Calories & Weight Loss - not working
akorbiel
Posts: 4 Member
I’m 5’9 and 165lbs. My BMR is 1700 calories, and my caloric needs are about 2800 for my activity level - which is fairly high.
I have been eating about 1800 calories a day plus decreasing that by 600 with exercise. I’ve been doing this for about 2 months, and my weight stays the same. I’m feeling stronger but not losing any weight or fat.
I spoke to a nutritionist/personal trainer and was told that my body is in starvation mode because I’m not getting enough calories and that I should increase my calorie intake.
What I don’t understand is why one source tells me to increase my calories to to lose weight because of my activity level, but according to the meal plans on other apps, it suggests I only eat approximately 1800 calories to lose weight. But when I was doing that it wasn’t working and that puts my body back into starvation mode (holds on to weight and won’t get rid of it).
Any help or advice would be appreciated!
I have been eating about 1800 calories a day plus decreasing that by 600 with exercise. I’ve been doing this for about 2 months, and my weight stays the same. I’m feeling stronger but not losing any weight or fat.
I spoke to a nutritionist/personal trainer and was told that my body is in starvation mode because I’m not getting enough calories and that I should increase my calorie intake.
What I don’t understand is why one source tells me to increase my calories to to lose weight because of my activity level, but according to the meal plans on other apps, it suggests I only eat approximately 1800 calories to lose weight. But when I was doing that it wasn’t working and that puts my body back into starvation mode (holds on to weight and won’t get rid of it).
Any help or advice would be appreciated!
35
Replies
-
Starvation mode doesn’t exist. If it did, nobody would die of food deprivation! Get yourself a new nutritionist; someone who knows something about nutrition, for preference.
What is far more likely is that you are not eating at a deficit. Either you’re overestimating your calorie burn - what activities are you doing? - or you’re underestimating how much you’re eating. Are you weighing all solids? No ‘tablespoons’ of peanut butter? Remembering to count dressings and cooking oils? Including fruits and vegetables (they have calories too!). Are you using good database entries? No other people’s ‘homemade’ entries, no using cooked entries for dry rice etc?
These are all common errors that a lot of people make, even when they claim they’re not
29 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.26 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
lets start with the easy stuff. do you weigh your food with scales? can you open your diary?
think about 'starvation mode' another way. people wouldn't starve to death the body was able to conserve fat when someone ate too little, would they?
If your TDEE is 2800 then there is no way you need to eat only net 1300 calories. given your stats, how much weight are you actually trying to lose?10 -
At 5ft 9 and 165 you are within the normal weight range.
You are also active and exercising.
Weight change is quite likely to be slow. Underfueling your activity and exercise is likely to be counterproductive.
That said, take a real hard look at your logging.
Weigh (don't measure) ingredients individually and pre-log everything before eating it. Do not forget condiments and most certainly do not forget cooking oil or butter.18 -
Starvation mode really isn't a thing. Trainers are not scientists.
While the body does adapt to reduced calories and lower metabolism eventually, it doesn't happen in two months, and it's not enough to prevent you from losing weight.
When someone is unable to lose weight on a tiny number of calories over an extended period of time, overwhelmingly the reason is that they are taking in more calories than they claim. You haven't explained how you are calculating your calories. It is shockingly easy to double the number of calories you are taking in by failing to report high density condiments, overestimating portion sizes, and just forgetting stuff. Dawn French, a British actress, agreed to be on a show where her consumption was, unknown to her, tracked by radioactive isotopes in her food. They found her food diary was only logging one third of the calories she was eating. Multiple studies have found that obese people estimate portion sizes worse than normal weight people. If you aren't losing weight, the first thing to do is to check your logging. Weigh every single bite. If this fails to find the issue, then take the next steps.
18 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.21 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
Just because a lot of people say a thing, that doesn't make it true. Trainers and nutritionists are not trained dietitians.
Also, as someone who spent two and a half years at often high deficits in order to lose 230 lb - no, the body really doesn't have a magical way to stop needing to spend calories. 'Starvation mode' is a comforting myth that exists to make people feel better when they don't want to find out where they're making mistakes.22 -
I would go with the nutritionist/personal trainer. As you may have read in the MFP newsletter about starvation mode this give the basic overview of Starvation mode good read. But do want your nutritionist is saying.72
-
jasonpoihegatama wrote: »I would go with the nutritionist/personal trainer. As you may have read in the MFP newsletter about starvation mode this give the basic overview of Starvation mode good read. But do want your nutritionist is saying.
Any numpty with a bit of spare internet time can call themselves a certified "nutritionist" and personal trainers quite often don't have any nutrition training (I won't say all because some do) and will just come out with a load of broscience beliefs about how weight loss works.
I'd suggest both you and OP take a read of this to better understand the myth of starvation mode as it exists in the diet industry - https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
26 -
jasonpoihegatama wrote: »I would go with the nutritionist/personal trainer. As you may have read in the MFP newsletter about starvation mode this give the basic overview of Starvation mode good read. But do want your nutritionist is saying.
Nope.
Here's the thing. It's been 2 months. With (an unhealthy excessive) deficit of 1500 kcal per day. If that was actually true - it cannot be - then there would be weight loss of some sort by now.
It's not the process that doesn't work. It's the accounting. The process is based on the law of energy conservation. No system in the universe can avoid obeying this law. If you are in a deficit over time, your body will take fuel from sources other than food. It has zero choice in the matter. If your body is not doing that (over time), then you are not in a deficit. There can be no other answer.
When the nutritionist is saying stuff like this, they are assuming there are no errors in the numbers. And that is extremely bad advice.
So what do you do?
1. Assume the process works. (Because again, it has to).
2. Go about finding where the errors are. It may be hard to find them, but they are there. If you cannot find them, then assume your 1300 is actually higher than you think, and adjust down accordingly.
3. Weigh everything with a food scale to the gram. If you use ounces, weigh to the tenth (.1) of an ounce.
4. Understand that your NEAT and exercise calories are estimates. You may need to tweak what you are using.
28 -
tinkerbellang83 wrote: »jasonpoihegatama wrote: »I would go with the nutritionist/personal trainer. As you may have read in the MFP newsletter about starvation mode this give the basic overview of Starvation mode good read. But do want your nutritionist is saying.
Any numpty with a bit of spare internet time can call themselves a certified "nutritionist" and personal trainers quite often don't have any nutrition training (I won't say all because some do) and will just come out with a load of broscience beliefs about how weight loss works.
I'd suggest both you and OP take a read of this to better understand the myth of starvation mode as it exists in the diet industry - https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
" Myth of starvation mode" This was not even worth reading. It seems some have "starvation" And "starvation mode" mixed up I don't know how someone could get these to mixed up? If you took the time to read real studies on starvation mode. But your right " Any numpty with a bit of spare internet time can call themselves a certified "nutritionist" or " personal trainer"49 -
jasonpoihegatama wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »jasonpoihegatama wrote: »I would go with the nutritionist/personal trainer. As you may have read in the MFP newsletter about starvation mode this give the basic overview of Starvation mode good read. But do want your nutritionist is saying.
Any numpty with a bit of spare internet time can call themselves a certified "nutritionist" and personal trainers quite often don't have any nutrition training (I won't say all because some do) and will just come out with a load of broscience beliefs about how weight loss works.
I'd suggest both you and OP take a read of this to better understand the myth of starvation mode as it exists in the diet industry - https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
" Myth of starvation mode" This was not even worth reading. It seems some have "starvation" And "starvation mode" mixed up I don't know how someone could get these to mixed up? If you took the time to read real studies on starvation mode. But your right " Any numpty with a bit of spare internet time can call themselves a certified "nutritionist" or " personal trainer"
There is a big difference between the "Starvation Mode" that you read about here and which is often cited by these sorts of nutritionist and trainer, which is not confusion with starvation, but is when people think that eating too little will cause their weight to maintain or gain, and the Metabolic Adaptation, which after a long term deficit can cause weight loss to slow down, but doesn't stop weight loss altogether.
I'd suggest you read something before you dismiss it.
The only thing that studies back up is Metabolic Adaptation, not the former Diet Myth of starvation mode. Which is exactly what the linked article says.24 -
jasonpoihegatama wrote: »I would go with the nutritionist/personal trainer. As you may have read in the MFP newsletter about starvation mode this give the basic overview of Starvation mode good read. But do want your nutritionist is saying.
No. If you want to see what "starvation mode" looks like, google the Minnesota Starvation Project. THAT is starvation mode. Also, there are ZERO - yes, ZERO -published entries with the term "starvation mode" in pubmed or jissn, so that should be what detectives refer to as "a clue" as to the legitimate meaning of the phrase.
Yes, if your calories are extremely restricted, your metabolism may slow down to conserve energy for the bodily functions that are 100% necessary, but it doesn't completely stop. If you're in as big as a caloric deficit as you say, for as long as you say, you would be losing weight. End of story. Weigh/measure/log ALL foods and caloric beverages. Don't guesstimate or eyeball anything. Put it on the scale, pour it into a measuring cup. Don't round down "ehhhh this is 43g but that's a weird number so I'll use 40g instead." If you are consistently in a deficit, you WILL lose.
16 -
I'm 5' 9", Male, 48 years old, and when I was 168lbs (last March) I lost 1lb a week on average eating 1800 cals per day.
In order to achieve the above I weighed and logged EVERY single thing I ate and drank. I even logged my 15 min cycle to work, and weekly hour long walk + strength training 3 times a week and ate back approx 50% of those calories. (I also made sure I set my activity level to sedentary and logged all exercise via MFP).
Check your logging but also - what exercise(s) are you doing that burns 600 cals? Out of interest. *An hour of heavy lifting for me only burns about 230 and I'm damned if i've got enough energy left for any more than that at the end of the day. :-)
Keep at it.22 -
Here's my addition to the conversation. I'm 6'1" and weigh 185 pounds (normal BMI). My NEAT on MFP is almost 2200 calories. I usually burn 600 calories a day in exercise. I can tell from experience that if I eat 1800 calories and don't eat back those 600 exercise calories then weight falls off of me - too fast.
I strongly suspect you either don't burn as many calories as you think you do or you are eating more than your body needs.19 -
OP are you using a food scale? If not, start there-it will be an eye opening experience, to say the least.7
-
Sorry in advance for the long post, but I'm addressing everything stated in this thread so far....
I am 5'8" and 175 pounds (down from 185 in about a month). I actually had to ADD to my intake to start seeing results.... see below. I have to intake 1200 kcals per day plus almost 100% of the calories I burn in exercise which is between 300 and 600 per day... so my daily is between 1500-1800 per day for intake. My daily burn rate is around 2200 because I'm active. Another issue was exercise. Depending on what you are doing for exercise (if you are only doing cardio and no HIIT or strength training), that could also be an issue. Your body will get used to an exercise after a while and it will not be as effective. You have to change it up and focus on exercises that also cause "afterburn" or causes you to burn more calories even at rest than you normally would.
If you look up "Metabolic Rate" and also search for Metabolic Rate in contestants of The Biggest Loser, this is perhaps the best study of what the Metabolic Rate does in a person who eats at an extreme deficit for too long. It is not "starvation mode" but rather the body trying to adjust for the lack of nutrition to keep your major organs functioning. In these contestants, it was found that the Metabolic Rate slowed to a point that was almost a dead stop... this caused typical nutritional eating habits (not the unhealthy stuff) to start packing weight back on to their bodies. It can take MONTHS for the metabolism to get back to a healthy burning level after this.
Now, for those of you who believe that eating less will automatically cause you to lose weight because the body "has no choice", that is ALSO a fallacy. My Dad has MS, arthritis, and other major issues preventing any type of exercise and he is close to 300 pounds due to his medications. He tried to lose weight by doing what he had been taught as a marathon runner back when he was in his 30s.... eat less, lose weight. He did that for MONTHS and the scale didn't move. Keep in mind, he can't exercise; only control his nutrition. When we went to a licensed dietitian, he was told he wasn't eating enough to maintain his bodily functions... so anything he was eating was going directly to "storage" because his Metabolic Rate had slowed to almost a stop. An additional 300 calories was added to his diet to get his metabolism working properly again... and within 2 months he started dropping weight. He lost 50 pounds in 3 months by eating MORE calories. Your body can and will work against you if you don't give it what it needs. At that point, he weighed less and he was able to lower his intake slowly to allow his metabolism to accommodate the change and it worked.
There are some people out there who believe hardcore that it is one way or the other, but everyone has all different body and metabolism types. What works for some, will not work for others. Going extreme (jumping directly into an extreme diet and exercise program) from an unhealthy lifestyle can shock the body. This is what happened to my Dad. He did too much reduction too fast.
Absolutely check the calorie logs and make sure absolutely everything is logged without fail. Cooking oil adds 120 calories to your diet per tablespoon depending on the oil. Butter and other condiments that are typically used on foods for cooking without thought also need to be logged. Salad dressings are TERRIBLE... and often are miscalculated as lower than they really are. If the issue is not with the logging, then definitely look at the possibility that your own metabolism is working against you... since you are so active, some additional adjustments may be required. As in, you may need to ADD to your intake to start seeing results.
For those of you who use the reasoning that "if starvation mode existed nobody would starve to death" - that is also untrue. The issue is that the body, past a certain starvation point, has no choice but to use food that is eaten as a source of fuel rather than "storage". So someone eating an apple every 3 days just to keep the body from starving to death, will STILL starve to death. The body reaches a breaking point where it MUST use any food that is eaten as it's only source of fuel after it has already eaten through the fatty tissue and muscle in the body. This is why people starve to death. But up to that point, the body can and will make appropriate adjustments to retain nutrients from food that it doesn't use to fuel the body. The body takes what it needs and stores the rest.61 -
DanSanthomes wrote: »I'm 5' 9", Male, 48 years old, and when I was 168lbs (last March) I lost 1lb a week on average eating 1800 cals per day.
In order to achieve the above I weighed and logged EVERY single thing I ate and drank. I even logged my 15 min cycle to work, and weekly hour long walk + strength training 3 times a week and ate back approx 50% of those calories. (I also made sure I set my activity level to sedentary and logged all exercise via MFP).
Check your logging but also - what exercise(s) are you doing that burns 600 cals? Out of interest. *An hour of heavy lifting for me only burns about 230 and I'm damned if i've got enough energy left for any more than that at the end of the day. :-)
Keep at it.
There would be weeks were I ate very little, and still wouldn’t be able to lose weight. I’ve been trying for over a year, and I’m just losing anything. I’m only trying to lose about 10lbs. My body fat % isn’t even decreasing.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I workout in the morning and in the evening.11 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily just based on calorie intake.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I’m working out twice a day.27 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
its very much a thing - especially on a calorie counting website.
you're eating more than you think.38 -
Beware of any numbers that you're given by fitness trackers like Apple Watch and Fitbit; they can be very inaccurate.
If you're only trying to lose 10 lbs, then presumably you're looking at dropping 0.5 lb per week. Since weight loss isn't linear, in the short term that's likely to be invisible under water weight fluctuations.
You also keep restating that you eat very few calories, but repeatedly avoid answering people's questions about how you measure that and you haven't opened your diary. I'm going with 'you know your logging is loose, you just don't want to admit it' and calling it case closed. You don't have to tighten up and lose that 10 lb if you don't really want to.21 -
Now, for those of you who believe that eating less will automatically cause you to lose weight because the body "has no choice", that is ALSO a fallacy.
It looks like that's a reference to a post of two of mine on these forums. If not, disregard, but if so, let me address:
I didn't say 'eating less' will automatically cause you to lose weight. I did say that a being in a deficit would. Potentially two different things.
The body has no choice but to lose weight if you are in a deficit. You're going to have to explain the fallacy.
The law of energy conservation is universal. If you reduce energy input, while keeping output the same, over time, your body will use stored energy. What you are referring to is that some people have a corresponding energy output decrease. This may come in the form of folks subconsciously reducing movements and your brain regulating other functions (through stress hormones like cortisol) to conserve energy, meaning keeping output the same is a difficult process. In theory, however, hold output the same, reducing input causes a deficit.
Most of the stuff you bring up deals with your burn rate (metabolism) and/or just movement in general. The law of conservation of energy doesn't care which side of the balance or which component is varied. The balance is always true. There are many things that influence the 'energy out' side of the balance - more than what influences energy in. It is admittedly complex and very hard to measure. All we have that is even remotely useful are estimates of the general population.
But the law of energy conservation is not fallacy. It's one of the most basic laws of nature.
If you were not addressing my statements, then don't bother with this.
21 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily just based on calorie intake.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I’m working out twice a day.
In this case it is very likely you are eating more than you think you are. using a scale is pretty important for most of us. here is some info on why:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10634517/you-dont-use-a-food-scale/p1
So the first thing i'd do in your shoes is get a scale and get a more accurate image of calories eaten.
Eating "healthy" while beneficial for general health, in no way impacts weight loss (not directly)
17 -
In this case it is very likely you are eating more than you think you are. using a scale is pretty important for most of us. here is some info on why:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10634517/you-dont-use-a-food-scale/p1
So the first thing i'd do in your shoes is get a scale and get a more accurate image of calories eaten.
^^^ all of that
by just scanning your barcode you are assuming the contents - weigh it and you will be surprised at how often there is more than stated
by using cups and spoons you can be madly out - weigh it
10 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily just based on calorie intake.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I’m working out twice a day.
The bolded is most likely the problem. Sorry, I know that's not what you want to hear. But the good thing is it means you can fix this! The MFP food log can be a wonderful tool when used correctly, but using it correctly is not always immediately clear. I used it wrong for about a year before I came to the forums and learned! I found I was eating 300-400 cals more per day than I thought.
When you get a moment, check out these threads, and best of luck
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10634517/you-dont-use-a-food-scale/p1
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1234699/logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide/p115 -
A prime example of why eyeballing doesn't work....
30 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily just based on calorie intake.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I’m working out twice a day.
You most likely just answered your own question as to why you're not losing weight.
Get a food scale and start weighing out your portion sizes.
(I'm almost 6 years into maintenance and I still use my food scale every day. It's one of the most helpful tools in my weight management plan).14 -
Another vote for a food scale. The juxtaposition of using one and not is often jarring; it was for me at least.
MFP's method is all well and good (referring to NEAT + exercise) but in my judgement there's too much uncertainty with setting an activity level, attempting to measure actual exercise burn reliably, etc. I prefer and have found far more success managing my weight by using TDEE; which is more of a black-box approach which reduces the number of variables (Calories consumed - Calories Expended = Change in Weight). I weigh myself daily, monitor my rolling average, and I'm borderline obsessive about weighing and logging my food. If my weight is trending up, I know I'm averaging more calories than my TDEE, if my weight is dropping I know I'm averaging less. No guessing if my activity level is right, or I'm consuming the correct percentage of my workout calories.0 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily just based on calorie intake.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I’m working out twice a day.
You're eating more than you think. Portion creep is a thing, as is weighing food. Doing the latter prevents the former.
Start weighing your food.7 -
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily just based on calorie intake.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I’m working out twice a day.
Whoops, my bad, I missed this part of your response.
There's your problem, then. Volume measurements are notoriously inaccurate, and 'eyeballing' even more so; you will be surprised to find how much more you've been eating than you think you have!
And yes, weighing your food is not only 'a thing', it is a thing that most MFPers who have successfully lost weight have been doing habitually for months or years. I have a digital scale beside my chopping board; weighing out my breakfast cereal, for example, only takes a few seconds.9
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions