Why do I see body builders eating less than me?
Noreenmarie1234
Posts: 7,492 Member
I am very underweight right now. I lost my brother 6 months ago and lost weight. I am not about 20lbs underweight and have been trying to gain for a few months. I have been eating 1900-2100 a day. (1900 on days I just am not hungry at all) Yes I am using a food scale and I weight and measure everything accurately.
I eat about 110-130g protein a day and not much carbs. I only exercise 5 days a week for an hour either on the elliptical or yoga.
I see all these people 20-60lbs heavier than me eating only 1500 to maintain. There is a body builder I saw on here who looks incredible with huge muscles and she has an open diary and is only eating 1500 a day as far back as you go?? How can this be? How can one person at a higher weight maintain and gain lean muscle on 1500 when I cannot even gain on 2000? It makes me question whether metabolisms REALLY are the same for each person (of same body mass, height, etc). I should not be able to maintain 20lbs underweight on this level. If I were to eat what others eat or what the calculators say are my maintenance I would lose weight. I lost to this weight by eating 1300 following the same exercise regime. I see others on 1500 calorie diets for longer than I was and they don't end up as sickly thin as me?! It is just frustrating because I want to eat more but have trouble because I hate eating when I'm not hungry because food doesn't taste good.
What do you guys think about differences in metabolism? Do you believe there can be from person to person, or do you think it follows a strict formula?
(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
I eat about 110-130g protein a day and not much carbs. I only exercise 5 days a week for an hour either on the elliptical or yoga.
I see all these people 20-60lbs heavier than me eating only 1500 to maintain. There is a body builder I saw on here who looks incredible with huge muscles and she has an open diary and is only eating 1500 a day as far back as you go?? How can this be? How can one person at a higher weight maintain and gain lean muscle on 1500 when I cannot even gain on 2000? It makes me question whether metabolisms REALLY are the same for each person (of same body mass, height, etc). I should not be able to maintain 20lbs underweight on this level. If I were to eat what others eat or what the calculators say are my maintenance I would lose weight. I lost to this weight by eating 1300 following the same exercise regime. I see others on 1500 calorie diets for longer than I was and they don't end up as sickly thin as me?! It is just frustrating because I want to eat more but have trouble because I hate eating when I'm not hungry because food doesn't taste good.
What do you guys think about differences in metabolism? Do you believe there can be from person to person, or do you think it follows a strict formula?
(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
0
Replies
-
Is it possible that person could be cutting??
Her age, weight, how tall this person is, her workouts, etc. factors in what people eat.0 -
Sometimes at the end of cutting when a bodybuilder is close to a show they will eat very low calorie. Part of it could be that they started cutting too close to a show and part of it could be a variety of metabolic adaptations.0
-
it could be they aren't accurately using MFP, i sometimes only log half days or partial days just to see what a particular meal is. not everyone logs accurately.0
-
it could be they aren't accurately using MFP, i sometimes only log half days or partial days just to see what a particular meal is. not everyone logs accurately.
That's another good point. If she's a bodybuilder she may have a meal plan and logs partially just to make sure she meets specific goals or minimums.0 -
^^
I've been known to track up until dinner, just to see where I'm at on protein, so I know if I need steak or french toast (or whatever) for dinner. I haven't done that in a while, and I'm not a bodybuilder, but it's the same idea.0 -
1 - they could be cutting
2 - they may be under-reporting...i don't log anymore, but when I did for maintenance, I very often wouldn't report everything...I used my diary at that point to basically say, "sweet...I'm at 2,000 calories...I can have a kick *kitten* dinner tonight and a beer and not sweat it."
also, you would have to consider other activity variables...a lot of bodybuilder types don't do much cardio...they're not going to have the calorie requirements of someone who, for example, participates in endurance events.
Yes, people's metabolisms differ, but not that much...couple hundred calories. There are outliers of course, but those are the exception and often there are other metabolic issues and health issues going on.0 -
Examine has a pretty good write up about the question of metabolism varying between two different people.
Essentially, no, there aren't huge differences in basal metabolic rate, even for people of differing heights and masses. There are rare outliers with some kind of condition, but chances are low the difference in BMR between two people explains differences in outcome.
http://examine.com/faq/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-people/One study[1] noted that one standard deviation of variance for resting metabolic rate (how many calories are burnt by living) was 5-8%; meaning 1 standard deviation of the population (68%) was within 6-8% of the average metabolic rate. Extending this, 2 standard deviations of the population (96%) was within 10-16% of the population average.[1]
Extending this into practical terms and assuming an average expenditure of 2000kcal a day, 68% of the population falls into the range of 1840-2160kcal daily while 96% of the population is in the range of 1680-2320kcal daily. Comparing somebody at or below the 5th percentile with somebody at or above the 95th percentile would yield a difference of possibly 600kcal daily, and the chance of this occurring (comparing the self to a friend) is 0.50%, assuming two completely random persons.0 -
Also, she might not being doing as much cardio as you are. From my experience, an hour of cardio is going to burn a lot more calories during that hour than an hour of lifting.0
-
No, mitochondria performing cellular respiration makes 38 ATP per molecule of glucose, in practice some gets lost, but that isn't something that really varies based on mitochondria in a person.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
Just consider, if some people had hyperefficient mitochondria during human evolution, other than the most recent 100 years or so, wouldn't they have a huge survival rate advantage being able to live off less food?
Human ancestors initially started walking upright over a savings of around 4 calories per km walking on two legs versus chimp style 4 limbed gaits. Evolution is pretty cut throat on these metabolic issues.0 -
No, mitochondria performing cellular respiration makes 38 ATP per molecule of glucose, in practice some gets lost, but that isn't something that really varies based on mitochondria in a person.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
Just consider, if some people had hyperefficient mitochondria during human evolution, other than the most recent 100 years or so, wouldn't they have a huge survival rate advantage being able to live off less food?
Human ancestors initially started walking upright over a savings of around 4 calories per km walking on two legs versus chimp style 4 limbed gaits. Evolution is pretty cut throat on these metabolic issues.
Errrrrrrr! I had to go back and read old notes from school. For some reason I have 36 or 38 ATP written down and of course this was many years ago so I can't remember why. This might drive me crazy for the next few hours
0 -
No, mitochondria performing cellular respiration makes 38 ATP per molecule of glucose, in practice some gets lost, but that isn't something that really varies based on mitochondria in a person.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
Just consider, if some people had hyperefficient mitochondria during human evolution, other than the most recent 100 years or so, wouldn't they have a huge survival rate advantage being able to live off less food?
Human ancestors initially started walking upright over a savings of around 4 calories per km walking on two legs versus chimp style 4 limbed gaits. Evolution is pretty cut throat on these metabolic issues.
Errrrrrrr! I had to go back and read old notes from school. For some reason I have 36 or 38 ATP written down and of course this was many years ago so I can't remember why. This might drive me crazy for the next few hours
Eukaryotic cells expend about 2 ATP moving things into the mitochondria (pyruvate for example). So 36 instead of 38.
0 -
Wow, thanks for this, very interesting.Examine has a pretty good write up about the question of metabolism varying between two different people.
Essentially, no, there aren't huge differences in basal metabolic rate, even for people of differing heights and masses. There are rare outliers with some kind of condition, but chances are low the difference in BMR between two people explains differences in outcome.
http://examine.com/faq/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-people/One study[1] noted that one standard deviation of variance for resting metabolic rate (how many calories are burnt by living) was 5-8%; meaning 1 standard deviation of the population (68%) was within 6-8% of the average metabolic rate. Extending this, 2 standard deviations of the population (96%) was within 10-16% of the population average.[1]
Extending this into practical terms and assuming an average expenditure of 2000kcal a day, 68% of the population falls into the range of 1840-2160kcal daily while 96% of the population is in the range of 1680-2320kcal daily. Comparing somebody at or below the 5th percentile with somebody at or above the 95th percentile would yield a difference of possibly 600kcal daily, and the chance of this occurring (comparing the self to a friend) is 0.50%, assuming two completely random persons.
0 -
Thanks for all the replies your right about the cutting and not logging.0
-
No, mitochondria performing cellular respiration makes 38 ATP per molecule of glucose, in practice some gets lost, but that isn't something that really varies based on mitochondria in a person.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
Just consider, if some people had hyperefficient mitochondria during human evolution, other than the most recent 100 years or so, wouldn't they have a huge survival rate advantage being able to live off less food?
Human ancestors initially started walking upright over a savings of around 4 calories per km walking on two legs versus chimp style 4 limbed gaits. Evolution is pretty cut throat on these metabolic issues.
Errrrrrrr! I had to go back and read old notes from school. For some reason I have 36 or 38 ATP written down and of course this was many years ago so I can't remember why. This might drive me crazy for the next few hours
Actually, now they are teaching (I am in medical school) that it may be closer to only 29, lol who knows.
0 -
Thanks for the replies, I enjoyed reading them and hearing what you guys thought.0
-
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »
No, mitochondria performing cellular respiration makes 38 ATP per molecule of glucose, in practice some gets lost, but that isn't something that really varies based on mitochondria in a person.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
Just consider, if some people had hyperefficient mitochondria during human evolution, other than the most recent 100 years or so, wouldn't they have a huge survival rate advantage being able to live off less food?
Human ancestors initially started walking upright over a savings of around 4 calories per km walking on two legs versus chimp style 4 limbed gaits. Evolution is pretty cut throat on these metabolic issues.
Errrrrrrr! I had to go back and read old notes from school. For some reason I have 36 or 38 ATP written down and of course this was many years ago so I can't remember why. This might drive me crazy for the next few hours
Actually, now they are teaching (I am in medical school) that it may be closer to only 29, lol who knows.
Thanks! Did a little reading and saw that the number has been revised. Thanks for sharing what is being taught now 0 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »
No, mitochondria performing cellular respiration makes 38 ATP per molecule of glucose, in practice some gets lost, but that isn't something that really varies based on mitochondria in a person.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
Just consider, if some people had hyperefficient mitochondria during human evolution, other than the most recent 100 years or so, wouldn't they have a huge survival rate advantage being able to live off less food?
Human ancestors initially started walking upright over a savings of around 4 calories per km walking on two legs versus chimp style 4 limbed gaits. Evolution is pretty cut throat on these metabolic issues.
Errrrrrrr! I had to go back and read old notes from school. For some reason I have 36 or 38 ATP written down and of course this was many years ago so I can't remember why. This might drive me crazy for the next few hours
Actually, now they are teaching (I am in medical school) that it may be closer to only 29, lol who knows.
29-30ish represents a typical amount that results after ones are lost to membrane leakage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_respiration#Aerobic_respiration0 -
How many carbs do you eat and why do you not eat many? if you mind mind me asking
0 -
Eating 110-130 protein would equate to around 440 to 520 calories of her total 1900 to 2100 calories. I highly doubt there is a "low carb" equation in these calories...
This sparked my curiosity as well..
0 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »I eat about 110-130g protein a day and not much carbs. I only exercise 5 days a week for an hour either on the elliptical or yoga.
We're the same height and eat very similar calories and i'm maintaining.
If i wanted to gain weight, i would be eating more Carbs and doing less exercise!
0 -
So it's a near certainty that one would know people at opposite extremes.Examine has a pretty good write up about the question of metabolism varying between two different people.
Essentially, no, there aren't huge differences in basal metabolic rate, even for people of differing heights and masses. There are rare outliers with some kind of condition, but chances are low the difference in BMR between two people explains differences in outcome.
http://examine.com/faq/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-people/One study[1] noted that one standard deviation of variance for resting metabolic rate (how many calories are burnt by living) was 5-8%; meaning 1 standard deviation of the population (68%) was within 6-8% of the average metabolic rate. Extending this, 2 standard deviations of the population (96%) was within 10-16% of the population average.[1]
Extending this into practical terms and assuming an average expenditure of 2000kcal a day, 68% of the population falls into the range of 1840-2160kcal daily while 96% of the population is in the range of 1680-2320kcal daily. Comparing somebody at or below the 5th percentile with somebody at or above the 95th percentile would yield a difference of possibly 600kcal daily, and the chance of this occurring (comparing the self to a friend) is 0.50%, assuming two completely random persons.
Comparing somebody at or below the 5th percentile with somebody at or above the 95th percentile would yield a difference of possibly 600kcal daily, and the chance of this occurring (comparing the self to a friend) is 0.50%, assuming two completely random persons.0 -
The longer you've been dieting the more your body is accustomed to it. I can't eat the same amount a year ago today as I do today and still expect to lose weight (at the same height weight just 1 year older)0
-
That's how I learned it as well. The net is 36 ATP with 2 being used up during the process. Have they revised the Kreb cycle?
No, mitochondria performing cellular respiration makes 38 ATP per molecule of glucose, in practice some gets lost, but that isn't something that really varies based on mitochondria in a person.Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
Just consider, if some people had hyperefficient mitochondria during human evolution, other than the most recent 100 years or so, wouldn't they have a huge survival rate advantage being able to live off less food?
Human ancestors initially started walking upright over a savings of around 4 calories per km walking on two legs versus chimp style 4 limbed gaits. Evolution is pretty cut throat on these metabolic issues.
Errrrrrrr! I had to go back and read old notes from school. For some reason I have 36 or 38 ATP written down and of course this was many years ago so I can't remember why. This might drive me crazy for the next few hours
Eukaryotic cells expend about 2 ATP moving things into the mitochondria (pyruvate for example). So 36 instead of 38.
0 -
Sorry about your brother. Individual BMR may not vary much from normal, but a lot of untrackable behaviors get lumped into TDEE. Nervous ticks like shuffling your feet while you are sitting, tossing around a lot in your sleep, a job where you have to sit down and get up a lot, a lot of stairs in your house, etc, are all somewhat invisible activity that goes towards your TDEE. My son can't sit still for 5 minutes with getting up to randomly jump up and down or run around in circles.
A lot of people log inaccurately too because they don't have a food scale or just because there are so many bad entries in the database.0 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »There is a body builder I saw on here who looks incredible with huge muscles and she has an open diary and is only eating 1500 a day as far back as you go?? )
I haven't done it recently with the "new mfp" but in the past whenever I changed calorie goals, it changed across my entire diary history. I can go back to a period where I know my goal was 1400 calories and it raised my new calorie goal. Stupid, it makes it hard for me to track where I was actually meeting goals and not going over or under.
So while her goal may say 1500 now, that might not have always been the case.
0 -
Tedebearduff wrote: »The longer you've been dieting the more your body is accustomed to it. I can't eat the same amount a year ago today as I do today and still expect to lose weight (at the same height weight just 1 year older)
Why not? (Please don't read as sarcasm - I'm really interested to know why...) I've read over and over in the forums that a calorie is a calorie and 3500 kcal is a lb. So unless your BMR changes, or something drastically affects your TDEE over the course of a year, why wouldn't eating the same amount yield the same results at the same height and weight? I would assume if you are the same weight, and you are maintaining the same activity level, your TDEE would be the same - wouldn't it? And as long as you are eating below your TDEE, you should lose weight.
I've also read that as you lose weight, you have to adjust calories down because you don't burn as many calories through exercise the less you weigh and the fitter you get. But I would think maybe your BMR would go up a little the fitter you get, wouldn't it? Will it not go up enough to offset the burn lost during exercise due to weighing less? How many lbs do you have to lose before you need to adjust calories down?
OP - my son has the exact same problem as you. He has difficulty gaining weight because he just gets 'tired' of the taste of stuff before he's eaten a lot of it and quits eating. He's a little over 6' tall and only 127 lbs! Are you able to do anything to increase your appetite perhaps? I was considering buying him protein powder or those 'bulking' shakes that have tons of calories packed into a fairly small volume...0 -
kristinels wrote: »Tedebearduff wrote: »The longer you've been dieting the more your body is accustomed to it. I can't eat the same amount a year ago today as I do today and still expect to lose weight (at the same height weight just 1 year older)
Why not? (Please don't read as sarcasm - I'm really interested to know why...) I've read over and over in the forums that a calorie is a calorie and 3500 kcal is a lb. So unless your BMR changes, or something drastically affects your TDEE over the course of a year, why wouldn't eating the same amount yield the same results at the same height and weight? I would assume if you are the same weight, and you are maintaining the same activity level, your TDEE would be the same - wouldn't it? And as long as you are eating below your TDEE, you should lose weight.
Adaptive thermogenesis (aka metabolic adaptation): BMR can decrease to become more efficient in response to prolonged calorie deficit or aggressive deficit0 -
Are you REALLY trying to gain weight eating ONLY 2000 calories and working out 5 hours a week ?0
-
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »I am very underweight right now. I lost my brother 6 months ago and lost weight. I am not about 20lbs underweight and have been trying to gain for a few months. I have been eating 1900-2100 a day. (1900 on days I just am not hungry at all) Yes I am using a food scale and I weight and measure everything accurately.
I eat about 110-130g protein a day and not much carbs. I only exercise 5 days a week for an hour either on the elliptical or yoga.
I see all these people 20-60lbs heavier than me eating only 1500 to maintain. There is a body builder I saw on here who looks incredible with huge muscles and she has an open diary and is only eating 1500 a day as far back as you go?? How can this be? How can one person at a higher weight maintain and gain lean muscle on 1500 when I cannot even gain on 2000? It makes me question whether metabolisms REALLY are the same for each person (of same body mass, height, etc). I should not be able to maintain 20lbs underweight on this level. If I were to eat what others eat or what the calculators say are my maintenance I would lose weight. I lost to this weight by eating 1300 following the same exercise regime. I see others on 1500 calorie diets for longer than I was and they don't end up as sickly thin as me?! It is just frustrating because I want to eat more but have trouble because I hate eating when I'm not hungry because food doesn't taste good.
What do you guys think about differences in metabolism? Do you believe there can be from person to person, or do you think it follows a strict formula?
(Just a random thought: When you think of the science behind it. Doesn't it really matter how efficiently your cells can make energy from glucose via cellular respiration? There is a huge variation in how many ATP a cell can make from glucose, and the rest of the energy is lost by heat. I think it is possible some peoples cells are less efficient than others (leading to a higher BMR).)
I am so sorry about the loss of your brother.
You just perceive these other people are eating a certain calorie goal unless you are with them 24/7 and see every single thing they eat.
If you are trying to gain weight, I suggest you eat a whole lot more and cut your exercise down a bit (half hour a day, maybe).0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions