01-21-2004, 11:11 AM #1Junior Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
question: Does your RMR have to drop to lose weight?
I can't remember, but I think I read that your RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate) really doesn't change if it is fat you're losing, but if you lose or gain muscle it does change...
But if I were to correctly assess someone's RMR through the benedict equation, would it be necessary to also give a SUGGESTIVE RMR based on their goals? or would that be just stupid since RMR doesn't really change much?
or would it be BEST to obviously just give a suggestive caloric intake opposed to their RMR to help them reach their goals?
thanks guys, i'm still learnin (apparently
01-21-2004, 07:48 PM #2
01-21-2004, 08:03 PM #3
Alright, i'll see if i can do this justice...
First off, your RMR is your resting metabolic rate, meaning the calories that your body would burn if you were lying in bed all day not moving. Basically what your body burns just by living...Also, for tater, the Benedict equation is an equation that uses your height and weight to estimate (with relative accuracy) your RMR.
In an ideal state, you would not lower your RMR at all. In fact, you should try to avoid this. However, with most diets, especially those not optimizing metabolic conditions (creating large calorie deficits, etc) your body reacts by lowering your RMR, thereby conserving energy. You burn less, as the body thinks that you are starving it. It's a survival mechanism from centuries ago...
With all that being said, you should try to keep your RMR high by being well-fed at regular intervals throughout the day - hence the idea of eating 6-7 meals per day. If you look at swole's diet tips, or rambo's guides, the idea is to keep the body burning calories, while preserving muscle mass.
I hope that helps. I guess the short answer to that is that to lose weight (at least to make it easier to lose weight) you should keep your RMR as high as possible - this is done by weight training, diet, as well as any other caffeine, ephedra, etc type supplements.
01-21-2004, 08:08 PM #4
RMR changes with any change in body weight, up or down.
01-21-2004, 08:11 PM #5Originally Posted by longhornDr
01-21-2004, 08:15 PM #6Originally Posted by cb25
01-21-2004, 08:18 PM #7Originally Posted by longhornDr
01-21-2004, 09:14 PM #8Junior Member
Originally Posted by cb25
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
01-22-2004, 09:42 AM #9
well it's not wrong, per se...
if you have less muscle (i.e. if you lose a bunch) you'll have a lower RMR. This is because muscle burns calories - that is why people with more muscle (higher lean body mass) will burn more calories than people with very lttle muscle.
So what you read is sort of right, but your RMR will still drop if you make some significant losses, even if it's mostly fat.
01-22-2004, 12:12 PM #10Originally Posted by cb25
To answer your question, I would say it's best to just give a suggestive calorie intake, mainly because I don't put much faith in the scales they use based on high and weight. There are a lot of other factors in determining the Basil Metabolism.
cb25 is right about not wanting to lower your RMR, you want to raise it. A good way to do that is to graze, or eat several small mealls all day long.
However, LonghornDr is not right about the RMR being changed with any change in body weight. We can talk about water weight, which is not active in the body and thus will not effect the RMR at all. Fat is active, but not very active at all, so the loss of fat such as through liposuction will not change your RMR by any appreciable amount (meaning that it will change, but by such a small fraction that it can barely be measured).
So you're pretty on point with this dreamache.
01-22-2004, 08:41 PM #11
RMR or BMR does indeed change with any change in body weight, even if the change is only fat.
If you are confused about this I suggest Basic and Clinical Endocrinology by Greenspan and Gardner, the Obesity chapter explains it quite nicely.
01-25-2004, 10:39 AM #12
Which edition are you refering to, the 2000 or the 2003? There have been some new findings since the 2000 edition. I didn't say there was no change in BMR at all, I said it was a negligable difference. And like I also said, in order to get the fat loss, your body has to have some change in metabolic rate. This seems to be getting confused. If you read that section a little more closely, you will see that it involves the PROCESS of losing fat and not the simple loss of fat cell, such as with lypo suction. There have been findings about the actual fat cell activity between the 2000 edition and the 2003 edition. Fat cells actually do more than we first thought and they are therefore more active than we first thought, but there activity doesn't make that much of an impact on the metabolic rate of the entire system.
01-25-2004, 12:34 PM #13
The change in BMR does not come from loss/gain of adipocyte activity, but rather there is some whole body metabolic cost of the extra mass, the mechanisim of which is not known, but the value of which far exceeds what would be calculated from the metabolic activity of the adipocytes.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)