FIGURING BASIL ENERGY EXPENDITURE!

[rippedboy]

Re: Xcel and Crowler

Xcel,

Sounds about right given energy expenditure.

For those who are interested, basal metabolic rate (BMR) is your lowest resting metabolic rate (baseline), i.e., when you are very relaxed or asleep and motionless. Usually measured in the morning upon waking. Resting metabolic rate (RMR) is a more general term for met. rate at rest and is higher than BMR during the day, as your moderate levels of arousal increase energy expenditure even when you're sitting still.

Total energy expenditure is a matter of RMR throughout the day, energy cost of activity, thermic effect of activity (e.g., energy expended after you've exercise) and thermic effect of eating (energy expended d/t digestion, etc.). The last 2 are pretty minor and usually ignored.

HOWEVER - this gets a Crowler's point - resting metabolic rate can be greatly changed by energy balance. This is the idea of the set-point theory. If you overeat, your body increases metabolic rate to keep you at a lower bodyweight. The opposite when you diet for fat loss - metabolic rate is adjusted to conserve energy. The degree to which your body "defends" its set point (body mass and fat) is highly variable.

Some very interesting studies were done up in canada using twins, both fraternal (DNA similar, like siblings), and identical (same DNA). In the studies, RMR, BMR and daily energy expenditure were determined at the start and the subjects placed on a diet to match expenditure (they were sequestered in a clinic - nowhere to run, nowhere to hide). After a period to assess if they were in caloric balance (no changes in wt., etc.), they placed them on a diet that was:

Experiment #1.) 1000 kcal / day in excess, 6 out of 7 days a week for around 3 mo.

OR

Experiment #2.) 500 kcal / day in deficit, 6 out of 7 days a week, and required 500kcal of exercise (6 out of 7 days a week) for about 3 mo. (1000 kcal / day *deficit*, 6 /7 days per week.)

Afterwards, the range in weight gain (exp. 1) was like 5kg to 15kg - HUGE!!! Same caloric excess given initial energy needs but a GIGANTIC difference in how well the individuals' metabolisms adjusted to prevent weight gain. Same thing was seen in experiment #2, except the rate was in weight loss, of course.

Even cooler - the fraternal twins were pretty close when looked at in pairs - within 3-4 kg wt. gain (exp. 1) or loss (exp. 2). The identical twins were DEAD on in terms of wt. gain or loss (~1kg difference). Those with pretty similarly DNA (fraternal twins) responded very similarly. Those with identical DNA (identical twins) responded identically, within experimental error.

So, Crowler, it sounds like you've got a body that really desires to be lighter. I'm the same way - 5000 kcal / day offseason and I won't gain an ounce.

-Randy

P.S. The studies were done by Claude Bouchard - big guy in genetics of obesity research.

you can eat 5000 calories per day and not gain an ounce? man wtf you lucky bastard, but do you at least love eating or is it different for you guys with fast metabolisms? if so, then you are lucky. i cant believe it, 5000 calories?

anyway, you explained what BMR and RMR are but how do i figure out how many cals is my maintenance caloric intake? do you take bodyweight x 12 or 13 or 15? is the system above precise? xcel says he ate more than twice that in calories and still lost muscle. for a person around 140 at 12% BF, would 1700 be good or too low? i will be doing cardio 5 times per week, 2 days out of the week will be morning AND post-workout, the other days will be morning AND night. but i will still take off wed and sun.

 

[xcelbeyond]

Re: Re: Xcel and Crowler

xcel says he ate more than twice that in calories and still lost muscle.

If you'd have read the following posts, I did the formula incorrectly. I still eat more than basil - probably due to the amount of energy I'm expending in a day.

xcel

 

[rippedboy]

Re: Re: Re: Xcel and Crowler

If you'd have read the following posts, I did the formula incorrectly. I still eat more than basil - probably due to the amount of energy I'm expending in a day.

xcel

you mean like the 45 minutes of cardio 4-5 times per week? along with training?

 

[xcelbeyond]

Reread Randy's last post - he did an excellent job of explaining what BMR represents.

You need to remember that I'm in serious pre-contest mode now, which is not what you're striving for. I'm doing 45 min, of "low-intensity" cardio 2 out of 3 days. My weight workouts are a high intensity routine that takes about 45 min, 2 out of 3 days. I'm posing for at least 30 min ED. I'm also doing a fairly rigorous ab routine that takes 10-15 min ED.

xcel

 

[Crowler]

Re: Xcel and Crowler

So, Crowler, it sounds like you've got a body that really desires to be lighter. I'm the same way - 5000 kcal / day offseason and I won't gain an ounce.

-Randy

P.S. The studies were done by Claude Bouchard - big guy in genetics of obesity research.

WOW Randy thank you for taking the time to do all that.

Can I ask approx how much lean body mass you have and your heighth?

Having more muscle mass of course will increase the amount of calories needed to maintain.

I only have approx 174lbs of lean body mass at 6" tall. Yep it is tough to gain muscle, just like it is for all of us.

 

[MightyJohn]

awesome

I love this bored U guys compile alot of awesome information it is really tops

 

[rippedboy]

d

Reread Randy's last post - he did an excellent job of explaining what BMR represents.

You need to remember that I'm in serious pre-contest mode now, which is not what you're striving for. I'm doing 45 min, of "low-intensity" cardio 2 out of 3 days. My weight workouts are a high intensity routine that takes about 45 min, 2 out of 3 days. I'm posing for at least 30 min ED. I'm also doing a fairly rigorous ab routine that takes 10-15 min ED.

xcel

i see. do you think im ok with my training? it will be new to me (as in i have been training my full body at once for 8 months now) so im going back to training a couple exercises per part hitting it hard once each week. before i would do 1 exercise per part, 3 sets, every 4 days. i think it works but then again was not in a gaining phase the entire time, ive done the 1 bodypart per day routine each week and put on some good mass, of course this was right after not training for a long time and using some dbol.

 

[homonunculus]

Let's see...

RB,

15 x BW (lb) is a place to start in calculating TOTAL energy expenditure, given normal activity levels and moderate levels of exercise (e.g. wt.s 3 x/ week, light cardio 3x / week). I like to use 12 kcal * BW (lb) as a place to start for dieting. BUT, this is a VERY rough average and depends upon many factors, especially activity levels. Xcel is doing a shitload of exercise - thus he can each more and still lose body fat.

What you have done previously in terms of diet plays a big role, too. If you've been starving yourself for years, your metabolism might be very much slowed as your body is defending your setpoint. The setpoint is really just a concept that comprises thousands of physiological homeostatic processes that balance energy expenditure with intake. That is how many people (myself included), who have been training for years, and put on a lot of muscle (which of course increases metabolic rate), can shift the setpoint / balance in a way that results in a lower % BF at a higher bodyweight.

I have worked with or known people (women especially) who live off of an amount of food that wouldn't keep a sparrow from starving and didn't exercise with much vigor (or have much muscle mass to show for it). For them, 15 x BW (lb) would not be a place to start for maintenance kcal. In that case, the best idea for fat loss is to increase exercise, and INCREASE kcal slowly so that the metabolism will increase and the starvation mechanisms will be shut down. In some cases, this can actually result in body fat loss from the get-go. Over the long haul, even if they end up with more body fat, they now have a metabolism that can be manipulated into fat loss, i.e., one that is not starved and with which you can create a caloric deficit.

I see the above when people skip breakfast, have a salad for lunch and then a big ass dinner (binge), but take in very little kcal overall. For the 16+ hr between the last monster binge meal of the day and the mini-lunch, the body gets zilch for food. Its like a dog that only gets food for a few hours a day - it hoards it. The body hoards fat by slowing metabolism when its starved most of the time.

So, with you, RB, you need to start at some value - 12 kcal * BW(lb) is a good palce to start FOR DIETING. Then see what happens to body fat and adjust accordingly.

Crowler,

I'm 5' 9 1/2" or so, around 219 (yesterday) and prob. 8-9% BF right now. I've actually considered doing some pics to capture progress for the hell of it and will def. post 'em if I get 'em.

Thing its, I have to eat > 5000 / day to gain when bulking, but near the end of my diet, I'm closer to 2000 kcal / day, sometimes even less depending on whether I'm cycling kcals, carbs, etc. My body defends its setpoint pretty well in both directions.

-Randy

 

[rippedboy]

Re: Let's see...

RB,

15 x BW (lb) is a place to start in calculating TOTAL energy expenditure, given normal activity levels and moderate levels of exercise (e.g. wt.s 3 x/ week, light cardio 3x / week). I like to use 12 kcal * BW (lb) as a place to start for dieting. BUT, this is a VERY rough average and depends upon many factors, especially activity levels. Xcel is doing a shitload of exercise - thus he can each more and still lose body fat.

What you have done previously in terms of diet plays a big role, too. If you've been starving yourself for years, your metabolism might be very much slowed as your body is defending your setpoint. The setpoint is really just a concept that comprises thousands of physiological homeostatic processes that balance energy expenditure with intake. That is how many people (myself included), who have been training for years, and put on a lot of muscle (which of course increases metabolic rate), can shift the setpoint / balance in a way that results in a lower % BF at a higher bodyweight.

I have worked with or known people (women especially) who live off of an amount of food that wouldn't keep a sparrow from starving and didn't exercise with much vigor (or have much muscle mass to show for it). For them, 15 x BW (lb) would not be a place to start for maintenance kcal. In that case, the best idea for fat loss is to increase exercise, and INCREASE kcal slowly so that the metabolism will increase and the starvation mechanisms will be shut down. In some cases, this can actually result in body fat loss from the get-go. Over the long haul, even if they end up with more body fat, they now have a metabolism that can be manipulated into fat loss, i.e., one that is not starved and with which you can create a caloric deficit.

I see the above when people skip breakfast, have a salad for lunch and then a big ass dinner (binge), but take in very little kcal overall. For the 16+ hr between the last monster binge meal of the day and the mini-lunch, the body gets zilch for food. Its like a dog that only gets food for a few hours a day - it hoards it. The body hoards fat by slowing metabolism when its starved most of the time.

So, with you, RB, you need to start at some value - 12 kcal * BW(lb) is a good palce to start FOR DIETING. Then see what happens to body fat and adjust accordingly.

Crowler,

I'm 5' 9 1/2" or so, around 219 (yesterday) and prob. 8-9% BF right now. I've actually considered doing some pics to capture progress for the hell of it and will def. post 'em if I get 'em.

Thing its, I have to eat > 5000 / day to gain when bulking, but near the end of my diet, I'm closer to 2000 kcal / day, sometimes even less depending on whether I'm cycling kcals, carbs, etc. My body defends its setpoint pretty well in both directions.

-Randy

wow you are very knowledgeable with this. check your PM.

 

[xcelbeyond]

Re: Re: Let's see...

wow you are very knowledgeable with this. check your PM.

HAVE YOU SEEN HIS PICS?!?! http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=3147

xcel

 

[rippedboy]

Re: Re: Re: Let's see...

HAVE YOU SEEN HIS PICS?!?! http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=3147

xcel

i just checked out those pics and you are looking awesome randy!! i would not want to be any bigger really, but of course you might. you are ripped, how low was your BF% in that pic, is that around competition time where you are water depleted, carb loaded, etc?

 

[homonunculus]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's see...

Thanks, man.

Yes, you're right - I do want to be bigger - MUCH MUCH bigger. 8^)

Those were taken a couple weeks out from a show. I know I wasn't intentionally water depleted but might have been carbing up (I do cyclical diets often). I think I was bored so I decided to take some pics.

As far as BF%, I really don't worry about it. The regression equations for body comp. estimation for the most part were not devised using a study sample that included bodybuilders weeks away from a show, so they're often not valid for BB'ers. (I think I address this somewhere in the pic thread(?)...)

What some test tells ya doesn't really matter on stage... Now if there were a freakiness index, I might want to know my numbers!

-Randy

i just checked out those pics and you are looking awesome randy!! i would not want to be any bigger really, but of course you might. you are ripped, how low was your BF% in that pic, is that around competition time where you are water depleted, carb loaded, etc?