Not losing weight!

Options
245

Replies

  • Shanel0916
    Shanel0916 Posts: 586 Member
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    ilex70 wrote: »
    800-1000 for one gym session is an awful lot. If you are using the MFP entries for exercise calories they are generally believed too be to generous.

    Try only eating back half the exercise calories and see if that gets the scale moving.

    No I use a heart rate monitor when working out and do a lot of cardio (zumba/ interval training) in addition to running two miles and lifting weights...



    In case you aren't aware, depending on the type of heart rate monitor you have it may not accurately count calories burned when lifting weights. It should generally be used for cardio only. Sounds like you maybe over estimating calories burned in the gym. I would focus on your diet what you're eating and weighing your food properly.
  • gabbo34
    gabbo34 Posts: 289 Member
    Options
    Sometimes your body just gets in a stall. It sucks. Been there and done that. Your doing all the things you should be doing and the scale just isn't moving. It gets incredibly frustrating. Keep doing the right thing and you'll start to get results. I was at my wit's end last month. I had been in a 6 week stall despite working out 4-5 days a week and eating well below my net calorie goal. My fitness level was improving, but the scale/tape measure weren't reflecting it.

    Be patient and keep working, the results will come.

  • slw19
    slw19 Posts: 513 Member
    Options
    hard to say if your diary is closed what is going on. i do believe there is more than just being in a deficit sometimes to actually losing weight. everyone is different and some are more sensitive to certain foods. it is important to feed your body every couple of hours and to make sure you are getting the right nutrients. it really does help. so if you want better advice, you should make your diary public
  • _Waffle_
    _Waffle_ Posts: 13,049 Member
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    _Waffle_ wrote: »
    Igotithear wrote: »
    _Waffle_ wrote: »
    Igotithear wrote: »
    Within the last two and a half weeks I've been at the gym religiously burning between 800-1000+ calories 4/5 days a week, and as a result have stayed below 1200 calories on those days. The days I haven't been at the gym I've gone over but when I look at the entirety of the week have only been a couple hundred over. Shouldn't the scale have gone down by now? I've cut out over 4000 calories a week from my usual eating habits within this time. I count out or measure portions and track everything I eat but I'm getting frustrated that the scale won't move. What am I doing wrong?

    You're over on calories. No weight loss. That's pretty much the entire story here.

    Even by just going over 100 total for the entire week?..

    The idea is that you segment your calorie goals into a specific day but your weekly calories must be under your calorie needs to lose weight. What's your goal to lose weight?

    If mine is 2000 per day then 2000 x 7 = 14000 per week. If I eat that or less I should lose. If I go over 500 a couple days and hit 15000 then I probably will not lose weight. Be consistent and hit your goals each day.

    40 pounds.. and my calorie intake for last week was 8,500.. so on a 1,200 calorie a day diet that's 1,200x7=8,400... I'm no where near 14,000

    Give it more time and check all of the lose ends where you could be missing calories you're not logging.

    570ypt9v6p92.jpg
  • Shanel0916
    Shanel0916 Posts: 586 Member
    Options
    slw19 wrote: »
    hard to say if your diary is closed what is going on. i do believe there is more than just being in a deficit sometimes to actually losing weight. everyone is different and some are more sensitive to certain foods. it is important to feed your body every couple of hours and to make sure you are getting the right nutrients. it really does help. so if you want better advice, you should make your diary public

    Eating every couple hours is not necessary, trial and error to find what works for "your body" is. And I have had plenty trials and errors before figuring it out. It takes time, give it time.
  • xcalygrl
    xcalygrl Posts: 1,897 Member
    edited March 2016
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    You say you count and measure your portions. Are you weighing your portions out on a food scale? If not, you're most likely overeating/underlogging your food.

    If you were truly in a calorie deficit you would lose weight. Eating fewer calories than you need results in weight loss. Some medical conditions can mess with the CICO equation, but that just means you have to play with the CI side of the equation (by eating less) or bump up your CO (by exercising more). You can log 1200 calories all you want, but if you're actually eating more you won't see weight loss.

    Also, for everyone saying: you're just gaining muscle. It's highly unlikely. It takes time and extra food to build muscle, not just doing cardio at the gym eating 1200 calories a day.

    Well when the portions on the box say 17 pieces... That's when I count... Or when it says 1 cup, what is there to weigh?

    Exactly that. The package will say "1 cup (29 grams)", so weigh out 1 cup and see if it is actually 29 grams. (These are random numbers for the point of this example.) Measuring cups aren't accurate for solid or semi-solid (yogurt, nut butters, etc.), so you're best bet is to weigh them out on a food scale. An example that I use often: my oatmeal says 1/4 cup or 40 grams. My 1/4 cup measuring spoon actually gives me closer to 50 grams of oatmeal. That may not seem like much, but if I did that over a week, I would eat 245 additional calories a week that I wasn't accounting for in my food log.

    Also, those 17 pieces may be bigger or smaller than what the company has decided is 17 pieces. They're 17 pieces may be 17 grams, but you count out 17 pieces that actually weigh 25 grams. Guess what, you just ate 8 more grams than they anticipated, which could be a few calories or a lot (if it's something like nuts). Example: 1 ounce of almonds is roughly 32 almonds and 28.4 grams. Let's say you count out 32 almonds, but some of them are larger than average and you actually end up with 38.4 grams. Instead of eating 163 calories of almonds, you just ate 220 calories, or 57 more than you had planned. Now, if you do that everyday, you just ate 400 calories more than you logged for the week. If you're goal is only to lose 0.5 pounds a week, you just wiped out almost 2 days worth of deficit with just your serving of almonds.



  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    edited March 2016
    Options
    KrysKiss87 wrote: »
    There's another thing you might want to consider. If you are doing any type of weight training or strength training, you might be building muscle mass. SO even though the scale doesn't move, you might be gaining muscle while still losing fat. Instead of focusing on the scale, take your measurements. See if you have lost any inches. But in general you have to stay in calorie deficit. So if you are over (even just by 100 for the whole week) then you aren't truly in deficit. You are just maintaining. Hope this helps. Keep your head up though.

    Really? How much muscle mass do you think the OP has put on in 2.5 weeks?

    OP, if it's only been two and a half weeks and you have just started working out intensely, then you are likely retaining water. But really, two weeks is not enough time at all to gauge progress.

    ETA: But I agree with the advice to invest in a food scale and weight your food.
  • Igotithear
    Igotithear Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    Igotithear wrote: »
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    You say you count and measure your portions. Are you weighing your portions out on a food scale? If not, you're most likely overeating/underlogging your food.

    If you were truly in a calorie deficit you would lose weight. Eating fewer calories than you need results in weight loss. Some medical conditions can mess with the CICO equation, but that just means you have to play with the CI side of the equation (by eating less) or bump up your CO (by exercising more). You can log 1200 calories all you want, but if you're actually eating more you won't see weight loss.

    Also, for everyone saying: you're just gaining muscle. It's highly unlikely. It takes time and extra food to build muscle, not just doing cardio at the gym eating 1200 calories a day.

    Well when the portions on the box say 17 pieces... That's when I count... Or when it says 1 cup, what is there to weigh?

    Exactly that. The package will say "1 cup (29 grams)", so weigh out 1 cup and see if it is actually 29 grams. (These are random numbers for the point of this example.) Measuring cups aren't accurate for solid or semi-solid (yogurt, nut butters, etc.), so you're best bet is to weigh them out on a food scale. An example that I use often: my oatmeal says 1/4 cup or 40 grams. My 1/4 cup measuring spoon actually gives me closer to 50 grams of oatmeal. That may not seem like much, but if I did that over a week, I would eat 245 additional calories a week that I wasn't accounting for in my food log.

    Also, those 17 pieces may be bigger or smaller than what the company has decided is 17 pieces. They're 17 pieces may be 17 grams, but you count out 17 pieces that actually weigh 25 grams. Guess what, you just ate 8 more grams than they anticipated, which could be a few calories or a lot (if it's something like nuts). Example: 1 ounce of almonds is roughly 32 almonds and 28.4 grams. Let's say you count out 32 almonds, but some of them are larger than average and you actually end up with 38.4 grams. Instead of eating 163 calories of almonds, you just ate 220 calories, or 57 more than you had planned. Now, if you do that everyday, you just ate 400 calories more than you logged for the week. If you're goal is only to lose 0.5 pounds a week, you just wiped out almost 2 days worth of deficit with just your serving of almonds.




    I see.. so for portions where the serving is in pieces, do the companies typically have corresponding weight info to accurately weigh?
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    edited March 2016
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    Igotithear wrote: »
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    You say you count and measure your portions. Are you weighing your portions out on a food scale? If not, you're most likely overeating/underlogging your food.

    If you were truly in a calorie deficit you would lose weight. Eating fewer calories than you need results in weight loss. Some medical conditions can mess with the CICO equation, but that just means you have to play with the CI side of the equation (by eating less) or bump up your CO (by exercising more). You can log 1200 calories all you want, but if you're actually eating more you won't see weight loss.

    Also, for everyone saying: you're just gaining muscle. It's highly unlikely. It takes time and extra food to build muscle, not just doing cardio at the gym eating 1200 calories a day.

    Well when the portions on the box say 17 pieces... That's when I count... Or when it says 1 cup, what is there to weigh?

    Exactly that. The package will say "1 cup (29 grams)", so weigh out 1 cup and see if it is actually 29 grams. (These are random numbers for the point of this example.) Measuring cups aren't accurate for solid or semi-solid (yogurt, nut butters, etc.), so you're best bet is to weigh them out on a food scale. An example that I use often: my oatmeal says 1/4 cup or 40 grams. My 1/4 cup measuring spoon actually gives me closer to 50 grams of oatmeal. That may not seem like much, but if I did that over a week, I would eat 245 additional calories a week that I wasn't accounting for in my food log.

    Also, those 17 pieces may be bigger or smaller than what the company has decided is 17 pieces. They're 17 pieces may be 17 grams, but you count out 17 pieces that actually weigh 25 grams. Guess what, you just ate 8 more grams than they anticipated, which could be a few calories or a lot (if it's something like nuts). Example: 1 ounce of almonds is roughly 32 almonds and 28.4 grams. Let's say you count out 32 almonds, but some of them are larger than average and you actually end up with 38.4 grams. Instead of eating 163 calories of almonds, you just ate 220 calories, or 57 more than you had planned. Now, if you do that everyday, you just ate 400 calories more than you logged for the week. If you're goal is only to lose 0.5 pounds a week, you just wiped out almost 2 days worth of deficit with just your serving of almonds.




    I see.. so for portions where the serving is in pieces, do the companies typically have corresponding weight info to accurately weigh?

    The serving size in pieces is an approximation. Sometimes those 17 chips will weigh exactly what the package says in grams. Most of the time, they won't. Same goes for all packaged foods. That is why they put the serving in weight as well. So your chips may say a serving is 17 chips/28grams.
  • nilbogger
    nilbogger Posts: 870 Member
    Options
    KrysKiss87 wrote: »
    There's another thing you might want to consider. If you are doing any type of weight training or strength training, you might be building muscle mass. SO even though the scale doesn't move, you might be gaining muscle while still losing fat. Instead of focusing on the scale, take your measurements. See if you have lost any inches. But in general you have to stay in calorie deficit. So if you are over (even just by 100 for the whole week) then you aren't truly in deficit. You are just maintaining. Hope this helps. Keep your head up though.

    No, no, no. There's no way OP could have gained any significant amout of muscle eating at a deficit and exercising for only a couple weeks. Water retention is a possibility, though.
  • emdeesea
    emdeesea Posts: 1,823 Member
    Options
    Oh you need to definitely weigh everything and not go by the packaging.

    For example, I had some baked beans yesterday. The can says "3 servings of a half cup and there are 3 servings in one can." But the serving size is 130 grams and when I actually weigh it out, 130 grams comes to almost the entire can. Definitely NOT 3 servings to a can.

    So you can really overdo or underdo your calories if you're not weighing.
  • xcalygrl
    xcalygrl Posts: 1,897 Member
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    Igotithear wrote: »
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    You say you count and measure your portions. Are you weighing your portions out on a food scale? If not, you're most likely overeating/underlogging your food.

    If you were truly in a calorie deficit you would lose weight. Eating fewer calories than you need results in weight loss. Some medical conditions can mess with the CICO equation, but that just means you have to play with the CI side of the equation (by eating less) or bump up your CO (by exercising more). You can log 1200 calories all you want, but if you're actually eating more you won't see weight loss.

    Also, for everyone saying: you're just gaining muscle. It's highly unlikely. It takes time and extra food to build muscle, not just doing cardio at the gym eating 1200 calories a day.

    Well when the portions on the box say 17 pieces... That's when I count... Or when it says 1 cup, what is there to weigh?

    Exactly that. The package will say "1 cup (29 grams)", so weigh out 1 cup and see if it is actually 29 grams. (These are random numbers for the point of this example.) Measuring cups aren't accurate for solid or semi-solid (yogurt, nut butters, etc.), so you're best bet is to weigh them out on a food scale. An example that I use often: my oatmeal says 1/4 cup or 40 grams. My 1/4 cup measuring spoon actually gives me closer to 50 grams of oatmeal. That may not seem like much, but if I did that over a week, I would eat 245 additional calories a week that I wasn't accounting for in my food log.

    Also, those 17 pieces may be bigger or smaller than what the company has decided is 17 pieces. They're 17 pieces may be 17 grams, but you count out 17 pieces that actually weigh 25 grams. Guess what, you just ate 8 more grams than they anticipated, which could be a few calories or a lot (if it's something like nuts). Example: 1 ounce of almonds is roughly 32 almonds and 28.4 grams. Let's say you count out 32 almonds, but some of them are larger than average and you actually end up with 38.4 grams. Instead of eating 163 calories of almonds, you just ate 220 calories, or 57 more than you had planned. Now, if you do that everyday, you just ate 400 calories more than you logged for the week. If you're goal is only to lose 0.5 pounds a week, you just wiped out almost 2 days worth of deficit with just your serving of almonds.




    I see.. so for portions where the serving is in pieces, do the companies typically have corresponding weight info to accurately weigh?

    I'm using this picture as an example. The serving size is 1 ounce (28 grams/about 15 chips). Most nutrition labels on pre-packaged food have similar information to make weighing out your food possible.
    bakedlays.jpg
  • Cindy01Louisiana
    Cindy01Louisiana Posts: 302 Member
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    40 pounds.. and my calorie intake for last week was 8,500.. so on a 1,200 calorie a day diet that's 1,200x7=8,400... I'm no where near 14,000

    Is that a profile picture of you? How tall are you and what is your current weight? I'm kinda having a hard time seeing where you could possibly afford to lose 40 pounds.

  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    ilex70 wrote: »
    800-1000 for one gym session is an awful lot. If you are using the MFP entries for exercise calories they are generally believed too be to generous.

    Try only eating back half the exercise calories and see if that gets the scale moving.

    No I use a heart rate monitor when working out and do a lot of cardio (zumba/ interval training) in addition to running two miles and lifting weights...

    HRMs will not be accurate for interval, zumba or strength training. They are only designed to give a good estimate for cals burned for steady state cardio, all other forms of exercise will most likely be grossly overestimated.

    Also, do you weight your solid foods and measure liquids?
    You may also be retaining excess water if you changed or increased intensity of exercise.
  • ddowdy64
    ddowdy64 Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    Hi, How much weight do have to lose? If you only have 5 or 10 pounds then it will come off very slow. Addressing other posters they are right if you are burning 800 and taking in 1200 your body will go into starvation mode and start storing fat. Also you are building up muscle which weighs more than fat. Seek some professional guidance from the people at the gym and I am sure you will start to lose soon :)
  • Igotithear
    Igotithear Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    nilbogger wrote: »
    KrysKiss87 wrote: »
    There's another thing you might want to consider. If you are doing any type of weight training or strength training, you might be building muscle mass. SO even though the scale doesn't move, you might be gaining muscle while still losing fat. Instead of focusing on the scale, take your measurements. See if you have lost any inches. But in general you have to stay in calorie deficit. So if you are over (even just by 100 for the whole week) then you aren't truly in deficit. You are just maintaining. Hope this helps. Keep your head up though.

    No, no, no. There's no way OP could have gained any significant amout of muscle eating at a deficit and exercising for only a couple weeks. Water retention is a possibility, though.

    Curious... how would working out make me retain water? Wouldn't it do the opposite?
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    Options
    Igotithear

    You're still new at this. When I was new at this I learned sodium matters and fiber matters. Check your Reports. If your sodium is over 4000 and your fiber is less than half your target, just be patient. And fix your sodium intake.
  • tiffanylacourse
    tiffanylacourse Posts: 2,985 Member
    Options
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    Igotithear wrote: »
    xcalygrl wrote: »
    You say you count and measure your portions. Are you weighing your portions out on a food scale? If not, you're most likely overeating/underlogging your food.

    If you were truly in a calorie deficit you would lose weight. Eating fewer calories than you need results in weight loss. Some medical conditions can mess with the CICO equation, but that just means you have to play with the CI side of the equation (by eating less) or bump up your CO (by exercising more). You can log 1200 calories all you want, but if you're actually eating more you won't see weight loss.

    Also, for everyone saying: you're just gaining muscle. It's highly unlikely. It takes time and extra food to build muscle, not just doing cardio at the gym eating 1200 calories a day.

    Well when the portions on the box say 17 pieces... That's when I count... Or when it says 1 cup, what is there to weigh?

    Exactly that. The package will say "1 cup (29 grams)", so weigh out 1 cup and see if it is actually 29 grams. (These are random numbers for the point of this example.) Measuring cups aren't accurate for solid or semi-solid (yogurt, nut butters, etc.), so you're best bet is to weigh them out on a food scale. An example that I use often: my oatmeal says 1/4 cup or 40 grams. My 1/4 cup measuring spoon actually gives me closer to 50 grams of oatmeal. That may not seem like much, but if I did that over a week, I would eat 245 additional calories a week that I wasn't accounting for in my food log.

    Also, those 17 pieces may be bigger or smaller than what the company has decided is 17 pieces. They're 17 pieces may be 17 grams, but you count out 17 pieces that actually weigh 25 grams. Guess what, you just ate 8 more grams than they anticipated, which could be a few calories or a lot (if it's something like nuts). Example: 1 ounce of almonds is roughly 32 almonds and 28.4 grams. Let's say you count out 32 almonds, but some of them are larger than average and you actually end up with 38.4 grams. Instead of eating 163 calories of almonds, you just ate 220 calories, or 57 more than you had planned. Now, if you do that everyday, you just ate 400 calories more than you logged for the week. If you're goal is only to lose 0.5 pounds a week, you just wiped out almost 2 days worth of deficit with just your serving of almonds.




    /endthread #micdrop lol

    Seriously though. Exactly what she said.
  • shrcpr
    shrcpr Posts: 885 Member
    Options
    In addition to the great advice given to weigh everything and to make sure your exercise calories are not overestimated, my personal experience is that is just takes me a few weeks to start losing weight. I need to be consistent and accurate for 4-5 weeks before I see any loss of weight on the scale. It sucks and it's hard to continue when you're not seeing results right away but as long as you're doing everything you're supposed to it will come off. Accuracy and consistency is key to weight loss.
  • Igotithear
    Igotithear Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    Igotithear wrote: »
    40 pounds.. and my calorie intake for last week was 8,500.. so on a 1,200 calorie a day diet that's 1,200x7=8,400... I'm no where near 14,000

    Is that a profile picture of you? How tall are you and what is your current weight? I'm kinda having a hard time seeing where you could possibly afford to lose 40 pounds.

    Haha! That's cause that's a an old picture of me from when I lost weight on here the first time! I'm 5'7" and current weight is 180, my goal is 140. Just had a baby at the beginning of January.