Very slow metabolism (clinically tested)
joeymattluke
Posts: 13 Member
Hello, I had my metabolism checked after meeting with a nutritionist suggested it. History is that I have been steadily gaining weight after weight watchers, cross fit, Keto, etc.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
27
Replies
-
What makes you think that's a very slow metabolism? Depending on your stats, that could be a perfectly norma; RMR. So, what are your stats.
Also, you do not gain weight eating more than your RMR unless you never so much as stand up all day (and even then, you would get a few extra calories to use just from the fact that RMR doesn't even account for the calories used in digesting your food).
In all the things that you've tried (WW, cross fit, keto, etc.), have you ever tried logging everything you eat using a food scale?30 -
Resting metabolic rate is what you use in a coma. If you walk anywhere or do any activity or eat food ever, you'll burn more than that. Depending on how much you move around maybe a lot more. There's no such thing as a person who needs less than 1200 calories to lose weight unless that person should not be losing weight.
My BMR is roughly 1800, but my TDEE is about 2200, which is the number you need to be under to lose weight.20 -
joeymattluke wrote: »Hello, I had my metabolism checked after meeting with a nutritionist suggested it. History is that I have been steadily gaining weight after weight watchers, cross fit, Keto, etc.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
What are your stats? Age, height, current weight, goal weight?6 -
joeymattluke wrote: »Hello, I had my metabolism checked after meeting with a nutritionist suggested it. History is that I have been steadily gaining weight after weight watchers, cross fit, Keto, etc.
I have been so frustrated that I am trying and failing at all of these methods of weight loss. The metabolism test came back at my resting metabolic rate is 1224. So, if I eat more than that I will gain. So to lose, I’m looking at under 1000 calories per day. This just doesn’t seem feasible. I’m waiting on the nutritionist to get back with me, but realistically any advice here? I’ve gained weight steadily the last 5 years, regardless of what diet, eating plan or exercise I do.
Your RMR is your calorie needs if you were in a coma. You need to eat less than your TDEE to lose weight, which will be quite a bit more than your RMR. I wasn't tested, but my formula RMR is 1350ish and I lost weight eating 1550. If you are shorter than me (I'm 5'4) 1220 isn't really all that a low an RMR. If you legit need to eat under 1000 to lose weight, you need to get to the doctor and get blood work done, not a nutritionist. If your nutritionist is telling you that you need to eat less than your RMR to lose weight, they have a serious misunderstanding of what those numbers mean and I would advise you to not take any more direction from them.
Where did you get your RMR tested, was it through the nutritionist?
While you're waiting, these threads may help:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1080242/a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants/p1
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10634517/you-dont-use-a-food-scale/p119 -
This means your sedentary expenditure (exclusively sitting throughout the day to light day to day movement) is roughly 1450-1550. That can be normal, depending on your stats. This means your expenditure can be even higher, in the realm of around 1800 calories to maintain weight, if you're reasonably active. You could set your calories to 1200 and lose half a pound a week if sedentary, and you can eat even more if you're active and still lose the same. Don't let RMR numbers scare you.14
-
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
9 -
I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
20 -
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
Where are you getting those multipliers? They are slightly high compared to the ones I use. I have sedentary as 1.2 and light active as 1.375.2 -
Well, that sucks. It is kinda low for your stats. Doesn't mean you can't lose weight, you just don't lose it as fast. You would have to set your calories to 1/2-1 pound a week. How did they test your RMR?2
-
joeymattluke wrote: »I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
That is a significantly lower BMR than to be expected at your statistics. Did the physician offer any explanation as to why? Do you have PCOS, or any other medical condition that could cause a lower BMR? Sometimes treating those conditions can help with that.
That being said, if you make it a point to be more active throughout your day, there is no reason you couldn't lose a pound a week. I know that you would rather be losing 2 pounds a week, but that is likely not possible in your situation. But a pound a week is still very good weight loss. Lots of people here have lost a ton of weight doing that.19 -
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
Where are you getting those multipliers? They are slightly high compared to the ones I use. I have sedentary as 1.2 and light active as 1.375.
They are the ones MFP uses.2 -
joeymattluke wrote: »I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
Your numbers just all seem weird to me, and some of this may be over my head, so I'm going to say this...
You posted this because you know it's too much to ask to eat as little as you are being told. Unless you have a medical condition that requires you to lose weight as quickly as possible, I would suggest aiming to start out for a net goal of 1200 cals, using a food scale, logging accurately and consistently. Give it 6-8 weeks and see what kind of results it gives you and go from there. Better to lose more like 1 lb per week and stick with it to the end, rather than lose 2 lbs for a couple of months, hit the proverbial wall, and end up gaining it all back.
If you don't have a food scale, please get one and use it as much as possible. Getting a handle on your real life numbers would seem to be key to me, and accurate calorie intake that you can compare with long term trends on the scale will give you the info you need. Good luck!20 -
And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.11 -
joeymattluke wrote: »I am female, 41, 5’10 weigh 286.
I have gained 60# in 2 years, while doing these various plans, efforts.
I’ve had bloodwork done every 6 months, specifically thyroid at my urgency to the doctor. My numbers come back in the “normal” range but I insisted on a referral to an endocrinologist and am waiting on that. The physiologist who did the rmr testing said that the maintenance zone was 1468-1713 calories- so to achieve the 2#per week loss that was optimal would be under that 1224, either by calorie restriction and/or exercise.
Only because there was a misunderstanding about what the numbers meant (you thought RMR was daily burn to eat less than) which I'm thinking means they didn't explain things well.....
What was the exact test for your RMR?
The maintenance zone is totally based on your level of activity. You make it higher, you get more room to take a deficit to have a reasonable amount to eat.
Otherwise probably wiser to make deficit smaller.5 -
-
I am 5’ 10”. Was about 50 when I started, 256 pounds, lost 10 pounds a month for 6 months on 1600 calories a day.
Once I figured it out, it was easy.
My problem was: eat out=gain weight; cook at home=lose weight. Not that easy for everyone, but thank goodness it was for me.11 -
joeymattluke wrote: »And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.
You know what gives you the best results? A diet you can keep up. Eating under 1000 is a hard diet to keep up. I, for one, set my weight loss to slightly less than a pound a week. This IS what gives me the best results. Not everyone should aim for 2 lbs a week. Shorter or thinner people, for example, and people like you, who have been dealt a bad hand (or like me, who choose to lose slower in order to eat more). No, eating under 1000 is not the best course of action unless you have an urgent medical condition that requires you to lose weight as soon as possible.16 -
How do they test for your RMR? What does the test involve?0
-
As others have said, you are misunderstanding your RMR. Even if you are sedentary all day and do not exercise, you would multiply your RMR by 1.25. That would make your TDEE 1530. It depends on your stats, but that is really not an abnormal maintenance calorie amount for a lot of women here.
If you exercise, or are more active in your day, you burn more calories. If you even walk around a little bit in your day (usually more than around 3000-4000 steps), you are lightly active, which would be a multiplier of 1.4. So then your maintenance is 1713. Plus any exercise you do is additional to that.
Let's say you are sedentary except for exercise. You could eat 1200 calories a day, plus any additional calories your burn from exercise. That would give you a deficit of 330 calories a day, or enough for about 0.75 pounds of loss per week. That may not be as rapid as you hope, but that can be a lot of weight over time. If you are lightly active, then it is a pound per week.
Where are you getting those multipliers? They are slightly high compared to the ones I use. I have sedentary as 1.2 and light active as 1.375.
They are the ones MFP uses.
I see. I go by TDEE at the moment.0 -
joeymattluke wrote: »And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.
Eating under 1000 will certainly make you lose weight faster. But it will also leave you at risk for muscle wasting and malnutrition, and eating a painfully small amount of food. In addition to losing the weight, you want to be able to keep it off. Being miserable for a year to lose weight at a fast pace, will set you up for not being able to moderate once you get to goal. It may also ironically further lower your RMR. Adaptive thermogenesis is basically the Biggest Loser effect, netting very low cals over an extended period of time can cause your body to try to adapt by becoming more efficient. If your numbers are already too low, if it were me I would want to avoid forcing them lower. I'm no doctor, so I'm not sure if that's possible or not, but that's something I would think about!12 -
RMR tested by EKG/ CO2 output at dietary clinic. These in depth numbers are obviously new to me as I’ve been really tracking / journaling since I’m having such trouble with weight gain.
Trying to increase my steps - my daily job is sedentary but evenings are spent rarely sitting down (kids, pets, house, etc.).
Was truthfully tracking on weight watchers app for 8 weeks and lost 6# initially and then it came back while still following WW guidelines.1 -
The report was clear on calories needed for maintenance and weight loss did you not read it?17 -
joeymattluke wrote: »Actual report
So this says your weight loss calories should be 1218-1463. If the only one saying you should eat 1000 cals is your nutritionist, I will double down on what I said before - your nutritionist does not have a basic understanding of all this info and should not be advising you on weight loss.33 -
joeymattluke wrote: »And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.
Under 1000 calories is not the best option. It is hard to be sustainable and does not provide your body with enough nutrients. If you do 6000 steps a day, you are lightly active. That means that if you eat 1200 a day (which is the recommended minimum), you can lose about a pound a week. Sometimes results can be covered by water fluctuations, so it may not show on the scale immediately. But with patience and accurate logging, you can absolutelyose weight.10 -
Aside from a good reason for your low BMR which you should keep looking for, it means that plans that reduce deficit without strict tracking are likely not to work for you, which you have found to be true. You will need to track accurately which will involve a food scale. The trick on this low of a calorie is to find food that maximize nutrition and are satisfying. Lower fat and high protein worked for me. 40% protein, 30% carb and 30% fat is a good place to start to tweak things.
Also the more you increase you activity the more calories you will have to eat, which can be more sustainable if it is an option for you.2 -
The 1000 came up at the deficit of 500 calories a day to get to at least 3,500 in a week to lose 1# (based on the 3500=1# formula). Basing my activity at lightly active, hoping to have a bigger deficit than the 500/day to achieve a higher/faster loss result.
I obviously did read the report; I’m looking for advice since the nutritionist and exercise physiologist gave me this information right before the holiday week so I don’t have a plan yet. When I entered my caloric goal into the calculation part of the app here, it’s a bit daunting to see the low numbers... hence why I asked for input.
Thank you for advice... I’m hoping that I can figure this out because as I said before I was tracking for 2 months on the WW app and not being successful. I was around 1500 calories a day for eating and that was not tracking my activity - so in my mind, I assumed I should have been well within that weight loss zone == which is why I’m confused because it’s not working.
Tracking for me was by quantity / serving size. So I guess I’ll get a food scale to be even more accurate.10 -
joeymattluke wrote: »And I genuinely appreciate advice! I’m still waiting on the nutritionist to give me a plan and to see an endocrinologist for specifics.
But yes, my understanding was to eat under the 1,000 to get the best result. But if that’s not correct, then great.
I average about 6,000 steps/ day and am planning to get back to cross fit after a knee injury. It’s just hard to keep motivation going when I journal and work out and don’t get results.
Eating under 1000 will certainly make you lose weight faster. But it will also leave you at risk for muscle wasting and malnutrition, and eating a painfully small amount of food. In addition to losing the weight, you want to be able to keep it off. Being miserable for a year to lose weight at a fast pace, will set you up for not being able to moderate once you get to goal. It may also ironically further lower your RMR. Adaptive thermogenesis is basically the Biggest Loser effect, netting very low cals over an extended period of time can cause your body to try to adapt by becoming more efficient. If your numbers are already too low, if it were me I would want to avoid forcing them lower. I'm no doctor, so I'm not sure if that's possible or not, but that's something I would think about!
I wanted to add, RMR is not the biggest drop in calories burned. Its usually small and stops at a point. The biggest driver after weight loss of metabolism drop is loss of Lean Mass and skeletal Muscle efficiency, muscles spend less energy for the same movement. This loss is greater than would be predicted than an RMR reduction. Resistance training can help mitigate this. Kevin Halls BWP is close as far as TDEE as I have seen. If this was an rmr done at a gym with just a mouth piece on a small machine, I think they are basically worthless. Go to a REAL metabolic department at a University. Gods speed!7 -
joeymattluke wrote: »The 1000 came up at the deficit of 500 calories a day to get to at least 3,500 in a week to lose 1# (based on the 3500=1# formula). Basing my activity at lightly active, hoping to have a bigger deficit than the 500/day to achieve a higher/faster loss result.
I obviously did read the report; I’m looking for advice since the nutritionist and exercise physiologist gave me this information right before the holiday week so I don’t have a plan yet. When I entered my caloric goal into the calculation part of the app here, it’s a bit daunting to see the low numbers... hence why I asked for input.
Thank you for advice... I’m hoping that I can figure this out because as I said before I was tracking for 2 months on the WW app and not being successful. I was around 1500 calories a day for eating and that was not tracking my activity - so in my mind, I assumed I should have been well within that weight loss zone == which is why I’m confused because it’s not working.
Tracking for me was by quantity / serving size. So I guess I’ll get a food scale to be even more accurate.
Good plan. Also remember, EVERYTHING counts. Even vegetables, lean meats, and fat free yogurt.14 -
joeymattluke wrote: »RMR tested by EKG/ CO2 output at dietary clinic. These in depth numbers are obviously new to me as I’ve been really tracking / journaling since I’m having such trouble with weight gain.
Trying to increase my steps - my daily job is sedentary but evenings are spent rarely sitting down (kids, pets, house, etc.).
Was truthfully tracking on weight watchers app for 8 weeks and lost 6# initially and then it came back while still following WW guidelines.
Weight Watchers is a business. It's in their best interest to keep you going with them forever. That's why they have a ton of "zero point" foods that are in no way zero calorie. They want to keep you paying them. I feel like these days, the folks who are doing well on WW are already pretty good at regulating food intake.
Also beware of anyone calling themselves a nutritionist. That title isn't regulated. Dieticians have to actually go to school and be accredited to get that title. Joe Schmoe who dropped out of high school can call himself a nutritionist.
They're not all necessarily bad, but if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, expect quacks.16 -
I haven’t heard anything about weight watchers lately, but are they still doing points and free foods? Were you eating a lot of those free foods? Cause they ain’t free.4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions