New paper blows away experts' views on metabolism - men and women's aren't different and it doesn't slow gradually after 20

No more BS excuses.

I must have followed the science in the wrong direction.

Both the NYT and the literature reference are behind paywalls. Cannot critically evaluate. Therefore no conclusions are drawn from this one.

That’s clearly sexist and possibly racist...

So you're saying i'm just fat and eat too much sugar and carbs???

I guess I shouldn't be shocked considering I've been at the same size from age 19 to 39. It is most interesting in how this will take the excuse away from everybody.

This will get mostly buried, and people will still believe what they have believed for the past several decades.

Here's an interesting tidbit:

Even college students might see the effects of the metabolic shift around age 20, Dr. Klein said. “When they finish college they are burning fewer calories than when they started.”

Jerry Maguire wrote:

That’s clearly sexist and possibly racist...

"Once the researchers controlled for body size and the amount of muscle people have, they also found no differences between men and women."

Summer of 2006 wrote:

Both the NYT and the literature reference are behind paywalls. Cannot critically evaluate. Therefore no conclusions are drawn from this one.

This.

Studies collect data, but the conclusions about what that data means are sometimes suspect. I would like to see the data before drawing any conclusion from this paper.

I don't follow this topic, but IIRC, obesity, and conversely, starvation diets can slow metabolism.

Young people are growing, old people are shrinking.

That's all they're really saying. Nothing new at all.

DontFeartheVax wrote:

Jerry Maguire wrote:

That’s clearly sexist and possibly racist...

"Once the researchers controlled for body size and the amount of muscle people have, they also found no differences between men and women."

Controlling for the differences between men and women, they found no differences. Ceteris MF Paribus!!!

DontFeartheVax wrote:

Jerry Maguire wrote:

That’s clearly sexist and possibly racist...

"Once the researchers controlled for body size and the amount of muscle people have, they also found no differences between men and women."

I think what Jerry was trying to say is that modern bikini models no longer have an excuse, this study debunking the idea that any size goes.

CrispyChicken wrote:

DontFeartheVax wrote:

"Once the researchers controlled for body size and the amount of muscle people have, they also found no differences between men and women."

I think what Jerry was trying to say is that modern bikini models no longer have an excuse, this study debunking the idea that any size goes.

That's clearly sizeist and possibly homophobic...

So wait, they are saying what we thought all along was wrong? How can this be? They must be lying, how does the science just change like that? Sounds pretty Orwellian to me.

having trouble wrote:

So wait, they are saying what we thought all along was wrong? How can this be? They must be lying, how does the science just change like that? Sounds pretty Orwellian to me.

That's clearly ageist and possibly anti vaxxist...

Summer of 2006 wrote:

Both the NYT and the literature reference are behind paywalls. Cannot critically evaluate. Therefore no conclusions are drawn from this one.

I am waiting with bated breathe for your review of a peer-reviewed paper from Science.

HGH declines and it makes a big difference

Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here but... when studies fly in the face everything we observe every day every year across the board, what should our reaction be?

There are more than 80 co-authors on the study. By combining efforts from a half dozen labs collected over 40 years, they had sufficient information to ask general questions about changes in metabolism over a lifetime.

All of the research centers involved in the project were studying metabolic rates with a method considered the gold standard — doubly labeled water.

It’s interesting that this is not really one study but is more of a collection of data observed from individuals across many labs and many years. Still they used patient-level data so it’s not really a meta-analysis