5 crucial stats for weight loss (Shape)
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 06-02-2005 - 2:35pm |

5 crucial stats for weight loss
On its face, weight loss seems simple: As long as you burn more calories than you eat, you should shed pounds.
Story by Brenda Goodman
Photo by Mario De Lopez
On its face, weight loss seems simple: As long as you burn more calories than you eat, you should shed pounds. But almost anyone who has tried to reclaim her waist can point to weeks or months when it doesn't seem to work that way. You exercise like a fiend and pass up the breadbasket only to find your jeans are mysteriously getting tighter. If it's not the dryer's fault - and trust us, it's not - you're likely in need of a mathematical reality check. Recent research shows that several popular methods of gauging your calorie needs may be inaccurate - and that costs you results. Here's the latest thinking on the five vital statistics for helping you meet your weight-loss goals.
Resting metabolic rate
There are a number of competing equations to calculate your resting metabolic rate (RMR) - the number of calories your body burns at rest in a single day. While these formulas offer a ballpark number of calories you can eat based on your age and weight, the most commonly used equations come from decades-old research. In fact, one study found the formulas to be off by as much as 15 percent, especially in obese individuals. All equations, even those based on body composition, can over- or underestimate the number of calories you should eat, says David Nieman, Dr.P.H., professor of health and exercise science at Appalachian State University in Boone, N.C. "Some people think they're cutting back quite a bit, but they aren't losing weight because they're still eating too much."
If you can't find a BodyGem test near you, turn to page 152 for the most accurate formula we've found to calculate your RMR.
Daily calorie count
Once you know your RMR, you will still need to account for physical activity to determine the total number of calories you expend each day. Here, an equation is the most practical method to gauge your calorie burn. Multiply your RMR by the appropriate activity factor:
If you are sedentary (little or no activity)


This is where I sit here and go, what is wrong with me?
At age 30, my max heartrate would be 187, which means my range to aim for, as a beginner, would be 93-130. Um, my resting heartrate is already more than the 50% of my max. And if I start running and feel winded, to the point of really exerting myself, my heartrate gets over 200.
A slight workout will easily put me over the 70% threshold. lol.
So, either something is wrong, or I'm just abnormal. What is everyone else's views? I wish I could afford to find out my metabolic rate. but at least i have a heart-rate monitor that i use when i run.
~pineapple_girl
Great info! The article mentions that you can "turn to pg. 152 for the most accurate formula for finding your RMR". But where do we find pg. 152???
thanks, Katie
Cher, here's a link to another little article I've posted on Target Heart Rates, and it has some other options for reaching your optimal heart rate level, maybe not using numbers but using the percieved rate of exertion (or somthing like that):
http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-fbfitthirty&msg=9508.7&ctx=0
Katie, I too, wondered what the heck they meant by Page 152, and actually went out to buy the june issue only to find something completely different on page 152.
I have similar problems - my heart rate fluctuates a lot when I exercise and most of the time goes over the 70% range. My physician can't tell why and I am in general very healthy. So I switch to the "talk test" - it is simple and free! Just exercise to the point that you can still talk but not able to hold a long-winded conversation.
By the way, that is the CUTEST pineapple!