I'm getting past the initial losses and discouraged. :(
Replies
-
The road to improved health is not smooth, is it? It would be nice to travel on the expressway the whole time, but sometimes we take the scenic route through the small towns that have a stop sign every couple of blocks. Occasionally, we run into detours, or we get stuck in traffic. Maybe we get all that at some point in our adventure. Perhaps it's my age, but I've learned to appreciate the scenic route because there is much knowledge to be gathered on that slower path. The destination will be reached as long as the wheels are moving forward, and that's really all that matters.
Love this!
Anyway, about the quest bars. I learned almost right away that they and other things with sugar alcohols, made me very hungry! You mention having a big appetite.
Sounds to me like there's a problem with eating foods that taste sweet. It can trigger more hunger in many, if not most people.
I think eliminating that will be a very, very big benefit to you.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!0 -
That was a really good post Sunny_Bunny_ thank you for sharing!0
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »Ironically, I didn't switch to low carb to lose weight. I switched to stabilize BG, but then noticed I started losing so quickly that I'm now upset it isn't lasting... interesting how my perspective changed and I want to hold onto a benefit that I never expected to have.
How's it going on the BG front?0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Ironically, I didn't switch to low carb to lose weight. I switched to stabilize BG, but then noticed I started losing so quickly that I'm now upset it isn't lasting... interesting how my perspective changed and I want to hold onto a benefit that I never expected to have.
How's it going on the BG front?
BG's are much more stable, but also higher.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Ironically, I didn't switch to low carb to lose weight. I switched to stabilize BG, but then noticed I started losing so quickly that I'm now upset it isn't lasting... interesting how my perspective changed and I want to hold onto a benefit that I never expected to have.
How's it going on the BG front?
BG's are much more stable, but also higher.
How stressed out are you? Stress can make BG go up and it can also argue with you when you want to lose weight. Then again, so can sugar alcohols.
0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Ironically, I didn't switch to low carb to lose weight. I switched to stabilize BG, but then noticed I started losing so quickly that I'm now upset it isn't lasting... interesting how my perspective changed and I want to hold onto a benefit that I never expected to have.
How's it going on the BG front?
BG's are much more stable, but also higher.
How stressed out are you? Stress can make BG go up and it can also argue with you when you want to lose weight. Then again, so can sugar alcohols.
I'm always very stressed... that has been the one thing consistent throughout my weight loss journey.0 -
wahagent05 wrote: »That was a really good post Sunny_Bunny_ thank you for sharing!
You're welcome. It's a familiar feeling to me that I have mostly overcome. Definitely helps me to keep that perspective clearly understood for myself by encouraging anyone else to give credit where credit is due.
0 -
Here's another suggestion re the Quest bars. If you find it too difficult to give them up completely, instead cut one bar into quarters. Then for your meal have a a few ounces of a preferred meat, 1/4 of a Quest protein bar and a few tablespoons or a few ounces of HWC as decided by your macros and daily goals. I have a similar meal every day for lunch during the week...yes, I know that's pretty boring but it works for me. I change the flavor of the Quest bar and that 1/4th Quest bar, even though literally just a couple of small bites worth in size is like a mini-dessert for me at lunchtime.0
-
@midwesterner85 How many calories are you eating everyday? Are you 100% sure you logging weighing/measuring etc is accurate? What's your carb/protein/fat percentages?0
-
KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.
Something has to have gone wrong. I'm a 5'4" F, 6 pounds to goal, and with a moderate 20% deficit for a sedentary person, it gives me 1254. I did use that as a goal for several months before moving up to 1350 when I decided I was probably doing more harm than good approaching it so aggressively.
Edited:
I went back to look it over again. Something does seem off. I noticed the box to check male or female was aligned weird on mobile and I had the male box checked. So the above calories would be for a man with my details. Once I changed it to female, it was 1160. I never ate that low as a goal. I definitely did some days because I wasn't hungry. But never as a regular thing. I don't recall it ever giving me a goal under 1250 before. Even as I updated it as I lost weight.
Try this one
http://www.ruled.me/keto-calculator/
Seemed more like I expected...0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.
Something has to have gone wrong. I'm a 5'4" F, 6 pounds to goal, and with a moderate 20% deficit for a sedentary person, it gives me 1254. I did use that as a goal for several months before moving up to 1350 when I decided I was probably doing more harm than good approaching it so aggressively.
Edited:
I went back to look it over again. Something does seem off. I noticed the box to check male or female was aligned weird on mobile and I had the male box checked. So the above calories would be for a man with my details. Once I changed it to female, it was 1160. I never ate that low as a goal. I definitely did some days because I wasn't hungry. But never as a regular thing. I don't recall it ever giving me a goal under 1250 before. Even as I updated it as I lost weight.
Try this one
http://www.ruled.me/keto-calculator/
Seemed more like I expected...
This brings me to 1,629 for a 1 lb./week loss.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.
Something has to have gone wrong. I'm a 5'4" F, 6 pounds to goal, and with a moderate 20% deficit for a sedentary person, it gives me 1254. I did use that as a goal for several months before moving up to 1350 when I decided I was probably doing more harm than good approaching it so aggressively.
Edited:
I went back to look it over again. Something does seem off. I noticed the box to check male or female was aligned weird on mobile and I had the male box checked. So the above calories would be for a man with my details. Once I changed it to female, it was 1160. I never ate that low as a goal. I definitely did some days because I wasn't hungry. But never as a regular thing. I don't recall it ever giving me a goal under 1250 before. Even as I updated it as I lost weight.
Try this one
http://www.ruled.me/keto-calculator/
Seemed more like I expected...
This brings me to 1,629 for a 1 lb./week loss.
Due to the various dietary affects of a low carb diet, you might not have to have your deficit that high to lose a pound a week. It's not a basic math calculation like everyone suggests. It's like a bad combo of calculus, chemistry, physics, biology, chaos theory, and all that mess all rolled into one big ball of random! Some things we can control, other things we can't. Remember that we're going for long term progress, not short/once and done changes! Good luck to you in continued health improvements!0 -
KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.
Something has to have gone wrong. I'm a 5'4" F, 6 pounds to goal, and with a moderate 20% deficit for a sedentary person, it gives me 1254. I did use that as a goal for several months before moving up to 1350 when I decided I was probably doing more harm than good approaching it so aggressively.
Edited:
I went back to look it over again. Something does seem off. I noticed the box to check male or female was aligned weird on mobile and I had the male box checked. So the above calories would be for a man with my details. Once I changed it to female, it was 1160. I never ate that low as a goal. I definitely did some days because I wasn't hungry. But never as a regular thing. I don't recall it ever giving me a goal under 1250 before. Even as I updated it as I lost weight.
Try this one
http://www.ruled.me/keto-calculator/
Seemed more like I expected...
This brings me to 1,629 for a 1 lb./week loss.
Due to the various dietary affects of a low carb diet, you might not have to have your deficit that high to lose a pound a week. It's not a basic math calculation like everyone suggests. It's like a bad combo of calculus, chemistry, physics, biology, chaos theory, and all that mess all rolled into one big ball of random! Some things we can control, other things we can't. Remember that we're going for long term progress, not short/once and done changes! Good luck to you in continued health improvements!
I seem really good at maintaining, so I am fine with a quick loss. Today, trendweight downgraded me further to 0.6 lbs/week. Before long, I'll be losing nothing. I totally agree that CICO by itself is a gross oversimplification. However, I'm going to try cutting back to 1350 daily in hopes that it helps.0 -
Just keep at it, man. I am starting to flatten out as well, but as long as the overall trend is going down, I try not to worry. I have also found that I had a couple of chunk losses where my weight would be the same for several days then a drop of a pound or .8 pound in a day, then continue small drops from there.0
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.
Something has to have gone wrong. I'm a 5'4" F, 6 pounds to goal, and with a moderate 20% deficit for a sedentary person, it gives me 1254. I did use that as a goal for several months before moving up to 1350 when I decided I was probably doing more harm than good approaching it so aggressively.
Edited:
I went back to look it over again. Something does seem off. I noticed the box to check male or female was aligned weird on mobile and I had the male box checked. So the above calories would be for a man with my details. Once I changed it to female, it was 1160. I never ate that low as a goal. I definitely did some days because I wasn't hungry. But never as a regular thing. I don't recall it ever giving me a goal under 1250 before. Even as I updated it as I lost weight.
Try this one
http://www.ruled.me/keto-calculator/
Seemed more like I expected...
This brings me to 1,629 for a 1 lb./week loss.
Due to the various dietary affects of a low carb diet, you might not have to have your deficit that high to lose a pound a week. It's not a basic math calculation like everyone suggests. It's like a bad combo of calculus, chemistry, physics, biology, chaos theory, and all that mess all rolled into one big ball of random! Some things we can control, other things we can't. Remember that we're going for long term progress, not short/once and done changes! Good luck to you in continued health improvements!
I seem really good at maintaining, so I am fine with a quick loss. Today, trendweight downgraded me further to 0.6 lbs/week. Before long, I'll be losing nothing. I totally agree that CICO by itself is a gross oversimplification. However, I'm going to try cutting back to 1350 daily in hopes that it helps.
Weight loss isn't linear, and neither is your rate of weight loss. You will likely have times when you don't lose at all, and times when you lose a lot at once. I don't know if anyone asked about your protein macros yet. Keeping them a little high, like a gram per pound of your lean mass, seems to help some people.0 -
lithezebra wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.
Something has to have gone wrong. I'm a 5'4" F, 6 pounds to goal, and with a moderate 20% deficit for a sedentary person, it gives me 1254. I did use that as a goal for several months before moving up to 1350 when I decided I was probably doing more harm than good approaching it so aggressively.
Edited:
I went back to look it over again. Something does seem off. I noticed the box to check male or female was aligned weird on mobile and I had the male box checked. So the above calories would be for a man with my details. Once I changed it to female, it was 1160. I never ate that low as a goal. I definitely did some days because I wasn't hungry. But never as a regular thing. I don't recall it ever giving me a goal under 1250 before. Even as I updated it as I lost weight.
Try this one
http://www.ruled.me/keto-calculator/
Seemed more like I expected...
This brings me to 1,629 for a 1 lb./week loss.
Due to the various dietary affects of a low carb diet, you might not have to have your deficit that high to lose a pound a week. It's not a basic math calculation like everyone suggests. It's like a bad combo of calculus, chemistry, physics, biology, chaos theory, and all that mess all rolled into one big ball of random! Some things we can control, other things we can't. Remember that we're going for long term progress, not short/once and done changes! Good luck to you in continued health improvements!
I seem really good at maintaining, so I am fine with a quick loss. Today, trendweight downgraded me further to 0.6 lbs/week. Before long, I'll be losing nothing. I totally agree that CICO by itself is a gross oversimplification. However, I'm going to try cutting back to 1350 daily in hopes that it helps.
Weight loss isn't linear, and neither is your rate of weight loss. You will likely have times when you don't lose at all, and times when you lose a lot at once. I don't know if anyone asked about your protein macros yet. Keeping them a little high, like a gram per pound of your lean mass, seems to help some people.
Yes, I know it isn't linear. But I almost always struggle with losses. I've been trying to lose with CICO since 1/1/14 and have only lost about 32 lbs. I try to keep protein to just over 1g per lb. of lean mass. However, as I cut calories to 1350, that becomes more and more difficult.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »KnitOrMiss wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »DorkothyParker wrote: »I think everyone else has made really great points. I'm going to ask the obvious, have you recalculated your macros since your initial loss? If you lost a goodly amount of weight, you may want to check the keto calculator and see if it suggests a change.
That's a good point. I went through the MFP guided setup, and it came back with 50 fewer daily calories for a 1 lb. weekly loss. So I have some new targets now.
BAH! @midwesterner85 Banish the MFP crap. Use a real calculator! You might actually need to increase your targets rather than lower them...
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
There are other ones that consider more factors that others can link for you!
Hmm... well, this makes me lose another 260 calories.
You can adjust the deficit percentage. It's set to a default. If it's showing less calories than MFP, it's default is probably just set higher than MFP.
Yes, I had to adjust to get to the same 1 lb./wk deficit and came up with 1350 calories vs. 1610 on MFP.
Something has to have gone wrong. I'm a 5'4" F, 6 pounds to goal, and with a moderate 20% deficit for a sedentary person, it gives me 1254. I did use that as a goal for several months before moving up to 1350 when I decided I was probably doing more harm than good approaching it so aggressively.
Edited:
I went back to look it over again. Something does seem off. I noticed the box to check male or female was aligned weird on mobile and I had the male box checked. So the above calories would be for a man with my details. Once I changed it to female, it was 1160. I never ate that low as a goal. I definitely did some days because I wasn't hungry. But never as a regular thing. I don't recall it ever giving me a goal under 1250 before. Even as I updated it as I lost weight.
Try this one
http://www.ruled.me/keto-calculator/
Seemed more like I expected...
This brings me to 1,629 for a 1 lb./week loss.
Due to the various dietary affects of a low carb diet, you might not have to have your deficit that high to lose a pound a week. It's not a basic math calculation like everyone suggests. It's like a bad combo of calculus, chemistry, physics, biology, chaos theory, and all that mess all rolled into one big ball of random! Some things we can control, other things we can't. Remember that we're going for long term progress, not short/once and done changes! Good luck to you in continued health improvements!
I seem really good at maintaining, so I am fine with a quick loss. Today, trendweight downgraded me further to 0.6 lbs/week. Before long, I'll be losing nothing. I totally agree that CICO by itself is a gross oversimplification. However, I'm going to try cutting back to 1350 daily in hopes that it helps.
Weight loss isn't linear, and neither is your rate of weight loss. You will likely have times when you don't lose at all, and times when you lose a lot at once. I don't know if anyone asked about your protein macros yet. Keeping them a little high, like a gram per pound of your lean mass, seems to help some people.
Yes, I know it isn't linear. But I almost always struggle with losses. I've been trying to lose with CICO since 1/1/14 and have only lost about 32 lbs. I try to keep protein to just over 1g per lb. of lean mass. However, as I cut calories to 1350, that becomes more and more difficult.
I don't like meat, and if I eat enough of it, I don't feel like eating at all, so I always have it first in a meal.0 -
So, you have been doing low calories since 2014 and you have been doing LCHF for a little over a month? Well if that is the case, I think you are doing really, really well. And you should be proud of yourself. 2lb a week is great! Even .8lb a week is great!
It took me 44 days before I lost any weight and I actually gained weight the first 3 weeks. I think you are doing very good for your first month.0
