Not losing enough..?

jaimydude

My BMR is around 2100.
Goal on MFP is 1900.

Here are my calories consumed and deficit from last week -
7-May 1202 (698)
8-May 1385 (515)
9-May 1240 (660)
10-May 1482 (418)
11-May 1273 (627)
12-May 1199 (701)
13-May 1159 (741)

Total deficit just in Calories was 4360.

Apart from this I worked out around 50 minutes / day for 6 days - at least 500 calories per day.

My weight loss last week was 1.1 lbs.

Not quite adding up is it?

Tacklewasher

First, 3500 deficit is 1 lb. So it isn't that far out, given the ability to accurately estimate activity and consumption. It's pretty freaking close in fact.

Second, our bodies are not that simple and while you may have hit the fat loss goal, water weight, waste etc. all add to the variability of weight loss, so it will never be bang on over 1 week, but should work out on average over months.

kgeyser

Well, it's never going to add up exactly, because all of our calorie counts are estimates. But looking at what you have above, I think you are overestimating your exercise calories if you are getting over 500 calories for 50 minutes. Also, I'm not sure why you are eating so far below your calorie goal, the deficit is built into MFP's goals. Would you be willing to share your stats (age, height, weight, gender, activity)?

jaimydude

@Tacklewasher it may be close if you look at only the consumption part. But if you take in the exercise, that adds another ~3000 calories lost. So totally the deficit should be around 7500 - 8000 calories give or take.

Tacklewasher

jaimydude wrote: »

@Tacklewasher it may be close if you look at only the consumption part. But if you take in the exercise, that adds another ~3000 calories lost. So totally the deficit should be around 7500 - 8000 calories give or take.

Ahh. Missed that.

Go to my second point. Weight loss is not linear (there is a thread here on that) and reality will vary from the numbers just because.

jaimydude

@kgeyser
37, 231 lbs, height 5.8, Male.

Exercise -
30 minutes elliptical pretty brisk
20 minutes Treadmill walking - 3.4 mph at 4.5incline

around 3X10 minutes of brisk walking spread across the day.

moonstroller

There are weeks where I'll lose 6 pounds, and weeks where I'll lose 3 pounds, one week I lost a whole 0.8 pounds. My diet and exercise is exceptionally consistent so I chalk the differences to just the way my body works.

animatorswearbras

Water weight fluctuations both mask and exaggerate loss you'll get a better idea of your progress over the course of a couple of months (also muscles retain water if you have started exercising). HOWEVER your cals consumed seem awfully low considering your BMR is 2100 and the amount of exercise you are doing, what is your deficit set to (1 pound 2 pounds?) I'm guessing 1900 is what MFP has put for you to lose net and you're eating way below that and not eating back your exercise cals if I'm reading your figures correctly. You may be losing alot of lean mass (muscle) as well as fat if you continue being this restrictive. x Please correct me if I'm wrong though.

jaimydude

@animatorswearbras @kgeyser

You are not wrong. MFP has set my goal to 1900. Loss goal is around 2.2 lbs.

I just seem to be on such a delicate balance between losing and gaining that I'd rather err on the lower side of the 1900. Besides, if my average consumption is around 1400 and I'm underestimating as one could, on average I'm hoping I'm still close.

I've been exercising for more than a year now at the rate mentioned above. I had stopped logging my eating for a long time and have restarted that part of it in the last couple of weeks.

For months now I had stagnated to around 240 lbs week after week.
Now that I've started logging again, in the last two weeks ... week 1 = -3 lbs, week 2 = -1 lb (original post).

I'm not sure if I'll continue losing if I add more calories to my diet.

animatorswearbras

jaimydude wrote: »

@animatorswearbras @kgeyser

You are not wrong. MFP has set my goal to 1900. Loss goal is around 2.2 lbs.

I just seem to be on such a delicate balance between losing and gaining that I'd rather err on the lower side of the 1900. Besides, if my average consumption is around 1400 and I'm underestimating as one could, on average I'm hoping I'm still close.

I've been exercising for more than a year now at the rate mentioned above. I had stopped logging my eating for a long time and have restarted that part of it in the last couple of weeks.

For months now I had stagnated to around 240 lbs week after week.
Now that I've started logging again, in the last two weeks ... week 1 = -3 lbs, week 2 = -1 lb (original post).

I'm not sure if I'll continue losing if I add more calories to my diet.

You definitely will lose if you eat more* as the 1900 figure is at least 1000-1100cals below maintenance (what you need to eat to stay the same weight) can I ask have you set MFP to sedentary or active?

edit: *assuming you are weighing and measuring your food accurately

Silentpadna

jaimydude wrote: »

My BMR is around 2100.
Goal on MFP is 1900.

Here are my calories consumed and deficit from last week -
7-May 1202 (698)
8-May 1385 (515)
9-May 1240 (660)
10-May 1482 (418)
11-May 1273 (627)
12-May 1199 (701)
13-May 1159 (741)

Total deficit just in Calories was 4360.

Apart from this I worked out around 50 minutes / day for 6 days - at least 500 calories per day.

My weight loss last week was 1.1 lbs.

Not quite adding up is it?

It's been said a little bit already, but water weight can mask or exaggerate your loss by quite a bit - even in a day. I've been up to 4 or more pounds different in the same day. If your goal is 2 lbs per week, there is no possible way for you to know whether it adds up or not in a single given week. If you are losing 2 pounds of fat in a week, you probably need 3-4 weeks minimum to even see the trend with some accuracy above the "noise" of fluctuation. Especially since that fluctuation in a day can be twice as big as your potential fat loss in a week.

If it was me, and several times this was/is me, I would stay the course.

jaimydude

animatorswearbras wrote: »

You definitely will lose if you eat more* as the 1900 figure is at least 1000-1100cals below maintenance (what you need to eat to stay the same weight) can I ask have you set MFP to sedentary or active?

edit: *assuming you are weighing and measuring your food accurately

I've set MFP to lightly active.

I believe I'm measuring food accurately. If I can I prefer overestimating to underestimating. Of course there is a margin of error but apart from that it is as accurate as I can get it.

animatorswearbras

jaimydude wrote: »

animatorswearbras wrote: »

You definitely will lose if you eat more* as the 1900 figure is at least 1000-1100cals below maintenance (what you need to eat to stay the same weight) can I ask have you set MFP to sedentary or active?

edit: *assuming you are weighing and measuring your food accurately

I've set MFP to lightly active.

I believe I'm measuring food accurately. If I can I prefer overestimating to underestimating. Of course there is a margin of error but apart from that it is as accurate as I can get it.

In that case I would at least eat the 1900 a 1000 cal deficit is already quite aggressive, the 2100 BMR is what your body needs to function in an inactive state for example if you were comatose (pumping your heart, muscles for breathing, digesting, reproducing cells etc) and 1900 is already 200 calls below that. When you have a larger deficit than this your body will not only utilise stored fat but will break down muscle.

That is just advice on top of the explanation why weight loss is not linear due to water weight fluctuations. Take care and keep on going and well done so far. It will come off. X

jaimydude

Thanks and will do. I'm going to go a couple of weeks more at the current rate and then try to bump up intake and monitor.

Thanks again.