Anyone get RMR tested? How did it differ vs estimates?

Options
2»

Replies

  • dlwyatt82
    dlwyatt82 Posts: 1,077 Member
    Options
    Mine was higher than I expected (it was either 1800 or 1850, it was a couple of years ago and I don't remember the exact number) but I was also breastfeeding my daughter at the time, who was around 10 months old. At around that age of the infant, women expend about 250-300 calories a day from breastfeeding, which would put my RMR around 1500-1600 at that point. The BMR calculators say my BMR is about 1587, so I would say it's pretty close.

    If your BMR is 1587, then your RMR should be quite a bit higher, depending on how active you are throughout the day. Even if you're fairly sedentary, I'd still expect to see an RMR of at least 1800 calories (assuming the 1587 BMR is accurate).
  • easfahl
    easfahl Posts: 567 Member
    Options
    I had my BF% tested via hydrostatic weight and it was way lower than all of the estimated calculators, which I pretty much already knew.

    I am going to get my RMR tested as well but it's quite a bit more expensive. All this testing is through our university, and compares to the costs you mentioned.

    Isn't the FitBit an RMR calculator/estimator as well? Anyone have one of those AND get their RMR tested? Can anyone chime in on that variation?
  • dlwyatt82
    dlwyatt82 Posts: 1,077 Member
    Options
    Actually, I do have a FitBit, but bought it after my most recent RMR test. I'll try to remember to compare the FitBit's readings for the day before and day of the next test.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    Options
    Mine was higher than I expected (it was either 1800 or 1850, it was a couple of years ago and I don't remember the exact number) but I was also breastfeeding my daughter at the time, who was around 10 months old. At around that age of the infant, women expend about 250-300 calories a day from breastfeeding, which would put my RMR around 1500-1600 at that point. The BMR calculators say my BMR is about 1587, so I would say it's pretty close.

    If your BMR is 1587, then your RMR should be quite a bit higher, depending on how active you are throughout the day. Even if you're fairly sedentary, I'd still expect to see an RMR of at least 1800 calories (assuming the 1587 BMR is accurate).

    I think you mean TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). The resting metabolic rate should be very nearly the same as BMR. It is the calorie burn while resting, including NO movement.
  • dlwyatt82
    dlwyatt82 Posts: 1,077 Member
    Options
    Mine was higher than I expected (it was either 1800 or 1850, it was a couple of years ago and I don't remember the exact number) but I was also breastfeeding my daughter at the time, who was around 10 months old. At around that age of the infant, women expend about 250-300 calories a day from breastfeeding, which would put my RMR around 1500-1600 at that point. The BMR calculators say my BMR is about 1587, so I would say it's pretty close.

    If your BMR is 1587, then your RMR should be quite a bit higher, depending on how active you are throughout the day. Even if you're fairly sedentary, I'd still expect to see an RMR of at least 1800 calories (assuming the 1587 BMR is accurate).

    I think you mean TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). The resting metabolic rate should be very nearly the same as BMR. It is the calorie burn while resting, including NO movement.

    That's not correct. RMR is the same thing as TDEE on a day when you haven't performed any exercise. Unless you spent the entire day basically in bed asleep, the RMR is going to be somewhat higher than BMR.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    Options
    Just did mine on Friday. Predicted was 1688, actual was 1498. Enough of a difference to make a difference, as I try to keep a small deficit so I have energy to run. I have not been losing weight for the last year and a half, and I am happy to know this could be the reason.

    Also to consider - my HRM has likely been overpredicting calories burned, if they are based on averages.

    I suspect I may get similar results. Given my PCOS and thyroid issues, it would make sense.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    Options
    Mine was higher than I expected (it was either 1800 or 1850, it was a couple of years ago and I don't remember the exact number) but I was also breastfeeding my daughter at the time, who was around 10 months old. At around that age of the infant, women expend about 250-300 calories a day from breastfeeding, which would put my RMR around 1500-1600 at that point. The BMR calculators say my BMR is about 1587, so I would say it's pretty close.

    If your BMR is 1587, then your RMR should be quite a bit higher, depending on how active you are throughout the day. Even if you're fairly sedentary, I'd still expect to see an RMR of at least 1800 calories (assuming the 1587 BMR is accurate).

    I think you mean TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). The resting metabolic rate should be very nearly the same as BMR. It is the calorie burn while resting, including NO movement.

    That's not correct. RMR is the same thing as TDEE on a day when you haven't performed any exercise. Unless you spent the entire day basically in bed asleep, the RMR is going to be somewhat higher than BMR.

    I disagree: http://www.acefitness.org/blog/616/bmr-versus-rmr

    This also meshes with the literature the university hospital system gave me. While I'm not staying the night at the testing facility, I do have to be fasting for 12 hours before the test (so that I'm not burning calories due to digestion) and it will take an hour and a half to perform. I'll be in a dark room completely still, and not allowed to sleep, read, or anything.
  • dlwyatt82
    dlwyatt82 Posts: 1,077 Member
    Options
    I disagree: http://www.acefitness.org/blog/616/bmr-versus-rmr

    This also meshes with the literature the university hospital system gave me. While I'm not staying the night at the testing facility, I do have to be fasting for 12 hours before the test (so that I'm not burning calories due to digestion) and it will take an hour and a half to perform. I'll be in a dark room completely still, and not allowed to sleep, read, or anything.

    All those measures are doing is lowering your RMR to be measured as closer to your BMR, but it will never get all the way down. In any case, it doesn't really matter. There's so much misuse of those terms on the internet that you can't really rely on a web search to clear it up. I got the definitions straight from the physicians at the weight loss clinic I attend. If they're wrong, then so am I.
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options
    I've read that what the tests are actually measuring is your RMR. BMR is a tougher test. I think they use the terms virtually interchangeably.

    The Fitbit just uses the same formulas the web sites do, to estimate your BMR/RMR. It adds some 'intelligence' in getting to a TDEE from there, in that it can semi-accurately tell how sedentary/active you are. But it has no advantage over any other simple RMR estimater.
  • Lea_8D
    Lea_8D Posts: 106 Member
    Options
    I had mine tested and it was much lower than online estimates. Online calculators were around 1330-1430. Actual was 1007.

    I'm hoping that over time I can increase this some by adding muscle mass, but apparently this is something that you have little control over.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    Options
    I disagree: http://www.acefitness.org/blog/616/bmr-versus-rmr

    This also meshes with the literature the university hospital system gave me. While I'm not staying the night at the testing facility, I do have to be fasting for 12 hours before the test (so that I'm not burning calories due to digestion) and it will take an hour and a half to perform. I'll be in a dark room completely still, and not allowed to sleep, read, or anything.

    All those measures are doing is lowering your RMR to be measured as closer to your BMR, but it will never get all the way down. In any case, it doesn't really matter. There's so much misuse of those terms on the internet that you can't really rely on a web search to clear it up. I got the definitions straight from the physicians at the weight loss clinic I attend. If they're wrong, then so am I.

    And my information is from the University of Michigan hospital. I used that link because it was the same as they told me. So I'll believe them.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    Options
    And I never said BMR and RMR were the same, but they are VERY close.
  • redmapleleaf
    redmapleleaf Posts: 56 Member
    Options
    I had mine tested a couple of weeks ago. Mine was off by 311 calories.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    Options
    I had mine tested a couple of weeks ago. Mine was off by 311 calories.

    Under or over?
  • redmapleleaf
    redmapleleaf Posts: 56 Member
    Options
    The calculators had me at 1403 but the RMR test gave me 1092.

    To answer someone's previous comments I have a fitbit. On a regular, non work day, non exercise day the Fitbit has me at around a 1700 burn. That is just regular moving around and tending to my kids. Since I had to lie still for the RMR I can see how it gave me 1092 since the RMR test and wearing my Fitbit would calculate two totally different calorie burns.
  • Mama_Jag
    Mama_Jag Posts: 474 Member
    Options
    The calculators had me at 1403 but the RMR test gave me 1092.

    To answer someone's previous comments I have a fitbit. On a regular, non work day, non exercise day the Fitbit has me at around a 1700 burn. That is just regular moving around and tending to my kids. Since I had to lie still for the RMR I can see how it gave me 1092 since the RMR test and wearing my Fitbit would calculate two totally different calorie burns.

    I am not sure I totally understand what you are saying regarding the fitbit. I am trying to figure out how to still be able to use mine with my numbers being different from all the calculators. Is that possible, to your knowledge?
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options
    Mooser- Did you say you had your BMR tested and it's 1498? Find out what age/weight you can put into Fitbit so it calcs a BMR of about that rate for you. Tell it you're older and/or smaller than you are. I think then you might get good estimates of your TDEE (what you burn in a day including activity).
  • Mama_Jag
    Mama_Jag Posts: 474 Member
    Options
    Mooser- Did you say you had your BMR tested and it's 1498? Find out what age/weight you can put into Fitbit so it calcs a BMR of about that rate for you. Tell it you're older and/or smaller than you are. I think then you might get good estimates of your TDEE (what you burn in a day including activity).

    I will do that. I did that for MFP and I have the metabolism of a 55 year old woman my size (I am 32). :o) I will update fitbit, too. I adore my fitbit, and was really bummed that it may not be the tool for me. I hope this works! Thanks a bunch!
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options
    I love mine too and use it mainly for what any pedometer does-- just to get me to my steps goals. But the charts are neat. Even if it's not exact for you, it's all still totally valuable. Trends matter, as does the difference between your intake and output. It might mis-report your calorie output (burn) by x-hundred calories but if you know roughly by how much, you can use it just as if it was perfectly accurate. Good luck!

Categories