in desperate need of reassurance :(

PAV8888

You are this frustrated because you are desperately dieting in order to get quick results.

As a consequence of severely restricting your calories, you are losing more lean mass than you need to, and you are getting disappointed and frustrated when the scale doesn't move the way your hard work leads you to expect that it should.

If it is this difficult you're over-doing it.

You are looking to lose 6 to 12lbs. In other words you are probably not even officially overweight.

Set yourself a reasonable goal, in your case as an 18 yo with little weight to lose probably -250 Cal a day.
Engage in some strength training on top.
Maybe move around a little bit more.
Get the body you want.

Continue to restrict your food and crash diet and end up a lifelong customer of Weight Watchers, or MFP, or other places, losing quickly and gaining back what you lost + 10% before coming back for another round.

feisty_bucket

renfreri000 wrote: »

I didn't have a scale for a week or so and finally got a new one. I got on today expecting to lose EVEN MORE and what do you know.. I'm back at 131. I know you shouldn't focus on a number but its just a little discouraging to stay away from the scale and expect even more weight loss and get nothing but weight gain. I don't wanna feel like i'm gonna have to eat chicken and rice the rest of my life in order to NOT gain weight.. someone help me out here

Your food is probably fine; I don't know why people are running on that angle. You dropped a lot on your previous bathroom scale. Also, several pounds of variance is _nothing_, especially across scales.

I'd say, keep doing whatever you've been doing with the food. You need more data. Weigh yourself daily, first thing in the morning, post-toilet. Log it. Watch what happens over a month. If it's not trending downward, then maybe you're not measuring well and you need to improve your accuracy.

queenliz99

feisty_bucket wrote: »

renfreri000 wrote: »

I didn't have a scale for a week or so and finally got a new one. I got on today expecting to lose EVEN MORE and what do you know.. I'm back at 131. I know you shouldn't focus on a number but its just a little discouraging to stay away from the scale and expect even more weight loss and get nothing but weight gain. I don't wanna feel like i'm gonna have to eat chicken and rice the rest of my life in order to NOT gain weight.. someone help me out here

Your food is probably fine; I don't know why people are running on that angle. You dropped a lot on your previous bathroom scale. Also, several pounds of variance is _nothing_, especially across scales.

I'd say, keep doing whatever you've been doing with the food. You need more data. Weigh yourself daily, first thing in the morning, post-toilet. Log it. Watch what happens over a month. If it's not trending downward, then maybe you're not measuring well and you need to improve your accuracy.

Instead of wasting a month, she should get a food scale soon. So what you are saying, is what we are saying but wait a month. Ahhh, gotcha!

Back to running on angle I go!

snowflake954

OP, you weigh yourself on a scale, right? Why? You could try to stuff yourself into a bushel or a barrel and "measure" yourself. We weigh stuff because it's the most accurate way. Try it, using a digital scale, for a week and see what happens.

ClosetBayesian

snowflake954 wrote: »

OP, you weigh yourself on a scale, right? Why? You could try to stuff yourself into a bushel or a barrel and "measure" yourself. We weigh stuff because it's the most accurate way. Try it, using a digital scale, for a week and see what happens.

I love this. At some point, I'd like to quote it. I promise I'll cite you.

kimny72

renfreri000 wrote: »

Well I understand with meat how that would be effective (the scale) but I don't think I'm measuring wrong my using measuring cups? On things like cottage cheese, or brown rice, or even peanut butter it tells you the serving size. So I will either do the serving size or even half the serving size and just divide the calories in half.. I'm not sure how that would be inaccurate. I've been doing more things with weights so hopefully I'm just getting a little muscle and people are right that the scale is calibrated differently.. Im gonna buckle down a little more on planning and measuring cals because I heard after the first month or so that you kinda get careless. Thank you all for your suggestions and I'll try and stay updated and give it another week or so

The nutritional info on the container is accurate for the weight listed, not the volume measurement. My oatmeal container says a serving is 1/2 cup or 40 grams. When I put my 1/2 cup measuring cup on my scale and put in 40 grams of oats, it is NOT full. I would guess if I filled the scoop it would be over 45 grams. Now 5 grams doesn't seem like much, but when you are getting those kinds of differences on everything you eat, it adds up. Plus, if you are the kind of person who is not leveling off your measuring cup, it could be substantially more. When you have a lot of weight to lose and are dealing with a large deficit, these small differences won't keep you from losing. But when you are within a healthy weight range and working with a small deficit, they can easily negate it.

I was shocked when I first started using the food scale how many extra calories I was eating by eyeballing and using measuring cups. And now that I'm maintaining, I still use the food scale often to keep me from letting the weight sneak back on!

mitch16

According to her ticker, OP is 6 lbs from goal... And while the 'gain' may just be the new scale or a normal fluctuation, the closer you get to goal, the more important accurate logging becomes. Additionally, netting 1200 calories per day towards a 2 lb per week loss may be extremely unrealistic at this point.

kshama2001

renfreri000 wrote: »

Well I understand with meat how that would be effective (the scale) but I don't think I'm measuring wrong my using measuring cups? On things like cottage cheese, or brown rice, or even peanut butter it tells you the serving size. So I will either do the serving size or even half the serving size and just divide the calories in half.. I'm not sure how that would be inaccurate. I've been doing more things with weights so hopefully I'm just getting a little muscle and people are right that the scale is calibrated differently.. Im gonna buckle down a little more on planning and measuring cals because I heard after the first month or so that you kinda get careless. Thank you all for your suggestions and I'll try and stay updated and give it another week or so

Cooked rice is really fluffy. Before I got my digital food scale I was always stressing about how tightly I should pack things into cups. With the food scale, not only is this no longer an issue, but I don't have cups to wash either

Here's another angle on why to use a food scale. I got the winner, OXO Good Grips 11 lb. Food Scale with Pull Out Display, for Christmas 2014. It has an 11 pound capacity. Their version with the 5 pound capacity is half that price, and you can get decent scales at Walmart, etc., for under $15.

Digital Scales Review

Handy as they are, measuring cups will never measure up to the accuracy of a digital scale. We’ve found that when measuring dry ingredients using a “dip and sweep” method, different cooks can be off by as much as 10 percent—a variance that, in baking, can mean the difference between a dense cake or a fluffy, tender crumb.

To find the best scale for the job, we tested nine models, each measuring in 1-gram increments. As we placed 30-, 200-, and 500-gram lab weights on their surfaces-and moved them around to make sure readings were equal in every position-we found only negligible discrepancies (within 2 grams). We based our rankings, then, on how easy the scales are to use. Whether you choose a scale that measures in decimals (as the professionals use) or fractions (as most home recipes are written) is a matter of preference.

We ranked scales most highly for roomy platforms (over 6 inches); at least 7-pound capacity; a large, clear readout display; and sensitive, accessible buttons. Our new favorite, which displays weights in fractions or grams, measures up all around.

renfreri000

Thank you everyone. I like what one of you said about if it's this difficult and I worry that much I'll just burn out. I feel like counting calories makes me obsessed and I don't want that. I don't have much to lose, however I know I have more fat than muscle. I have friends who weigh more than me yet they show way more tone. I want to stop worrying about the weight itself and focus on the shape and tone I want. I wouldn't mind weighing the same I do now yet looking a thousand times better because it's all muscle and not fat. I'm just gonna continue to eat portion sizes and listen to my body and stop obsessing so much .. Thanks guys!

snowflake954

ClosetBayesian wrote: »

snowflake954 wrote: »

OP, you weigh yourself on a scale, right? Why? You could try to stuff yourself into a bushel or a barrel and "measure" yourself. We weigh stuff because it's the most accurate way. Try it, using a digital scale, for a week and see what happens.

I love this. At some point, I'd like to quote it. I promise I'll cite you.

Use it as much as you like. We all need a good laugh now and again.

azulvioleta6

Lots of packages do not actually contain what they say they do. This seems to be especially true with canned foods.

Weigh it all.

booksandchocolate12

The package of Thomas' English Muffins says that each muffin is 57 grams. I always weigh them and have yet to come across one that is 57 grams.

CoffeeNCardio

azulvioleta6 wrote: »

Lots of packages do not actually contain what they say they do. This seems to be especially true with canned foods.

Weigh it all.

Bagged frozen meals too. Anyonewho likes Bertolli beware, I've had those things come in a full 35 grams light of what they say is in there, as well as almost 80 grams heavy (more chicken in that one it seemed)