Bod Pod
Anyway, I guess it very accurately measures your bodyfat. I had never heard of this thing before! According to the Bod Pod, her bodyfat percentage was at 22% and she was blown away because her gym's calipers said she was at 16%. And she came to find out that she had been eating too few net calories (net calories are calories consumed minus calories burned) and if she goes too low below her RMR then losing body fat will be impossible. (RMR is resting metabolic rate)
Interesting....
I'd NEVER read that information ANYWHERE. And I've read a TON about this stuff over the past 5-6 years, trust me. First of all, I hadn't ever heard of RMR (I had heard of BMR) and I wanted to know what the difference was and why you won't lose fat if you eat fewer calories than your RMR.
According to this website I found, RMR, or resting metabolic rate, is the calories you would burn if you did nothing but rest for 24 hours. And per their calculator, my RMR is 1223. So if I did nothing for 24 hours, my body would require 1223 calories for energy.
Now this woman says that if you go below this number, it is impossible to lose fat. I would assume that since your body is using all it's resources for keeping you alive and functioning, it's not wasting any to help you lose fat at that point.
So, if for instance if I ate 1500 calories today, then burned off 400 calories at the gym, my net calories is 1100 (which is 123 calories under my RMR). So while it looks fantastic from a calorie deficit perspective, if I continually do this, I will not lose fat.
If I eat too much, I won't lose fat. If I eat too little, I won't lose fat. And how can I eat within that perfect range of calories required for fat loss long enough to actually see a loss in fat??
Another thing I was confused about was that to take the RMR calculation further, and factor in activity level, that drives the RMR number up. For me, it goes somewhere between 1600 and 1800. Then which number am I supposed to take note of when making sure not to go below it: the one factoring in exercise or not? Because there is a big difference between 1223 calories and 1896 calories.
It's food for thought though. Interesting theory indeed. Wouldn't it be cool if we could be implanted with some sort of chip that sent us data like how many calories we need, how many we actually burn and how many we actually consume on a daily basis?? If I were a scientist, this is what my life's ambition would be. Will someone please invent this? It would make my life infinitely easier ;)
2 comments:
i think the "experts" over-think things too much!!! doesnt it come back to clean calories in -v- calories expended? i was watching aussie biggest loser last night and they are eating around 1000 - 1200 cals per day, doing heaps of exercise and challenges and some of the girls are losing 5kg and its week 7 of the competition - the time when it gets harder to lose. would they be eating less than their RMR?
It dose get tricky - i know my days are different with exercise not at the gym but with work and what i do around the house. I'm convinced its clean eating - just wish i could do 100% compliance!!!
i'm hearing you re the weekends !!!
keep up the good work charlotte, you look amazing xx
Totally agree with the overthinking it. Sometimes I wonder if I would do better if I just threw away everything I've studied and just let my body do the driving. I always thought it was about calories in vs calories out but I recently watched a short talky vid from a guy I follow (his blog is in the top 50 most popular fitness blogs) who claims it isn't that easy because you don't take into consideration macros. He thinks we should be tweaking macros instead of worrying about calories. Not sure what to make of that idea. I think both probably work, it just depends on the person and body type. All I can do is try the best I can without driving myself insane. Gotta enjoy life too!
Thanks for your comments, always so refreshing and uplifting!
Take care!
Post a Comment