Losing body fat. Curious of what others in this community would do.
Options
Replies
-
Why don't you tell "this person" to open up their diary and link it to us? If it's so accurate?
Maybe they want to be private. Actually that is the reason, that is why they came to me. I mean look at the responses. Maybe they don't want to be called a liar, this and that. Just offer advice and move on is what they wanted and now we have a debate over what if, it worked for me, it has to be.
The only reason that's happening is because we have no evidence to the contrary. If the logging is actually accurate, showing it wouldn't be an issue and would in fact back up your point.
Just saying "it can't be the most common reason for this problem, you have to believe me" doesn't work because the problem is that people can't recognize it as bad logging without help.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
Also said I didn't take into consideration exercise.
0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
P.P.S. Why the refusal to answer the question of whether your "friend" lost any weight before hitting 160-161?0 -
Why don't you tell "this person" to open up their diary and link it to us? If it's so accurate?
Maybe they want to be private. Actually that is the reason, that is why they came to me. I mean look at the responses. Maybe they don't want to be called a liar, this and that. Just offer advice and move on is what they wanted and now we have a debate over what if, it worked for me, it has to be.
The only one using the word liar is you.
While MFP is a great tool, it's too easy to be inaccurate without really realizing it. The database entries are mainly user added and can be inaccurate due to typos, changes in ingredients/serving sizes, or the NI came from a bad source. Even the verified entries are not guaranteed to be accurate. Other ways to be inaccurate are to use generic entries, homemade entries that you didn't create yourself, using entries with serving sizes measured as small/medium/large, etc. This doesn't mean that the person is lying, it just means that they may need to take the time to learn how to properly search the database to find the right entries.
Pass this link along to your friend:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1234699/logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide/p10 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower?0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower? This is a serious question.
0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower?
Don't jump to conclusions. It's insulting.0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower?
Don't jump to conclusions. It's insulting.
??? So, what was the point of this sentence? P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower?
Don't jump to conclusions. It's insulting.
??? So, what was the point of this sentence? P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
The point is that the number could be wrong. It is likely wrong. There is a 99% chance that it is wrong.0 -
So, what do you recommend then?0
-
I did both MFP calculator and another one and they were like 18 calories off. 100 less, 200 less? If the TDEE is wrong that would help to know.0
-
I did both MFP calculator and another one and they were like 18 calories off. 100 less, 200 less? If the TDEE is wrong that would help to know.
While knowing his actual on the button TDEE would be nice to know, it is impossible. That's because all calculators are based on estimates. In general you use one to get a good starting point. Then you subtract calories from that and determine your starting calorie level to eat at while you lose weight. Then if you aren't losing weight you drop calories from there because if you aren't losing weight, you're eating too much to lose. My recommendation is for you to drop calories if you aren't losing weight over a period of 3-4 weeks because it means that you are eating too much to lose.0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
P.P.S. Why the refusal to answer the question of whether your "friend" lost any weight before hitting 160-161?
I didn't see this last part, yes they lost 4 pounds before.0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower?
Don't jump to conclusions. It's insulting.
??? So, what was the point of this sentence? P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
actually the 1983 is not their TDEE as TDEE is total Daily expenditure which should include exercise and you said you chose sedentary and they are not. They exercise 4-6x a week...
Their TDEE is probably closer to 2200-2400 (based on the fact they are close to my age, height, weight albeit male) and my TDEE during the summer/spring/fall is about 2400...0 -
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower?
Don't jump to conclusions. It's insulting.
??? So, what was the point of this sentence? P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
actually the 1983 is not their TDEE as TDEE is total Daily expenditure which should include exercise and you said you chose sedentary and they are not. They exercise 4-6x a week...
Their TDEE is probably closer to 2200-2400 (based on the fact they are close to my age, height, weight albeit male) and my TDEE during the summer/spring/fall is about 2400...
True, but as I stated 4 times now I did not count exercise at all.0 -
I got enough info. I will try to make sure the person measures in grams, and ask them if they are not logging everything. Thanks for all the info. This post can be closed as there is no more gain to be made from it. Thanks!0
-
fatfudgery wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »
This is not accurate logging sorry.
I see 8.2 oz not grams
I see peanut butter in tbsp not grams.
8.2 oz of chicken thigh is 232.6 grams of meat USDA has those calories at 381 not 369. Small difference but just pointing out logging is not accurate.
I suspect eating more than they think...esp measuring peanut butter in tbsp.
ETA so in any given day this log can be off from anywhere 100-200 calories 700-1400 a week...even with not logging exercise this is not going to work.
Hence the 0.8lbs lost in 3 weeks not the 3 you probably expected.
The scale they use does both grams and ounces, it's the same no matter of conversation, as I tested it myself.
Then I looked into your diary and see you do the same thing. Northumberland - Cereal Cream 10%, 4 tbsp 60 4 6 1 0 0
Cream is a liquid and can be measured with tbsp.
Besides I am not complaining about not losing....I've lost 50+lbs logging accurately and consistently.
Not once did I come here and say "help what am I doing wrong..." because I log(ged) accurately and consistently.
There is a huge difference in losing 50 pounds as it's easier to lose weight if you have more to lose, not the same as trying to lose 4-10 pounds. No, you did not come here asking for advice, but the advice you give goes against what you're doing yourself. I mean bread is not a slice, but it can be logged as one, even though on the back of packages it will say slice then something 26/1.0 oz. So, you're saying this person should be that microscopic with detail? I'll start having them do this.
So you're assuming that the entire time she was losing weight that she was 50 pounds away from goal? That makes no sense. If she was 190 to start and eventually got to 140, at some point she was 144-150. She's been 4-10 pounds from goal. She knows what she's talking about.
I don't know what her goal is. To me it came across as well, I lost this much weight so it has to work for everyone.
Accurate calorie counting, a calorie deficit, and patience will work for anybody (barring medical complications.)
You're still assuming it's inaccurate logging. And though it could be you don't know if the person has already lost weight before February. Did they just start at 160 or were they 175 and go to 160. So instead of helping, you are now ridiculing this person and me over an idea that it has to be poor logging. Even though it could be a plateau, muscle weight gain. You aimed your sights on inaccurate logging.
Inaccurate logging is the most common problem. It's not an insult to suggest it's happening. It's something that most of us (myself included) have done and had to overcome at some point or another.
The person would have to be eating at maintenance which is 1983 (to not gain or lose weight) calories a day
Didn't you just say further up the thread that they're not losing weight on 1600 Cal/day? Wouldn't 1983 Cal/day put them at a surplus, then?
I've stated they get on average 1600 a day, sometimes less, maybe 80 more on rare occasion that are logged. But then I gave this info to show how I get their maintenance calories.
I can give the actual specs:
Male.
34 years of age.
5'6" shorter side.
159 pounds now, they were 160-161 3 weeks ago.
Sedentary lifestyle, the lowest one you can pick.
So to summarize we're talking about a metabolism problem for somebody who has lost 1-2 pounds in two weeks while overtraining by lifting weights 3x/wk and doing 30-40 minutes of cardio a week.
P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
So, you think it should be lower?
Don't jump to conclusions. It's insulting.
??? So, what was the point of this sentence? P.S. You do understand that online TDEE calculators are only estimates and that 1983 isn't written in stone as his TDEE, right?
actually the 1983 is not their TDEE as TDEE is total Daily expenditure which should include exercise and you said you chose sedentary and they are not. They exercise 4-6x a week...
Their TDEE is probably closer to 2200-2400 (based on the fact they are close to my age, height, weight albeit male) and my TDEE during the summer/spring/fall is about 2400...
True, but as I stated 4 times now I did not count exercise at all.
So his TDEE is not 1983 stop saying that.
"your friends" NEAT is 1983.
Your friend is not logging exercise calories burned therefore not eating them back.
only lost 0.8lbs in 3 weeks (about 1/4lb a week) and with only 6-10lbs to lose why is that a bad thing?
Logging isn't accurate
If I lose 1/4lb a week I am happy as I didn't gain.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/737101-relatively-light-people-trying-to-get-leaner?page=2
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/872212-you-re-probably-eating-more-than-you-think
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1183428-tdee-vs-neat?hl=TDEE+vs+NEAT#posts-18476322
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1234699-logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide?hl=Logging+accurately
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/of-whooshes-and-squishy-fat.html
http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/search/list
I will leave these here for you and your friend to read. Your friend is not losing for one of two reasons.
1. Undiagnosed medical issue (not likely)
or
2. Eating more than they thing due to poor logging practices.
If they want to lose weight tighten up the logging and if after 4-6 weeks there still isn't a loss go to the doctor and get checked out.
Other than that people have done what they can.
BTW when you aren't losing at the rate you think...eating more food is not the answer.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 912 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions