Mythical BMR

If you're going to link to something as proof you're going to have to do better than a bodybuilding blog.

But people are supposed to take what random posters take as gospel? Please.

I basically use the calorie estimate as a guide, sort of. i don't eat more if I'm not hungry, but will eat over my allotted calories if I need to. i just tell people to feel it out, and see where they function the best.

If you're going to link to something as proof you're going to have to do better than a bodybuilding blog.

Did you read the article or just dismiss it. Where are your sources for all the crap you have claimed.

"An initial review of this woman's calories indicates she is just above starvation level in the 400-700 per day range."

How is this relevant?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAvFsIUxvY

He's basically just a trainer/blogger but he's got a lot of education:

My formal education background is a degree in human biology and nutrition from the University of Guelph (Ontario Canada), and a Masters In Human Biology and nutrition also from U of Guelph.

I did further graduate research and taught exercise physiology at the University of Florida (Go Gators!)

I’ve taken a bunch of personal training certifications, all the usual ones such as the NSCA CSCS, ACE PT, CSEP etc. I was also a certified kinesiologist blah blah, if you’ve taken any of these certifications you know how BS they are…I personally don’t put any value in these certificates because they’re not hands on and just require a simple written test…so yeah I have em’ but I don’t think they mean anything.

I think a few concepts are being confused in this discussion. There is clearly some number of calories that your body burns every day just to run its autonomic systems. What we don't know (and scientists don't know it yet either) is what percentage of that number can you supply from your own fat stores before doing temporary or permanent damage. I can not say this emphatically enough. The answer to this question is not yet settled regardless of what dieting websites and books try to tell you.

But don't forget that while you are trying to lose weight, you also have to go on with your daily life. You have to go to work, take care of family, walk the dog, etc. And you probably need to be mentally and physically able to do that. There is a point at which you simply don't function well, physically or mentally. Whether your weight loss actually slows down is probably also an unsettled scientific question but your quality of life certainly can slow down.

For a fascinating study of how our functioning breaks down without calories, I recommend the book, "The great starvation experiment" by Todd Tucker. This study followed a group of conscientious objector volunteers during WWII to study the effects of starvation in order to find the best way to "refeed" a starved continent once the war ended. It is truly eye opening.

There is probably a sweet spot, where you are eating a nutritionally balanced diet of sufficient calories to let you function as a decent human being and still lose weight at an acceptable rate. My guess is that everyone will have to find that spot on for him or herself. The sad part is that it probably will change as you lose weight and age but thats life! 1200 is probably a decent place to start but there is nothing magic about that number.

If it works for you, use it. If it doesn't, don't. That's that about that.

here is a write up on the military study... as for the abstract and the accurall study, still looking

http://fitnessblackbook.com/main/starvation-mode-why-you-probably-never-need-to-worry-about-it/

You do need to eat something... you need at least some carbohydrates/sugar since this is the only fuel your brain can use. You do have some carbohydrate storage but not enough to last very long.

I'm not doing the very low carb ketosis thing, but this is just incorrect. Your brain can use ketones in addition to glycogen, and your body can make glucose as needed. It's called gluconeogenesis. Carbohydrates are in fact the only macronutrient that the human organism does not NEED to sustain life.

As for BMR, it shouldn't be a huge concern for obese people like me as long as you are eating some sensible amount of food - which varies by person, but I can see slimmer people needing to fine tune things a bit. The biggest thing is that the online calculators are rubbish for at least half the population - there is much variance between individuals.

You are correct... but the ketone bodies, that can be derived from fatty acids, are only used in 'starvation' mode when glucose levels are low... they are a secondary source of energy and not preferred - so I guess it depends on how 'happy' you want your neurons to be ;-) Gluconeogenesis can also occur in the liver but needs pyruvate from either carbohydrates or from amino acids.

As to the poster's question, I agree that there is nothing particularly special about the BMR number. But for most people, I don't think that simply not eating is the best way to go even if they have lots of excess fat supplies since you are going to be going into a modified metabolism mode and that can have some undesired effects (as examples, diminished ability to exercise or concentrate)... but the amount to which effects are seen will, of course, vary from person to person.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAvFsIUxvY

He's basically just a trainer/blogger but he's got a lot of education:

My formal education background is a degree in human biology and nutrition from the University of Guelph (Ontario Canada), and a Masters In Human Biology and nutrition also from U of Guelph.

I did further graduate research and taught exercise physiology at the University of Florida (Go Gators!)

I’ve taken a bunch of personal training certifications, all the usual ones such as the NSCA CSCS, ACE PT, CSEP etc. I was also a certified kinesiologist blah blah, if you’ve taken any of these certifications you know how BS they are…I personally don’t put any value in these certificates because they’re not hands on and just require a simple written test…so yeah I have em’ but I don’t think they mean anything.

Now that I'm on my PC not the phone, I went to check this out.

I'm afraid he's lost all credibility with me as he doesn't even know the difference between BMR and TDEE,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPkD3bYIlA0&feature=relmfu

Why do so many people say you should not eat under your BMR? Some even try and get slightly scientific saying that the BMR shows how many calories your body needs to survive if in a coma.

1. People who log on here are not in a coma, we are moving about so burning more calories.
2. BMR is an estimate. Just look at the different values you get from the different equations.

http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/yjada/article/S0002-8223(95)00366-5/abstract

3. What is a lot more important is the nutritional quality of what you eat rather than the calorie value. Who has a healthier diet, both have a calculated BMR of 1,500. One eats 1,600 calories of lard each day the other eats 1,300 calories in a mix of lean meats, vegetables, fruit and grain.

4. When overweight your body has an adequate source of energy in the fat that makes you overweight.

awesome way of putting it. i think if your eating a healthy balance you shouldnt worry about the number so much. people freak out if you eat 1350-1400 cals like me. something everyone should remember is that people do what works best for THEM. not yourself.