Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Had resting metabolic rate calculated.
Quote | Reply
Ok, I went and had my resting metabolism calculated and here's what they gave me. BTW the way it was tested was by breathing in to a tube for 10 minutes.

Resting Metabolic Rate: 2520 Cals
Lifestyle&Activity(estimated): 756 Cals
Exercise: (dependant upon the day) usually 500-1000

The lady said that my metabolism is off the charts, but I find this result hard to swallow. I'm a recreational athlete (nothing exceptional), I am 5'9", 160 lbs., and 8.5% body fat. It seems that if my metabolism was really high, I would be less than 8.5% body fat (mainly around my stomach, because up until about 7 years ago I was a "big" boy) because I eat healthy and don't really over eat. I probably eat about 2700 cals a day on average before these results.

On the same note, the results shouldn't be skewed for any foreseeable reason....i.e. I took the test first thing in the morning, no exercise, no eating beforehand. And I was rested at the time of the test.

According to this, on a regular day I'm supposed to eat 4376 Cals to "maintain" my current weight assuming I exercise for 600 Cals worth that day. It's hard to eat that many calories a day without going to McDonalds.

Comments, Comparisons, Suggestions, anyone?

Chad
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [TriNuke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Are you a hummingbird?! No way your RMR is 2520 kcal - maybe your total calorie needs, but RMR is roughly 10 x weight in lbs.

(...pulls out nutrition text from last semester....)

This is the fomula used for estimating [male] caloric needs:

66 + (13.7 x weight in kilos) + (5 x height in centimetres) - (6.8 x age in years)

so for you

66 + (13.7 x (160 lbs / 2.2 lbs/kg)) + (5 x (69 in x 2.54 cm/in)) - (6.8 x ____ yrs)

fill in the blanks and do the math, I don't have a calculator handy.

also curious to know why a person would want to know exact numbers when it works pretty well just to eat when you're hungry.

maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [tigerchik] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That calculation is just an estimation. I know that there are a ton of people that have super high metabolisms. I know a few people at work that can eat anything they want to and they never gain or lose weight.

--
01001010 01100101 01101110 01001000 01010011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01010100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01000100 01100101 01110110 01101001 01101100 00100000 00101000 01100001 01100011 01100011 01101111 01110010 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110010 01101111 01100001 01100100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01110011 01100101 00101001 00100001
http://trainingoferic.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [TriNuke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I had my RMR measured with the same method as you did last April. At the time, I was 5'11" and 184lbs. My RMR was 2590. However, if I use the Harris-Benedict formula that TC put up there, it gives me a number of about 1940. Also, I read that that formula tends to overestimate by about 5%. Taking that into account, I should be around 1840 RMR. I've been on a weight loss mission the last couple of weeks and I'm losing about a pound every 4 days now.

--
01001010 01100101 01101110 01001000 01010011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01010100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01000100 01100101 01110110 01101001 01101100 00100000 00101000 01100001 01100011 01100011 01101111 01110010 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110010 01101111 01100001 01100100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01110011 01100101 00101001 00100001
http://trainingoferic.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [erichollins] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For your weight loss plan, what calorie estimation are you using? The Harris-Benedict or the one that you had calculated? Which one do you find to be more accurate?

Chad
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [TriNuke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm actually using a program on my PDA. With it, it seems to use the Harris-Benedict formula. I'm using that formula and I'm losing weight faster than I should so I'm guessing that my RMR is actually higher than the Harris-Benedict formula is using. Also, I would trust a measurement from a test actually done on me than just some random formula. It's basically the same thing as the BMR because I'm overweight according to it, but you take one look at me and wouldn't think I'm overweight at all.

--
01001010 01100101 01101110 01001000 01010011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01010100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01000100 01100101 01110110 01101001 01101100 00100000 00101000 01100001 01100011 01100011 01101111 01110010 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110010 01101111 01100001 01100100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01110011 01100101 00101001 00100001
http://trainingoferic.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [TriNuke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your RMR number seems fishy. My guess on the HIGH side would be 1900kcal/day. To get an accurate number you typically need your testing to be done with a resting ONLY cart. Many tests are done on an exercise (for submax and VO2 max tests) cart, which due to the vast gas volume differences can have huge error at the really low meaures (resting). Were you fasted? (12hrs, not just no breakfast)
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [erichollins] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Eric, you are right about the Harris-Benedict equation overestimating. In the world of nutrition (ADA and ASPEN), it is now being stressed that the Mifflin-St. Jeor is the one that we should use instead so as to avoid that overestimation:

Men: 10 (wt. in kg) + 6.25 (ht. in cm) - 5 (age) + 5

Women: 10 (wt. in kg) + 6.25 (ht. in cm) - 5 (age) -161

As someone that was taught that Harris-Benedict is the gold standard, I have switched to Mifflin after comparing the two over the last year with pts. Mifflin is usually lower. My only warning about using Mifflin instead is that if you are very small to begin with say like under 5' and under 100#, it might almost underestimate. But seeing the trend in America these days, most people could probably benefit from something even lower than Mifflin.
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [gwaveswims] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
With that formula, I'm at 1840 which is still about a 750 calorie difference from my measured RMR. Something isn't adding up.

--
01001010 01100101 01101110 01001000 01010011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01010100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01000100 01100101 01110110 01101001 01101100 00100000 00101000 01100001 01100011 01100011 01101111 01110010 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110010 01101111 01100001 01100100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01110011 01100101 00101001 00100001
http://trainingoferic.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [TriNuke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
what is metabolic rest rate? so here's my equation

66 + (13.7 x 39.5) + (5 x 155) - (6.8 x 14) = 1286.95
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [erichollins] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Eric, are you using Deit & exercise assistant? They have my Basal Metabolic Rate at around 2115 or so (5'8", 190). with activity level(excluding exercise as Moderate: Standing).


"I can endure more pain than anyone you've ever met. That's why I can beat anyone I've ever met." Steve Prefontaine, Without Limits
Quote Reply
Re: Had resting metabolic rate calculated. [Bluefan75] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, that's the program that I'm using. I love it. What they call BMR seems to be closer to RMR though and they do use the Harris-Benedict formula.

--
01001010 01100101 01101110 01001000 01010011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01010100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01000100 01100101 01110110 01101001 01101100 00100000 00101000 01100001 01100011 01100011 01101111 01110010 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110010 01101111 01100001 01100100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01110011 01100101 00101001 00100001
http://trainingoferic.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply