Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Metabolism privilege

shaumom
shaumom Posts: 1,003 Member
This is an entirely theoretical question. :-)

Everyone's heard of high metabolism vs. low metabolism, but how much it impacts one's ability to gain or lose weight is debated, from what I've seen.

For the purposes of this question, let's pretend it exists. Not only exists, but has a huge impact. So a person could have, essentially, 'metabolism privilege.' It's like people with a low metabolism are playing the game of 'losing weight' at the high difficulty setting, and people with a high metabolism are playing the game on the 'easy' setting.

So pretending that is true - I'm not saying it is, just for the purposes of this discussion - would knowing this alter how you think about losing weight with other people? And if so, how?

Like, would you trust people's dieting advice more if you knew they had the same metabolism as you did? Would you have more compassion for people with low metabolism or less sympathy for those with high metabolism, when they are struggling? And so on.
«1

Replies

  • urloved33
    urloved33 Posts: 3,323 Member
    and if I had a slow metabolism would I get a handicap?
  • zeejane03
    zeejane03 Posts: 993 Member
    Not really. At the end of the day, no matter how many calories we're using, we all need the same thing to maintain our weight -- the right number of calories of our activity level. So if I somehow found out that someone I was getting advice from was somehow burning 200 calories more than I would at the same weight/activity level, it wouldn't really make a difference to me. Both of us need to understand approximately how much energy we're using, both of us need to understand approximately how much we're eating.

    For someone whose body somehow uses more calories per day, reaching a deficit may be as challenging for them as it would be for me. Hunger, cravings, tempting foods, the desire to sit on the couch instead of going for a walk, these are equal opportunity challenges. Someone who needs to eat 2,000 calories a day to lose a pound per week may find that to be as challenging -- or even more challenging -- as someone who needs to eat 1,500 calories a day to lose a pound per week.

    This.

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    urloved33 wrote: »
    and if I had a slow metabolism would I get a handicap?

    I believe OP is arguing that a slower-than-usual metabolism (assuming such a thing exists) would be, in and of itself, a handicap when it comes to weight management.

    So the question "would I get a handicap?" doesn't really make sense in this context. A handicap isn't something that is bestowed upon one like a prize, at least not to my understanding.
  • Fatty_Nuff
    Fatty_Nuff Posts: 273 Member
    edited February 2019
    Well, the logic of the OP's premise is somewhat skewed. Assuming someone is "privileged" with high metabolism, they wouldn't be struggling at all, so they wouldn't even need compassion. They would be one of those naturally skinny people that supposedly exist, that can eat anything they want and never gain weight. And in that made-up world, people with low metabolisms would be like the visually or hearing impaired, and would of course deserve sympathy for not being able to lose weight. In the real world, I get a lot of advice here and from others even though they are not overweight. To reject that advice would be like throwing a rope out to someone who has fallen out of a boat, only to have them say "No fair, you have the advantage of not being in the water with me."
  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    Everyone's heard of high metabolism vs. low metabolism, but how much it impacts one's ability to gain or lose weight is debated, from what I've seen.
    Seems a pointless debate, given what we know about the actual distribution of resting metabolic rates.
    https://examine.com/nutrition/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.

    What does vary much more between people is appetite, level of activity, and responses to certain conditions, e.g., some people eat more when stressed while others increase activity, and there is even evidence that some people become more active as they eat less.
    shaumom wrote: »
    Like, would you trust people's dieting advice more if you knew they had the same metabolism as you did? Would you have more compassion for people with low metabolism or less sympathy for those with high metabolism, when they are struggling? And so on.
    No, I wouldn't take advice based on someone's metabolism being like mine. I'd still base it on empirical evidence.
    I don't know if I would have any different sympathy for anyone. I'm already sympathetic that weight loss is hard.

    Exactly! I'm all for playing with the factors you can play with to find individual tastes and preferences, but that's an individual end goal. At the end of the day, doing things because someone else did them with no evidence of efficacy other than "I feel like it helped" is part of why so many people are frustrated and confused about weigh loss. Control the major factors, play with the minor ones, and stop drawing conclusions based on a day or two of experimentation.
  • jseams1234
    jseams1234 Posts: 1,219 Member
    edited February 2019

    However, there are definitely people who are 'hard gainers', who can accurately and persistently eat 3000 calories a day and maintain large calorie surpluses yet still not gain substantial weight.

    Then it's not really a calorie surplus for them, is it?

    As I've gotten older I feel like I am eating more and not gaining, but it could be absorption problems or better nutrition or it could be my imagination.

    How do you know this 3000 calorie per day calorie surplus person always eats like that? What about his/her activity level?

    ... or even relative size and body composition. I'm a pretty big guy and fairly muscular. I maintain on about 3500 calories a day. I wouldn't expect someone half my size to require the same amount. I have a friend that is much smaller than me but like you mentioned, his activity levels are off the charts. He trains for marathons/triathlons and he would probably die on 3500. ;)
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    urloved33 wrote: »
    urloved33 wrote: »
    and if I had a slow metabolism would I get a handicap?

    I believe OP is arguing that a slower-than-usual metabolism (assuming such a thing exists) would be, in and of itself, a handicap when it comes to weight management.

    So the question "would I get a handicap?" doesn't really make sense in this context. A handicap isn't something that is bestowed upon one like a prize, at least not to my understanding.

    it makes perfect sense. NUTRISYSTEMS lose weight in 6 weeks accept those w slow metabolism it will take 9 for you BUT we only charge you for 6 weeks ;)

    You're talking about a discount, promotional pricing.
  • Phirrgus
    Phirrgus Posts: 1,894 Member
    I would accept their advice if they were trying to guide me in finding my own personal numbers in order to maintain a healthy deficit sure. I wouldn't want to display a lack of compassion to anyone really either. A struggling person is a struggling person. maybe I'm just old fashioned though lol.
  • witchaywoman81
    witchaywoman81 Posts: 280 Member
    I'm guessing this topic came from this thread: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10725138/it-can-t-all-be-calories-in-out/p1 about how it can't just be calories in/calories out, because the person who started the conversation has a roommate who eats junk all the time and doesn't gain weight.

    In the context of what we're doing here at MFP, I'm not sure I understand the relevance of slower/faster metabolism. We are all unique humans of various ages, weights, heights, etc. MFP calculations for how much a person should eat to be in a particular deficit rely on averages. Are there outliers? Of course, but what's the point of focusing on them?

    For example, if I choose a deficit of 750 calories/day, giving me 1800 calories to eat, I'll use this as a guide and track this way for 4-6 weeks. At the end of that time, I can evaluate if I'm losing as expected or not, then adjust accordingly, just as anyone else would.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    Well it isn't true and purely hypothetical - metabolism is simply based on mass and there is little variation in this process. This question only has the slightest bit of merit in a society cursed with abundance.

    I have compassion, but there's a matter of prioritization at play here. On par with the compassion I felt when Metallica was railing against Napster.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    edited February 2019
    shaumom wrote: »
    So pretending that is true - I'm not saying it is, just for the purposes of this discussion - would knowing this alter how you think about losing weight with other people? And if so, how?

    Like, would you trust people's dieting advice more if you knew they had the same metabolism as you did? Would you have more compassion for people with low metabolism or less sympathy for those with high metabolism, when they are struggling? And so on.

    Pretending it's true, no, it wouldn't, because I don't really rely on advice for others, but base what I try on my own research and what works for me, and I don't judge others based on their weight or weight loss. There are many, many reasons some people may find it harder than others. I imagine for most of us it's been harder or easier based on other things in our lives.

    Beyond that, I don't see why metabolism wouldn't affect hunger, so that a 500 cal deficit would be equally hard, all else equal (which it never is).

    Also, I now am positive the whole "privilege" thing has gotten way out of hand. A pretty good book on it is The Perils of Privilege by Phoebe Maltz Bovy: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2017/03/23/the-last-thing-on-privilege-youll-ever-need-to-read/?utm_term=.df627ef762a8
  • shaumom
    shaumom Posts: 1,003 Member
    So here's your belief, then, @shaumom?...

    ...Because that sort of puts a different spin on this topic.

    No, actually. The spin you have assumed is no in way what's going on here.

    This topic is not based in reality. There is no reality currently where we have proven that metabolism has a huge impact on weight gain, or any sort of standardized understanding of it. Sure, maybe there could be in the future, sorta-kinda, because I don't think we have it fully understood yet, but who cares? That literally doesn't matter here.

    That other conversation DID trigger the trip down the rabbit hole, though, to think about what would it be like in a world where metabolism was an actual thing, that made a big difference. I'm a fan of old sci fi; I think about crap like 'if the world was X way, what would happen?' So it's related that way, sure. But right now, I was honestly just curious about the intellectual exercise of trying to think about 'what if.'

    So reality doesn't matter - doesn't matter if metabolism doesn't work this way, or if CICO is a thing or not, or that people wouldn't be exactly the same, etc... Literally irrelevant.

    It's looking at the ethical and social implications of a physical hypothetical. No different than speculating 'hey, what if half the world only had one leg,' or 'what if everyone you know was suddenly homeless.'



    Honestly, I was kind of surprised by some of the answers, because they definitely went down a different rabbit hole than my own.

    For me, I started thinking about things like, say, if there would be a financial issue for folks of one persuasion or another. More time available to work because you need less time to exercise if you're hi metabolism(HM)? Or there is more financial difficulty because LM folks find it harder to lose weight without professional help they'd have to pay for? Or maybe the opposite, because HM folks have to pay for more food to keep healthy.

    And compassion - I personally tend to feel for anyone struggling, but I've noticed that sometimes, people can have an attitude that boils down to: I did it this way, and it worked, so if it's not working for you then you are just not trying hard enough. But if a world existed where it had been literally proven that the same thing won't work for both groups of people...would that change? Would we be more understanding when people are trying what we try and it's harder for them, or easier for them? Would we be more understanding when people who are struggling more have more failures?

    Personally, I think it can be easier sometimes to understand and empathize with someone else if we know some of the struggles that they are going through, so I'd like to think that people might be more understanding of others, or more tolerant of people struggling without being as judgmental, if there was a specific, known, physical thing that people knew about each other. More compassionate about people who can't gain weight, or can't lose it, without enough effort that they are unable to keep it up, when they have other stressors in their lives, that sort of thing.

  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,392 Member
    ..and yeah, all we can do is say, "Here's what worked for me. Try it."

    If 20 people say the same thing, maybe there's something to it.
  • shaumom
    shaumom Posts: 1,003 Member
    Seems a pointless debate, given what we know about the actual distribution of resting metabolic rates.

    Pointless maybe if this were a reality-based debate looking at what should we do IF this is ever found to be true.

    But I guess I don't view it as pointless if we're looking at a discussion about attitudes and ethics that involve people and losing weight, more. Such as, our own beliefs about other people, especially from the perspective of how we think about/treat them if we have known differences. Especially known differences that mean their experience of weight loss may not be the same as our own.

    That's more what I was interested in discussing, not 'whether this could ever happen,' if that makes sense?