How to fix metabolic adaptation?
Replies
-
Lolana1822 wrote: »Something's clearly going wrong here. I'm 5'2". I checked my Fitbit step history and I'm already burning about 3000 calories on day where I'm "only" walking 15k steps. 50k steps would mean well over 5000 burnt calories. You're a bit taller, so you're probably burning a bit more than me. Combine that with eating 2000kcal a day and you should be losing quite a bit, if your logging is accurate.
Also, are you sure you're actually doing 50k steps a day? If you're measuring your steps with you phone, the count might be really off. If it's true, you're walking about 9 hours everyday and that doesn't sound neither correct nor healthy. Additionally, your current weight is actually not far from your ideal weight. Going back to 135lbs would be quite underweight. Definately talk to your doctor about your steps, your calorie intake and your weight/health goals. If you're still growing it's double important to make sure your body gets what it needs.
I agree with you, but I think that there is an element here that is over looked. There is something called the energy constraint model. Hermann Pontzer talks about it. An interview here.
https://youtu.be/QFdPCpVGQV8 2 -
That study he's discussing came up in another thread recently.
They used typical BMR/TDEE statistical formulas for population masses NOT specific to that population to compare to for deciding there must be constraint.
Where other research on examining size of the most metabolically active organs, shows those populations in Africa have smaller less calorie burning organs. Their BMR is smaller using typical formulas.
So trade between BMR and and NEAT you might say.
Still interesting research and discussion of where the body finds extra calories to spare.
Great interviewer to ask the right questions since he was familiar with it.
"that mile has a set cost, that doesn't change .... energy comes from somewhere else"
ETA - compared to the claim the body energy expenditure goes back to a level or is capped - how have all the research studies that caused weight loss by increasing exercise ever worked?
Many with fat loss almost matching exactly the deficit created by the exercise?
Hmmm.5 -
That was a fun video, @psychod787
Interesting back and forth.
You're really all about the whole set point thing.
I mean, I don't really believe the OP's post...I think there is an element of stretching the truth in the OP.
2 -
Unless op can clarify some of the very basic details that are still not clear, I'm not sure reading in new ideas on energy expenditure is necessary. This might not make sense simply because there is missing information, or sadly because it was intended to not be clear in the first place.4
-
cmriverside wrote: »That was a fun video, @psychod787 Interesting back and forth.
You're really all about the whole set point thing.
I mean, I don't really believe the OP's post...I think there is an element of stretching the truth in the OP.
Yes ma'am and no ma'am in the set point. More of an interest in what drive our overall metabolism and how our environment plays into it. While the semi sedentary westerner mentioned can be over weight, the Hadza have ideal body composition even while eating the same calories.Unless op can clarify some of the very basic details that are still not clear, I'm not sure reading in new ideas on energy expenditure is necessary. This might not make sense simply because there is missing information, or sadly because it was intended to not be clear in the first place.
Yes ma'am, I would agree that OP is over estimating EE and unestimating EI, but we have to be careful when ruling out all scenarios. However unlikely they are.2 -
That study he's discussing came up in another thread recently.
They used typical BMR/TDEE statistical formulas for population masses NOT specific to that population to compare to for deciding there must be constraint.
Where other research on examining size of the most metabolically active organs, shows those populations in Africa have smaller less calorie burning organs. Their BMR is smaller using typical formulas.
So trade between BMR and and NEAT you might say.
Still interesting research and discussion of where the body finds extra calories to spare.
Great interviewer to ask the right questions since he was familiar with it.
"that mile has a set cost, that doesn't change .... energy comes from somewhere else"
ETA - compared to the claim the body energy expenditure goes back to a level or is capped - how have all the research studies that caused weight loss by increasing exercise ever worked?
Many with fat loss almost matching exactly the deficit created by the exercise?
Hmmm.
Yes. It's all calories in and calories out, but what controls CICO is far more complicated. Yes, weight loss is almost as predicted in most studies, but degrades over time for amount predicted by the original deficit. Yes, bodies get smaller and they burn less energy, but the is a further down regulation in many studies than would have been predicted for the new size. Hence, AT. I have been wondering if AT is nothing more than this energy constraint model in action. Down regulation in hormones and skeletal fuel efficiency. Now, weight gain studies are even more interesting. When you look at twin studies, different sets of twins gained different amounts of weight in response to the same over feeding. There is also evidence in Liebels lab of an increase in rmr and a decrease in skeletal muscle efficiency in acute overfeed. People also complain of having to eat more and feeling full. I.E. an energy intake constraint.1 -
OP, I'm not sure if this is a typo or not. Are you saying that 4 months ago you were 5'9" and 135 lbs and now you are 5'11" and 175 lbs? Are you still growing?
Regardless, 135 lbs would be quite underweight for 5'9 or 5'11.
I'm just having a tough time getting my head around all your numbers. You are talking about getting a number of steps that would require walking for most of the day, all your calorie numbers are nice round numbers, your weight gain is again round dramatic numbers.
If you have in fact gained 40 lbs in 4 months while eating 2000 calories daily and taking 50,000 steps a day, all I can suggest is a doctor's appointment.
I already asked like 5 different doctors who specialize in dietary fields and nutritionists and all did not have a direct answer. They just pulled the "everyone has a different metabolism " card or something along the lines of it. I was 135 after doing like a 3 day fast to lose those final vanity pounds and just wanted to test myself. But normal weight at the end of my cut was around the 140s0 -
Go see a doctor to confirm you're ok especially with rapid weight gain as described.
In all cases, a daily step count of 50-60K, over 350,000 steps a week, is also something that should be discussed with your doctor in the context of confirming that this is a healthy goal and pursuit for yourself at this time. You should also check the wear pattern on your shoes and mention / show any thing of note to your doctor.
If you're using the walking primarily to burn calories, again this should be discussed with your doctor.
Furthermore you're well into diminishing returns because yes your muscles will get more efficient at performing this same movement and you will comparatively burn a little bit less per step as compared to your untrained self. A bit less does not mean zero.
Ok yes for that last paragraph, how do I "reset" it so that my body DOES burn the average amount of calories burned while walking again?1 -
psychod787 wrote: »60k steps? Hell, you must just walk all day! No way to "fix" metabolic adaptation per se. I mean, unless you want to "repay" the energy gap. Why do I feel like I'm being trolled? 60k steps a day is like 30 miles. If burn 100 cals a mile, you are burning 3k cals before rmr and tef are taken into account.
I thought about this again later. I wonder if one of the issues is that the steps are being counted twice, once on a phone and the second on a watch.
I just use the health app on my phone. No watch
0 -
Personally I think you're just creating human error.. and there is nothing to actually reset9
-
psychod787 wrote: »60k steps? Hell, you must just walk all day! No way to "fix" metabolic adaptation per se. I mean, unless you want to "repay" the energy gap. Why do I feel like I'm being trolled? 60k steps a day is like 30 miles. If burn 100 cals a mile, you are burning 3k cals before rmr and tef are taken into account.
1 -
arizonaj22 wrote: »I also weigh everything on my food scale and Do Not eat anything else besides what I track. For some reason the picture option wont function to upload my food journal but heres the written out version in form of calories per food
300 calories of chicken breast
100 calories watermelon
70 cal blueberry
150 cal beans
150 cal grits
100 cal sweet potato
120 calorie unsweetened almond milk
100 cal cocoa puff
100 cal HNcheerios
100 cal honeycomb cereal
150 cal tuna
250 cal beef jerky
100 cal banana
200 cal soup
I'll round it to 2000(its 1990 cal)
Anyways that's a deficit for the average sedentary male and I'm over here doing all this activity and gaining fat just by looking at food!
I thought it might be due to undereating aka starvation mode. Which is why I wanted to reverse diet and add calories but it seems that the more I add the more I gain(weight)
I put what I ate yesterday in my new diary its public ..0 -
nanamerriman2020 wrote: »Bottom line: if you grew 2" in the past few months, it is very reasonable for you to also put on weight. Trying to get back to the weight you knew when you were shorter is probably not a realistic goal.
Guys tend to reach their full height by age 18, but that is not an absolute.
Yes but I see a dramatic change in my fat like bigger stomach. Waistline, hip, 0 veins now
and pants fit tighter and the 5'11 thing is just 2 inches 0 -
arizonaj22 wrote: »nanamerriman2020 wrote: »Bottom line: if you grew 2" in the past few months, it is very reasonable for you to also put on weight. Trying to get back to the weight you knew when you were shorter is probably not a realistic goal.
Guys tend to reach their full height by age 18, but that is not an absolute.
Yes but I see a dramatic change in my fat like bigger stomach. Waistline, hip, 0 veins now and pants fit tighter and the 5'11 thing is just 2 inches
Your diary is empty when I viewed it, and what do you do that you walk close to 40 miles a day?1 -
I can't even find where to view the diary lol..0
-
KrissDotCom wrote: »I can't even find where to view the diary lol..
Do you mean this:
https://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/diary/arizonaj22?date=2020-08-06 ?
Or are you referring to the fact that there are no entries in it for this last week?4 -
Devil’s advocate here. MFP has been wonky lately. Maybe?0
-
kshama2001 wrote: »KrissDotCom wrote: »I can't even find where to view the diary lol..
Do you mean this:
https://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/diary/arizonaj22?date=2020-08-06 ?
Or are you referring to the fact that there are no entries in it for this last week?
Yeah that, I guess you can't view from the app.0 -
There isn't any entries for the last month lol..1
-
I checked the OPs posting history to see if there were any clues to what might be going on. And a Nov post mentioned they were an Asian woman who was bulking.
Because OP mentioned in this thread that 2000 would be a deficit for a sedentary man, I assumed OP was male.
OP, if you are a menstruating female, has your cycle been normal during this time of weight gain?
And you still haven't clarified the height issue - did you grow 2 inches in the last 4 months, or were one or both of those heights a typo?
It would also be great if you could clarify what you are doing all day to get the daily step count you are getting.
Sorry this was an account my sister using at the time but gave it to me because she had premium but I ended it because I didnt feel it was worth the money. I'm a male1 -
rheddmobile wrote: »If the OP really did gain 2 inches and also was in the process of transforming from a scrawny boy to a grown man, the weight gain may be perfectly normal.
30 miles a day is a lot of walking. Like, 8 to 10 hours a day. Is that really what’s happening?
Definitely I understand that usually taller=gain of weight which is normal. However, this much for almost 2 inches AND a huge growth in my stomach,hips,waist tighter cloths etc... should not be happening imho0 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »Devil’s advocate here. MFP has been wonky lately. Maybe?
Yes I agree. It has rarely opened up to the point where I can log. Fortunately I was able to put the foods I had yesterday in today's log0 -
You don't gain 40 pounds in four months (after eating the same and increasing exercise) because of AT.
It just doesn't work that way.
Only the most extreme dieters have longterm down-regulation. The rest of us mortals reset their metabolism to normal within a week (unless you're a Biggest Loser contestant who was undereating and over-exercising.)
If you lost weight and then started exercising MORE and gained weight on the same calories (that is your stated premise) then you need to see a doctor.
You don't have a log for us to view, and none of the rest of your story makes sense. See an endocrinologist. Ask for a referral - they will be able to figure this out. Don't go to a regular GP, because I don't think they will believe you either.9 -
You reset muscle efficiency by detuning your adaptation.
In other words you do nothing or something else till your tuned body... de-tunes!
It is the reverse of performing better.
If you're walking around all day to burn calories to control your weight you do have an issue that should be discussed with your doctor and a referral to a specialist.... you're not going to spend the next 60 to 80 years walking like this every day all day.....
Take a couple of rest days.
Full rest days.
No walking around.
Couch all day. 6,000; not 60,000 maximum steps
If you can't, ask yourself why you cannot and whether this is healthy. And discuss your findings as per above.8 -
You reset muscle efficiency by detuning your adaptation.
In other words you do nothing or something else till your tuned body... de-tunes!
It is the reverse of performing better.
If you're walking around all day to burn calories to control your weight you do have an issue that should be discussed with your doctor and a referral to a specialist.... you're not going to spend the next 60 to 80 years walking like this every day all day.....
Take a couple of rest days.
Full rest days.
No walking around.
Couch all day. 6,000; not 60,000 maximum steps
If you can't, ask yourself why you cannot and whether this is healthy. And discuss your findings as per above.
Thank You very much for the advice! So this might be too much to ask but do you know how long it takes on average to de-tune? Maybe a week? And I'm just assuming that symptoms that my body reset is just losing weight once I reintroduce normal activity(lifting and moderate walking like 15k steps while maintaining a moderate diet)?2 -
arizonaj22 wrote: »OP, I'm not sure if this is a typo or not. Are you saying that 4 months ago you were 5'9" and 135 lbs and now you are 5'11" and 175 lbs? Are you still growing?
Regardless, 135 lbs would be quite underweight for 5'9 or 5'11.
I'm just having a tough time getting my head around all your numbers. You are talking about getting a number of steps that would require walking for most of the day, all your calorie numbers are nice round numbers, your weight gain is again round dramatic numbers.
If you have in fact gained 40 lbs in 4 months while eating 2000 calories daily and taking 50,000 steps a day, all I can suggest is a doctor's appointment.
I already asked like 5 different doctors who specialize in dietary fields and nutritionists and all did not have a direct answer. They just pulled the "everyone has a different metabolism " card or something along the lines of it. I was 135 after doing like a 3 day fast to lose those final vanity pounds and just wanted to test myself. But normal weight at the end of my cut was around the 140s
Did you have those tests at the end of this fast? Some metabolic testing reacts to fasting and gives incorrect results. Sure, those tests should be done x hrs after the last meal, but several days of fasting can throw the results off.3 -
arizonaj22 wrote: »nanamerriman2020 wrote: »Bottom line: if you grew 2" in the past few months, it is very reasonable for you to also put on weight. Trying to get back to the weight you knew when you were shorter is probably not a realistic goal.
Guys tend to reach their full height by age 18, but that is not an absolute.
Yes but I see a dramatic change in my fat like bigger stomach. Waistline, hip, 0 veins now and pants fit tighter and the 5'11 thing is just 2 inches
Okay, but 135 at 5’9” is quite thin for a man. And 175 at 5’11” is normal weight. If you are Asian, the numbers look a little different, but I’m still concerned about your self-perception. It is normal to fill out dramatically when going from a teen to a man.6 -
arizonaj22 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »60k steps? Hell, you must just walk all day! No way to "fix" metabolic adaptation per se. I mean, unless you want to "repay" the energy gap. Why do I feel like I'm being trolled? 60k steps a day is like 30 miles. If burn 100 cals a mile, you are burning 3k cals before rmr and tef are taken into account.
Do you work night shifts? Why are you walking from 3am?7 -
arizonaj22 wrote: »OP, I'm not sure if this is a typo or not. Are you saying that 4 months ago you were 5'9" and 135 lbs and now you are 5'11" and 175 lbs? Are you still growing?
Regardless, 135 lbs would be quite underweight for 5'9 or 5'11.
I'm just having a tough time getting my head around all your numbers. You are talking about getting a number of steps that would require walking for most of the day, all your calorie numbers are nice round numbers, your weight gain is again round dramatic numbers.
If you have in fact gained 40 lbs in 4 months while eating 2000 calories daily and taking 50,000 steps a day, all I can suggest is a doctor's appointment.
I already asked like 5 different doctors who specialize in dietary fields and nutritionists and all did not have a direct answer. They just pulled the "everyone has a different metabolism " card or something along the lines of it. I was 135 after doing like a 3 day fast to lose those final vanity pounds and just wanted to test myself. But normal weight at the end of my cut was around the 140s
Did you have those tests at the end of this fast? Some metabolic testing reacts to fasting and gives incorrect results. Sure, those tests should be done x hrs after the last meal, but several days of fasting can throw the results off.
Oh no no my apologies if I was unclear. It was just near the end of my cut where I was on my high horse and tried to see how low I could go(like how boxers go for super low weigh ins. I was excited because of creed the movie and just decided to try to aim for a low as possible weigh in)1 -
Redordeadhead wrote: »arizonaj22 wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »60k steps? Hell, you must just walk all day! No way to "fix" metabolic adaptation per se. I mean, unless you want to "repay" the energy gap. Why do I feel like I'm being trolled? 60k steps a day is like 30 miles. If burn 100 cals a mile, you are burning 3k cals before rmr and tef are taken into account.
Do you work night shifts? Why are you walking from 3am?
Yes I volunteer at midnight mission type food banks and homeless shelters which often peak at the early am5
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K 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
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions