One's Metabolism Doesn't Simply....

Jun 21, 2017 1:47 PM

Sarcasto4

Views

112398

Likes

2026

Dislikes

163

I've been hearing a ton of misunderstood nonsense flying around my social sphere, work, and in general everyday life out and about, and of course, on the mystical interwebs.

"Gosh darn it! Kelsey is skinny because her faster metabolism mrreeehh!" Yea, okay, shut up. For that is wrong*. A simple definition would be that metabolism is the process by which our bodies break down proteins, carbohydrates, and fat, in order to produce energy to run our bodies. This isn't just the energy to run, jump, swim, sacrifice goats, stay up late killing Mythic Gul'dan, or JV 3-stocking your friends, but also the energy to power your bodies more low-key functions, like breathing, digestion, hormone control, and suppressing thoughts of light murder when someone cuts you off in the fucking rain not using their blinkers. The energy required for these basic functions are called your basic metabolic rate, BMR.

The most common myth seems to be that skinnier people have faster BMRs and bigger people have slower BMRs. Wrong. See, it takes more energy to move around those 456 lbs of sexy man meat than it is to lithely swing around those curvy 145 lbs of lady love. Now, it is true that protein, and thus muscle, burn more than fat does, but it takes more energy to power a bigger body. What is less known is that a body's BMR will slow down if it is not given food in the first place. Your BMR can vary depending on your habits. This is excluding ailments that directly affect your BMR.

I'm a chemical engineer, so I know this stuff. Also, actual sauce and extra reading material.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22825659

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24398647

http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v31/n2/full/0803523a.html

https://spoonuniversity.com/lifestyle/real-difference-slow-fast-metabolism

http://www.thedailybeast.com/5-metabolism-myths-debunked

http://www.livestrong.com/article/401289-what-is-the-difference-between-slow-fast-metabolism/

EDIT: The point of this post was to shed light on metabolic information as it relates to weight changes. While i do know a fair amount about this subject from research and my studies, i do not claim expertise. The above tidbit about being an engineer was playing the "trust me, I'm an engineer" card. Use the links for more in depth analysis. If you do find information that argues against my post, please let me know and we shall discuss!

EDIT 2: So I've been getting a ton of messages and comments saying how this post oversimplifies metabolism, and contains inaccuracies. Yes, BMR will vary from person to person depending on genetics, weight, height, age, sex, and any other major biological differences you can think of. Different types of calories also affect BMR differently, i.e. protein burns more energy than fat. This information is located within the above links. If someone has issues with the simplicity of the post itself, please understand this is more of an abstract rather than a detailed post. Again, i implore you to read and digest the links.

Been calorie counting and nothing else really for almost 8 months now down 110. Luckily have a job that keeps me very active. Work is my gym

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I appreciate you sources PubMed articles and not Huffington post or some garbage

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Gul'dan shmul'dan! We're off to Kil'jaeden!

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 2

Gettin' real sick of Illidan's shit.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Read that in Khadgar's voice for some reason.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You mean Dhadgar?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But I'm different and thermodynamics don't apply to me

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You had me at "456 lbs of sexy meat."

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

456 lbs of sexy man meat*

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Wise correction. Thank you!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

no problemo

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If you want to burn more calories doing weights is often better than cardio

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There are verifiable metabolic disorders that your doctor can test for. There is also a theory that the regulatory T cells are to blame. 1/

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Obesity should not actually occur.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4107662

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So how do metabolic disorders play into this then? It's literally a disordered metabolism... so while for MOST people calories in (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

They change the calories out part. You could have a disorder that changes how your body uses energy, thus changing how much you need 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

without changing your eating habits. Then you have sudden weight gain or loss. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Calories out works just fine, it's not always the case. Not making excuses for anyone/myself, it's just a fact some people deal with

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

"Trust me im an engineer" doesn't really apply to the human body. Lmao. Especially considering at best the hooman body is 25% understood....

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

But i agree with your general beef about the misuse, yadda yadda (Also a chemE, holla)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"calories in - calories out < 0" If your calories go negative, doesn't that mean you're literally starving?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Which is why your body will start using the saved fat as energy source. You should be careful to eat essential nutrients though.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Cutting off a limbs not going to help with cal in/out. It does produce fast results, and a real motivational boost, but only 3 or 4 times.

9 years ago | Likes 137 Dislikes 3

The dismembering will continue until morale improves

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Depends on what limb you cut off.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

For example, cutting off the top one is a great way to lower calorie intake to 0. Unfortunately, your calorie use also drops to 0.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Since muscle contains a shitload of calories, I would argue with you.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

ya but how do you cut off the 4th one?

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Teeth.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You just man up and do it

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

5 max

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

7 if u split pears

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Losing weight is about lifestyle changes, not going on a stupid diet. Diets don't work in the long run

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The Biggest Loser study showed that the formerly obese had to exercise 3+ hrs a day + a low cal diet to just maintain their weight loss.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

If you do research, the success rate of people keeping large amounts of weight off permanently is pretty much 0% :/ It HAS to be a lifestyle

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

change and it requires CONSTANT effort and maintenance. Once you've been really fat, that's all your body ever wants you to be -.-

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The Biggest Loser study was a pile of nonsense

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

"I'm a chemical engineer"... so I don't actually know that much about human metabolism since it's a lot more complicated than mere chemistry

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

Your metabolic rate is the rate at which your body expends energy. So if you have a high metabolism your body is less efficient at con (1)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Verting energy from one form to another. Thus you burn more calories doing the same task as someone with a lower metabolism.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So you would need to consume more food to have a caloric surplus and gain weight. When compared to someone with a slow metabolism. (3)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You can also burn calories by fuckin OP's mom.

9 years ago | Likes 661 Dislikes 17

Yeah but she has a slow metabolism.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Explains how OP is so skinny.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Confirmed. I'm down 22 pounds.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

I don't last long so I burnt more digging her up.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

This isn't effective because the line is so long the average calorie burnt per unit time isn't worth it.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sigh, I love imgur.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I don't know, you don't spend a lot of time waiting in a line a mile long.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

crap you don't burn a lot of calories waiting in line a mile long.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 222 Dislikes 4

Is this a threat?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Holy shit!!!

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Oh my god that could have been my kitchen!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Ok so what do I do when my metabolism doesn't seem to be working? I cold turkeyed some meds I'd been on for 13 yrs (yeah, stupid I know) and

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

gained 45 pounds despite being more active and eating the same. I've tried every diet and workout plan and can't seem to lose weight.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Could be that the meds were making your body less efficient. Then when you quit, your body needed less but your diet didn't change.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Whether or not a person's body is producing the correct amount of required metabolic hormones and has blood that is chemically within the

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

normal ranges, will in fact have a large impact on how the body is able to process food. If anyone has difficulty losing weight they should

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

be seen to by a doctor to have these addressed before going to calorie controlled extremes. But always eat healthy.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

So what you're saying is I should eat a pepper every 30 mins? Sounds reasonable.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

No, a curry every 30 mins.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

May god have mercy on your digestive tract

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

All that sauce!!!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

A serious note: how do some medicine like an AD slow down your metabolism?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They don't. They increase your appetite so you eat more.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah they actually do...I just keep on gaining weight since I've been taking them. Tried to stop once, but being chubby is less worse (1)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Than feeling miserably I guess

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Calories in - Calories out may work for some people. But uncertainty in calories on food labels and hormones affecting energy utilization...

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 3

Have a really large effect on how the body responds differently to different categories of macro-nutrients. Low insulin sensitivity...

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Is a major culprit for obesity and plays a large role in difficulty with losing weight. For people with this problem, calories-in...

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Calories out is not always a sufficient method for weight loss

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

I feel like this is a gross over-simplification of health in general. No one model applies to everyone.

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 4

It is. Other studies show that "calories out > calories in" does not necessarily result in long-term weight loss, and can be dangerous.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

yeah, if you take it to the extreme. but if you are dropping 100 calories every few weeks, then it really shines.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Metabolism doesn't work that way for everyone, as OP alludes to even: Metabolism itself will adjust based on caloric intake and schedule

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

What kind of insane over eating do you think people do that they can just continually drop 100 calories?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

yeah, because you're supposed to do that forever, not until you're at your desired weight, forever. don't stop, for any reason.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

My point is that most people are going to be well under their calorie limit before they hit their desired weight. If they ever do.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I've found that simply sticking to that doesn't work for me. I'll lose 10 lbs or so in the beginning and nothing else, even if I keep at it>

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

>a year. I'm also overly tired on a low sugar diet. On the other hand, i can eat about 3k calories a day, work out for a couple hours>

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

>still lose weight and feel amazing.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I've tried a lot of different food changes to lose weight, but the only thing that works for me is to eat what I want an exercise 1hr/day

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah but I have witnessed without question lazy average people who eat tons of shitty food without gaining ANY weight. We even had a bet (1)

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 2

Having calories disappear isn't impossible. He could have a tapeworm, or a shitty digestive system. Having calories appear is impossible.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Where a guy like that took mass gainers for an extra 2000kcal a day in addition to his fast food habits. He didn't gain anything. (2)

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

And he did it for a month. And I know the guy, he doesn't do any sports. I know more than one person like that.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

*two months

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I had a roommate similar to this. It turned out he ate a ton in one sitting but only ate like every 10 hours. His avg cals were still low.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I am that guy! I eat just as much if not more than my friends, still I won't gain shit. If I eat less for a few days I will lose weight 1/

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I ate those 2000 cal shakes twice a day and regular food when I got sick of being bullied. Gained 0.5 kg in 5 months. 2/

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Cool read but what does being Chem eng have to do with biology?

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 4

https://xkcd.com/435/ biology is just applied chemistry.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

That part was a joke on the "trust me, I'm an engineer" trope, but i did learn a fair bit of biology as a result of my degree

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 7

My sister got a bio-molecular chemical engineering degree. She had to take A&P and a lot of other traditionally biology classes.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Fair enough. I just graduated Chem eng

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

How can you change your metabolism to gain weight? I've been 140 my whole life and have tried everything to gain weight.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

are you working out? I went from 140 to 180 in a few months after i started weight lifting (6'2" male) also, force yourself to eat more.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I run track and hurdles but I'm in the weight room pretty much every day, does cardio hurt gains?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm not sure but my gut is telling me yes. I would recommend decreasing cardio until you have a strong enough base of muscle.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

May be worth getting your pancreas checked. I've got EPI and finally gained weight with Creon. I wasn't absorbing much of what I ate

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not this simple. Type of intestinal bacterial flora, genetic and epigenetic make up has a huge impact on someone's digestive efficiency.

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 3

Efficiency, yes. But you can't get over 100% efficiency, which means you can't maintain mass while taking in less energy than you use.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Also, food sensitivities which are one of the biggest causes of weight gain. Which everyone has but goes unnoticed.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

There's also the hormone angle. Insulin resistance means fat is not converted into energy, which is why chronic fatigue is a symptom.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

So how do things like Intermittent Fasting play into all this? Wouldn't 16 hours of fasting slow your metabolism and fat burn?

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

You would need to not eat for longer than 16 hours to see a lowering of your metabolism. your body doesn't update metabolism hourly

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

your metabolism "slowing" wouldn't cause you to burn fat. Your body simply dips into its fat stores when your glucose levels become lower1/2

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The reason intermittent fasting works is because you skirt the line between survival mode (where your body dips into muscle stores) and 2/3

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

ketosis(your body using fat stores) 3/3

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It also stimulates production of growth hormones and detoxification of organism, since the body has time to do something other than digest.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'd like to learn how this works too!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Best diet for ppl who are not hungry in the morning. Just youtube it, it's pretty great. Terry Crews has been doing it for 5 years now and..

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

..look at that man :) I have been doing it for 2 months, I have more energy, feel better and can still enjoy good food.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

..you also save time skipping breakfast and it's much easier to count calories with just lunch-snack-dinner.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Frequent fasting actually leads to weight gain and not loss, because your metabolism learns to conserve fat because you>

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

keep starving yourself. This is why eating disorders ruin metabolisms, sometimes permanently. You will only lose weight at the beginning and

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

then you will start to gain faster any time you eat even regularly(3 meals a day). Best way is small, frequent snacks/meals in a day to keep

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

your metabolism active, including drinking water throughout the day!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That is true for long fasting. 16 hours is not long enough to slow your metabolism down. need to not eat for 24 hours or longer

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Hence why I said frequent. And by frequent I really mean eating disorders, not like...ramadan. Although if you go most days only eating>

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

1 meal a day, for example, as many who work a LOT do, it can also slow your metabolism and you can gain weight as a result.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Tho, particularly the weight gain will occur on a day where you meet your actual calorie needs, ie, 2-3 meals.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Okay, you clearly know what you're talking about, but surely there are exceptions where some people's metabolisms are naturally better...

9 years ago | Likes 80 Dislikes 12

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Jun 22, 2017 1:42 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

If you were fat as an infant you have more chance to store fat all your life

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

My mother has Graves' disease and with that is a rapid heart rate. She lost 100lbs due to this, and almost her life. I have the opposite 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hashimoto and I am tired all the time and actually without meds can go into a coma. However she's gaining now and I'm losing weight ty meds!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Account a part of the results to the diet. It seems to help but is not all healing. This guy claims false authority

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He doesn't know what he is talking about. Scientific studies that compare the outcomes of weightloss trials using those methods can only 1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's the opposite. Thin people who eat like 3 truckers combined are just really shitty at storing energy. That's all, really.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There's a lot of studies on natural differences in metabolisms, they are often the same but not ALL the same. Aside from illnesses, eating>

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

disorders also can permanently affect it. Plus someone who has been significantly overweight for an extended period of time can never have>

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

the same metabolism as someone who was generally "thin". That's why losing weight is SO hard, you have to maintain it always or you'll gain>

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

the weight right back. This narrow view of the metabolism and how food affects your body is why almost ALL people gain the weight back. The>

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

KIND of calories you ingest also matter a lot for losing and maintaining weight loss. Eat better, not less.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

in general the mayority of people has a "efficient metabolism". which means they are able to store energy easily as fat. it's evolutionary.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Dude. I am an identical twin and my brother is a fitness freak while I sit here on the internet. I actually weigh less than him (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

because I have no muscle mass and a bit of fat while he has much more muscle.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

IIRC you can ballpark BMR for mammals via 70M^.75, where M = mass in kg. 70kg human needs ~1700 kcal/day, 2kg cat needs ~120 kcal.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Note that this (Kleiber's law) is based on observations of the scaling between body mass and BMR across different animals, and is not

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

/2 intended for precise human dietary calculation nor does it take into account actual metabolism from activity, genetics, or environment.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Theres probably other factors you're not noticing or accounting for, thermodynamics doesn't permit anything else.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I have no eating habits, I'm 30, I eat junk food and don't exercise, I've weighed 185 lbs since 10th grade...my dad is just as lean as I am

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 4

You've quantified 2 of the 3 criteria. Final one is what's your net calorie intake/deficiency? Without that those two facts are meaningless

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

I eat fast food for just about every meal 7 days a week

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 8

Sorry bud that doesn't answer the question...

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 4

It's a lot of intake calories, with very little to burn it off other than my basic rate

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

I've known a lot of people who swear they eat a lot, but the actual calorie breakdown was only ~1300 calories

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Just did a rough estimate, yesterday, i consumed about 3000 calories, today about 3200

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Rough estimates of calories never work. We humans are just really bad at estimating. Weigh your food and do the math.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

In high school, I moved more than my peers, 1800 cals a day, 300lbs. Next lowest intake was 4900 cals, 180 lbs. I am one with the lard.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

You either lie or you just completely suck at calculating calories. You can't gain weight out of thin air.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I wasnt the one calculating them, Health teacher did it based on piles of info we brought in, was a major project. 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I've been told by medical professionals of 4 different specialties that I'm extremely strange, medically speaking.Only 1 dietary though.2/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Exercise / intake tracking was a full year project for health class, values were averaged at the end.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Yup. OP's explanations are overly simplistic and leave out a million important factors. But yay, let's repeat the old calorie in=out BS.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Either you were underestimating your intake or they were overestimating theirs

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I cant speak for their info, mine was good though. Saved all food wrappers / got info from school lunch. If labels were accurate, data was.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My thyroid doesn't work so I have metabolism issues, but yay for drugs!

9 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

Same! Hashimoto's, yay. Everyone in my family thought I was eating poorly, despite eating exactly the same things as my rail-thin sis.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

hyper thyroid issues. Faster metabolism but also shaky, heighten anxiety like being startled all of the time. Nucked it normal function now

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I was hyperthyroid! Got radiation and now my metabolism has totally changed (I'm hypo now, uncontrolled). I feel the urge to eat less 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

but haven't lost any weight. When I was hyper at least I could eat like a madwoman and maintain my weight! I would eat like shit too

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I.e. My brother and I; we both exercise roughly the same but he eats twice as much. He is skinny, like my dad - I am not, like my mum?

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 4

Yes, I have friends who straight up never exercise and are rails. I have to work hard just to maintain.

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

are you sure he is eating twice as much? because I am rumored to be a black hole when it comes to food but i don't eat many meals.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Are you male or female? That makes a huge difference.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

A part of that goes past metabolism and more into genetics. You and your brother have the same parents but may have taken on different +

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Genes from both. For example your brother got your dad's thin nature while you got your mother's body type. When it comes to genetics each+

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Parent has two version (generally) of a genome that they get from their parents. There are four different possible combinations of this.+

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Assuming both your parents carry a dominant and non dominant version of the trait there is a 1/4th chance you will get the non dominant(

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

(1/2) You are correct, but the variance isn't large enough to explain something as noticeable as obese vs fit. I'd estimate that variance

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 14

2 seriously my friend hates her body and wishes she wasn't so "bony" and eats like crap cuz she wants to gain weight and she never does.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

(2/2) to be about 10-20 lbs difference over a long time span, assuming lifestyle and food intake are similar.

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 11

That a interesting

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This is a necessary distinction that should have been in your post, OP

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I was going to come down here to point out the same thing as the poster, but ill add the BMR for 5'2 person is gonna be less than 6'2 person

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Guy I know is in his early 50s. He's quite active but he claims it doesn't matter what he eats: he never goes up in weight. He's around 170.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Height's around 6'5'', if not a bit more. Skinny as a rail. While I can't verify that he eats as much as he claims, the claim still exists.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I weigh more than twice what he does, and he's seen me eat, but he claims he probably eats more than I do. (I'm just a hair under 6' tall.)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

How do you explain how some people can eat a lot of shit and not gain weight and some people gain easily. Feel free to be technical.

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 1

Perception. Metabolic ward studies that supply all caloric needs showcase there is little variation among individuals gain/loss in fat

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Curious to see some of these studies.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh no, it's not obese/ skin and bone. More thin vs stocky, but there is a noticeable difference to our reactions to the same food

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

(1/2) It's difficult to narrow down the full range of difference as to why. The scope of this post was to simply point out metabolism's

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 4

(2/2) role and effects. Maybe your biological difference are outside the norm, or maybe your physical activities aren't truly the same?

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

So what's up with me? I am 172lbs of solid muscle. 9 percent bf and bench over 300lbs. I stopped being a gym rat 8 years ago and eat crap

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

I know two people, a friend and my roommate, who are both very skinny but consistently eat junk food. Pizza, fast food, candy, cake.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

This is me & my roomie. We eat fatty high calorie meals and play video games all day, but we've always been skinny.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Perception. If you're male, ~20y/o, and around 5'9-6'0, you burn approximately ~2500-3500 calories just being inactive-slightly active. (1)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A serving of chips may have a range of 150-400+ calories (lots of variation). So, even in a whole bag of chips may only contain 2000 cals(2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Exactly. So while I believe the vast majority of obese people caused their obesity, I don't believe every single thing person "worked" to 2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Be skinny. My ex roommate had a six pack, never been to a gym in his life and a complete stoner who lived off pizza. It's odd. 2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What variance? How is it measured and where are you pulling this conclusion from?

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 2

Metabolic ward and clinical trials that use substitution versus elimination or addition to caloric intake and/or expenditure. (1)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

little variation in the population (even less than 5%). (4)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thus variation that controls for say, polymorphisms in genes that affect metabolism (ie. thyroid T3/T4 production) accounts for very (3)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He has no idea what the fuck he's talking about.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Indeed. Citation(s) needed. And a chemical engineer is not a doctor, or physiologist.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

I changed majors, but I did study nutrition and kinesiology for about a year. I don't know enough to argue, but this guy reeks of bullshit

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Without giving a random source, typically the results show that 95% of variation in weight gain or loss is similar in a test population. (2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Variance in weight loss and gain is not the same as variance in metabolism. Also you didn't provide any source, let alone a "random" one

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The expression here is weight and metabolism. Weight gain is a reflection of caloric needs above metabolism, so by inference they are (1)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

generally a good predictor of metabolic need, and thus a predictor of whether weight gain will occur. (4)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Correlated. Within nutrition research, caloric requirements and macro-nutrient distribution are controlled within certain clinical trials(2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So as to not be a confounding factor, to say, study changes in serum cholesterol. It is known that caloric control within BMI is (3)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Source linked: Isocaloric diets, no significant difference (variance) in weight loss. Pretty normal outcome (Current MSc in Nutrition).

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0