Question
Asked 29 October 2016

Which formula are recommended by nutritionists and scientists to measure "BASAL METABOLIC RATE" ?

there is Harris–Benedict equations with its revised version by mifflin, i m confused which one to use ?

Most recent answer

Shahin Salehi
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
thank you

Popular answers (1)

Marc Birringer
University of Applied Sciences Fulda
Dear Munib,
Although established around 100 years ago, our students still use the Harris–Benedict prediction in the physical activity lab. Due to changes in lifestyle, new predictions such as the Mifflin St Jeor equation are more accurate. Working with obese patients (BMI 30 or more) the Broca-Index correction makes sense.
All these measurements simply rely on bodyweight, height, age and gender.
If you are able to measure lean body mass by bioelectrical impedance analysis you can predict the daily resting energy expenditure by Katch-McArdle and Cunningham formula, respectively.
Concerning you question, the difference between Harris–Benedict and Mifflin St Jeor equations is around 5 %, with higher accuracy of the later one.
Best wishes
Marc
7 Recommendations

All Answers (6)

Marc Birringer
University of Applied Sciences Fulda
Dear Munib,
Although established around 100 years ago, our students still use the Harris–Benedict prediction in the physical activity lab. Due to changes in lifestyle, new predictions such as the Mifflin St Jeor equation are more accurate. Working with obese patients (BMI 30 or more) the Broca-Index correction makes sense.
All these measurements simply rely on bodyweight, height, age and gender.
If you are able to measure lean body mass by bioelectrical impedance analysis you can predict the daily resting energy expenditure by Katch-McArdle and Cunningham formula, respectively.
Concerning you question, the difference between Harris–Benedict and Mifflin St Jeor equations is around 5 %, with higher accuracy of the later one.
Best wishes
Marc
7 Recommendations
Munib Ur Rehman
University of Karachi
thankyou Mr. Birringer
1 Recommendation
Chris Repar
Banner Health System
I manage the nutritionists in a large tertiary care facility.  This is what we currently use when evaluating adult patients.  We do not have a metabolic cart so we rely on the published research:
Obesity (BMI > 30)  When available, indirect calorimetry (metabolic cart) should be performed. 
For healthy/mildly ill (ex: cardiovascular disease, CVA, DM) the Mifflin-St Jeor equation using actual weight has been validated for estimating caloric needs. 
For acutely ill obese patients: If using Harris-Benedict equation--To estimate full calorie needs, use the average weight  (Average weight = (IBW + actual wt) ÷ 2) with a stress factor of 1.25 to 1.3.  Accuracy is within 10% of REE for 69% of  obese, spontaneously breathing patients. 51,52,53
For permissive underfeeding,  a reasonable initial goal in the obese hospitalized patient is achieved using an adjusted weight.51,52,53 (Adjusted weight = [(actual wt-IBW) x 0.25] + IBW) 
NOTE:  when permissively underfeeding, 2g pro/kg IBW is needed to promote nitrogen balance.54,55 Permissive underfeeding may not be appropriate for patients with renal or hepatic dysfunction.
Kcals per KgCaloric expenditure is significantly underestimated if ideal body weight (IBW) is used and significantly overestimated if actual body weight is used. Using Adjusted weight (Adjusted weight = [(actual wt-IBW) x 0.25] + IBW) with Kcals per Kg for patients with >130% IBW, resulted in predictions within 146 kcal of indirect calorimetry results.
Mifflin-St Jeor (Preferred method)Use with non-obese and obese patients
Derived from a sample of normal-weight, overweight, obese, and severely obese individuals aged 19 to 78 years
Predicts RMR within 10% of actual in the most people and creates the smallest errors when the results are erroneous.  This is true for non-obese and obese individuals, though accuracy rate is reduced in the obese.  In one study, the Mifflin–St. Jeor equation was accurate in 82% of non-obese and 70% of obese people, as compared to 69% and 64% using the Harris–Benedict equation. 30, 50 
 Harris-Benedict Equation (HBE) Developed using predominantly normal-weight white men     and women aged 15-74.  Accuracy ranges 45-80% in validation studies; overestimates occur more than underestimates.50
The use of an adjusted (.25) body weight in healthy obese patients should be avoided due to increased risk of underestimating nutrition needs.50 (May be used for permissive underfeeding if 2 g protein/kg IBW provided)Choban
Cachectic (< 50kg):  Harris Benedict underestimates, use Kcal Per Kg instead 48
Cachectic (> 50kg), BMI < 30:  use actual wt48, 52
BMI 30-50 to estimate full calorie needs, use average (Avg) wt with a stress factor of  1.25 to 1.351, 52, 53 
Avg wt = (IBW+actual wt)/2
Permissive underfeeding (BMI > 30), use adjusted (Adj) wt31 Adj wt = (actual wt-IBW)x0.25 + IBW
 NOTE:  when permissively underfeeding, 2g pro/kg IBW is needed to promote nitrogen balance. Permissive underfeeding may not be appropriate for patients with renal or hepatic dysfunction.
1 Recommendation
Kamalita Pertiwi
Wageningen University & Research
You may also want to check the paper by Henry (2005): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16277825. In the paper, the equations are different according to age and sex.   
Munib Ur Rehman
University of Karachi
Thank you all.
Shahin Salehi
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
thank you

Similar questions and discussions

Does working with genetically altered "cell pool" through CRISPR-Cas9 make sense?
Question
8 answers
  • Diogo MoraesDiogo Moraes
Hello
I am new to CRISPR-Cas9 and, for my project, I started to collaborate with another lab that claims expertise on this technique. The objective is to produce 3 cell lines, each with a knockout for a different gene. They did all the process of cloning the plasmid until viral transfection, where a point mutation was induced and an antibiotic resistence gene was added and then selected for.
From what I understand, all cells they gave me are resistant to antibiotic but not all cells necessarily have the mutation or the same mutation, and the solution for that, as far as I know, would be single cloning. However, they said single cloning would not be necessary and that all I had to do was run a western blot for the targets in this heterogeneous cell pool to be sure the knockouts worked. They said if the band was weaker or had a different size it would prove it worked. They also said I could already run phenotypic experiments and it would show it worked as well, but, according to them, the definitive proof is the western blot.
Because I am completely new to this, I just wanted to know if such decisions make sense. I just find it a bit weird because I would have to do single cloning anyway in the end. It wouldnt make sense to me to ever try to check the phenotype of a heterogenous cell pool, if I don't even know the mutation rate of the cells, and I assume such rates might even change every time I plate those cells. Moreover, I think that there might be the possibility the protein could maintain the same size even if it became dysfunctional with the knockout.
I found those decisions weird, but I don't have enough experience with the technique to have a solid opinion. Any thoughts?

Related Publications

Article
LEARNING OUTCOME: To develop a module enabling dietetic students to apply nutrition care principles and skills for elders in home and community based settings. Delivery of health, supportive and nutrition services is shifting from institutional to home and community settings. Dietetic students must be able to translate didactic knowledge into pract...
Article
Having approached human nutrition from the two parameters of basic research and applied nutrition, the authors see that certain databases provide more relevant citation than others. The strategies must be very specific to obtain greatest precision and accuracy when answering a research request. For basic or clinical nutrition research, the data fil...
Article
Full-text available
This paper overviews the historical background and development of applied nutrition and community nutrition in Korea. The nutrition studies in the early years focused on animal experiments, human metabolism, and food analysis and therefore were limited to classrooms and research laboratories in universities without spreading into the lives of peopl...
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.