Anybody create a deficit mostly through exercise?

Options
2

Replies

  • Sailor_Moon86
    Sailor_Moon86 Posts: 48 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Sailor_Moon86 wrote: »
    I'm 5'3.5 135-138 female looking to get down to 125. I run 35-40 miles per week and according to Scoobys calculator, I maintain at 1670. So because I run so much, I usually hit 1670 since I get hungry. Sometimes 1600. Sometimes, last week, I hit 1700-1800 twice. You can see my diary.

    Anyway I've been losing about .75 a week on average when I do the math since 11 months ago. But I feel like these past 3 weeks have been kinda slow. I feel like I should be in lower 130s by now. Should I eat less calories?

    Oh I also strength train for 40 min 3 X a week so that's about another 300 cals burned, plus about 3500 or so with running

    I have sedentary maintenance of about 1600 or so (5'3, 125), and because I run a lot and do other exercise I should be able to lose at 1800, so kind of similar.

    Of course, lately I haven't been eating 1800, but I keep saying I'm going to make an effort to lose again one of these days. I'd stick with it and see how you do -- .75/week is great and 3 slow weeks isn't enough to worry about, IMO.

    Yeah 1670 for me is on the "low intensity cardio 3x week" level, just to be safe.

  • ryry_
    ryry_ Posts: 4,966 Member
    Options
    I think you have a good plan in place. The last 10 are the hardest and can also be the most frustrating because it seems like the scale gets a little bit less consistent in showing progress.

    Diary is closed so can't look but as long as you aren't having any free for all days you should be ok.
  • endlessfall16
    endlessfall16 Posts: 932 Member
    edited March 2016
    Options
    Sailor_Moon86 wrote: »
    I'm 5'3.5 135-138 female looking to get down to 125. I run 35-40 miles per week and according to Scoobys calculator, I maintain at 1670. So because I run so much, I usually hit 1670 since I get hungry. Sometimes 1600. Sometimes, last week, I hit 1700-1800 twice. You can see my diary.

    Anyway I've been losing about .75 a week on average when I do the math since 11 months ago. But I feel like these past 3 weeks have been kinda slow. I feel like I should be in lower 130s by now. Should I eat less calories?

    Oh I also strength train for 40 min 3 X a week so that's about another 300 cals burned, plus about 3500 or so with running

    Sure, if you have a *consistent* workout schedule. That's the key.

    In hindsight I think that's what I've been doing. I didn't expect to lose more than 2 lbs/week which every calories website told me. But as soon as I strictly followed the cal number given, the loss got into hyper drive. My sport sessions have been consistent for years. If I had eaten the maintenance cal number, I still would have enough deficit to lose 1.25/lbs per week.

    For curiosity I pondered about your running vs my tennis. I can't handle 4-mile running (on treadmill) every other weekday and that's only a fraction of what you do.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Sailor_Moon86 wrote: »
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    It's easier to eat less food than to exercise more. My years of experience here.

    Weight loss is created by a calorie deficit and exercise is for health
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    It's easier to eat less food than to exercise more. My years of experience here.

    Weight loss is created by a calorie deficit and exercise is for health

    What's the difference between calories not eaten and calories burned through exercise? I easily burn like 3500-4K a week. And don't often eat above maintenance.

    If you follow TDEE you are eating exercise calories back. Maintenance means NEAT + exercise, so it is dificult to decifer if you are eating sedentary TDEE cals, and exercising and not eating them back, or you are eating TDEE cals, which if that is the case you shouldn't be losing. so eith
    HorrorGeekLiz wrote: »
    2fat4knees wrote: »
    muscle weighs more than fat...are you measuring hips, waist, etc?? The scale is not the only measurement of fat loss. I always have a deficit from exercise but, if I "eat" it, I don't lose any weight....

    This is a huge pet peeve of mine and I wish this phrase would die already. Muscle does not weigh more than fat. One pound is one pound whether it is muscle, fat, bricks, or feathers.

    Muscle is less dense than fat. It takes up less room. It still weighs the same.

    You know what they mean. When someone says muscle weighs more than fat they assume, by volume muscle weighs more than fat. Since it is assumed that it is equal volumes (when comparing two things you should keep something constant, if doing weight, keep volume constant) it does not have to be stated.

    Using your way, you and I weight the same because 1 lb of you weighs the same as 1 lb of me, what kind of argument is that?
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Sailor_Moon86 wrote: »
    KevinHolmes1 wrote: »
    On rest days I eat at 10% deficit of my TDEE. On gym or ride days I know the approximate cal/min burn rate I hit. I then add those burn totals to my TDEE and eat at a 10% deficit of that. I log and weigh all food, over many months I have been able to get a very good idea of average burn rates.

    I have found the difference between a calorie not eaten, and a calorie burned is it's much easier to miscalculate how many calories you burn. The calorie labels on food are very accurate. The caloric burn rate varies wildly from person to person.

    Yup. That's why I redo calculations lol. I will multiply each mile by 90 calories- Mfp is far too generous.

    That isn't how TDEE works, you are following the NEAT method, which is what MFP does for you, except you use your own cals burned calculation.

    Do you weigh all solid food and measure liquids?
  • daniwilford
    daniwilford Posts: 1,030 Member
    Options
    Because I am a short, 5'2", older, mid 50"s, female. It is difficult for me to be in a calorie deficit without exercise. Without exercise, I maintain at about 1500 calories. On my one rest day a week, I try to eat only 1200 calories, I would hate having to do that everyday to lose.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    Options
    HorrorGeekLiz wrote: »
    2fat4knees wrote: »
    muscle weighs more than fat...are you measuring hips, waist, etc?? The scale is not the only measurement of fat loss. I always have a deficit from exercise but, if I "eat" it, I don't lose any weight....

    This is a huge pet peeve of mine and I wish this phrase would die already. Muscle does not weigh more than fat. One pound is one pound whether it is muscle, fat, bricks, or feathers.

    Muscle is less dense than fat. It takes up less room. It still weighs the same.

    People assuming that everyone only has exactly one pound each of fat and muscle is a huge pet peeve of mine.
  • heatherlewisis
    heatherlewisis Posts: 118 Member
    Options
    You're doing fine! The last 10-15 lbs are stubborn... I have 10 lbs to lose now to get to my goal and it is coming off, slowly but surely... I disagree with the statement that exercise is for health... Exercise is ALSO for creating or adding to a deficit... Definitely :) I don't create my deficit purely through exercise simply because I don't have time to exercise enough to do that, but I know my workouts really help to soften that small margin of error I have now that I'm so close to my goal.
  • Sailor_Moon86
    Sailor_Moon86 Posts: 48 Member
    Options
    erickirb wrote: »
    Sailor_Moon86 wrote: »
    KevinHolmes1 wrote: »
    On rest days I eat at 10% deficit of my TDEE. On gym or ride days I know the approximate cal/min burn rate I hit. I then add those burn totals to my TDEE and eat at a 10% deficit of that. I log and weigh all food, over many months I have been able to get a very good idea of average burn rates.

    I have found the difference between a calorie not eaten, and a calorie burned is it's much easier to miscalculate how many calories you burn. The calorie labels on food are very accurate. The caloric burn rate varies wildly from person to person.

    Yup. That's why I redo calculations lol. I will multiply each mile by 90 calories- Mfp is far too generous.

    That isn't how TDEE works, you are following the NEAT method, which is what MFP does for you, except you use your own cals burned calculation.

    Do you weigh all solid food and measure liquids?


    Yup. My tdee is 1670. All I meant was that MFP says I burned 1100 calories running 11 miles and I take it down to 990. Doesn't matter- don't eat those calories back anyway. I'm trying to stick to 1600 to eat below my TDEE plus the added 3500-4K burned calories a week.
  • Sailor_Moon86
    Sailor_Moon86 Posts: 48 Member
    Options
    erickirb wrote: »
    Sailor_Moon86 wrote: »
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    It's easier to eat less food than to exercise more. My years of experience here.

    Weight loss is created by a calorie deficit and exercise is for health
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    It's easier to eat less food than to exercise more. My years of experience here.

    Weight loss is created by a calorie deficit and exercise is for health

    What's the difference between calories not eaten and calories burned through exercise? I easily burn like 3500-4K a week. And don't often eat above maintenance.

    If you follow TDEE you are eating exercise calories back. Maintenance means NEAT + exercise, so it is dificult to decifer if you are eating sedentary TDEE cals, and exercising and not eating them back, or you are eating TDEE cals, which if that is the case you shouldn't be losing. so eith
    HorrorGeekLiz wrote: »
    2fat4knees wrote: »
    muscle weighs more than fat...are you measuring hips, waist, etc?? The scale is not the only measurement of fat loss. I always have a deficit from exercise but, if I "eat" it, I don't lose any weight....

    This is a huge pet peeve of mine and I wish this phrase would die already. Muscle does not weigh more than fat. One pound is one pound whether it is muscle, fat, bricks, or feathers.

    Muscle is less dense than fat. It takes up less room. It still weighs the same.

    You know what they mean. When someone says muscle weighs more than fat they assume, by volume muscle weighs more than fat. Since it is assumed that it is equal volumes (when comparing two things you should keep something constant, if doing weight, keep volume constant) it does not have to be stated.

    Using your way, you and I weight the same because 1 lb of you weighs the same as 1 lb of me, what kind of argument is that?

    Oh okay! Yeah so I'm eating below (trying to )TDEE at low intensity cardio 3x a week (which is an underestimate) and not eating back.
  • Sailor_Moon86
    Sailor_Moon86 Posts: 48 Member
    Options
    endlessfall16 wrote: »
    Sailor_Moon86 wrote: »
    I'm 5'3.5 135-138 female looking to get down to 125. I run 35-40 miles per week and according to Scoobys calculator, I maintain at 1670. So because I run so much, I usually hit 1670 since I get hungry. Sometimes 1600. Sometimes, last week, I hit 1700-1800 twice. You can see my diary.

    Anyway I've been losing about .75 a week on average when I do the math since 11 months ago. But I feel like these past 3 weeks have been kinda slow. I feel like I should be in lower 130s by now. Should I eat less calories?

    Oh I also strength train for 40 min 3 X a week so that's about another 300 cals burned, plus about 3500 or so with running

    Sure, if you have a *consistent* workout schedule. That's the key.

    In hindsight I think that's what I've been doing. I didn't expect to lose more than 2 lbs/week which every calories website told me. But as soon as I strictly followed the cal number given, the loss got into hyper drive. My sport sessions have been consistent for years. If I had eaten the maintenance cal number, I still would have enough deficit to lose 1.25/lbs per week.

    For curiosity I pondered about your running vs my tennis. I can't handle 4-mile running (on treadmill) every other weekday and that's only a fraction of what you do.

    Yup. Super consistent. Will increase weekly mileage to 50 by August. Otherwise I'd have no choice but to eat less. And really, I'm running to get better, so weighing less helps. For marathon goals.
  • shrcpr
    shrcpr Posts: 885 Member
    Options
    daniwilford wrote: »
    Because I am a short, 5'2", older, mid 50"s, female. It is difficult for me to be in a calorie deficit without exercise. Without exercise, I maintain at about 1500 calories. On my one rest day a week, I try to eat only 1200 calories, I would hate having to do that everyday to lose.

    +1

    I carry a 250 calorie deficit at 1300. I can't eat that low every day so exercise about that much most days. On non exercise days I just am hungry or break out the tuna and berries.
  • sanfromny
    sanfromny Posts: 770 Member
    Options
    2fat4knees wrote: »
    muscle weighs more than fat...are you measuring hips, waist, etc?? The scale is not the only measurement of fat loss. I always have a deficit from exercise but, if I "eat" it, I don't lose any weight....

    Oh boy...not this^^^^ So a pound of bricks weigh more than a pound of feathers? NO...never will. Will they take up the same amount of space..no because what is different is the shape and make up, Fat is a big funky blob and muscle is lean and smooth so although it in appearance one appears smaller than the other they are in fact the same weight.
  • intangiblemango
    intangiblemango Posts: 38 Member
    Options
    It sounds like you have a good plan to me. You have to fuel your body if you are running a lot of miles per week or you're going to be miserable! I think a lot of people who are not active really underestimate how many calories you can murder as an athlete. Eating like you are sedentary is just not appropriate for someone who is running 30-50 miles a week. Fueling your body means eating more calories (so 'creating the deficit primarily through exercise', although I probably wouldn't use that wording for mindset reasons), but as long as you are below your TDEE, you'll keep losing. :)
  • Sailor_Moon86
    Sailor_Moon86 Posts: 48 Member
    Options
    intangiblemango wrote: »
    It sounds like you have a good plan to me. You have to fuel your body if you are running a lot of miles per week or you're going to be miserable! I think a lot of people who are not active really underestimate how many calories you can murder as an athlete. Eating like you are sedentary is just not appropriate for someone who is running 30-50 miles a week. Fueling your body means eating more calories (so 'creating the deficit primarily through exercise', although I probably wouldn't use that wording for mindset reasons), but as long as you are below your TDEE, you'll keep losing. :)
    I know- the math never fails and weight loss isn't linear (especially when I average it out- haven't updated my weight here) and it does really come out to .75. Just so close and it's frustrating. Like today I'm at 1500 because I've been grazing and haven't had time to sit and eat a meal. No way I'll be satisfied with 100 calories lol. I wil eat at least 300, so it's like...should I just subtract from tomorrow? I'm kind of banking calories because this weekend I know I'm going to go drinking. Want to have at least a 3500 cal deficit.
  • Livgetfit
    Livgetfit Posts: 352 Member
    Options
    HorrorGeekLiz wrote: »
    2fat4knees wrote: »
    muscle weighs more than fat...are you measuring hips, waist, etc?? The scale is not the only measurement of fat loss. I always have a deficit from exercise but, if I "eat" it, I don't lose any weight....

    This is a huge pet peeve of mine and I wish this phrase would die already. Muscle does not weigh more than fat. One pound is one pound whether it is muscle, fat, bricks, or feathers.

    Muscle is less dense than fat. It takes up less room. It still weighs the same.

    THANK YOU!
  • whmscll
    whmscll Posts: 2,254 Member
    Options
    HorrorGeekLiz wrote: »
    2fat4knees wrote: »
    muscle weighs more than fat...are you measuring hips, waist, etc?? The scale is not the only measurement of fat loss. I always have a deficit from exercise but, if I "eat" it, I don't lose any weight....

    This is a huge pet peeve of mine and I wish this phrase would die already. Muscle does not weigh more than fat. One pound is one pound whether it is muscle, fat, bricks, or feathers.

    Muscle is less dense than fat. It takes up less room. It still weighs the same.

    Thank you!! This drives me nuts also.
  • whmscll
    whmscll Posts: 2,254 Member
    Options
    My deficit used to be largely created through exercise. I lost weight consistently and got within 3 pounds of my goal weight. But I couldn't keep all of it off. I've gained about 10 pounds back. Partly because I did not keep tracking calories, but also because a couple of back injuries impacted my ability to work out. I was so used to my deficit coming from exercise that I had trouble adjusting to a deficit created by diet alone.
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    Options
    I would very much struggle staying in a deficit without exercise. I rely on it to keep me within my appropriate weight loss calories.
  • Karstey050
    Karstey050 Posts: 62 Member
    edited March 2016
    Options
    I have to exercise to have enough of a deficit to lose weight. I'm at the minimum calorie limit (1200). If I don't exercise, I only burn about 1500 calories/day. So I briskly walk 2 miles 6 days per week. That gives me another 240 calories/day burned.

Categories