4 ms·
Simple, yes, but too simple. That formula ignores the fact that (all things being equal) as your weight drops, your basal metabolic rate drops as well. This mea
by a-priori 18y ago
Simple, yes, but too simple. That formula ignores the fact that (all things being equal) as your weight drops, your basal metabolic rate drops as well. This means that with each pound you lose, it becomes harder to lose the next.
This is why exercise is critical for losing weight. Exercise counteracts this effect by raising the metabolic rate.
- shizcakes 18y agoThat's the thing: It doesn't ignore anything. If your basal metabolic rate drops, that means you are expending less calories through those means. The bottom line remains the same. You'll either need to consume less calories as a reaction, or up your calorie expenditure through increased exercise or through metabolism 'tricks' such as consuming increased (but safe) levels of water.
- a-priori 18y agoLet me illustrate what I meant with an example. Based on your formula, if I wanted to lose 10 pounds over 10 weeks, needing a deficit of 514 kcal/day, and my basal metabolism rate were 1800 kcal/day (roughly what mine is), ignoring exercise I would need to maintain a diet of no more than 1284 kcal/day. How I interpreted your first comment was that you were arguing this would work for the entire 10 week period. My point was that it would not, that over time the rate of weight loss would slow as your basal metabolism rate drops. Given a constant diet, at some point an equilibrium will be reached. Sorry for the misunderstanding.