Slow Metabolism?

2»

Replies

  • trigden1991
    trigden1991 Posts: 4,659 Member
    You do not have a slow metabolism, the majority of the population is within a very small range.
  • elisa123gal
    elisa123gal Posts: 4,146 Member
    sounds to me you'e working out too much… getting fit isn't losing weight. The body could struggle as you do both too aggressively.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 7,379 Member
    'Metabolism' is so much more than just 'burning fat'. What makes you think that a tiny part of your metabolism is broken while the rest still seems to work?
    Metabolism describes all the chemical processes that go on continuously inside the body to keep you alive and your organs functioning normally, such as breathing, repairing cells and digesting food.
  • rosebette
    rosebette Posts: 1,657 Member
    edited August 2016
    I'm about your height, 5'1", but older (57) and lighter (120 lbs.). I wear a Fitbit Charge HR, which actually measures by burn all day based on heart rate. I'd say my inactive metabolism is at 1200 or even lower (some days as little as 1050 to 1100) so eating that much with no activity would give me 0 weight loss. Yesterday, I did 10,000 steps, typical for my daily walking, which got me around 200+ calories and then pilates, so maybe another 100. By the end of the day I got less than 1600 calories. So, to lose weight, I'd actually have to eat 1200, not "net" 1200 because the deficit I can have to lose is very small (since you need to eat 500 calories less than you burn to lose 1 lb. a week). The estimates MFP gives me for the amount of exercise I do is actually much higher than the "burn" the Fibit calculates based on my heartrate and effort. For instance, MFP way overestimates the burn riding on a stationary bike. So, if you're "netting" 1200 and eating back exercise calories based on MFP estimates you might actually be eating more than you are burning. I'd eat back only have 1/2 to 2/3 of the MFP exercise calories and see what happens.
  • pinksparklefairy
    pinksparklefairy Posts: 97 Member
    Try changing up the exercise now and then, as your body will get used to things you do regularly.

    Quite a few women do have thyroid issues without realising it, so you could get it checked out. I have hypothyroidism, but I really don't think it has that much impact on my weight.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    jdubsms wrote: »
    Thank y'all so much for the insight. I never thought about weighing food. I weigh 166lbs and I'm 5 feet tall. -like a rolly polly. I want to get down to 150. Anything below 150 would be a miracle. My calories are net; I take into consideration the exercise I do. I looked at my weekly nutrients and I am very low on carbs. I've been meeting/exceeding my protein intake. Just trying to find out where I'm going wrong.

    No, anything below 150 would not be a miracle. I used to think the same thing, and I now weigh much less than my "miracle weight" and am in a healthy BMI. You can do this!
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    Try changing up the exercise now and then, as your body will get used to things you do regularly.

    Quite a few women do have thyroid issues without realising it, so you could get it checked out. I have hypothyroidism, but I really don't think it has that much impact on my weight.

    That would be a tool to cut boredom only. :)
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 7,379 Member
    edited August 2016
    rosebette wrote: »
    I'm about your height, 5'1", but older (57) and lighter (120 lbs.). I wear a Fitbit Charge HR, which actually measures by burn all day based on heart rate. I'd say my inactive metabolism is at 1200 or even lower (some days as little as 1050 to 1100) so eating that much with no activity would give me 0 weight loss. Yesterday, I did 10,000 steps, typical for my daily walking, which got me around 200+ calories and then pilates, so maybe another 100. By the end of the day I got less than 1600 calories. So, to lose weight, I'd actually have to eat 1200, not "net" 1200 because the deficit I can have to lose is very small (since you need to eat 500 calories less than you burn to lose 1 lb. a week). The estimates MFP gives me for the amount of exercise I do is actually much higher than the "burn" the Fibit calculates based on my heartrate and effort. For instance, MFP way overestimates the burn riding on a stationary bike. So, if you're "netting" 1200 and eating back exercise calories based on MFP estimates you might actually be eating more than you are burning. I'd eat back only have 1/2 to 2/3 of the MFP exercise calories and see what happens.

    So what settings did you use on your fitbit to determine your resting and working out HR? I mean, if you have a fairly slow heart rate in general then the fitbit can only conclude you have a very low 'metabolism', whatever it means by that. HR simply cannot be correlated to calorie burn if your heart rate deviates a bit away from the mid point. I read somewhere that only about 40% of all people sit anywhere near that mid point. How high your heart rate goes is partly influenced by genetics. Some people have a very high maximum heart rate, some a very low one. it has nothing to do with how fit or unfit you are or how many calories you burn. It's just a fact, like having naturally red hair vs. blond hair. If you are unfit and you more around though, your heart rate will go further up, at least for a moment than when you are fitter. Do you burn more calories? No, you don't. Furthermore, some medical problems, like hypothyreodism can lower the heartrate somewhat. If you're on betablockers your heartrate might stay low as well.

    Imagine this: my maximum heart rate is very high, around 210. if I sit on the sofa it might just be around 50-60 as I'm fairly fit. Fitbit will assume I'm burning very few calories, based on the low HR. If I get up and run to the supermarket around the corner my heartrate might go up to 170 and fitbit will assume I just did something extraordinarily difficult and overestimate the calorie burn big time while it was just a very light, easy jog for me.

    Oh, some other numbers: I wore my HR sensor for a few nights as I wanted to know what my minimum HR for running is. After 9 hours of measuring I got around 300kcal out of it. Over 24 hours that would be less than 900 calories. Honestly, no. My base metabolic rate is not below 900. I just have a very low resting heart rate.
  • xvolution
    xvolution Posts: 721 Member
    I have to agree with the full thyroid panel if you're doing everything right and either at a plateau or actually gaining weight. I plan on getting one myself at my next doctor's visit, since even though I'm keeping calories down I'm actually gaining weight [yes, I'm weighing all my food and even keeping my calories below my current bmr]. The only things I can think of is hypothyroidism or iodine deficiency [I'm on a dairy and sodium restrictive diet, both of which are the main sources of iodine].
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    xvolution wrote: »
    I have to agree with the full thyroid panel if you're doing everything right and either at a plateau or actually gaining weight. I plan on getting one myself at my next doctor's visit, since even though I'm keeping calories down I'm actually gaining weight [yes, I'm weighing all my food and even keeping my calories below my current bmr]. The only things I can think of is hypothyroidism or iodine deficiency [I'm on a dairy and sodium restrictive diet, both of which are the main sources of iodine].

    I snooped your diary and doesn't look like you weigh everything. You use cups, weigh in ounces and a lot of your entries are exactly the same. You also have generic entries, are those your recipe built recipes? If you really do use a food scale, my apologies.

    If you are not losing you could eat just cut another 100 off your current daily intake, see that helps you a little.
  • xvolution
    xvolution Posts: 721 Member
    edited August 2016
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    xvolution wrote: »
    I have to agree with the full thyroid panel if you're doing everything right and either at a plateau or actually gaining weight. I plan on getting one myself at my next doctor's visit, since even though I'm keeping calories down I'm actually gaining weight [yes, I'm weighing all my food and even keeping my calories below my current bmr]. The only things I can think of is hypothyroidism or iodine deficiency [I'm on a dairy and sodium restrictive diet, both of which are the main sources of iodine].

    I snooped your diary and doesn't look like you weigh everything. You use cups, weigh in ounces and a lot of your entries are exactly the same. You also have generic entries, are those your recipe built recipes? If you really do use a food scale, my apologies.

    If you are not losing you could eat just cut another 100 off your current daily intake, see that helps you a little.

    I usually use cups for measurement because they're what the entries in the food database tend to go with. I do verify everything with a small food scale I have [an older mechanical scale that might be a bit off, but I'm usually at least 1000 calories below my TDEE [3250 on lift days, 2800 on more sedentary days] every day, and I doubt it would mismeasure that much]. The only things I don't measure are vegetables with very low calories anyways [onions, garlic, ginger, etc].

    I'm assuming most of that weight gain is water weight [I did my tape measurements today and lost a half inch on the waist, so I am losing fat], but it doesn't hurt to rule out any thyroid problems.
  • sllm1
    sllm1 Posts: 2,129 Member
    Six pounds is awesome. Be patient.

    Weigh everything and log honestly. Results will follow in their own time. :)
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    xvolution wrote: »
    I have to agree with the full thyroid panel if you're doing everything right and either at a plateau or actually gaining weight. I plan on getting one myself at my next doctor's visit, since even though I'm keeping calories down I'm actually gaining weight [yes, I'm weighing all my food and even keeping my calories below my current bmr]. The only things I can think of is hypothyroidism or iodine deficiency [I'm on a dairy and sodium restrictive diet, both of which are the main sources of iodine].
    You could also be eating more than you think via the entries you choose in your database, especially entries that use cups and measuring spoons. There are a lot of incorrect entries in there. USDA in grams are usually more accurate.
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    OP, I had a peek at your diary. It looks like you are using generic entries and not weighing your food. Also, how are you calculating your calorie burns? 260 calories for 19 minutes of pilates seems really high to me.

    If you are eating your exercise calories back, and not weighing and using accurate entries, you are very likely underestimating your calories in and overestimating your calories out, resulting in slower weight loss.

    That being said, 6 pounds in 8 weeks is great :smile:
  • xvolution
    xvolution Posts: 721 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    xvolution wrote: »
    I have to agree with the full thyroid panel if you're doing everything right and either at a plateau or actually gaining weight. I plan on getting one myself at my next doctor's visit, since even though I'm keeping calories down I'm actually gaining weight [yes, I'm weighing all my food and even keeping my calories below my current bmr]. The only things I can think of is hypothyroidism or iodine deficiency [I'm on a dairy and sodium restrictive diet, both of which are the main sources of iodine].
    You could also be eating more than you think via the entries you choose in your database, especially entries that use cups and measuring spoons. There are a lot of incorrect entries in there. USDA in grams are usually more accurate.

    Like I said, I also verify the amounts with a food scale [example: 1/2 cup cottage cheese is 113g, the greek yogurt is 150g, etc]. It's just hard to believe that it would be off so much that I'm eating 2800-8200 more calories than is being reported in the diary.

    I did recently switch from using resistance bands to dumbbells for strength training [plus I recently started a job that requires quite a bit of lifting and carrying 25 pound boxes of product], so it could be water weight.
  • FLBeachluvr
    FLBeachluvr Posts: 110 Member
    rosebette wrote: »
    I'm about your height, 5'1", but older (57) and lighter (120 lbs.). I wear a Fitbit Charge HR, which actually measures by burn all day based on heart rate. I'd say my inactive metabolism is at 1200 or even lower (some days as little as 1050 to 1100) so eating that much with no activity would give me 0 weight loss. Yesterday, I did 10,000 steps, typical for my daily walking, which got me around 200+ calories and then pilates, so maybe another 100. By the end of the day I got less than 1600 calories. So, to lose weight, I'd actually have to eat 1200, not "net" 1200 because the deficit I can have to lose is very small (since you need to eat 500 calories less than you burn to lose 1 lb. a week). The estimates MFP gives me for the amount of exercise I do is actually much higher than the "burn" the Fibit calculates based on my heartrate and effort. For instance, MFP way overestimates the burn riding on a stationary bike. So, if you're "netting" 1200 and eating back exercise calories based on MFP estimates you might actually be eating more than you are burning. I'd eat back only have 1/2 to 2/3 of the MFP exercise calories and see what happens.

    Yes to this! You can link your MFP account to your Fitbit account and it will bring over your daily calories consumed and factor in how many calories you have burned to tell you if you are within your daily deficit goal or not. I personally find that more accurate than what MFP tells me I can still eat at the end of the day. For example, yesterday I ended up with a deficit of 580 calories (whoops) which put me more than my goal of 500 per day. MFP told me that I could still eat another 262 calories which would have put me at less than my deficit goal.
  • I_Will_End_You
    I_Will_End_You Posts: 4,397 Member
    3bambi3 wrote: »
    OP, I had a peek at your diary. It looks like you are using generic entries and not weighing your food. Also, how are you calculating your calorie burns? 260 calories for 19 minutes of pilates seems really high to me.

    If you are eating your exercise calories back, and not weighing and using accurate entries, you are very likely underestimating your calories in and overestimating your calories out, resulting in slower weight loss.

    That being said, 6 pounds in 8 weeks is great :smile:


    260 calories for 19 minutes of pilates sounds virtually impossible.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 25,697 Member
    3bambi3 wrote: »
    OP, I had a peek at your diary. It looks like you are using generic entries and not weighing your food. Also, how are you calculating your calorie burns? 260 calories for 19 minutes of pilates seems really high to me.

    If you are eating your exercise calories back, and not weighing and using accurate entries, you are very likely underestimating your calories in and overestimating your calories out, resulting in slower weight loss.

    That being said, 6 pounds in 8 weeks is great :smile:


    260 calories for 19 minutes of pilates sounds virtually impossible.

    Ya, I weigh more than the OP and the system is telling me I'd get 68 calories for 19 minutes of pilates.
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,582 Member
    OP: I think your weight loss so far has been pretty decent. But here's a chart for you to sort through issues you may be having, most of which have been mentioned in this thread. :)

    8qioyeppu4ey.jpg