Jump to content

A few tools


DNA

Recommended Posts

I found a couple of tools to help determine where each of us are with our BMR and what each exercise is estimated to burn so that you can help plan your diet and exercise better.

 

The BMR will basically tell you how much you need to consume to stay the same as you are now. So as long as your eating less then your BMR, your losing weight. So each 3500 calories we burn off then we lose one lb...

 

So here is the BMR link

 

 

and then the exercise link

 

Hope it helps...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My BMR is 2149. Although this disclaimer:

 

Will underestimate caloric needs for the extremely muscular and will overestimate caloric needs for the extremely overweight.

 

was made for me. I carry more than average muscle mass, just always have. Used to tinkle my friends off honestly. At my best weight/bodyfat ratio, I was a caliper tested 7% bodyfat and my BMI said I was morbidly obease. Looks like this has some of the same weightings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My BMR is currently 2494. That sounds high.

 

 

again that is if you did not want to lose any weight...you added up every little calorie you where consuming as the "OLD" you it would be close to that...I know when I did mine and actually wrote down my normal day befoer now it was almost right on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Revisiting The Classic Research

Although Bouchard's mathematical calculations seem to make sense, they definitely do not line up with the classic research studies on this topic. In 1994, two well-conceived and well-conducted research studies examined the effects of strength training on muscle development and resting metabolic rate.

 

One study was conducted by Campbell and his research associates at Tufts University1,and the other study was conducted by Pratley and his research associates at the University of Maryland5.

 

At Tufts University, the subjects performed progressive resistance exercise three days a week for 12 weeks. Each training session consisted of four standard strength exercises, each of which was performed for three sets of eight to 12 repetitions.

 

After three months of training, the subjects, on average, added 3.1 pounds of lean (muscle) weight and lost 4.0 pounds of fat weight. As a result, their resting metabolic rate increased by 6.8 %, or approximately 105 calories per day. At face value, this finding would indicate that 1 pound of muscle uses about 35 calories per day at rest (105 calories per day ÷ 3 pounds of muscle = 35 calories per day per pound of muscle).

 

At the University of Maryland, the subjects performed progressive resistance exercise three days a week for 16 weeks. Each training session consisted of 14 standard strength exercises, most of which were performed for one set of 10 to 15 repetitions.

 

After four months of training, the subjects, on average, added 3.5 pounds of lean (muscle) weight and lost 4.2 pounds of fat weight. As a result, their resting metabolic rate increased by 7.7%, or approximately 120 calories per day. At face value, this finding would indicate that 1 pound of muscle uses about 34 calories per day at rest (120 calories per day ÷ 3.5 pounds of muscle = 34 calories per day per pound of muscle).

 

It is interesting to note that, in both of these studies, the same strength-training program that increased lean (muscle) weight by about 3 pounds, likewise increased resting metabolic rate by about 7%.

 

It is also interesting to note that, in both of these studies, the strength-training programs responsible for these impressive results were relatively basic and brief. The Tufts University subjects performed just 12 sets of exercise per session (three sets of four exercises), and the University of Maryland subjects completed 17 sets of exercise per session (one set of 11 exercises and two sets of three exercises).

 

These represent essentially 30-minute workouts that are manageable both time-wise and energy-wise for most adults. It is nothing short of remarkable that such modest investments in strength exercise can produce such profound physical outcomes.

 

Although a few studies on this topic have not noted increases in muscle mass and resting metabolic rate as a result of strength training, these have involved relatively large reductions in caloric intake.

 

When calories are significantly restricted, the body assumes a starvation/survival mode, and does not respond in the same manner as when the appropriate amount of calories are consumed. Essentially, all studies that do not involve low-calorie diets show significant increases in muscle mass and resting metabolic rate after 10 weeks or more of sensible strength training.

More…

 

I have always heard from day one of my lifting experience that the more muscle you carry the more you burn at rest. It looks to be true no matter where you look, how much you actually burn seems to be the biggest question. Articles I find range from 5 cal on the conservative side to upwards of 100 calories on the other side. I would conclude somewhere in the middle would be the answer. Either way you can't refute that if we weigh the same and I have more muscle mass, I am burning more calories at rest than you are.

 

Now, what seems to be accepted by all of the articles is that resistance training while burning calories while you're working out also increases your metabolic rate afterwards. Muscle is built by tearing down what you have and then providing it with the nutrients required to rebuild, from my understanding after years of reading and research (especially while I was semi in the business), when you rebuild your muscle a little extra is added each time. Evidently the body burns more calories repairing the damage you have done during the resistance training afterwards. Therefore, resistance training not only provides calorie burning effects while working out, but for some time afterwards while you are "rebuilding." Thus the reason you see all the muscle heads with high protein shakes and other supplements right after working out. They are attempting to provide the body with the nutrients required to rebuild the most of that muscle possible.

 

Now, as far as the BMI is concerned, it is a flawed measurement for a certain % of the population. This is widely accepted and I am living proof that it doesn't fit my body type. Therefore I hold very little value in that number. As an example, in my heyday, I was 6' tall, 210 lbs, and 7 % body fat. My BMI would have been 28.5. Right now I have no clue what my bodyfat % is, but I'm 6', 220 lbs and my BMI is 29.8. According to what I just looked up, here is how your BMI is "measured":

 

Underweight = <18.5

Normal weight = 18.5-24.9

Overweight = 25-29.9

Obesity = BMI of 30 or greater

 

I'll grant you I'm a little over weight now, that's why I'm in this biggest loser thing, but I can guarantee you that I am NOT Obese or even close to it.

 

(Sorry, BMI stuff tinklees me off)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...