Replies

I can agree with you in a number of your points. The Harris–Benedict equation sprang from a study by James Arthur Harris and Francis Gano Benedict, which was published in 1919 by the Carnegie Institution of Washington in the monograph “A Biometric Study Of Basal Metabolism In Man.”

A 1984 revision improved its accuracy. Mifflin et al. published an equation more predictive for modern lifestyles and changes in the gene pool in 1990.

Later work produced BMR estimators that accounted for lean body mass. As the BMR equations do not attempt to take into account body composition, identical results can be calculated for a very muscular person, and a very fat person, who are both the same height, weight, age and gender. As muscle and fat require differing amounts of calories to maintain, the TEE estimates will not be consistent for such cases.

The Harris–Benedict equation is a formula commonly used to estimate basal energy expenditure of individuals, adjusted for height, weight, age and gender. This estimate is then multiplied by a physical activity factor to estimate total daily energy needs to maintain the given weight. It can be used, with a further adjustment, for weight loss meaning consistent adjustment.

But there is one thing that is always a problem with any program: one size doesn’t fit all. Everything from oxygen consumption to water intake is variable. But this program does base a historical practice to create an outlet for accomplishing a goal rather than just saying get out there and do it. It is not an easy program but it has been tested with success in many countries and using a variety of body compositions and capacities to include militaries around the world and ours.

Nothing is perfect because of the body variants at the least. But if you have another basis for weight, strength, and metabolism estimates and control, I’m all ears.

rwood

“Nothing is perfect because of the body variants at the least. But if you have another basis for weight, strength, and metabolism estimates and control, I’m all ears.”

Any metabolism estimate, let alone control, that doesn’t count carefully excreta (in clear, how much and how often sh.t is produced) is junk. And because no such estimate exists AFAIK doesn’t mean the existing ones are ok, or even near right while they are dead wrong. It would be like saying because heliocentrism doesn’t exist, then geocentrism is imperfect but ok.

The Dukan diet for example, which is purely empiricist without the pseudo-scientific babbling about energy & calories balance sheet (for good reason because it is a fat based diet, with huge intakes of calories, yet it works !) seems much more credible because it addresses the subject of excreta without taboo.