I know that the metabolism slows down when we lose weight. But will it go up if we gain weight?
My only issue is weather this slowness in metabolism is reversible or permanent.
It takes less power to heat a small body and less power to pump and circulate the blood in a small body.
So it is obvious that the metabolism will slow down and makes perfect sense.
But once they ( the biggest loser) increase their calories intake they will gain weight. So if we follow the same logic the bigger body will require more power which means there metabolism will go up.
Metabolism slows when we lose weight by restricting daily calories in a “non-keto and eat 3 to 5 times a day diet” because the body perceives the long winter ahead and starts preparing for it (i.e. lowers to meet the new normal).
From what I have read (not a doctor!) here and elsewhere:
I do not think metabolism slows when we lose weight after becoming keto (fully fat adapted) because the body does not sense calorie restriction - always having the fat on the body to pull from when necessary (and can easily do so).
I do not think metabolism slows when we lose weight fasting - metabolism seems to go up - prepping us for the hunt. It will do that for survival over allowing a slowing of the metabolism (which leads to unsuccessful hunts and eventual death - those genes got kicked off the planet a long time ago).
So, reversible vs. permanent issue goes away if you do not slow it down in the first place (as they did on the biggest loser).
Really, that’s interesting. You’re suggesting that calories don’t count.
You haven’t lost weight for 2 years, and you answer to that is … … … … reduce calories to zero!
When people lose without counting calories, they HAVE NO CLUE if they are in a calorific deficit or not. So how can they say, calories don’t count?
How Long Does It Take for Excess Calories to Turn to Body Fat? “… Dr. David Katz, reports in “O, the Oprah Magazine,” that the body begins to store consumed calories as fat within four to eight hours from the beginning of the meal. As you consume these calories, the body automatically stores the first 1,000 calories within the liver and muscles for immediate energy reserves. …” …More
4 to 8 hours to make fat? Gawd darn that’s quick? Thinking of all the effort blood, sweat and tears it takes (months) to burn it off?
“… Researchers estimate that the body stores approximately 2000 calories in the form of muscle and liver glycogen. Depending on the person, this means that glycogen levels will be depleted within 6-24 hours when no other calories are consumed. …” …More
I’ll feast and fast… I was more talking about the no counting calories when the weight fell of without trying than the current situation which will be a few days at most then back to the non calorie counting feasting…
because I am of course trying to force my body into something it doesn’t want to…
NO. If you continue to eat in a calorific deficit for ever, you WILL lose weight until finally, you die of starvation/malnutrition. Think POWs (a bit extreme I know, but the principle is the same).
I think your engine size thinking might be similar to person size (like a 250 pound person has a bigger engine than a 150 pound person).
Why can some people eat whatever they want and sit at 14% body fat forever? They’re getting rid of that intake somehow (and are probably underrepresented here). Their hormones are signaling “got all we need - don’t store anything”. Other than being born that way:
Improving sleep tends toward hormones that work that way.
Very few carbs tends toward hormones that work that way.
Reducing stress tends toward hormones that work that way.
Being able to use your own body fat tends toward hormones that work that way.
Fasting tends toward hormones that work that way.
So, I would equate “engine size” to how high a level of intake you need to get to before your hormones allow storage of fat. In this case a 150 pound person could easily have a bigger engine than a 250 pound person.
Good post, Robert. I think that many people who “eat whatever they want” and don’t gain fat tend not to be eating huge quantities or not to be doing it very often. They don’t come to the end of their metabolic rope that way. Most of us here eventually got into the bad/viscious cycles of increasing insulin resistance/weight gain/fat accumulation in and around the pancreas and liver, etc.
In regards to cutting calories, the smaller engine requires way less gas than the bigger engine. If the bigger engine was used to burning 3500 calories a day without adding weight, then the slowed metabolism means the smaller engine only needs 1500 calories per day. Anything in excess of 1500 is not burned, and fat is added. So the bigger engine could eat up 3300 calories per day and not add a gram of weight… but now if the smaller engine takes in 1700 and only burns 1500, then weight is gained.
The 3500 and 1500 calories are just examples and the bigger engine and smaller engine are opposite spectrums of one person (one overweight and one at a healthy weight). Hope this makes sense.
Up until I hit age 40, I was that guy. I ate anything I wanted without fear of gaining a pound. I ate in excess and I still wore the same sized pants I wore in high school. I remember many a time when I would eat a quart of ice cream and a half a bag of potato chips (the big bags). I always thought this was due to a high metabolism and some people would accuse me of having a hollow leg (to store all this food in).
I continued to eat this way after I turned 40 and slowly but surely I began eating larger meals with not as much crap, yet still it was not the very healthy. Tons of fried foods and chips, cookies, doughnuts and ice cream… and the weight started adding up.
I only made it to 28, Carl, and 10 years later the rising insulin resistance and related declines in health were well established. “High metabolism” can still apply though - I only gained an average of 5 lbs. per year, when there were many weeks that I should have put on that much. Lots of being hot, sweaty pillows, etc.
I don’t think it’s so cut-and-dried in a linear way. If we lose half our weight, we’re not going to be using half as many calories - we’re going to be using more than that. And - especially when eating ketogenically - many people don’t gain fat by “going over” on calories by a few hundred, for example. If the metabolism increases a bit in response, that would be a good explanation.
In the end, though, taking in more than we burn and excrete will eventually result in weight gain, certainly.
Well of course calories do count. I see it as rather a mania - this stuff about them somehow magically “not counting.” We can and should say that “cutting calories” may not be a good way to go, for some people’s personal situations, and that it may be very bad and counter-productive, there, even.
The concern of “too few calories” applies a couple places, I think - one is before fat-adaptation. We want hormonal healing to occur without the body wanting to slow the metabolism.
After fat adaptation, a “daily deficit” of calories may not matter at all - if the body is burning its own fat, then no problem. As one gets fairly lean, things may change again - there apparently being a limit on how much of our own fat we can burn each day, based on how much we have. If our fat stores decline to the point where the body becomes reluctant to use fat for energy, then the undesirables of consuming wanted lean mass and metabolic slowdown raise their nasty heads, eh?
I was speaking in reference to AMA’s recommended diet of “Eat Less and Move More”, specifically about the Dr. Jung video I posted. Yes, I totally agree that the smaller engine is using up more calories, as long as it’s exercising. The excess calories don’t come into play until the high calorie burning activities stop. The reduced metabolism is because all the exercising and massive calorie burns triggers the body to believe that it can’t keep losing all its resources at this rate or it will wither away to skin and bones.
Keto on the other hand does not reduce metabolism. It has the opposite effect of the ELMM diet. Keto and fasting actually raises metabolism. The body’s resources are depleted slow enough that it responds in a primative yet positive manner, possibly to motivate us to go out and hunt ourselves something to eat.
