If You're Sedentery You Will Have A Slow Metabolism

[Kingpinguin]

It is not extreme or miserable at all...on the contrary...working every muscle in my body...15 minutes 3 times a week is working well for me at the moment...what could be easier?

From my experience workouts should be short, with weight you have good control and instead of having heavy weights you have medium and your movements are controlled and explosive.

 

[Braveheart]

From my experience workouts should be short, with weight you have good control and instead of having heavy weights you have medium and your movements are controlled and explosive.

Explosive?....Controlled and slow.

 

[corvetteseeker]

This is a very interesting discussion and agree with the OP to a degree based on personal experience ...

When I was my healthiest was when I was in Florida where I spent large parts of every day walking and riding my bike in the sun and even playing full court hoops quite often. My libido was amazing and my sleep was solid.

I would eat whatever I wanted and not gain any weight. My friends actually coined several flattering nicknames for me thinking that I naturally was lean and could eat whatever I wanted.

When in reality I was bullied and self conscious all throughout my youth for tending toward obesity.

Fast forward 10 years and I had a factory job. Not as much sunlight or sleep, my diet was still average but i was moving all day and was still lean and healthy as a result.

All of a sudden I get "promoted" to a desk job at the same company. I instantly gained 15 pounds without changing a single thing - all exercise and eating stayed the same.
I eventually probably gained 30 to 40 pounds. And my libido got worse and worse.

@Cirion - you like to speak of this perfect world on an island and I sort of agree with that because I have tasted it during my younger days but the fact of the matter is, what do you do when this lifestyle is not feasible, at least not for a while? The only solution I have found is fasting.

I know this is heresy around here and I agree that it is not preferential to the natural high meatbolism of being active but when your life puts you in a corner and you have no choice but to either be obese or to lean up at a small cost, you have to make the difficult decision. I think you just try to refeed with as many Peaty and pro metabolic foods as you can and let the chips fall where they may.

Even in my current sedentary state, I'll get a day or two here and there where I have extra time for sleep and I have a low stress, active day and I feel amazing and I feel my metabolism ramps up. But the problem is, for many of us, there's no way to recreate this often enough and so we have to make difficult but correct choices or else be overwight which I have decided, is not an option for me.

 

[corvetteseeker]

The more I think about it, I don't think the dangers of lack of sunlight and being sedentary can be understated.

If I am active all day, I can eat almost any food and feel energized afterward. I can literally feel being insulin sensitive.
Conversely, when I am sedentary, I can't eat most starch/fat/protein until dinner or I feel like death - I can literally feel the food not being burned up.

This is such a huge factor, I can't say this enough. Unfortunately, many of us are stuck in sedentary lifestyles. And for many of us, fasting is the only answer if your standard is to be lean and you don't have an insane food budget and you don't want to be a social outcast.

 

[tara]

For healthy young people, that's probably between 10% and 20%, but for older people, maybe more is better.

Some people maybe able to sustain a healthy metabolism in that range, but for many people getting too far below 20% might be too lean for optimal health, especially many women.

 

[Collden]

It is not extreme or miserable at all...on the contrary...working every muscle in my body...15 minutes 3 times a week is working well for me at the moment...what could be easier?

Thats cool if you have good results with this method, you are doing it slightly different or? Thought it advocated only working out once every 7-10 days?

 

[milkboi]

Body by Science was way too intense for me. The guy who developed it also recommends hyperventilating while you trains, which is also not conductive to better health imo.

 

[Kingpinguin]

Explosive?....Controlled and slow.

Controlled not slow. The contractions should be explosive and the release slow. Theres different types of muscle fibers reacting differently to what you’re doing. Also you have to take into account the neuromuscular connection. Its muscle memory like learning a new code in your fingers. The muscles and brain have a memory and enchancing this will make your brain force signal your muscles to grow. This type of exercise that trains your muscle to brain connection has a much stronger effect on your hypothalamus releasing hormones like testosterone. This is how you can lie in your bed and If you imagine you lift weights for 10 minutes everyday in your bed you will build muscle faster than one who does not. Explosive but controlled contractions are better for this purpose.

 

[Braveheart]

Thats cool if you have good results with this method, you are doing it slightly different or? Thought it advocated only working out once every 7-10 days?

That's when you are at top strength...seniors can start and work up to that level w more reps at lighter weight...have good results

 

[baccheion]

This is a very interesting discussion and agree with the OP to a degree based on personal experience ...

When I was my healthiest was when I was in Florida where I spent large parts of every day walking and riding my bike in the sun and even playing full court hoops quite often. My libido was amazing and my sleep was solid.

I would eat whatever I wanted and not gain any weight. My friends actually coined several flattering nicknames for me thinking that I naturally was lean and could eat whatever I wanted.

When in reality I was bullied and self conscious all throughout my youth for tending toward obesity.

Fast forward 10 years and I had a factory job. Not as much sunlight or sleep, my diet was still average but i was moving all day and was still lean and healthy as a result.

All of a sudden I get "promoted" to a desk job at the same company. I instantly gained 15 pounds without changing a single thing - all exercise and eating stayed the same.
I eventually probably gained 30 to 40 pounds. And my libido got worse and worse.

@Cirion - you like to speak of this perfect world on an island and I sort of agree with that because I have tasted it during my younger days but the fact of the matter is, what do you do when this lifestyle is not feasible, at least not for a while? The only solution I have found is fasting.

I know this is heresy around here and I agree that it is not preferential to the natural high meatbolism of being active but when your life puts you in a corner and you have no choice but to either be obese or to lean up at a small cost, you have to make the difficult decision. I think you just try to refeed with as many Peaty and pro metabolic foods as you can and let the chips fall where they may.

Even in my current sedentary state, I'll get a day or two here and there where I have extra time for sleep and I have a low stress, active day and I feel amazing and I feel my metabolism ramps up. But the problem is, for many of us, there's no way to recreate this often enough and so we have to make difficult but correct choices or else be overwight which I have decided, is not an option for me.

What's your body temperature and pulse? What are you taking to maintain insulin sensitivity and thyroid/HPTA/metabolism?

 

[corvetteseeker]

@baccheion - I've tried to eat as Peaty as possible while also factoring for my energy levels after meals.
I'm on T3/T4 and am taking various supplements like calcium, magnesium, B complex and some pro androgenic herbs.
Will be trying a pansterone/androsterone combo soon.

But I'll be completely honest, I just go by my energy levels, sleep, libido, etc;
I don't have time to constantly get pulse and temps and the above markers are indicative of the same thing, imho

I don't get any insulin sensitivity unless I fast extensively or am very active. I can't do the latter so I have to do the former.

 

[corvetteseeker]

I also get regular blood work.

 

[Cirion]

Fasting is a trap, I get the allure, it seems like a quick fix, but trust me it just doesn't work. Maybe you can do like a juice fast (only carbs/sugar during the day like 1 maybe 2x a week) but anything more extreme than that (fasting from all calories for ex, especially for more than one day) is going to end badly. Trust me. As will caloric restriction. Another alluring, but trapping, approach.

Let me scare you off from fasting or even caloric restriction quickly by saying that I lost 30 lbs restricting calories then not only rebounded and gained it all back, but 70 lbs past that. It's not worth it. Trying to "whip" your metabolism into shape from fasting will end badly. I'm proof of it.

 

[MetabolicTrash]

I am kind of torn with the exercise and whether it's always a positive, but still lean toward activity at some level even in the very sick/ill to be mostly a pro than a con.

As an example, nearly every person I've known/known to have died around me was of low activity. Not saying fit people can't die, but from my experience, relatives of mine and some others have passed younger than they should have because they were two things: very obese and not very physically active. I think it is pretty much a trend: significantly overweight and significantly inactive people tend to die sooner. I think it's harder to find someone who is lean/a healthy BF% and relatively stress free who is somewhat active/eats pretty "okay" even if somewhat PUFA-ish who would die of a heart attack or etc. than the very same example with someone who just happens to be 40-50 lbs. heavier or so and has nearly zero activity. You could argue that it's because the heavier person has more PUFA/FAO/etc., but I'm not sure that's always the case. I mean people can become very obese even with virtually zero PUFA/MUFA if they just have endless calories nonstop/binge eat/etc. and do zero exercise.

Not saying it was just the weight, but it does seem to matter when it comes to overall health. I don't think anyone significantly overweight is healthy, even if they're not necessarily "very unhealthy" or such either. You can of course be pretty unhealthy and be lean too, yeah, but you're probably not as far off as the same case with someone 100 lbs. heavier than you. All of that excessive eating/fats/etc. can do a lot of bad damage to you over time, which someone who isn't over-eating probably will have much less of/none at all, even in the midst of other issues possibly. This all of course isn't adding in exercise, which seems to possibly mitigate bad effects of overeating and etc.

Again, I mention that most of the people I've known to die/have died tended to not be physically active and were usually pretty obese (and usually died of heart attacks). I'm sure diet played a role, but assuming they had the same diet and weren't as lazy/inactive or as obese, things could've been different for sure. As others have said: exercise in a nutshell helps mitochondrial activity and has a whole host of other chain-reaction like positives that can help step in and affect health, even if to a minor extent only. Not talking about the gymbro/excessive stuff, but just getting the heart rate up a bit and improving breathing/fitness/ability to have some endurance. I'm no longer a fan of the excessive running/"pushing till death" kind of mentality anymore since I know that can be more harmful than helpful -- but I would encourage anyone -- especially really heavy/bad diet/lazy/older people -- to try and get moving/lifting slowly in the process of changing the diet. It doesn't have to be anything heavy, but just as others said: walking every other day for like 30 minutes leisurely at the least; biking at a slow pace every few days; light jogging maybe; some little weights with strong emphasis on concentric movements; and of course bodyweight exercises like push ups, sit ups, etc. Listen to your body, but don't be scared to push a bit harder if you want to sometimes.

So basically: exercise is a good tool everyone should use, even if weak/ill. I think terminally-ill people tend to have better survival rates with better eating/diets/supplements + some exercise/stimulation. The worst thing a sick person can do is remain still/inactive and continue eating garbage/reducing eating/accept their fate and give up on a mental and physical level. It may be hard to be exact, but usually light exercise -- even in really ill -- is often helpful more than harmful.

While I'm still not too sure how far to lean on each side, I couldn't allow myself to remain bedridden without feeling like a condition would be getting worse/I'd be suffering more. I'd also have reduced mental health if I stayed inactive too long (I need to at least walk/ride bike significantly a few times a week + light resistance). I couldn't feel healthy if I knew I wasn't do any real exercise ever, and believe exercise helps fight against aging/deterioration on a somewhat similar level as diet/supplementation, give or take. So people who are doing very, very little exercise and are obese -- even if on a good diet -- probably still aren't in an ideal condition. We are meant to move -- doesn't mean excessively, but at least walking/climbing stuff pretty regularly and not feeling tired/fatigued too easily from doing such.

 

[corvetteseeker]

Fasting is a trap, I get the allure, it seems like a quick fix, but trust me it just doesn't work. Maybe you can do like a juice fast (only carbs/sugar during the day like 1 maybe 2x a week) but anything more extreme than that (fasting from all calories for ex, especially for more than one day) is going to end badly. Trust me. As will caloric restriction. Another alluring, but trapping, approach.

Let me scare you off from fasting or even caloric restriction quickly by saying that I lost 30 lbs restricting calories then not only rebounded and gained it all back, but 70 lbs past that. It's not worth it. Trying to "whip" your metabolism into shape from fasting will end badly. I'm proof of it.

I really appreciate the feedback, man. I do really believe that fasting is a lot different than caloric restriction which I do not agree with. But if you look at studies on fasting, the BMR goes up as much as 13% within the first 3 days so I don't buy that it slows metabolism if you cycle between fasting and feasting.

I know that if I ate nothing but juice and ground beef I would lean out but what kind of life is that? I don't feel like becoming a social pariah.
Also, when I tend to eat this way, I don't sleep well, it exacerbates my excessive urination and I'm constantly hungry so there's all that.

 

[Cirion]

You could argue that it's because the heavier person has more PUFA/FAO/etc., but I'm not sure that's always the case. I mean people can become very obese even with virtually zero PUFA/MUFA if they just have endless calories nonstop/binge eat/etc. and do zero exercise.

Yes, it is always the case. More body fat = more lipolysis/FFA/FAO period. Studies have been posted on these forums showing this. It's in fact why low fat diets are superior for the obese person. It helps keep the FFA/FAO somewhat in check. It is indeed difficult to get fat on SFA alone. Keeping in mind though that when people think of SFA they think of butter, beef fat, dairy fat, all of which also has PUFA so it is NOT pure SFA and all of these are indeed fattening in my experience. Only hydrogenated coconut oil is a pure SFA. But even pure SFA probably is not ideal at least in the overweight person, but that's a debate for another time.

 

[Cirion]

I really appreciate the feedback, man. I do really believe that fasting is a lot different than caloric restriction which I do not agree with. But if you look at studies on fasting, the BMR goes up as much as 13% within the first 3 days so I don't buy that it slows metabolism if you cycle between fasting and feasting.

I know that if I ate nothing but juice and ground beef I would lean out but what kind of life is that? I don't feel like becoming a social pariah.
Also, when I tend to eat this way, I don't sleep well, it exacerbates my excessive urination and I'm constantly hungry so there's all that.

Increasing BMR is not the same as increasing the healthy metabolism. Increasing BMR is easy - exercise a lot and drink more coffee and other stimulants.

There are two pathways to increase BMR. One is stressful (too much exercise, stims, fasting etc), the other is not (T3, CO2, etc). The reason why excess exercise is so popular, is because it DOES work... at increasing BMR and making you lose weight (until it doesn't, due to finally destroying your metabolic rate), at the expense of your health.

 

[Vinny]

Controlled not slow. The contractions should be explosive and the release slow.

Can you attach some video here to see how it should look like?

 

[MetabolicTrash]

Yes, it is always the case. More body fat = more lipolysis/FFA/FAO period. Studies have been posted on these forums showing this. It's in fact why low fat diets are superior for the obese person. It helps keep the FFA/FAO somewhat in check. It is indeed difficult to get fat on SFA alone. Keeping in mind though that when people think of SFA they think of butter, beef fat, dairy fat, all of which also has PUFA so it is NOT pure SFA and all of these are indeed fattening in my experience. Only hydrogenated coconut oil is a pure SFA. But even pure SFA probably is not ideal at least in the overweight person, but that's a debate for another time.

I meant the PUFA/obese part. Sure, because PUFA is nearly everywhere, it's probably hard to imagine someone overweight only entirely on SFA.

I meant more in the sense that it may not always be the case of high PUFA overall that makes you immedialy obese/sick. Some light people have high PUFA intake too -- not everyone downing the vegetable oils + processed PUFA & junk is overweight. I once was high PUFA for a while and had some abs/wasn't terribly ill/depressed or anything. My idea was more to show that -- when comparing someone overweight/inactive and all things equal -- it seems the person not overweight/obese and the addition of being active has better chances at keeping healthy/survival (if terminally ill). T3 and C02 matters of course, as these can allow you to burn through more foods and remain fit/healthy/active. It's the best to increase them, but the less healthier people sometimes have to compensate with adrenaline + caffeine and other things, which isn't of course as healthy (I can attest to this, as that's how I was). High PUFA doesn't always mean fat, and fat or overweight doesn't always have to mean high PUFA.

And even though PUFA is generally bad, this doesn't mean SFA is perfectly good. Both PUFA:SFA dominant ratios both ways can lead someone to atherosclerosis. PUFA seems worse in older people, but this doesn't mean younger people should have lots of it -- same with SFA not necessarily being something you should have lots of just because it's possibly seen as a polar opposite by some here to PUFAs/MUFAs/etc. I'm not defending either/any fat, but just showing cases don't always boil down to 'X' thing.

 

[Cirion]

I meant the PUFA part. Sure, because PUFA is nearly everywhere, it's probably hard to imagine someone overweight only entirely on SFA.

I meant more in the sense that it may not always be the case of high PUFA overall that makes you obese/sick. Some light people have high PUFA intake too -- not everyone downing the vegetable oils + processed PUFA & junk is overweight. I once was high PUFA for a while and had some abs/wasn't terribly ill/depressed or anything. My idea was more to show that -- when comparing someone overweight/inactive and all things equal -- it seems the person not overweight/obese and the addition of being active has better chances at keeping healthy/survival (if terminally ill). T3 and C02 matters of course, as these can allow you to burn through more foods and remain fit/healthy/active. It's the best to increase them, but the less healthier people sometimes have to compensate with adrenaline + caffeine and other things, which isn't of course as healthy (I can attest to this, as that's how I was).

Ok, but now we once again get into the age old debate of: does being overweight automatically mean you are unhealthy relative to your lean counterparts? To which I say absolutely not. The other age old debate is: get rid of fat, restore health. Both assumptions are false. Is that natural state of a healthy metabolism a pretty lean body? Yes, I do think so. But "forcing" it against your bodys will is NOT the answer. It should happen "naturally". Modern fitness culture is absolutely obsessed with forcing weight loss at all costs. Fasting, caloric restriction, carb restriction, insane workout routines, excess stimulants, etc etc...

I realized this after I eliminated my life long depression, despite being obese compared to super lean now. I was nearly suicidal level depressed very frequently when younger, despite being extremely healthy weights.

In fact, user tyw said that weight has almost nothing to do with overall health, I'm not sure I'd go that far, but it's very possible for the overweight person to have way better co2 and t3 levels than the lean person. The lean person having waking temps of 95-96F temps due to "athletic" status, but the fat person having temps 98F+. In fact I can sometimes achieve euthyroid 98.4F+ waking temps despite being obese, whereas when I was lean I was in the 96F temps and felt VERY bad. User ilikecats is one of the healthier people on these forums while being very overweight. He said before I presume he left the forum (I haven't seen him post a while) due to fixing his health, he found no reason to post anymore, that he basically lived in a constant state of euphoria his health was now so good. And I am pretty sure he doesn't exercise, at all. It's all chemicals and hormones. Fix those, fix your CO2 levels, fix your T3 levels, and all is well. I'll be fair though and say that In some cases exercise might assist in fixing chemicals/hormones but I don't believe its required.

I view overall level of fatness as a gauge of stress that that person has built up. Stress must be reduced, it is the only sustainable long term-answer. The vast majority of people use stress to lose weight, which is a mistake. It's easy to look at fat people and think they're lazy or gluttonous, but it's simply not the case. If you look into their lives you find the real answer is they have constant stress in their job, personal life, lack of sleep lack of sunlight all this matters. "Just get rid of the fat" is just not the answer and is far too simplistic of an approach.