If Body Fat % affects cals burned...cals burned calculator q

Options
2»

Replies

  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,668 Member
    Options
    . . .

    Raising you RMR is the most important thing you can do though since about 75% of your fat calories are burned at rest.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal & Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    I know that increasing lean muscle mass increases resting metabolic rate. What else does? I read an article that was way above my head that was advocating high intensity interval training (HIIT) because somehow it adds mitochondria (or increases the activity of mitochondria), so even the muscle I already have will burn more. Is that the sort of thing you recommend?
    HIIT increases VO2 max. The more oxygen you use the higher the MET value. 8-10 MET is working hard and this hard work pays off by higher calorie burns and a small jump in RMR.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal & Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • Chipmaniac
    Chipmaniac Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    And we know that people with lower body fat % burn more calories doing the same exercises as those with higher body fat %.
    We do? I don't think this is the case. In fact, a person with a lower body fat % is likely to be fitter and more biomechanically sound and efficient. Thus, they are likely to burn less, not more.

    I think you are confusing the additional BMR that lean muscle mass creates with the amount of energy it takes to do a specific exercise on a machine.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    And we know that people with lower body fat % burn more calories doing the same exercises as those with higher body fat %.
    We do? I don't think this is the case. In fact, a person with a lower body fat % is likely to be fitter and more biomechanically sound and efficient. Thus, they are likely to burn less, not more.

    I think you are confusing the additional BMR that lean muscle mass creates with the amount of energy it takes to do a specific exercise on a machine.

    Excellent point and better way to look at it.

    Lady A at 200 lbs has LBM of 120 lbs, BF% of 40%.

    Lady B at 140 lbs has LBM of 98 lbs, BF% of 30%.

    Lady A is going to burn more calories, not only because of carrying more weight, but because higher LBM means higher metabolism too.

    But then again, perhaps question was assuming same weighted person. In which case, smaller BF% automatically means higher LBM%, and that would mean higher calorie count.

    Except as you point out, higher LBM probably means more muscle that can carry the load easier at equal pace, so lower HR to accomplish it, therefore less calories burned.

    Ha! Basic premise is false. Nice work Mr Holmes!
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,668 Member
    Options
    And we know that people with lower body fat % burn more calories doing the same exercises as those with higher body fat %.
    We do? I don't think this is the case. In fact, a person with a lower body fat % is likely to be fitter and more biomechanically sound and efficient. Thus, they are likely to burn less, not more.

    I think you are confusing the additional BMR that lean muscle mass creates with the amount of energy it takes to do a specific exercise on a machine.

    Excellent point and better way to look at it.

    Lady A at 200 lbs has LBM of 120 lbs, BF% of 40%.

    Lady B at 140 lbs has LBM of 98 lbs, BF% of 30%.

    Lady A is going to burn more calories, not only because of carrying more weight, but because higher LBM means higher metabolism too.

    But then again, perhaps question was assuming same weighted person. In which case, smaller BF% automatically means higher LBM%, and that would mean higher calorie count.

    Except as you point out, higher LBM probably means more muscle that can carry the load easier, so lower HR to accomplish it, therefore less calories burned.

    Ha! Basic premise is false. Nice work Sherlock!
    I think the only time that the higher LBM will burn more vs the higher body fat% is when both are the same weight and due to the fact that the one with higher LBM may be fitter doing the same exercises.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal & Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • Chipmaniac
    Chipmaniac Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    And we know that people with lower body fat % burn more calories doing the same exercises as those with higher body fat %.
    We do? I don't think this is the case. In fact, a person with a lower body fat % is likely to be fitter and more biomechanically sound and efficient. Thus, they are likely to burn less, not more.

    I think you are confusing the additional BMR that lean muscle mass creates with the amount of energy it takes to do a specific exercise on a machine.
    In which case, smaller BF% automatically means higher LBM%, and that would mean higher calorie count.
    It's obvious a higher LBM would indeed burn more calories for every second of every day, however I'm not sure that a person with higher metabolism is going to expend extra energy to complete a specific task, with factors such as weight and fitness are normalized. In other words, their additional calorie burn will occur whether they exercise or not. Thus, the net calories burned in a given activity should be the same, all other things being equal.
  • Chipmaniac
    Chipmaniac Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    And we know that people with lower body fat % burn more calories doing the same exercises as those with higher body fat %.
    We do? I don't think this is the case. In fact, a person with a lower body fat % is likely to be fitter and more biomechanically sound and efficient. Thus, they are likely to burn less, not more.

    I think you are confusing the additional BMR that lean muscle mass creates with the amount of energy it takes to do a specific exercise on a machine.

    Excellent point and better way to look at it.

    Lady A at 200 lbs has LBM of 120 lbs, BF% of 40%.

    Lady B at 140 lbs has LBM of 98 lbs, BF% of 30%.

    Lady A is going to burn more calories, not only because of carrying more weight, but because higher LBM means higher metabolism too.

    But then again, perhaps question was assuming same weighted person. In which case, smaller BF% automatically means higher LBM%, and that would mean higher calorie count.

    Except as you point out, higher LBM probably means more muscle that can carry the load easier, so lower HR to accomplish it, therefore less calories burned.

    Ha! Basic premise is false. Nice work Sherlock!
    I think the only time that the higher LBM will burn more vs the higher body fat% is when both are the same weight and due to the fact that the one with higher LBM may be fitter doing the same exercises.
    I don't think it holds true that a fitter person will burn more during exercise than one who is not fit. In fact, I think the opposite is true. That's the basis of the higher heart rate = higher calorie burn theory that HRM's work off of. A fitter person will have a lower heart rate doing the exact same exercise and thus a lower actual burn, all other factors normalized.
  • mollydubs
    mollydubs Posts: 205 Member
    Options
    That post is all sorts of wacky. I wasn't far off on what I thought my bf% was, but apparently it means I have to go 8 years older to get the same bmr needs. Which seems...odd. Right? Do older people have naturally lesser bf%?

    It means you have the Lean Body Mass of an average lady your weight/height but 8 yrs older.

    That's why I joked everyone would hope to get younger.

    What it means is, at far as the Polar knows, you are being given an estimated calorie burn higher than you are really burning, because you have less LBM, therefore slower metabolism, then they are estimating you have.

    But 8 yrs is nothing! Keep doing weight lifting, lose some more fat, and your LBM for weight/height will be right on, or even better! So younger.

    But my point is...my body fat is at 16.6%...and I'm a woman. I have a super high LBM...
  • treetop57
    treetop57 Posts: 1,578 Member
    Options
    That post is all sorts of wacky. I wasn't far off on what I thought my bf% was, but apparently it means I have to go 8 years older to get the same bmr needs. Which seems...odd. Right? Do older people have naturally lesser bf%?

    I'm guessing I didn't explain the method clearly enough and you're coming up with a bogus number.

    Using the formulas from this page ( http://www.cordianet.com/calculator.htm ) and algebra, I find this equation for the "effective age" of a woman, i.e. the age with the lean muscle mass assumed by the Harris-Benedict equations for a person of your weight and height. Height in inches, weight in pounds, and BF% as a number, not fraction (16.6, not 0.166 for you).

    For women:

    Age = (285 + 4.7 * height - 5.4476 * weight + 9.7976 * BF% * weight / 100) / 4.7

    For men:

    Age = (-304 + 12.7 * height - 3.5676 * weight + 9.7976 * BF% * weight / 100) / 6.8

    Plug in your numbers, mollydubs, and see what you get. I think you are right that your "effective age" will be lower than your chronological age since 16.6% is very low for a woman. It wouldn't even surprise me if it turns out negative!

    I hope this doesn't turn into another "order of operations" thread!
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,668 Member
    Options
    And we know that people with lower body fat % burn more calories doing the same exercises as those with higher body fat %.
    We do? I don't think this is the case. In fact, a person with a lower body fat % is likely to be fitter and more biomechanically sound and efficient. Thus, they are likely to burn less, not more.

    I think you are confusing the additional BMR that lean muscle mass creates with the amount of energy it takes to do a specific exercise on a machine.

    Excellent point and better way to look at it.

    Lady A at 200 lbs has LBM of 120 lbs, BF% of 40%.

    Lady B at 140 lbs has LBM of 98 lbs, BF% of 30%.

    Lady A is going to burn more calories, not only because of carrying more weight, but because higher LBM means higher metabolism too.

    But then again, perhaps question was assuming same weighted person. In which case, smaller BF% automatically means higher LBM%, and that would mean higher calorie count.

    Except as you point out, higher LBM probably means more muscle that can carry the load easier, so lower HR to accomplish it, therefore less calories burned.

    Ha! Basic premise is false. Nice work Sherlock!
    I think the only time that the higher LBM will burn more vs the higher body fat% is when both are the same weight and due to the fact that the one with higher LBM may be fitter doing the same exercises.
    I don't think it holds true that a fitter person will burn more during exercise than one who is not fit. In fact, I think the opposite is true. That's the basis of the higher heart rate = higher calorie burn theory that HRM's work off of. A fitter person will have a lower heart rate doing the exact same exercise and thus a lower actual burn, all other factors normalized.
    In contrast what I meant to convey is that the fitter person will be able to do longer duration and higher intensity than that of their counter part, who isn't fit, thereby resulting in a higher calorie burn.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal & Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Categories