Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Decline in metabolic rate in response to caloric restriction

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    6,946

    Decline in metabolic rate in response to caloric restriction

    I realize this might be a bit dense, but it is a good read for anyone wondering why they do not lose weight at the same rate when further reducing calories. Even as the subjects exercise metabolic rate is reduced with too much of a calorie restriction. It is a great read unless you fall asleep

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-63BdOXcERGcy16elhXLUtOenc/view?usp=sharing

  2. #2
    GirlyGymRat's Avatar
    GirlyGymRat is offline Knowledgeable Elite ~ Respected Female Leader ~
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    In a gym!
    Posts
    14,952
    I will when I get on computer. Phone is too small for my tender eyeballs strained on work computer.

  3. #3
    GirlyGymRat's Avatar
    GirlyGymRat is offline Knowledgeable Elite ~ Respected Female Leader ~
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    In a gym!
    Posts
    14,952
    dammit! i could have eaten more!!!!!

    main points
    - metabolism quickly adjusts to low calories
    - weight lifting increases metabolism more then cardio
    - high protein, lower carb better then higher carb, lower protein

  4. #4
    GirlyGymRat's Avatar
    GirlyGymRat is offline Knowledgeable Elite ~ Respected Female Leader ~
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    In a gym!
    Posts
    14,952
    Does this mean the body adjusts quickly when adding calories. Yes I guess not. Because we gain weight when increase calories. Doesn't seem fair!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    uk.Dudley
    Posts
    19
    Thanks for the read, coming in handy

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,058
    Quote Originally Posted by GirlyGymRat View Post
    Does this mean the body adjusts quickly when adding calories. Yes I guess not. Because we gain weight when increase calories. Doesn't seem fair!
    Yes it does, metabolic damage isn't permanent which is what reverse dieting is for, slowly adding in calories to allow the body to adapt back to maintenance.

  7. #7
    GirlyGymRat's Avatar
    GirlyGymRat is offline Knowledgeable Elite ~ Respected Female Leader ~
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    In a gym!
    Posts
    14,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Khazima
    Yes it does, metabolic damage isn't permanent which is what reverse dieting is for, slowly adding in calories to allow the body to adapt back to maintenance.
    The key word being SLOWLY adding in calories!

    I added in 200 calories and then another 200. I gained a stone. Now starting to lose it. Maybe take off a 100 and see what happens.

  8. #8
    The trouble with increasing calorie intake is that the body is genetically geared towards storing fat at every opportunity but it would rather use muscle as fuel when food is scarce.

  9. #9
    GirlyGymRat's Avatar
    GirlyGymRat is offline Knowledgeable Elite ~ Respected Female Leader ~
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    In a gym!
    Posts
    14,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Mykl
    The trouble with increasing calorie intake is that the body is genetically geared towards storing fat at every opportunity but it would rather use muscle as fuel when food is scarce.
    Don't I know it. That fat is clingy. I hate clingy people too!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •