<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Metabolic Rate Overview</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html</link>
	<description>Training and Nutrition advice, straight from the monkey's mouth.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 21:15:42 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: lylemcd</title>
		<link>http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html/comment-page-1#comment-4778</link>
		<dc:creator>lylemcd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 May 2010 13:05:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.181.182.145/?p=831#comment-4778</guid>
		<description>Simply a single study, never replicated with other work failing completely to support that value.  So either there was something special about the study or the results were due to flawed methodology or something.  But if you have 5 studies and one says one thing and the other 4 say something different (and are consistent), you have to go with the conclusions of the majority. Which are that EPOC is irrelevant in the big scheme of things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Simply a single study, never replicated with other work failing completely to support that value.  So either there was something special about the study or the results were due to flawed methodology or something.  But if you have 5 studies and one says one thing and the other 4 say something different (and are consistent), you have to go with the conclusions of the majority. Which are that EPOC is irrelevant in the big scheme of things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html/comment-page-1#comment-4770</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 02:15:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.181.182.145/?p=831#comment-4770</guid>
		<description>RE:  The 700kcal post-weight training EPOC number.  I remembered reading about that, and it turns out it was here.  Your comments in this research review (http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/research-review-effects-of-exercise-intensity-and-duration-on-the-excess-post-exercise-oxygen-consumption.html) would seem to &#039;deride&#039; the 700 kcal number, but it stands out in this article.  Is it just a timing issue - something you discovered after writing this?

Awesome site, by the way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE:  The 700kcal post-weight training EPOC number.  I remembered reading about that, and it turns out it was here.  Your comments in this research review (<a href="http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/research-review-effects-of-exercise-intensity-and-duration-on-the-excess-post-exercise-oxygen-consumption.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/research-review-effects-of-exercise-intensity-and-duration-on-the-excess-post-exercise-oxygen-consumption.html</a>) would seem to &#8216;deride&#8217; the 700 kcal number, but it stands out in this article.  Is it just a timing issue &#8211; something you discovered after writing this?</p>
<p>Awesome site, by the way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicole</title>
		<link>http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html/comment-page-1#comment-1719</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.181.182.145/?p=831#comment-1719</guid>
		<description>Bromocriptine?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bromocriptine?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html/comment-page-1#comment-1699</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 15:40:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.181.182.145/?p=831#comment-1699</guid>
		<description>Sure. 

You plan refeeds at a sufficient frequency to help offset the metabolic slowdown and hunger issues.  So they only end up being on low calories for a short-period of time before an influx of calories.

Or use drugs.

Or both.

Lyle</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure. </p>
<p>You plan refeeds at a sufficient frequency to help offset the metabolic slowdown and hunger issues.  So they only end up being on low calories for a short-period of time before an influx of calories.</p>
<p>Or use drugs.</p>
<p>Or both.</p>
<p>Lyle</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicole</title>
		<link>http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html/comment-page-1#comment-1697</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 11:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.181.182.145/?p=831#comment-1697</guid>
		<description>Lyle - Have you ever had success with getting the thrifty phenotypes to comply to a LCD?  It seems they get too hungry and their energy level drops too much to maintain it for any length of time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lyle &#8211; Have you ever had success with getting the thrifty phenotypes to comply to a LCD?  It seems they get too hungry and their energy level drops too much to maintain it for any length of time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
