RMR Test Results- Very Very Surprised
Replies
-
You know what mate you are old enough to make your own decisions. If you want to eat so little for a week knock yourself out.
You really need to know your audience though because it isnt just the people replying who are reading this. There are lots of lurkers for whom eating VLCD is a really bad idea - youngsters who arent even overweight but think they need to be size 0, overweight people who think the only way to lose weight is eat tiny amounts and end up giving up, people who have been on the diet rollercoaster for years who lose and gain because they never learn to eat properly.
Thats why people on this site will continue to argue that VLCD is a bad idea and that a smaller deficit and patience is the way to go, because if it saves one kid from an eating disorder, or one morbidly obsese person from giving up then it is worth it.
0 -
Yes, PLEASE provide me a study to show this.I don't see anything in the article that addresses my point? I was discounting the notion that people with high levels of BF% will somehow burn significant amounts of muscle tissue as opposed to fat when they significantly restrict calories and are in a deficit. They will always tend to burn fat before muscle. Do you want a study to show this or are we on the same page?
From the study I linked too...I will agree that muscle loss may occur with elite athletes and not the average fatty posting here.
>>One-hundred thirty overweight men (58) and women (72) between the ages of 40 and 56 were recruited into the study.<<
>> Further, irrespective of the amount of weight lost, participants in the PRO group obtained greater improvements in body composition as reflected by greater FM [fat mass] loss and attenuated relative lean mass loss.<<
The point here being that those didn't take protein DID suffer more noticable LBM loss. I don't have the full text of the study unfortunately.
I have eaten a good bit under the calories considered acceptable in the past and lost a good bit of weight while PRETTY MUCH maintaining STRENGTH. Recently for a month I lost significant weight while increasing STRENGTH.No. Newbie with a different perspective is taking a different approach to weight loss which has upset the "eat more, not less" crowd. Drink our Kool aid or we get mad and post insults and immature memes and gifs cause we like to march in lock step with the conventional clap trap. And if you respond to our insults, we will call you a meanie.................
I would still like to see a study that proves the OP claims.
I always like to see studes, because it gives me a better insight in to how our bodies work in reality.0 -
Hitting the gym for 33 years, knows more than all of us fools.... and is a self-proclaimed fattie.0
-
Hitting the gym for 33 years, knows more than all of us fools.... and is a self-proclaimed fattie.
And if this is all about eating nothing but water and air to lose 50lbs, what has being laid up with an injury got to do with it?0 -
:laugh:0
-
Let me get this straight.
You estimated a rough TDEE/BMR. Decided to eat below these.
You then had your RMR professionally measured, discovered it was much higher than you anticipated, and are now going to eat even less than you were before.
Yep, for this week. I would like to get 2-4 more lbs off this week. And then I'll bring up the calories next week. I'm NOT going to go out and have a pie to celebrate. I'd rather whack off a couple more pounds this week and re-set the calories next week.
you realize that you are just going to lose mainly water weight with your fast and then when you go back to eating at regular levels you will just gain most of what you lost back…
I would just keep doing what you are doing, as it is working...0 -
i would be curious as to how you can direct your body to burn 100% fat and not reach for other sources of energy….fat burning is not a perfect process and there is always going to be additional energy (i.e. muslce) that is burned in the process….0
-
Why have you written this post??0
-
Wow, you're not paying for anything?? I wish I had a free gym and a free personal trainer.
I stick by a post I made a few pages back. Show me some good progress pictures where you don't look like crap for undereating and I will shut my mouth.
Show me a progress pic where you look half as good as any of the shirtless dudes in this thread who are telling you you're doing it wrong, and I will eat my damn hat.
Besides, I never claimed I was as lean as the 20 somethings here. I still have a way to go. And consider myself a fattie
been lifting and/or dieting since the 80's and is still a self proclaimed "fattie" yet, claims to know more than the rest of people who have had success and claims to be doing it better than them..
interesting thread...0 -
Background:
SW 11/01/2013 265lbs
12/31/2013 220lbs
CW 02/09/2014 217lbs
Dropped 40 plus in a couple of months. Stagnated/increased for a few weeks in January. Started working with a Body Builder/Nutrionalist 2 weeks ago. Started carb/calorie cycling and upping both. Weight loss resumed. After doing some research and reading here, I was concerned about slowed metabolism or metabolic damage. In order to lose the weight in the first couple of months, I was well below 1200 calories. Most days I was 700-900 calories and some days zero calories when I fasted, frequently. My estimated RMR was anywhere from 1800-2000 depending on the calculator used. So I had some pretty aggressive deficits and became concerned with a metabolic slowdown. Decided to get an RMR test to get more accurate RMR/BMR and TDEE numbers so I could re-assess and try to get off another 10-20lbs. Test came back today and I was expecting the bad news. I was shocked:
RMR was about 2300!
That is about 10%-25% HIGHER than the estimates. Chest and biceps are up and waist is down. So LBM is way up and fat is way down. I was gonna up the calories today to celebrate and take the weight off slower. Screw that! I am so jacked and pumped I am going to do a 36 hour fast and squeeze off a few more pounds and restrict calories this week to get off as much as possible. I find that whenever I fast, I set a new lower weight baseline that makes it easier to take the weight down. Another week of sacrifice aint no biggie. I can do another week of a couple grilled chicken caesar salads and water per day. Next week the Bodybuilder will come up with new higher numbers to cycle up the calories and carbs. I'm gonna guess he'll want to take up the low end and high end UP by 100-200 calories per day. Light at the end of the tunnel. Goal weight is in the single digits.
Ever thought of NOT starving yourself and get the weight off slowly - it will have taken more than a few weeks to put the weight on so is gonna take more than that to get the weight off. Your methods are not really appropriate for sustained weight loss...unless you plan on eating this way for the rest of your life...0 -
Balancing Weight Loss versus LBM. This is a problem NOBODY here has....................
I know this has no relevance but I think that is hideous! Fair play to have that level of dedication but I think that is awful! lol0 -
Who is "the Body Builder" that OP keeps talking about? Is this one particular person?0
-
Who is "the Body Builder" that OP keeps talking about? Is this one particular person?
I assumed he meant whoever is "training" him.0 -
OP - was it tested by breathing into a device thingy? If so, they're not great. I had this done (before I found MFP and the error of my ways) before starting a protein sparing VLCD diet. Was seemingly around the 1400 mark before I starved myself for months for the end test result to be in the region of 1900?!? So, without any resistance training I seemingly had a massive improvement - even though my *kitten* turned to a saggy grannyish mess as opposed to what I've got now from squats etc.
I'm with the others who are telling you not to drop calories more - if it is an accurate RMR reading, you surely want to keep it good and high (by preserving as much LBM as possible)?0 -
Why have you written this post??
^^^^^^^^^^^YES0 -
You know what mate you are old enough to make your own decisions. If you want to eat so little for a week knock yourself out.
You really need to know your audience though because it isnt just the people replying who are reading this. There are lots of lurkers for whom eating VLCD is a really bad idea - youngsters who arent even overweight but think they need to be size 0, overweight people who think the only way to lose weight is eat tiny amounts and end up giving up, people who have been on the diet rollercoaster for years who lose and gain because they never learn to eat properly.
Thats why people on this site will continue to argue that VLCD is a bad idea and that a smaller deficit and patience is the way to go, because if it saves one kid from an eating disorder, or one morbidly obsese person from giving up then it is worth it.
Excellent response which many of us fail to remember when posting here.0 -
Who is "the Body Builder" that OP keeps talking about? Is this one particular person?
apparently, it is the broscientist that he gets all his information from....0 -
Who is "the Body Builder" that OP keeps talking about? Is this one particular person?
I love how he always capitalizes it, as if it's a proper noun. He's giving this person more credit than they deserve in more ways than one.
Regardless, this was a somewhat entertaining read to start the day...0 -
Who is "the Body Builder" that OP keeps talking about? Is this one particular person?
apparently, it is the broscientist that he gets all his information from....
You crazy son... he is training with the GOAT Dorian Yates himself!0 -
OP - was it tested by breathing into a device thingy? If so, they're not great. I had this done (before I found MFP and the error of my ways) before starting a protein sparing VLCD diet. Was seemingly around the 1400 mark before I starved myself for months for the end test result to be in the region of 1900?!? So, without any resistance training I seemingly had a massive improvement - even though my *kitten* turned to a saggy grannyish mess as opposed to what I've got now from squats etc.
I'm with the others who are telling you not to drop calories more - if it is an accurate RMR reading, you surely want to keep it good and high (by preserving as much LBM as possible)?
It seems from this one study that the Bodygem is reasonable accurate and consistent http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/168374220 -
It was a pleasant surprise to wake up this morning and find my usual thoughts as I surf these forums written so eloquently by someone else. Bravo, OP.0
-
The. BEST.0 -
No. Here is the thing about losing LBM, that he explained to me. Yes, if you are Dorian Yates, Ronnie Coleman, or Phil Heath, you have to worry about balancing weight loss versus LBM when you are cutting for Mr Olympia. But guess what? I aint them. I and 99% of the people on this site are not elite athletes with a 3-10% body fat. I and most people here have significant stores of body fat in spite of my weight loss. You will burn fat before you burn muscle if you have fat stores. I may write more in depth about this. It is one of the mantras that people on this site get wrong. Most of us are too fat to burn muscle in any significant amounts.
Yep.
Likewise they are backwards about deficits and metabolism loss too. Time in a deficit is a stronger variable than magnitude of deficit for metabolism decline for a given amount of weight loss. Most people are going to losing a relatively fixed quantity, therefore magnitude and duration are inversely related. The advice to lose slow to preserve metabolism is the worst advice possible. If you have lose 8 lbs, spending 16 weeks in a consistent deficit will kill your metabolism far more than doing it in 3 weeks will, especially if you consider the 13 weeks at maintenance you'd get going faster.
Loss of muscle mass, if you have the basics of strength training and adequate protein intake down, does not become a significant factor until you are well into the single digits of BF% (for males, mid teens for females). People design their whole program around the fear of an effect that does not apply to them.0 -
Not even sure why I'm jumping into this, but a good review article about free fat mass/total weight loss ratios in 26 studies that have been done:
Int J Obes (Lond). 2007 May;31(5):743-50. Epub 2006 Oct 31.
Changes in fat-free mass during significant weight loss: a systematic review.
Chaston TB, Dixon JB, O'Brien PE.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17075583
Basically, you will lose muscle mass while losing weight, but how much is impacted by your level of calorie deficit (more extreme leads to more muscle loss) and exercise can help to preserve muscle mass.0 -
Just curious, but do you have a reputable source for this? I just read something (can't remember where) that said there was little evidence to support the "lose slower to keep it off" theory. I'm honestly asking...
Likewise they are backwards about deficits and metabolism loss too. Time in a deficit is a stronger variable than magnitude of deficit for metabolism decline for a given amount of weight loss. Most people are going to losing a relatively fixed quantity, therefore magnitude and duration are inversely related. The advice to lose slow to preserve metabolism is the worst advice possible. If you have lose 8 lbs, spending 16 weeks in a consistent deficit will kill your metabolism far more than doing it in 3 weeks will, especially if you consider the 13 weeks at maintenance you'd get going faster.0 -
OP - was it tested by breathing into a device thingy? If so, they're not great. I had this done (before I found MFP and the error of my ways) before starting a protein sparing VLCD diet. Was seemingly around the 1400 mark before I starved myself for months for the end test result to be in the region of 1900?!? So, without any resistance training I seemingly had a massive improvement - even though my *kitten* turned to a saggy grannyish mess as opposed to what I've got now from squats etc.
I'm with the others who are telling you not to drop calories more - if it is an accurate RMR reading, you surely want to keep it good and high (by preserving as much LBM as possible)?
It seems from this one study that the Bodygem is reasonable accurate and consistent http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16837422
My results tell me different. Granted, that is only me.
I had great weight loss results, don't get me wrong, and looked great in clothes. The diet I did is nothing like the OP is suggesting btw (think he only wants to do a few days fasting).
I obviously can't compete with an actual study, but from knowing what I know now, there is no way I gained enough muscle to justify a 500 cal jump (I would say I probably lost muscle) just by meal frequency with NO resistance training.
Just throwing my experience out there as it is something else to consider.
ETA: not even sure if it was a Bodygem that was used, but it does sound familiar.0 -
I say this, I have personally tested "common" wisdom about deficit size, metabolism, and cardio.
And like the OP I came to the conclusion that BBer wisdom (muscle loss is insignificant until well into the single digits) is in fact correct, that muscle mass loss is not significant no matter how big your deficit, even while moderately lean (I've never gotten deep into the single digits). (again, assuming regular strength training and adequate protein intake, it is well established that these things matter for muscle mass preservation).
I measure my metabolism via reverse engineering CI/CO data with the scale, and came to the conclusion after several different cuts that metabolism always drops when in a deficit, the magnitude of deficit really doen't have an impact on the slope. The slope will sharpen the leaner you are. By and large the variables that affect metabolism loss the most are time in a deficit and leanness. Size of deficit and quantity of cardio seems to have zero impact above and beyond that.
Through trial and error I figured out to cut as fast as possible when cutting, doing as much easy cardio as is reasonably possible. Cut fast, get it over with and get out of a deficit.
For people that need to lose more, cutting super hard with frequent longer diet breaks (2 weeks+) is preferable to straight linear cutting at a lower rate. If you're going to lose 8 lbs in 2 months, doing it in two 2 week bursts at 2 lb/wk with two 2 week diet breaks is far better than 8 weeks at 1 lb/wk with no breaks.0 -
In because I am finding the discussion interesting and hoping someone will post a study to back up the op's side of the discussion. Esp since several studies have been posted against it0
-
so is your comment
Balancing Weight Loss versus LBM. This is a problem NOBODY here has....................
I know this has no relevance but I think that is hideous! Fair play to have that level of dedication but I think that is awful! lol0 -
Balancing Weight Loss versus LBM. This is a problem NOBODY here has....................
I know this has no relevance but I think that is hideous! Fair play to have that level of dedication but I think that is awful! lol
I imagine that there are plenty of people who think your body type is hideous. Thankfully they have the sense not to say so.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions