Sport Slow/Fast metabolism...??

Sport Fitness
I often hear when somebody is trying to justify his bad shape or discredit someone's good shape with comments like: 'I have a slow metabolism, or he has a fast metabolism" and so on...
So what is the truth?

OK, I think we have a case of RTFQ here, as my business studies teacher used to say. RTFQ stands for 'Read The F*cking Question'

The OP asked if you can justify your bad shape on metabolism. The concensus here seems to be 'no'. All posters here have said that everyone is capable of gaining muscle and losing fat. It's just that some are born with an added hill to climb.
 
Not everyone's going to have their joints expand etc, whereas the science does apply on a base level to everyone!..

Lol, that is science, power lifters have the strongest joints and thickest bones of all athletes.

I know that's off topic but just wanted to mention it
 
Well, there's a conversation stopper!..

Agreed, nobody can blame bad shape on metabolism or genetics, but on the other hand, I also concur that some people do have a genetic disadvantage - again, NOT a reason to be fat/skinny/whatever, just a cross you have to bear and get on with it!

The OP's question was answered like 20-odd posts ago, this is all just added convo for the sake of it..
 
bipennate - did you read the rest of my posts??? Or only the first one??? I have clarified what I meant by "not genetic" (which turned out to be a poor choice of words)

please tell me which exercises I need to do therefore to help me to grow taller,

To the best of my knowledge the body types being discussed in this thread (endo, ecto, meso) operate independently of height. And yes, body type can change over time.

While the decline in activity levels are among the chief reasons cited for the youth obesity rise, to claim that is the only factor is, again,

Lack of activity is by far the most significant aspect of fatter children. I have also addressed the fact that fatter people have fatter children. Though that seems to occur more because of outside factors, children increase number of fat cells in the third trimester, if the mother in eating crappy all the time that will more often be a factor than genetics.

Most people would argue that parents who were born skinny, got fat, and had a fat kid is a little fast to be a genetic factor. (significant change in one generation.) Unless a person, through behavior, changes their genetics over a portion of their lifetime.

Another explanation would be that, a child, in an environment where lack of activity and poor eating habits, gets fat, is more likely to have fat children, since, during their growing period, they increased their genetic potential to be fat and will be able to pass it on to their children.

(I am not saying the above 2 things are true or not. I am just suggesting these points)

Saying that body type and metabolism are not genetic was a mistake by me. As I have stated in later posts, we are born with a certain metabolism and body type. My point is, that though that is true, these things can be (and are) changed through behavior change over a lifetime. The vast majority of people are able to make these changes if they choose to.

As I have already stated many times, there is no way to know the extent that genetics will help of hinder a person. Someone who initially struggles over the first few years in their training career may find things come much easier after that. The same may be true for a person who makes rapid gains in the beginning, they may find it more difficult a few years into their training career.

I hope you read the rest of my posts. I do understand that genetics are a factor. Of course it does not matter to the fitness professional, whose job is to help get people results. The goal is finding what works, regardless of any given genetic "limitations" or "benefits"

I also have not stated that all people will have the same results, on the same programs, and in the same time line. I do understand that people are different.

The fact is, in real life, if they are truly motivated to get results they will, regardless of genetics. Initially things may be very difficult. As they continue training, they may find that they have a greater genetic potential than they thought, and greater success as time goes on.
 
Lack of activity is by far the most significant aspect of fatter children. I have also addressed the fact that fatter people have fatter children. Though that seems to occur more because of outside factors, children increase number of fat cells in the third trimester, if the mother in eating crappy all the time that will more often be a factor than genetics.

Saying that body type and metabolism are not genetic was a mistake by me. As I have stated in later posts, we are born with a certain metabolism and body type. [B]My point is, that though that is true, these things can be (and are) changed through behavior change over a lifetime. The vast majority of people are able to make these changes if they choose to.[/B]

As I have already stated many times, there is no way to know the extent that genetics will help of hinder a person. Someone who initially struggles over the first few years in their training career may find things come much easier after that. The same may be true for a person who makes rapid gains in the beginning, they may find it more difficult a few years into their training career.

I hope you read the rest of my posts. I do understand that genetics are a factor. Of course it does not matter to the fitness professional, whose job is to help get people results. The goal is finding what works, regardless of any given genetic "limitations" or "benefits"

The fact is, in real life, if they are truly motivated to get results they will, regardless of genetics. Initially things may be very difficult. As they continue training, they may find that they have a greater genetic potential than they thought, and greater success as time goes on.

What a great post!.. I so agree with the "try, try and try n you'll get" sentiment!
 
Wow, a lot has happened while I way typing my last post.

I think that most of us agree to a certain extent. I think that most of the heat from this discussion has come from the first 2 lines in my first post. :eek:

Which are, admittedly, a little extreme. :D

I get a little excited about the genetics thing. I truly believe that it is used as an excuse most of the time, and that the majority of people can get the type of results they want, regardless of what they are born with.

This has been a pretty good discussion. :beerchug:
 
Well, there's a conversation stopper!..

Agreed, nobody can blame bad shape on metabolism or genetics, but on the other hand, I also concur that some people do have a genetic disadvantage - again, NOT a reason to be fat/skinny/whatever, just a cross you have to bear and get on with it!

The OP's question was answered like 20-odd posts ago, this is all just added convo for the sake of it..

I didn't mean it as a conversation stopper, I just wanted to highlight the fact that people have ignored helping the poster (what we're supposed to be doing) in favour of pointing fingers and insulting each other (common amongst wiki-experts)

Your second paragraph is spot on :)

As for added convo, lol, you called me a power drunk fascist earlier, I don't count that as conversation

EDIT: Just noticed you said that the power drunk fascist comment was meant with tounge in cheek. Then sorry, I didn't pick up on that, it's hard judging tone of voice on the internet :)
 
Last edited:
It's true, I think people, such as yourself, even me, get annoyed when people come across as being lazy and then moan.. Which is totally understandable!..:)

But I think you've come from being totally against genetics as an argument, to accepting it to a certain extent, which is what it deserves, nothing more, its not an excuse and anyone who uses it as such does, no doubt, deserve a slap in the face! :boxing_smiley: Or a punch, either way!..
Definitely been a great thread, there will probably be a hundred more like this but still, this one's been good!

(Apologies CCR! I know you know your stuff!) lol it's all good..

Could I have the last (ish) word? If so, let it be that:

GENETICS IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FACTOR WHICH MUST BE RECOGNISED AND ADDRESSED - IT IS NOT AN EXCUSE FOR LAZINESS.

Cheers. :beerchug:
 
Saying that body type and metabolism are not genetic was a mistake by me. As I have stated in later posts, we are born with a certain metabolism and body type. My point is, that though that is true, these things can be (and are) changed through behavior change over a lifetime. The vast majority of people are able to make these changes if they choose to.


The fact is, in real life, if they are truly motivated to get results they will, regardless of genetics. Initially things may be very difficult. As they continue training, they may find that they have a greater genetic potential than they thought, and greater success as time goes on.

Great post, right to the point :)
 
Last edited:
Nicolasd:

I'd say that yes, obesity is linked to genetics, clearly (sorry gorgeron), however that isn't because certain people are inclined genetically to eat more, it's because their bodies are genetically programmed to respond a certain way to nutrients. A la the endo who's carb sensitive or the ecto who can't gain despite stuffing himself with a kilo of carbs a day lol..

I'm sorry, but you're very wrong. Obese people eat a lot more than people with normal weight. I've never heard of anyone who only eats the suggested daily calories for their ideal weight and exercise level, but still become obese EDIT: outside of the very small minority who have actual metabolic disorders.

The main (if not only) reason for obesity is overeating. The reason for the overeating may be increased and uncontrollable appetite because the leptin receptors don't work because of unfortunate genetics or whatever.

I'm still curious to know if anyone has data on how much BMR varies between individuals because of biochemistry.
 
Last edited:
I'm still curious to know if anyone has data on how much BMR varies between individuals because of biochemistry.

I don't have specific references to research but if you look at Phates log you'll see that the guy is bulking on about 2,000 Kcals a day although his BMR says it should be a hell of a lot higher.

For me, my BMR says I need 3,500 kcals for maintenance but if I were eat that amount I know I'd lose a lot of weight because I've tried it. There will be many people at my height and activity level who could bulk on 3,500 but I need more like 4,500

I don't know how much of that is genetic, all I know is that my fast metabolism doesn't stop me from gaining weight and muscle and the slow metabolism hasn't stopped Phate from losing weight either, we just need to pay more attention to our consumption
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry, but you're very wrong. Obese people eat a lot more than people with normal weight. I've never heard of anyone who only eats the suggested daily calories for their ideal weight and exercise level, but still become obese, outside of the very small minority who have actual metabolic disorders.

Granted, obese people are so because they overeat, however, what I meant was that some people react differently to others to certain foods. Of course, if they followed the suggested daily calories they wouldn't be obese, but not everyone has that knowledge, your average joe on the street isn't gonna know what his BMR is!.. So it's ignorance + perceived "normal" eating habits that = obesity imo..

I'd also be interested to see that data if anyone has it.. Although I don't think there's really been much work done in this specific area..

Also, personally, I bulk on about 3000cals atm, whereas my calculated bulking requirements are around 2800.. I went from having a slow metabolism, to working up towards a faster one through regular, clean meals and exercise etc..
 
Last edited:
Of course, if they followed the suggested daily calories they wouldn't be obese, but not everyone has that knowledge, your average joe on the street isn't gonna know what his BMR is!.. So it's ignorance + perceived "normal" eating habits that = obesity imo..

I'm under the impression that obese people, even when given this knowledge and a diet too follow, the majority of them still have a very hard time sticking to it and not overeating. It's not like you can just teach them what healthy eating habits were and that's the end of their obesity.

Uncontrollable appetite + easy access to unhealthy food = obesity.
 
I'm under the impression that obese people, even when given this knowledge and a diet too follow, the majority of them still have a very hard time sticking to it and not overeating. It's not like you can just teach them what healthy eating habits were and that's the end of their obesity.

Uncontrollable appetite + easy access to unhealthy food = obesity.

I see.. I was thinking of it being a mainly educational issue rather than an appetite one.. Well yes, I also agree with that, although I really don't think there's anything genetics-related that makes people eat constantly and indiscriminately.. Surely that's just bad eating habits through laziness.
 
I see.. I was thinking of it being a mainly educational issue rather than an appetite one.. Well yes, I also agree with that, although I really don't think there's anything genetics-related that makes people eat constantly and indiscriminately.. Surely that's just bad eating habits through laziness.

Not sure I would characterize obese people as ' lazy ' - I think that is just another myth / stereotype.

Do you think would also apply to other forms of over consumption - like ' over-drinking ' - might also stem from simply ' learning ' bad habits ?

If alcoholism is alleged to run in families and therefore may have a strong hereditary component to it - I wonder if bad eating habits do as well ?
 
CCR how much money do you spend on food! 4500 kcals! That is intense, props for being able to eat that much.
 
Not sure I would characterize obese people as ' lazy ' - I think that is just another myth / stereotype.

Do you think would also apply to other forms of over consumption - like ' over-drinking ' - might also stem from simply ' learning ' bad habits ?

If alcoholism is alleged to run in families and therefore may have a strong hereditary component to it - I wonder if bad eating habits do as well ?

Well, that's just it: we've primarily been focused on the physical aspects of genetically influenced obesity, but don't forget that there's a strong psychological and neurological aspect to it as well: terming the difficulty that some people have with sticking with a diet or exercise routine can have as much to do with actual neurologically induced issues as it can have to do with anything else...again, this doesn't mean that these issues cant be overcome with effort, but think about this: we accept that alcoholism is strongly affected by heredity, that depression, anxiety, attention-deficit, etc, are all neurologic disorders, but then we turn around and claim that obese people that can't stick to a diet, basically doing what we are genetically programmed to do in order to survive (i.e. consuming in times of prosperity in order to survive in times of famine: 60 years of McDonalds and easily available food isn't long enough to alter our genetic programming), are in fact "lazy" and should be shunned. The fact is, 5000 years ago, the body-type that we covet, the lean and slender individual, would be a sign of poor health because they would be less likely to be able to survive during stress and starvation. These individuals are following a genetically programmed plan that had been successful in keeping the human species alive for hundreds of thousands of years. Our genetic purpose is to live long enough to give birth to offspring and to live long enough to raise them until they are capable of independent living, which is basically 30 years or so, and for the majority of our existence, that is exactly what we did. Now with improvements in medicine and standards of living (including food availability, shelter, cleanliness, etc, etc), we can live 2-3x as long, if not more. What helps us early in life ends up killing us later on, but this is "genetically" unimportant. Modern lifestyles work against our biology, which includes the genetic mandate to eat, eat, eat. This is the root of the problem, not some abstract concept of "laziness."

As far as how much does metabolic type vary, the truth is that most studies show that it's not much from person to person, if I recall...however, it's also important to look at subject populations, too: syudies also show differences in the way that obese individuals actually utilize the calories that they consume vs. lean individuals, even when taking into account activity levels or influences of obesity itself (i.e. type II diabetes).

Early reports of "50 calories/day" additional BMR per pound of muscle estimates have been lowered considerably, to around 7-12 kcals/pound of muscle per day. Meaning if I start working out today and put on an additional 20 pounds of muscle in a year, I have only increased my BMR by around 150-200 calories/day, which is barely significant (that's roughly one extra banana a day...of course, energy requirements needed to sustain the work levels that i will need to build that muscle will be greater too, which is why active people need to eat substantially more). However, the sum total of genetic factors (not just BMR due to muscle type, distribution, and amount but actual chemical/hormonal factors, neuromuscular efficiency, psychological brain chemistry, blah, blah, blah) might make this more significant, too.

Like G said, we don't know to what effect any of this will play on any specific individual; however, like I was trying to say, by knowing that these are real factors and not just laziness, we are able to not only better understand why an individual might be having difficulty with their efforts but to be able to better tailor our own efforts in helping them through their difficulties. It's easy to label someone as being lazy. It's also counter-productive and won't help anyone that is attempting an honest lifestyle change having real issues that go beyond a simple issue of motivation.
 
Last edited:
CCR how much money do you spend on food! 4500 kcals! That is intense, props for being able to eat that much.

LMAO, I'm a 230lb baby, go ask Goergen who can go up to 8,000kcals a day when he's in serious training, that man's a beast :)

I probably spend about $20 a day on food now I'm preparing all my food myself
 
Not sure I would characterize obese people as ' lazy ' - I think that is just another myth / stereotype.

Do you think would also apply to other forms of over consumption - like ' over-drinking ' - might also stem from simply ' learning ' bad habits ?

If alcoholism is alleged to run in families and therefore may have a strong hereditary component to it - I wonder if bad eating habits do as well ?

It's an interesting concept but I think not.. At least, I've never heard of any evidence/suggestion even that bad eating habits are hereditary.. I'd be surprised if there is any link myself.. But on the other hand, if you take the template of the drinking issue being hereditary, there's no reason why it shouldn't theoretically apply to food..

I think this may be one situation where nurture takes over from nature, in that, the kid sees the parents reckless eating behaviour and then copies, as children do.. As for genetics (i.e. via DNA), I don't think that plays a huge part.. Then again, is this situation nature or nurture? :- baby in the womb who at some point during pregnancy starts to get a taste for sweet stuff that the mothers eating.. Surely that's nurture?

It's a very interesting topic! Hopefully bipennate is as well versed on this topic as he is on general nutrition/fitness and makes a post!..

EDIT: just seen his post so I'll have a mull over that!! thanks..
 
bipennate - did you read the rest of my posts??? Or only the first one??? I have clarified what I meant by "not genetic" (which turned out to be a poor choice of words)
Yeah, I was focusing on that first post a bit more because I felt that it was the focus of a lot of the point that I was arguing against...you know I <3 you, big guy! :D I just wanted to "flesh that out" and talk about that concept, which I think is a commonly held belief, even if you hadn't exactly meant that...



To the best of my knowledge the body types being discussed in this thread (endo, ecto, meso) operate independently of height. And yes, body type can change over time.
My point was that certain things are under our control, while other things are not: you can't lump it all together and say that anything can be changed. So while the density and possibly the circumferential measurements of my bones might be altered, I can't also alter the length of the diaphysis either. The same goes for genetic/biological factors related to obesity and weight gain/loss: some things can be altered while others cannot.



Lack of activity is by far the most significant aspect of fatter children. I have also addressed the fact that fatter people have fatter children. Though that seems to occur more because of outside factors, children increase number of fat cells in the third trimester, if the mother in eating crappy all the time that will more often be a factor than genetics.
It's nature vs nurture, and while I'm not going to disregard the social aspect of weight gain in children (food habits, healthy habits, etc), there have been a large number of "twin" studies (I posted one, in fact) that point to the genetic influence far outweighing the social influence (adopted twins going to different families maintaining similar weight and body-types regardless of separate and disparate upbringings)

Most people would argue that parents who were born skinny, got fat, and had a fat kid is a little fast to be a genetic factor. (significant change in one generation.) Unless a person, through behavior, changes their genetics over a portion of their lifetime.
Sure, but the same genetics that allowed or influenced that couple to become fat (as opposed to staying skinny) exist in the child as well, and the same eating habits will influence him/her just the same.

Another explanation would be that, a child, in an environment where lack of activity and poor eating habits, gets fat, is more likely to have fat children, since, during their growing period, they increased their genetic potential to be fat and will be able to pass it on to their children.
Exactly: that would be my argument too

Saying that body type and metabolism are not genetic was a mistake by me. As I have stated in later posts, we are born with a certain metabolism and body type. My point is, that though that is true, these things can be (and are) changed through behavior change over a lifetime. The vast majority of people are able to make these changes if they choose to.
Insinuating that i could play basketball was a mistake by me :rolleyes:

But I think that the main issue is the concept of "choice." For some, making that choice and adhering to that choice is a LOT easier than for others. How we deal with these individuals has as much to do with our understanding of where their potential problems come from as it does with what kinds of problems they actually are...

As I have already stated many times, there is no way to know the extent that genetics will help of hinder a person. Someone who initially struggles over the first few years in their training career may find things come much easier after that. The same may be true for a person who makes rapid gains in the beginning, they may find it more difficult a few years into their training career.
No we don't, but it doesn't mean that we should ignore the issues, either.

I hope you read the rest of my posts. I do understand that genetics are a factor. Of course it does not matter to the fitness professional, whose job is to help get people results. The goal is finding what works, regardless of any given genetic "limitations" or "benefits"
But it does matter: we have to treat each individual as an individual, and understanding the possible factors contributing to his/her particular roadblocks helps us to do just that, wouldn't you agree?

The fact is, in real life, if they are truly motivated to get results they will, regardless of genetics. Initially things may be very difficult. As they continue training, they may find that they have a greater genetic potential than they thought, and greater success as time goes on.
But how we cultivate that motivation can mean the difference between success and failure. We shouldn't make excuses for these factors, but we can use them to our benefit to help rather than hurt :)
 
Back
Top