He is actually correct, the most accurate method for calculating BMR is the Katch-Mcardle formula and it has nothing to do with height. The less accurate formula (Harris Benedict) uses height and weight. So in terms of failing you are on top by merely including one component of the less accurate formula.
|
-
06-21-2011, 12:46 PM #61My Reverse Diet Log
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=153750981&p=1077733831#post1077733831
-
06-21-2011, 12:57 PM #62
- Join Date: Jun 2009
- Location: Minnesota, United States
- Posts: 14,047
- Rep Power: 11553
Yes, but you need a BF% to use that formula and BF% is affected by height in the same way I noted in the previous post.
So while the measurement of your height does is not in the Katch-Mcardle formula, the mass of bones and organs that you have because of your height does and is compensated for in the formula.
I agree though that height is a much lesser metric than weight or BF% but it is a factor indirectly or directly depending on the formula used.Vikings--Wolves-Gophers
***United----MNUFC***
*****Celiac Bruh*****
-
06-21-2011, 01:05 PM #63
-
06-23-2011, 07:10 PM #64
-
-
06-23-2011, 07:33 PM #65
-
06-23-2011, 08:37 PM #66
-
06-23-2011, 09:51 PM #67
-
08-10-2011, 10:08 AM #68
Update been sticking to the 2500 calories a day for about a month now. Went from 272 to 261 just started lifting again this week. Can notice a different in fat loss it seems. I havent watched my macors closely but i doubt there too far off i have been eating alot of foods high in protein and getting carbs and fat
-
-
08-10-2011, 10:23 AM #69
- Join Date: Jun 2009
- Location: Vancouver, Washington, United States
- Age: 61
- Posts: 4,384
- Rep Power: 777
-
08-10-2011, 10:31 AM #70
-
08-10-2011, 10:33 AM #71
-
08-10-2011, 10:33 AM #72
Thanks alot ya i already feel a little better physically. Now its time for me to start making sure i really get some good lifting in whilekeeping at my deficit. I felt great after my lift yesterday real sore today as to be expected since its been a while feels great to have that sorness back. But thanks im glad i finally found somethign that works for me. And im drinking a ton of water everyday seems to help curb my hunger alot.
-
-
08-10-2011, 11:00 AM #73
-
08-10-2011, 11:02 AM #74
-
08-10-2011, 11:44 AM #75
-
08-10-2011, 11:51 AM #76
- Join Date: Jun 2009
- Location: Vancouver, Washington, United States
- Age: 61
- Posts: 4,384
- Rep Power: 777
Slow and steady weight loss through calorie control, not starvation. *Good nutrition. *Heavy lifting. *Consistency and Patience. Good Genetics. *Read this:*http://www.bodyfatguide.com/LooseSkin.htm
A diet isn't punishment. A diet is a way to reward your body with the wholesome, nutritious food that it needs. Your body composition is a direct reflection of what you put in your mouth.
-
-
08-10-2011, 12:44 PM #77
I read it all im eating at my resting metabolic rate which is 2515 calories so thats good. Im beginning to lift again. I feel im eating healthy to get to my calories each day id say things im eating are ground beef some form of bread chicken tuna mayo a cup or 2 of milk tomatoes whey protein once in a while ill have hot dogs or frozen pizza but still fit it in the 2500 i also eat peanut butter fig newtons and im sure some more random things i cant think of right now. But yea im going to try and follow that thanks for the article alot of good stuff.
-
08-10-2011, 12:59 PM #78
-
08-10-2011, 01:04 PM #79
-
08-10-2011, 02:28 PM #80
it depends on your routine. i train my abs just like every other muscle in my body. 4 sets of 8 reps, increasing weight as needed. unfortunately, the crunch machine at my gym ran out of plates once i got past 200lbs lulz. for some weird reason my abs, calves and my traps were really strong to begin with...........
-
-
08-10-2011, 03:20 PM #81
-
08-10-2011, 03:37 PM #82
He misinterpreted the result, the 33 cals per pound of body fat is your max DEFICIT so you'd subtract that from your maintenance, which at 200 lbs is probably around 2800-2900, you're looking at a 1500-1600 calorie diet minimum. Which, for an extended period of time is pretty low.
Barely decent crew
-
08-10-2011, 03:42 PM #83
no sir, you misread my post, of course that would be wrong. 33cal a lb for the deficit, so if that persons maintenance is 3000 cals, they could cut at 1700 cals a day max. of course this number changes as weight is lost. my LBM is 170, my maintenance goes from 3000-3500 cals a day, i've been cutting at 2000 for the longest time. i'm slightly over 20% BF, if you've seen the pictures ive posted recently its easily obvious i lost absolutely no muscle.
-
08-10-2011, 03:45 PM #84
-
-
08-10-2011, 03:49 PM #85
-
08-10-2011, 04:03 PM #86
- Join Date: Nov 2007
- Location: London, Ontario, Canada
- Age: 35
- Posts: 6,869
- Rep Power: 21031
33 cals per pound of fat? Where did you come up with that figure?
“Go back?" he thought. "No good at all! Go sideways? Impossible! Go forward? Only thing to do! On we go!" So up he got, and trotted along with his little sword held in front of him and one hand feeling the wall, and his heart all of a patter and a pitter.”
-
08-10-2011, 04:23 PM #87
i dont remember where now, but im not the only person who has mentioned it on this forum. the body can use 33 calories per day from each lb of fat you have, so if you're at 10% BF and trying to go down to something crazy like 6% and you weigh like 190lbs anymore then a 500 cal deficit is a bad idea.*
-
08-10-2011, 04:40 PM #88
I understand what your saying now. The concept comes from Lyle McDonalds theoretical max amount of lipolysis/day. Under ideal conditions the body can supply X amount of calories from fat each day and X is determined by the amount of fat you have. A 1320 calorie deficit sounds much better for my 20% body fat example.
That said, those numbers are all theory and depend on you knowing an exact body fat. I would error on the side of caution as it does take some time to put muscle mass back on. I want to say the theoretical max for a natural bodybuilder, bulking is 1-2 lbs of muscle/month under ideal conditions.My Reverse Diet Log
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=153750981&p=1077733831#post1077733831
-
-
08-10-2011, 04:47 PM #89
yes but have you ever been out of the gym and atrophied? it comes back much faster then it initially went on. no not 20lbs in a month, but if you spent two years gaining 25lbs of muscle, and cut and lost 5lbs total of muscle through stupidity, as soon as you stop cutting those 5lbs will go back on fast. its like noob gains sorta
-
08-10-2011, 04:55 PM #90
I think you may be confusing glycogen depletion with true mass loss. It pretty easy to drop 5 lbs of LBM through glycogen/water depletion and feel like crap in the gym. Then have a couple of refeed days and your back to beast mode. If you do actually manage to lose real muscle mass it takes months to replace it.
My Reverse Diet Log
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=153750981&p=1077733831#post1077733831
Similar Threads
-
23% Bf, 6'2 and 197 pounds.....is 1500 calories too low for a cut?
By dave3k3 in forum NutritionReplies: 6Last Post: 07-19-2010, 11:39 AM -
Is 2000ish calories too low for this program I'm doing?
By thew2wa in forum Teen BodybuildingReplies: 6Last Post: 09-22-2008, 12:26 AM -
Calories too low for fast loss to occur?
By alexwilliams in forum NutritionReplies: 11Last Post: 07-28-2008, 04:33 PM -
why is 1500 calories too low for a woman?
By miss_carrie in forum Losing FatReplies: 12Last Post: 03-05-2006, 04:51 PM -
My Calories too low?(for cutting)
By dodigago in forum NutritionReplies: 3Last Post: 06-11-2005, 09:26 PM
Bookmarks