We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Demoralised from Science :( Gained 3 Pounds
Replies
-
n1cholee93 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
From what i've seen, it does. Trying to eat only 1,200 calories and working out resulted in 0 pounds lost. Upping calories to 1,500 calories has started the weight loss back up. And a number of others have said the same thing. My point is, it's still unhealthy to burn off everything when we need the fuel just to survive. What is the OP suppose to do when he reaches his goals and wants to stop walking? He's going to gain back. That means he's doing something wrong and it's best he figures it out now.
No, it does. not. exist. If you burned off absolutely everything you ate and starvation mode was real, anorexics and holocaust victims [excluding the ones that died of disease] wouldn't die. Instead, they would store fat. But because starvation mode isn't real, people do indeed die from starvation. Happens all the time in third world countries.
My money is on the OP doing something wrong. Either overestimating his burns, tdee or the food he eats, or both.
OP, how are you calculating your TDEE?0 -
Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
+1
I am a recovered anorexic. I lost weight fast on 500 calories a day plus cardio. I guess I should have been fat instead of stick thin0 -
I am 5'10" about 104Kilos (230 or so pounds I think it converts to) male and closing in on 50. I eat 2100 calories a day, and don't exercise that much and I still lose. There is something wrong if you, who are half my age, are supposedly eating 1200-1500 calories a day and not eating unless you essentially take your net calories to zero by walking. My thought is that you are eating far more than you think you are, or you have some major medical issue. If I ate 1500 calories a day I would drop weight far faster. For that matter for a male to be under 1500 calories, assuming I am wrong and you are not eating more than you think you are, you are eating far too little and will be losing huge amounts of muscle.
In terms of eating more than you think you are, since you say you are weighing your food (hopefully to the gram) it could be that the foods you are choosing from the Myfitnesspal database are incorrect in the calorie numbers they have, that is, that the number they have is far lower than it should be, thus the number you get for the weight of food you are eating is incorrect.
No matter what, you either have had the weight you lose hidden by water weight, or you are simply eating more than you think you are.0 -
n1cholee93 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
From what i've seen, it does. Trying to eat only 1,200 calories and working out resulted in 0 pounds lost. Upping calories to 1,500 calories has started the weight loss back up. And a number of others have said the same thing. My point is, it's still unhealthy to burn off everything when we need the fuel just to survive. What is the OP suppose to do when he reaches his goals and wants to stop walking? He's going to gain back. That means he's doing something wrong and it's best he figures it out now.
From what you've seen? Elaborate please. I ask because I agree that starvation mode does not exist and the people who say they ate more and lost weight either a) started to log more accurately because they had more calories to play with, b) didn't give the original deficit enough time and decided after one week of no weight loss they were in "starvation mode" and when they ate more for one day then saw the scale drop, it was their "proof".0 -
n1cholee93 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
From what i've seen, it does. Trying to eat only 1,200 calories and working out resulted in 0 pounds lost. Upping calories to 1,500 calories has started the weight loss back up. And a number of others have said the same thing. My point is, it's still unhealthy to burn off everything when we need the fuel just to survive. What is the OP suppose to do when he reaches his goals and wants to stop walking? He's going to gain back. That means he's doing something wrong and it's best he figures it out now.
From what you've seen? Elaborate please. I ask because I agree that starvation mode does not exist and the people who say they ate more and lost weight either a) started to log more accurately because they had more calories to play with, b) didn't give the original deficit enough time and decided after one week of no weight loss they were in "starvation mode" and when they ate more for one day then saw the scale drop, it was their "proof".
I did a 1,200 calorie "diet" for 3 weeks. And i did workouts for about 45 minutes 6x a week. Besides the point of going to bed hungry/waking up hungry i didn't lose a single pound outside my first week.
Week 1- 5 pounds
Week 2- 0 pounds
Week 3- Gained 3
Now i just started actively using this site, so i logged most of my calories in notebook paper. Mind you i started at 165 pounds. Im at 145 pounds now.
Breakfast: Fruit
Snack: Veggies
Lunch: Hard boiled eggs
Snack: fruit bar
Dinner: Chicken/Veggies
Most added up to about 1,200 calories. A little less or a little more depending on what i ate. And mind you i worked out 6x a week. 2x with weight and the rest with aerobics. And i went as hard as a could, sweat dripping down my face. Walked my dog a good 40 minutes each day. Even rode my bike on our nicer days. There was no reason not to drop weight.
Maybe i screwed up on my second week? Maybe i shouldn't of had any bread? Maybe i shouldn't of had that silk milk? Weight loss is different for everyone. Maybe if i continued to eat 1,200 it would of all just melted off? I don't know. I'm losing weight but feeling like i was starving wasn't what i would call a good thing.
Maybe it is a myth. As in "you can't lose weight if you go below ____" But i do 100% agree in the fact of "starvation mode" makes you more EASILY gain weight back. " Semi-starvation diets don’t work long-term for this simple reason – under ordinary pressures, when eating resumes, people put the weight back on and oftentimes, gain more."0 -
n1cholee93 wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
From what i've seen, it does. Trying to eat only 1,200 calories and working out resulted in 0 pounds lost. Upping calories to 1,500 calories has started the weight loss back up. And a number of others have said the same thing. My point is, it's still unhealthy to burn off everything when we need the fuel just to survive. What is the OP suppose to do when he reaches his goals and wants to stop walking? He's going to gain back. That means he's doing something wrong and it's best he figures it out now.
From what you've seen? Elaborate please. I ask because I agree that starvation mode does not exist and the people who say they ate more and lost weight either a) started to log more accurately because they had more calories to play with, b) didn't give the original deficit enough time and decided after one week of no weight loss they were in "starvation mode" and when they ate more for one day then saw the scale drop, it was their "proof".
I did a 1,200 calorie "diet" for 3 weeks. And i did workouts for about 45 minutes 6x a week. Besides the point of going to bed hungry/waking up hungry i didn't lose a single pound outside my first week.
Week 1- 5 pounds
Week 2- 0 pounds
Week 3- Gained 3
Now i just started actively using this site, so i logged most of my calories in notebook paper. Mind you i started at 165 pounds. Im at 145 pounds now.
Breakfast: Fruit
Snack: Veggies
Lunch: Hard boiled eggs
Snack: fruit bar
Dinner: Chicken/Veggies
Most added up to about 1,200 calories. A little less or a little more depending on what i ate. And mind you i worked out 6x a week. 2x with weight and the rest with aerobics. And i went as hard as a could, sweat dripping down my face. Walked my dog a good 40 minutes each day. Even rode my bike on our nicer days. There was no reason not to drop weight.
Maybe i screwed up on my second week? Maybe i shouldn't of had any bread? Maybe i shouldn't of had that silk milk? Weight loss is different for everyone. Maybe if i continued to eat 1,200 it would of all just melted off? I don't know. I'm losing weight but feeling like i was starving wasn't what i would call a good thing.
3 weeks is too short to tell. You could have retained fluid, etc. I lost 3+ lbs a week from my underweight body on 500 calories plus I exercised so probably netted below 0.0 -
double post... sorry0
-
Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
From what i've seen, it does. Trying to eat only 1,200 calories and working out resulted in 0 pounds lost. Upping calories to 1,500 calories has started the weight loss back up. And a number of others have said the same thing. My point is, it's still unhealthy to burn off everything when we need the fuel just to survive. What is the OP suppose to do when he reaches his goals and wants to stop walking? He's going to gain back. That means he's doing something wrong and it's best he figures it out now.
No, it does. not. exist. If you burned off absolutely everything you ate and starvation mode was real, anorexics and holocaust victims [excluding the ones that died of disease] wouldn't die. Instead, they would store fat. But because starvation mode isn't real, people do indeed die from starvation. Happens all the time in third world countries.
My money is on the OP doing something wrong. Either overestimating his burns, tdee or the food he eats, or both.
OP, how are you calculating your TDEE?
I am not calculating my TDEE i already mentioned above my approach
(A+B)-C=D
A= Calories i burned by exercise which i am not doing for 3 weeks.
B= BMR (only BMR, zero activity yeah i mean it because of papers i am not even moving lol, activity of 3 weeks= study, logging of food lol and washroom if you count these in TDEE then you are most welcomed
C= Calories i consumed/take in
D= Deficit
This is only i am doing for 3 weeks and this was the main reason of this post that i created deficit of 3500-4000 calories and I gained weight.0 -
Any chance you'd be willing to open your diary? I think there is a disconnect here.0
-
AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
From what i've seen, it does. Trying to eat only 1,200 calories and working out resulted in 0 pounds lost. Upping calories to 1,500 calories has started the weight loss back up. And a number of others have said the same thing. My point is, it's still unhealthy to burn off everything when we need the fuel just to survive. What is the OP suppose to do when he reaches his goals and wants to stop walking? He's going to gain back. That means he's doing something wrong and it's best he figures it out now.
No, it does. not. exist. If you burned off absolutely everything you ate and starvation mode was real, anorexics and holocaust victims [excluding the ones that died of disease] wouldn't die. Instead, they would store fat. But because starvation mode isn't real, people do indeed die from starvation. Happens all the time in third world countries.
My money is on the OP doing something wrong. Either overestimating his burns, tdee or the food he eats, or both.
OP, how are you calculating your TDEE?
I am not calculating my TDEE i already mentioned above my approach
(A+B)-C=D
A= Calories i burned by exercise which i am not doing for 3 weeks.
B= BMR (only BMR, zero activity yeah i mean it because of papers i am not even moving lol, activity of 3 weeks= study, logging of food lol and washroom if you count these in TDEE then you are most welcomed
C= Calories i consumed/take in
D= Deficit
This is only i am doing for 3 weeks and this was the main reason of this post that i created deficit of 3500-4000 calories and I gained weight.
How are you calculating your BMR, and calculating exercise? are you using a online calculator for those things, or a device like a Fitbit, Garmin, Jawbone, etc? If it's the first, then it could simply be that your math is off. My Fitbit says my BMR is around 1600, while online calculators say 1473-1500. I wouldn't know that if I didn't have a device to tell me that.
Your BMR is about 2300 cals a day, which means a deficit of 1100 cals a day, which means in a week, 7700 cals from deficit, which equals 2.2 lb weight loss per week. So clearly, something you're doing is wrong.0 -
AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »Colorscheme wrote: »n1cholee93 wrote: »AamirKhan2016 wrote: »Its been 3 weeks i am not exercising and eating 1200 -- 1500 calories. Average deficit week 4000 calories per week. I gained weight 3 pounds.
When i was exercising i was losing weight. Was walking 12+ miles daily and was losing weight linearly. This is how i lost 37 Pounds. You say you burn almost 1,500+ walking
What did I wrong? Confused.
Should I believe in deficit or not or exercise is everything about weight loss.
I mean i always believe in calories deficit but I am disappointed.
So... Say you eat 1,500, then you're burning it ALL off, which is leaving you at 0 calories... And if you only eat 1,200 that means you're -200. That makes no sense? That means you're starving yourself? If what you're saying is actually true, your body is going into starvation mode? Are you noticing "bad" things happening to your body? Getting tired? Headaches? Anything?
You're doing something wrong either way. You're either A: Starving yourself or B: Logging wrong.
And since you're bigger, know what you lost so far could very much be water weight. You didn't gain all that weight in 3 weeks, you're not going to lose it all in 3 weeks!
Starvation mode doesn't exist....
From what i've seen, it does. Trying to eat only 1,200 calories and working out resulted in 0 pounds lost. Upping calories to 1,500 calories has started the weight loss back up. And a number of others have said the same thing. My point is, it's still unhealthy to burn off everything when we need the fuel just to survive. What is the OP suppose to do when he reaches his goals and wants to stop walking? He's going to gain back. That means he's doing something wrong and it's best he figures it out now.
No, it does. not. exist. If you burned off absolutely everything you ate and starvation mode was real, anorexics and holocaust victims [excluding the ones that died of disease] wouldn't die. Instead, they would store fat. But because starvation mode isn't real, people do indeed die from starvation. Happens all the time in third world countries.
My money is on the OP doing something wrong. Either overestimating his burns, tdee or the food he eats, or both.
OP, how are you calculating your TDEE?
I am not calculating my TDEE i already mentioned above my approach
(A+B)-C=D
A= Calories i burned by exercise which i am not doing for 3 weeks.
B= BMR (only BMR, zero activity yeah i mean it because of papers i am not even moving lol, activity of 3 weeks= study, logging of food lol and washroom if you count these in TDEE then you are most welcomed
C= Calories i consumed/take in
D= Deficit
This is only i am doing for 3 weeks and this was the main reason of this post that i created deficit of 3500-4000 calories and I gained weight.
Even following this you would burn more than your BMR because you are doing something, you got out of bed, you are studying, you are getting up to eat, going to the washroom, etc, those all add to BMR. By that description you would fall into the sedentary category so you would multiply BMR by 1.2 to get TDEE. As stated, you are half my age, and while I am slightly more active than you, recently, for the month of February and first week of March I was about at your activity level and I lose on 2100 calories a day being twice your age. That leads me to think you either have a medical problem or your calories consumed (C) is much higher than you think it is.0 -
You've weighed everything you ate.
Did you use the correct entries for the things you ate? That's another possibility that opening your diary will help check.0 -
Your BMR at your age will be right around 2300, as one who is sedentary you will still be around 2700 calories burned in a day, meaning if you ate at 2200 calories your weight loss per week would average out to about 1 pound a week. Some weeks that would be more, some it would be less, but if you looked over a 4-6 week stretch it would start to show a consistent trend at that rate.
You are not going to be so much of an outlier that you will not lose at 1500 calories a day without exercise. Instead, as has been stated, there is an issue somewhere with calories consumed or with you having a medical problem that is severely effecting your metabolism to the point that it is functioning at less than half of what it should be functioning at. If that were the case I would expect you would have other symptoms than simply not losing weight.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 917 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions