Bluelight

Thread: Drugs/supplements that increase metabolism

Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. Collapse Details
    Drugs/supplements that increase metabolism 
    #1
    Are there any drugs or supplements that are proven to increase the metabolism without causing any significant side effects or harm to the body? If so, what are they and how effective are they.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #2
    Bluelighter Clean_Cut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    A stones throw from CA
    Posts
    676
    Green Tea extract definetly increases my metabolism
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #3
    Bluelighter SangerRainsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St.Pete, <central>FL
    Posts
    1,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Toast to the Spirits View Post
    Are there any drugs or supplements that are proven to increase the metabolism without causing any significant side effects or harm to the body? If so, what are they and how effective are they.
    There are many that increase metabolism, but unsure which do so w/o significant effects to the body. Further, their metabolic boost seems pretty correlated to their detrimental effects on the body (black coffee will help a lil and is pretty damn safe, meth will help tons and is absolutely unsafe).
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #4
    I don't think what you're looking for exists.

    I could make a list of substances that increase metabolism but every one of them I could also associate with pretty serious negatives.

    The least powerful and also least harmful would probably be caffeine in w/e form you prefer.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #5
    Bluelight Crew addictivepersona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Buffalove
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Toast to the Spirits View Post
    Are there any drugs or supplements that are proven to increase the metabolism without causing any significant side effects or harm to the body? If so, what are they and how effective are they.
    Eat more, earlier in the day and less as the day goes on. Eat more frequent meals (every 3-4 hours) that get smaller as the day goes on. AKA breakfast should be your largest meal and your last meal should be the smallest.

    After awhile of eating healthy, nutritious food in this manner, your metabolism should increase. If not, add in some exercise.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #6
    Bluelighter SangerRainsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St.Pete, <central>FL
    Posts
    1,643
    The "frequent meal" hypothesis was disproven, no? Wasn't it that people who eat more frequently tend to eat less in total? NOT that there's some special metabolic trick?
    /the body's metabolism is based on calories consumed that need metabolisation, your metabolism is infrequent/high if you eat once daily, it's constant/low if you eat regular, smaller meals ;P
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #7
    Bluelight Crew addictivepersona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Buffalove
    Posts
    4,316
    Your metabolism is LOW if you eat once a day, HIGH if you eat regular, smaller meals.

    Perhaps it was disproven but that's news to me and my studies--Dietetics courses still preach a way to up your metabolism is smaller, more frequent meals. And I learned from experience that eating larger earlier and lighter as the day went on is a way to up the metabolism.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #8
    Bluelighter SangerRainsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St.Pete, <central>FL
    Posts
    1,643
    metabolism rates/levels are a direct result of metabolising food that's taken in. If you eat one huge meal, your metabolism spikes through the roof, then goes to practically zero. If you eat small, frequent meals your metabolism stays more constant, but at a lower level.
    Your body's daily metabolism is a directly correlated to your calorie intake, if you eat 5k calories daily, you have the same metabolic activity whether you eat one huge 5k meal, or 10 500 calorie meals.
    (hope someone can bring that study in, been a while since I read it. Honestly tho, to those who disagree, I'd like to hear this purported mechanism where metabolism of calories can increase by the way said calories are distributed through a day).

    and again, I support smaller, more frequent meals, there are many benefits - increased metabolism is NOT one tho. Sometimes people think it is, when in reality they lost weight because they ate less calories due to the frequent eating schedule (which promotes less overeeating), but they erroneously attribute this effect to some situation where metabolism suddenly becomes disproportionate to calorie consumption
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #9
    Bluelight Crew addictivepersona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Buffalove
    Posts
    4,316
    Hrm, interesting. I get what you mean, but I guess it must vary depending on the individual...

    When I was losing weight, I'd eat about 1700 calories a day: 6-700 around 8a, 4-500 around 1p, 2-300 around 5p, and 1-200 around 8p. Lost 45 pounds in three months doing that. And have kept all but ten pounds (that I attribute to quitting smoking) off for almost three years.

    Yet, when I eat 1700 calories a day, with a 500 calorie meal around 8a, 500 calories around 12p, and 700 calorie around 5, I gain weight. Same types of foods, same proportions/portions, just different times.

    Gotta go with what works for you, I guess. If eating one big meal a day causes you do lose weight, you're probably not getting all the nutrition you need in that one big meal, but if weight loss is your only goal I guess you'd be on the right path.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #10
    Bluelighter SangerRainsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St.Pete, <central>FL
    Posts
    1,643
    Doesn't depend on the individual *except* for what the changed dietary-intake causes. More frequent meals means more balanced blood sugar/energy levels, so one is likely to exert themselves just a lil more through the day, resulting in a better calorie deficit.

    I think we're on the same page roughly, but just that you're not believing me that there's no difference in the body's metabolism by eating more/less meals, when I'm saying metabolism is a direct function of calories taken in.
    /if you'd like, I can try and find some data - if you/others here think it'd be useful, lemme know ;P
    //still tho, I see you as chalking up weight fluctuations to some metabolic trick, whereas they're due to caloric deficits/surpluses..
    Reply With Quote
     

  11. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Bluelight Crew addictivepersona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Buffalove
    Posts
    4,316
    I do understand what you're saying--Esp. about how having regulated blood sugars allows you to exert yourself a bit more. But! what I've been hearing in the dietetics courses I'm taking, is when you eat once a day, your body is in starvation mode (aka your metabolism isn't going anywhere) so when you eat, your body wants to horde the food as fat for the next famine. *Shrug* If you feel like digging up the reputable sources with data, feel free. I'm willing to agree to disagree with ya, but I'm always looking to learn more about this stuff, esp. since my classes are basically funded by the USDA/FDA and I am not a fan.
    Reply With Quote
     

  12. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Bluelighter SangerRainsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St.Pete, <central>FL
    Posts
    1,643
    Said another way:
    If you eat one huge meal a day, your metabolism is HUGE, but for a short period of time.
    If you eat many small meals a day, your metabolism is smooth for a continuous time.
    Metabolism is a function of calories needing metabolism.

    I'm gg google real quick to find something to help clarify this. Oh, I should note that I *AM* a huge proponent of frequent, smaller meals, a HUGE proponent!!
    Reply With Quote
     

  13. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Bluelighter mgmt&mdma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    584
    back to OP- i know EGCG (green tea extract) speeds up metabolism, caffeine helps alot too. i read that L-tyrosine helps stimulate metabolism while supressing appetite, so i went out and bought some yesterday and ill letcha know if i see any results.

    those are the safe methods,
    meth obviously does, but i doubt u wanna go that far haha

    cigarretes are the last thing i can think of that will help stimulate metabolism.
    Reply With Quote
     

  14. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    Bluelighter SangerRainsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St.Pete, <central>FL
    Posts
    1,643
    Here's something I found real quick, but from a board I can attest to. I'll find more later if need be, just lemme know ;P

    Frequency of feeding, weight reduction and energy metabolism.

    Verboeket-van de Venne WP, Westerterp KR.

    Department of Human Biology, University of Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

    A study was conducted to investigate the effect of feeding frequency on the rate and composition of weight loss and 24 h energy metabolism in moderately obese women on a 1000 kcal/day diet. During four consecutive weeks fourteen female adults (age 20-58 years, BMI 25.4-34.9 kg/m2) restricted their food intake to 1000 kcal/day. Seven subjects consumed the diet in two meals daily (gorging pattern), the others consumed the diet in three to five meals (nibbling pattern). Body mass and body composition, obtained by deuterium dilution, were measured at the start of the experiment and after two and four weeks of dieting. Sleeping metabolic rate (SMR) was measured at the same time intervals using a respiration chamber. At the end of the experiment 24 h energy expenditure (24 h EE) and diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT) were assessed by a 36 h stay in the respiration chamber. There was no significant effect of the feeding frequency on the rate of weight loss, fat mass loss or fat-free mass loss. Furthermore, fat mass and fat-free mass contributed equally to weight loss in subjects on both gorging and nibbling diet. Feeding frequency had no significant effect on SMR after two or four weeks of dieting. The decrease in SMR after four weeks was significantly greater in subjects on the nibbling diet. 24 h EE and DIT were not significantly different between the two feeding regimens.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •