • geebusuk
    geebusuk Posts: 3,348 Member
    I've been doing some metabolic testing with a new leaf machine.

    The difference in people's base rates doesn't vary that much in my experience - certainly no where near the amount a bit of exercise will add to it.

    The only time I've tested myself was the morning after a 'big three' weights session the day before.
    I came out at just under 2400 calories - I'd be willing to bet related to the weights I'd done the day before (should have left a bit longer), which does fit in with the 'elevated metabolism' for the next 39 hours or whatever - and fitted in with what I was eating at the time.
    I am sharing links to a fraction of the things I have been reading over the last 10 years. A calorie is not a calorie The quality of your nutrition matters MORE.
    So someone eating a diet of fast food (fat head) or a diet of twinkies (Mark Haub), would probably not lose weight and would end up less healthy?

    Of course, they both lost weight AND using common indicators of health, were more healthy at the end of it.
  • lpina2mi
    lpina2mi Posts: 425 Member
    For various reasons my metabolism has always been slower than normal. It sucks. But it is not an excuse to be obese. I learned early on that to stay within a healthy weight, I had to watch my calorie intake. I simply could not eat like some other people around me could eat. And I had to stay fairly active.

    BUT, that also meant that if I ate the right foods, I would not be hungry on a much lower calorie level than others who have higher metabolisms. It is all relative.
    If your body burns 3000 cals a day, and you eat 3500, you will gain a pound a week.
    If your body burns 1500 cals, and you eat 2000, you will also gain a pound a week.

    The secret that I have found, is finding out the number that is right for me, figuring out the macros that work best for me, and willpower to only eat when I am hungry, and not just because I am bored, or frustrated, or because it just smells so good!

    Yes.
  • tomg33
    tomg33 Posts: 305 Member
    For the general population not suffering any disease or hormonal issue, being overweight is really just about over consumption. That's pretty much it.

    Exactly. For God's sake people... Open your eyes.

    This victim mentality is so prevalent in the fitness community because everyone wants to make excuses for why they're so "into" fitness but don't get results. Lying to others is one thing but lying to yourself is the most pathetic, especially since this website is designed around a food intake logging system.

    If you truly had a metabolic disorder you'd almost certainly know about it unless you don't care about your health at all.

    Also, even if your "metabolism" was perhaps 20% slower than the next guy, it still comes down to eating less and moving more.