30 Day Challenge

Jcorn7

Hello, all. I've been doing a 30 day challenge where I am cutting out anything sweet including: ice cream, candy, chocolates, chips, donuts, and white bread. I started on June 2nd. I would say soda but I already don't drink that. Breakfast is water, orange juice, and breakfast wrap or nothing to eating at all. Lunch is water, yogurt, and turkey and cheese sandwich on wheat bread. Dinner is typically Stouffer's lasagna. I believe I am consuming less calories, but physically I'm not losing much weight. My cravings for sweets have decreased quite a bit. I'm not expecting immediate results, but just something. This may lead into a 60 day challenge. I'd rather not go 6 months and come to find it isn't working. I'm just wondering how much more I can do to lose weight. I'm trying to see how much weight I can lose without exercise, aside from running around at work. Exercise may come into the picture after I started seeing some major results. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated. Thank you.

kommodevaran

You lose weight when you're in a calorie deficit. 3500 calories = a pound.

malibu927

You say you believe you’re eating less but are you actually counting calories? I lost 65 pounds without cutting out any of that stuff, just working items into my calories.

janejellyroll

Focus on what actually creates weight loss -- a calorie deficit. Eliminating foods isn't going to do anything for you unless you happen to create a calorie deficit by doing so.

If you're not already logging your meals, start doing so. Consistently hit a calorie deficit.

If you want to have some ice cream or candy, you can do that and still lose weight. If you find it easier to be in a calorie deficit without them, then go ahead and skip them. Just know there's no real difference between white bread and pasta noodles and your body can recognize the sugar in orange juice as easily as it can recognize the sugar in candy.

Jcorn7

I'm pretty sure Stouffer's lasagna is MUCH better than what i was eating before. I even cut out cereal. Before, dinner would consist of either pizza, spaghetti or a chicken Alfredo skillet meal, big bowl of cereal, go through a bag of chocolates in a couple days, and medium blizzard for dessert. I would occasionally throw in a bowl of soup and usually chips as a snack. I would say without a doubt I must have made an improvement. I cut all that out for post-lunch consumed food in exchange for a lasagna meal for dinner. No snacks, no sweets. Mostly water, like about 4 bottles a day.

janejellyroll

Jcorn7 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Stouffer's lasagna is MUCH better than what i was eating before. I even cut out cereal. Before, dinner would consist of either pizza, spaghetti or a chicken Alfredo skillet meal, big bowl of cereal, go through a bag of chocolates in a couple days, and medium blizzard for dessert. I would occasionally throw in a bowl of soup and usually chips as a snack. I would say without a doubt I must have made an improvement. I cut all that out for post-lunch consumed food in exchange for a lasagna meal for dinner. No snacks, no sweets. Mostly water, like about 4 bottles a day.

For weight loss it isn't whether a food is "better," it's whether or not you're consistently in a calorie deficit overall. So if you like lasagna for dinner, keep eating it! Just eat it in the context of a calorie deficit.

sijomial

I got fat eating delicious, nutritious, home cooked food.

"Better" food has calories too. If you want to know how many then log your food, if you have no idea what your calorie intake is then don't be surprised if your results aren't as expected.

Jcorn7

A lot of people struggle with quitting sweet food. For them, all they can eat is sweet stuff. I manage to cut it out, but from what I am reading, it's not that big of a deal.

malibu927

Jcorn7 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Stouffer's lasagna is MUCH better than what i was eating before. I even cut out cereal. Before, dinner would consist of either pizza, spaghetti or a chicken Alfredo skillet meal, big bowl of cereal, go through a bag of chocolates in a couple days, and medium blizzard for dessert. I would occasionally throw in a bowl of soup and usually chips as a snack. I would say without a doubt I must have made an improvement. I cut all that out for post-lunch consumed food in exchange for a lasagna meal for dinner. No snacks, no sweets. Mostly water, like about 4 bottles a day.

How much weight have you lost during your challenge?

Jcorn7

It's hard to tell. I usually drink about 4 bottles of water every day. Before, I was eating about 2k calories a day, and I was staying around the same weight. I can't tell for sure if I have lost wait. If the scale says a number I haven't seen in years, I will know I am losing weight. I'm not saying 30+ pounds, more like 5 or so. Again, not expecting immediate results, just wanting something to happen. Whether it be the scale saying a couple pounds less, feeling healthier, or feeling lighter.

janejellyroll

Jcorn7 wrote: »

It's hard to tell. I usually drink about 4 bottles of water every day. Before, I was eating about 2k calories a day, and I was staying around the same weight. I can't tell for sure if I have lost wait. If the scale says a number I haven't seen in years, I will know I am losing weight. I'm not saying 30+ pounds, more like 5 or so. Again, not expecting immediate results, just wanting something to happen. Whether it be the scale saying a couple pounds less, feeling healthier, or feeling lighter.

Were you logging and using a food scale before or is this just an estimate of what you were eating? I ask because humans typically are terrible at estimating how much we eat per day.

Jcorn7

I have looked up the calories before. I am taking in about 1600 calories per day since June 2nd, when I started this personal challenge.

bpetrosky

Jcorn7 wrote: »

I have looked up the calories before. I am taking in about 1600 calories per day since June 2nd, when I started this personal challenge.

It sounds like you're guesstimating or trusting the package labels at face value. Have you tried wheighing out your portions to see what your typical meals are coming in at? Frozen lasagnas can be pretty calorie dense, and the packages can be higher than 1 serving.

A lot of the other things you are doing will have little to no effect if your portions are bigger than you think. You have to have a calorie deficit for any of it to be effective.

Jcorn7

Trusting the packages at face value...thought that was what calorie counting was all about? Never heard about weighing food. From what I gather, calorie deficit is more important than anything and it doesn't matter what I eat.

malibu927

Jcorn7 wrote: »

Trusting the packages at face value...thought that was what calorie counting was all about? Never heard about weighing food. From what I gather, calorie deficit is more important than anything and it doesn't matter what I eat.

That's true, but the weights on packages can be off up to 20%, and few people are good at eyeballing how much a serving is. You may want to look into purchasing a food scale (they're usually under $20) and starting to weigh all of your solids with it.

bpetrosky

Jcorn7 wrote: »

Trusting the packages at face value...thought that was what calorie counting was all about? Never heard about weighing food. From what I gather, calorie deficit is more important than anything and it doesn't matter what I eat.

Ding ding! You're almost right.

• Calorie deficit is key for losing weight. Set up your stats in MFP and select a reasonable deficit and eat to that calorie target.
• You don't have to use a food scale, but it's a powerful tool. It's pretty eye opening for many people who have been used to eyeballing portions.
• What you eat matters mostly for getting enough nutrients (such as sufficient protein and fat) and helping you feel satiated. There is no one-size fits all solution there, just some guidelines that differ based on your individual preferences and goals.

Jcorn7

By the sound of it, I could cut out breakfast and/or dinner altogether and that would create a big enough deficit to start losing weight faster.

bpetrosky

Jcorn7 wrote: »

By the sound of it, I could cut out breakfast and/or dinner altogether and that would create a big enough seficit to start losing weight faster.

Possibly. You can look into 16:8 intermittent fasting, for example. As long as you don't eat more for the other meals.

You don't want to have too high of a deficit, however. The recommendation is 1500 cal minimum for men, and 1200 cal minimum for women. Going below that consistently can lead to complications from malnutrition.

Also if you are active and doing purposeful exercise you would want to eat more to avoid eating too few net calories.

kbmnurse1

I can't make sense of this.

janejellyroll

Jcorn7 wrote: »

Trusting the packages at face value...thought that was what calorie counting was all about? Never heard about weighing food. From what I gather, calorie deficit is more important than anything and it doesn't matter what I eat.

No, calorie counting is based on accurately tracking your intake. For many people, this will require more than just taking packages at face value.

For weight loss, it doesn't matter what you eat. For health reasons, you'll want to ensure you're meeting your nutritional needs (but this is the case for everyone, including people who are happy with their weight).