Is getting your RMR clinically tested worth it?
NotSoPerfectPam
Posts: 114 Member
Has anyone had their resting metabolic rate tested? I seem stalled after upping my exercise and weighing my food - I'm wondering if this could help. It's $150. I've played around with my calories and going lower, between 1200 and 1800, and nothing seems to help. I feel like if I did the RMR it's one thing I can rule out if it's normal, but then again, is it worth $150?
0
Replies
-
There's a number of other things you can try that don't cost $150 first. First of all, almost NO ONE has one of the very rare medical disorders resulting in metabolic problems (the only reason to really give a rip about RMR), and those that do manage to use CICO just fine by playing with their numbers and altering the CO side of the equation a little. Second, how long a time period did you do the other calorie amounts? One or two weeks is NOT going to show you anything as far as whether 1500 is working or not. You need to pick a number and stick with it for AT LEAST a month, ideally 6 or more weeks. You are not in a plateau unless you can guarantee you have an accurate count that has not changed for 6 or more weeks. so, how long did you sit at those numbers, which ones did you sit at, and how is your logging? Can you say without a doubt that you KNOW for sure that your counts are correct? I'm not accusing you, I'm asking you, dig deep and decide on that, cause that is the number 1 problem with CICO weight loss, and it has happened to literally everyone on here at least once.6
-
How long have you been stalled? If it's less than 6 weeks, I wouldn't worry yet. Any time you change anything (exercise, calorie target, etc.), it takes some time for your body to react. If you've been changing things, you need to give your body enough time to stabilize before you can tell what is/isn't working.
I also wouldn't drop $150 on RMR testing, to be honest. Given some time, some patience and accurate logging, you can get a very good idea of your TDEE, and that's more important than RMR. The thing is, though, that you need to be willing to track as accurately as possible, and keep things as consistent as possible, in order to get an accurate picture of your TDEE, and lots of people are too impatient for that.
Could you pick a calorie goal in the middle (say, 1500 or so) and stick with it for 6 weeks? During that time, keep your exercise as consistent as you can, and weigh/measure all your food accurately. After that time, you should have enough data to accurately calculate your TDEE.0 -
Also, if this is about that ridiculous Biggest loser RMR article, there have already been multiple other professionals jumping up and screaming "THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO YOU STOP FREAKING OUT" in every other publication, as well as on in the NY Times itself. And they're right, it doesn't apply to average Jane. The study may not even be good for Biggest Loser Jane according to some. In any case, if that's why you're concerned about RMR, you can stop being concerned about it yesterday, cause it doesn't apply to us. It applies to losing hundreds of pounds in a few months crazy VLCD and hard labor crash fad reality tv land lunacy, not us.3
-
Unless you suspect some serious medical condition (and you have more to go on than failing to lose weight) it isn't worth $150.
If you kept accurate records you could just go back 4-6 weeks and calculate your TDEE, which is ultimately all you need to know to set calorie goals. For example, I know that my TDEE is ~2500 based on the past few weeks worth of data. I set my calorie intake to 2250 and I lose ~0.5lb/week. I also know that my TDEE is about to spike up as the summer is coming which means Ultimate Frisbee and lots of running.
Also, how long have you stalled? I've easily gone 2 full weeks without losing anything despite trying to lose 1.5-2lb/week at that time. Water weight can fluctuate a lot. I'm up almost 3lb right now from just a few days ago, and while I've been eating ~2700-3000 calories for a few days, it wasn't long enough to actually gain 3lb of fat. Heck I was up 1lb from yesterday despite eating only 2200 calories.0 -
Probably not worth it fam. It's just a snapshot and of course it will read low because you have been in a diet. It's just a snapshot in time. Just keep reducing your food intake until you start losing again. If you tried eating 1200kcal and didn't lose weight, you weren't eating 1200kcal.
Also don't count exercise against your daily intake. MyFitnessPal waaayy overestimates that in my experience. Exercise is just gravvy.0 -
No you do not need to get RMR tested. If you are concerned about metabolic issues its time to see the doctor for blood testing such as metabolic blood testing, perhaps T4, TSH, creatine, etc.
On the outside of ruling out thryroid, etc through blood testing, you need to pick a number (not a range 1200 - 1800.. this is a huge range).. and eat that exact number for at least 3 weeks. If you eat your exercise calories then perhaps don't for a week or two or three.
This weight loss is a numbers game and finding your number, your deficit through some trial and error is all you need, but you too need patience. You have to buy a food scale if you do not have one yet. It will change the entire scope of weight loss.. $20 food scale, accurate food logging and weight loss priceless...2 -
I took a RMR exam (free to military and the people they sponsor) and it was right on what the free online calculators put me at. I use about 4 of them then take the average anyway. As long as I have a ballpark, it doesn't matter.
Also, this ^^How long have you been stalled? If it's less than 6 weeks, I wouldn't worry yet. Any time you change anything (exercise, calorie target, etc.), it takes some time for your body to react. If you've been changing things, you need to give your body enough time to stabilize before you can tell what is/isn't working.
0 -
NotSoPerfectPam wrote: »Has anyone had their resting metabolic rate tested? I seem stalled after upping my exercise and weighing my food - I'm wondering if this could help. It's $150. I've played around with my calories and going lower, between 1200 and 1800, and nothing seems to help. I feel like if I did the RMR it's one thing I can rule out if it's normal, but then again, is it worth $150?
Shop around for a lower price, I found it interesting and it also told me the RQ ie what proportion of my resting energy was from fats vs carbs.
Weight loss is empirical and I would agree with the others than knowing your RMR to 4 sig figs doesn't help much in the real world as if you don't lose weight you need to change something regardless.
0 -
NotSoPerfectPam wrote: »Has anyone had their resting metabolic rate tested? I seem stalled after upping my exercise and weighing my food - I'm wondering if this could help. It's $150. I've played around with my calories and going lower, between 1200 and 1800, and nothing seems to help. I feel like if I did the RMR it's one thing I can rule out if it's normal, but then again, is it worth $150?
Yes, I had it tested a few years ago. It didn't cost anywhere near the UK equivalent of USD150 (it was about half the cost.)
It wasn't really worth it in my opinion as it confirmed what I had already gleaned from trail and error - that my RMR is lower than the average predicted values (but not outside the range of what is expected) so calorie calculators were a bit off for me.
The RE stuff as mentioned above was cool though and a bit of a surprise as I always thought I wasn't a particularly efficient fat burner but it turns out the opposite was true I think. I will have to dig out the report and have another look now...
0 -
Not necessary to spend that amount imo - figure out your own TDEE over the next few weeks by tracking your foods and see what your weight is doing, if you're losing weight etc.0
-
I'd wait for 2 months without weight loss while being 100% sure that you have a deficit before spending the money, personally. It's not uncommon to stall for 4-5 weeks, especially for women.1
-
Thanks for all the responses! I'm going to closely keep in line with a cal amount for a month and see what happens. I started a boot camp and I think it may be to blame!0
-
NotSoPerfectPam wrote: »Thanks for all the responses! I'm going to closely keep in line with a cal amount for a month and see what happens. I started a boot camp and I think it may be to blame!
A new workout routine can definitely add some water weight, which will mask some fat loss. You have a good plan, going with patience/persistence. Best wishes!1 -
I do mine once a year. First, I say find somewhere cheaper. My gym/wellness center does them for $50, includes the two page results and a consult with the dietician. The one I did last summer showed a drop in my rate from the year before - too much focus on cardio, not enough on weights. Now I'm working more on weight lifting and strength training, so to me it's beneficial to have the numbers.0
-
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »There's a number of other things you can try that don't cost $150 first. First of all, almost NO ONE has one of the very rare medical disorders resulting in metabolic problems (the only reason to really give a rip about RMR), and those that do manage to use CICO just fine by playing with their numbers and altering the CO side of the equation a little. Second, how long a time period did you do the other calorie amounts? One or two weeks is NOT going to show you anything as far as whether 1500 is working or not. You need to pick a number and stick with it for AT LEAST a month, ideally 6 or more weeks. You are not in a plateau unless you can guarantee you have an accurate count that has not changed for 6 or more weeks. so, how long did you sit at those numbers, which ones did you sit at, and how is your logging? Can you say without a doubt that you KNOW for sure that your counts are correct? I'm not accusing you, I'm asking you, dig deep and decide on that, cause that is the number 1 problem with CICO weight loss, and it has happened to literally everyone on here at least once.
Actually thyroid issues cause a lot of metabolic problems and they are very common. But for that you should talk to your doctor. I would rule out thyroid issues before paying for this test.
I lost all the weight after my first pregnancy with CICO, but after the second the weight didn't budge. It took months before I ran tests because I thought I just wasn't doing it right. Once I started on thyroid meds I got a metabolism again and CICO actually worked.
CICO is what works, but there are reasons it doesn't and the pressure to make it work kept me out of treatment for a long time.0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »There's a number of other things you can try that don't cost $150 first. First of all, almost NO ONE has one of the very rare medical disorders resulting in metabolic problems (the only reason to really give a rip about RMR), and those that do manage to use CICO just fine by playing with their numbers and altering the CO side of the equation a little. Second, how long a time period did you do the other calorie amounts? One or two weeks is NOT going to show you anything as far as whether 1500 is working or not. You need to pick a number and stick with it for AT LEAST a month, ideally 6 or more weeks. You are not in a plateau unless you can guarantee you have an accurate count that has not changed for 6 or more weeks. so, how long did you sit at those numbers, which ones did you sit at, and how is your logging? Can you say without a doubt that you KNOW for sure that your counts are correct? I'm not accusing you, I'm asking you, dig deep and decide on that, cause that is the number 1 problem with CICO weight loss, and it has happened to literally everyone on here at least once.
Metobolic disorders are not the least bit rare!! PCOS, diabetes, hypothyroidism etc. Try all 3 like me. I can't eat over 1,100 and lose weight. My maintainence is about 1,600. This is quite normal for women after 40. If anyone is eating right and exercising and not losing, you most likely have a problem. Sometimes Metformin can help, but not always.0 -
The only reason I can think of to get it tested is that you may be eating *too few* calories, which over time could slow down your metabolic rate. I had mine done a few weeks ago ($75 for the medgem test) and interestingly tested EXTREMELY HIGH: 1910! (and I am a 61 year old woman!) I had been losing at a nice clip at 1200 cals a day- but the nutritionist I saw cautioned me that I would slow my metabolism by continuing at 1200 (she recommends 1700 for me- which sounds like a HUGE amount of food). I'm afraid to eat that many calories, though- so now I'm more confused than ever. I plan to have it redone at a doctor's office via a different test to confirm the results before I make any big changes.0
-
@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.1 -
I'd snap-vote no, not worth it. There's a general undercurrent of paranoia surrounding all internet health discussions imo, most of it completely unwarranted. I'm of the feeling that all this information we have available these days is kinda making us think too much, in general. Making fairly simple things more complicated, etc.0
-
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »There's a number of other things you can try that don't cost $150 first. First of all, almost NO ONE has one of the very rare medical disorders resulting in metabolic problems (the only reason to really give a rip about RMR), and those that do manage to use CICO just fine by playing with their numbers and altering the CO side of the equation a little. Second, how long a time period did you do the other calorie amounts? One or two weeks is NOT going to show you anything as far as whether 1500 is working or not. You need to pick a number and stick with it for AT LEAST a month, ideally 6 or more weeks. You are not in a plateau unless you can guarantee you have an accurate count that has not changed for 6 or more weeks. so, how long did you sit at those numbers, which ones did you sit at, and how is your logging? Can you say without a doubt that you KNOW for sure that your counts are correct? I'm not accusing you, I'm asking you, dig deep and decide on that, cause that is the number 1 problem with CICO weight loss, and it has happened to literally everyone on here at least once.
Metobolic disorders are not the least bit rare!! PCOS, diabetes, hypothyroidism etc. Try all 3 like me. I can't eat over 1,100 and lose weight. My maintainence is about 1,600. This is quite normal for women after 40. If anyone is eating right and exercising and not losing, you most likely have a problem. Sometimes Metformin can help, but not always.
Yea, according to calculators my maintenance should be at around 1540. That's pretty normal for us lighter shorties above 40. However, this is not a metabolic disorder and CICO still works for us. Mind you, I am hypothyroid and still managed to lose 40lbs without treatment without any problems: weighing every bit of food accurately in grams and choosing the right database entries. The 'meatolic breakdown' of being hypothyroid gets easily overestimated, maybe 4% of TDEE? This happens on the onset of hypothyreodism and doesn't get progressively worse. Being less active due to not feeling so well, and a higher tendency to store water do play the biggest role here. The metabolism doesn't really jump back to normal, but you lose the waterweight and become more active again if you choose to. That's all. Btw, thanks to a good set of muscles my maintenance calories are around 1750-1800. Not bad!0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.
Any way you slice it, if she's logging accurately, and not losing, she has a medical problem. After logging accurately for a month if someone isn't losing, they need a specialist. I do understand checking how you log. However I lost several weeks trying to figure why my logging wasn't helping and knowing it wasn't accurate.0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.
Any way you slice it, if she's logging accurately, and not losing, she has a medical problem. After logging accurately for a month if someone isn't losing, they need a specialist. I do understand checking how you log. However I lost several weeks trying to figure why my logging wasn't helping and knowing it wasn't accurate.
Oops lol knowing it was accurate. Logging correctly is not difficult0 -
I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.1
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.
Care to share ? I'm not sure where the "handheld" bit came from. All these devices are flowmeters and gas analysers at the end of the day. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12853896 found a small bias on a cheaper device compared to a more expensive cart from the same supplier but the results were within 2 sd of each other.
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.
Care to share ? I'm not sure where the "handheld" bit came from. All these devices are flowmeters and gas analysers at the end of the day. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12853896 found a small bias on a cheaper device compared to a more expensive cart from the same supplier but the results were within 2 sd of each other.
You have an untrained person testing a person in a gym without a clear pre-test protocol (caffeine consumption, sleep, food ...) and add on top of that inter-client variation. "Hand-held", comes from the unit type named upthread.
Do you think this is significantly better than estimator equations outside of the lab?
Other than the abstract, that article isn't available.
Here is data from another common device.
I wouldn't trust that.
0 -
I have had mine tested about 9 months ago at a performance medicine clinic after losing around 30 pounds. I wanted to get a better benchmark for the number of calories I need to consume a day to maintain my weight loss . I was surprised to find out that at the time, my BMR was 1,450 calories ( I was 5'4.5 and 129 pounds). This also explained why I continued to lose weight while heavily exercising and eating 2,000 calories a day. I gained about 12 pounds in the last 6-7 months mostly through bingeing and not being accountable for my actions, but now that I am back on track I know that I can can eat more (1,600-2,000 calories a day), while exercising 6-7 times a week and still lose weight. Previously I never thought I could eat above 1,500 calories a day and still lose weight.
In addition to having my metabolism tested, I make sure to get a physician once a year and test my thyroid and hormones every 6 months while losing weight. Knock on wood, I am perfectly healthy, but I want to make sure that I don't develop any health issues that would prevent me from either losing or maintaining weight.0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »@catsdogsh @thatgumyoulike Do forgive me, that was poorly phrased, however:
Diabetes is not as common as the media would like us all to think. 9.3% of the US population is afflicted, and this number includes a statistical assumption of those who likely have it but are not formally diagnosed. It accounts for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
PCOS is not common. 5% of the total population has it, which is between 9 and 11% of the population that is capable of having it: I.E. Women only.
Hypothyroidism is a little more common at 12% of the population. And in all due fairness, that 12% is not limited to HypOthyroidism, it also includes any of the sub-types of thyroid disorders, including Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism (graves disease, whose primary symptom is rapid weight LOSS), and thyroid cancer (which can cause both hypO and hypER at various stages and with various types).
That's not to mention at all the fact that these disorders all have symptoms which OP can (and I'm sure has) simply google or ask her doctor about if she is worried. But the odds are in her favor considering these disorders affect, generously, 33 million people (individually) out of a total population of 318 million. I'm sorry that you have all three, but the likelihood in OP's case, both mathematically likely and repeatedly observed on this site, is that she has a problem with measuring her food for logging or simply hasn't given enough time to her adjustments to have an obvious affect.
And most importantly: RMR is STILL not the key factor in adjusting CICO for metabolic disorders. Knowing it isn't going to give OP any information necessary to help her alter her plan. She needs to log consistently, at the same intake for a long period of time and weigh herself to check her results, then adjust off that standard. Part of this game is realizing that calorie counting is based on estimation, which inevitably leads to some trial and error at the individual level.
I didn't want OP, or anyone who reads this post, to jump immediately to the conclusion that a metabolic disorder, which is statistically unlikely, is to blame before checking all the MANY other simple, easy-to-fix things that go wrong with CICO estimating first. And I didn't want anyone to send OP into a health panic either: That's WebMD's job.
Any way you slice it, if she's logging accurately, and not losing, she has a medical problem. After logging accurately for a month if someone isn't losing, they need a specialist. I do understand checking how you log. However I lost several weeks trying to figure why my logging wasn't helping and knowing it wasn't accurate.
Oops lol knowing it was accurate. Logging correctly is not difficult
It actually does seem to be difficult for many people, especially at first.1 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I'm not convinced that any of these handheld measurements done in a gym are accurate and worth the cost. I've read some of the "validation" studies for these devices (paid for by the manufacturers) and remain somewhat skeptical.
Care to share ? I'm not sure where the "handheld" bit came from. All these devices are flowmeters and gas analysers at the end of the day. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12853896 found a small bias on a cheaper device compared to a more expensive cart from the same supplier but the results were within 2 sd of each other.
You have an untrained person testing a person in a gym without a clear pre-test protocol (caffeine consumption, sleep, food ...) and add on top of that inter-client variation. "Hand-held", comes from the unit type named upthread.
Do you think this is significantly better than estimator equations outside of the lab?
Other than the abstract, that article isn't available.
Here is data from another common device.
I wouldn't trust that.
That's all exercise based, when the OP is about resting metabolic rate. I don't know what an aquatrainer is.
I'm not seeing any evidence that portable RMR measurement is inherently unreliable yet. Several institutions offering tests have defined protocols like at http://www.eatfithealth.com/medgem-metabolic-testing/
With 30% of people falling outside of +/- 10% of RMR estimations I would be (and was) in favour of a personal measurement.0 -
CoffeeNCardio wrote: »Also, if this is about that ridiculous Biggest loser RMR article,
Considering OP made the one thread regarding it that I responded to, I'll bet that it is.
0 -
I just had this done this morning, actually. And I was going to post a similar question. I found that my RMR is 1610 calories per day, which isn't horrible. Mine was only 60$ so maybe you want to shop around for other places with the test, like a dietitian or a physical therapist instead of a doctor. I may be able to find the link I used to find this one... it had the ability to search for anyone with the testing machine in your area and give you their emails so what I did was email ALL of them at once and ask for information about their testing and got back several, one of which was right near my office for only 60$.
Anyways, was it worth it? Time will tell. She was a dietitian and a physical therapist so she gave me advice when I showed her my MyFitnessPal account, my diet reports, my history here and she gave me advice on different things to do, different physical activities, based on MyFitnessPal, which she is a big fan of anyways, it turns out. She said that I am not a "slow burner" and that what I thought was a plateau is actually just a normal rate for me to burn when considered over time, and that I need to just be patient and keep at it.
This is a relief even though i gained 2 lbs this week, because knowing that my metabolism is not horrible means that I don't need to invest a bunch of money and time in other tests... I just need patience. Also, if my metabolism was horrible, then she would have given me advice. Also, I could have had more tests. I would have known my next steps. So in summary. It was totally worth the price to me. And I want to compare my RMR to other peoples now. I feel more empowered with knowledge.0
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