When exercising how long to see llbs start coming off

darleenturner

Doing over 10,000 steps a day, Jillian Michael's 30 day shred and other hiit classes. On 1200 calories. Stayed the same this week. I know I'm building muscle

ninerbuff

darleenturner wrote: »

Doing over 10,000 steps a day, Jillian Michael's 30 day shred and other hiit classes. On 1200 calories. Stayed the same this week. I know I'm building muscle

Building muscle is an anabolic process. Losing weight is a catabolic process. The 2 don't exist at the same time. If you stayed the same (which is normal when uptaking a workout program), it's likely because of water retention due to muscle recovery (not the same as building). Can last up to 2 weeks.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

yirara

I'm sorry, but you're likely not building muscles from these exercises. To build muscles you need to do a progressive strength training and at least eat close to maintenance to fuel the process of building muscles. If you were totally sedentary previously then even walking could do something to your legs, but it won't be a lot as your body quickly adapts to it.

AnnPT77

The above posts from ninerbuff and yirara are realistic.

If you're just starting out, the best approach is to stick with a new (but realistic, sustainable) routine for 4-6 weeks, then compare your average weight loss over that time period to your weight loss goal, on a per-week average basis. If the first couple of weeks look wildly different than the later weeks, discard the first couple of weeks from your averaging data, and look at 4+ subsequent weeks. If you're a premenopausal woman, compare the same relative point in at least two different menstrual cycles, since normal hormone-related changes in water retention can be very distorting, otherwise.

There is no generic answer to "when will I see results". Water retention from new exercise (for muscle repair) will mask fat loss on the scale temporarily, and the timing varies by person. The best approach is to run that 4-6 week experiment, and find out.

Now, I'm going to shift into "tough love granny" mode, because I'm probably old enough to be your granny, or at least your concerned but caring old auntie.

If you're doing that much exercise - new exercise to you - and eating only 1200 calories, I think you're on a questionable course. When I lost weight 5+ years ago with MFP, 1200 was too low for me, even when eating back all my exercise calories (as MFP recommends) on top of the 1200. I didn't get hungry or have binges (as many would when underfueling), I felt good and energetic (as many wouldn't). Then I hit a wall, suddenly got weak and fatigued. It took several weeks to recover, even though I corrected quickly. No one needs that. I was lucky nothing worse happened, because it can (things like hair loss at the minor end, to gallbladder problems, and more, to - at an extreme - heart failure**).

1200 is the right base calorie number for some relatively petite, sedentary, usually older, women. MFP intends eating back a reasonable estimate of exercise calories on top of base calories. Fast loss is not necessarily the best route. It's possible to train one's body to limp along on minimum calories, but it's better to train one's body to thrive. Any meaningful amount of weight loss is going to take time. (It took me just under a year to lose 50+ pounds, and that's a pretty fast rate in practice, for those who make it all the way to goal, not to mention stay at a healthy weight afterward.)

I know we all want to drop it like it's hot, but slow and steady is more sustainable (less likely to feel deprived, maybe periodically overeat, even give up), reduces health risks that can come with fast loss, and lets one experiment to find new, sustainable habits that will keep one at a healthy weight log term. Treating weight loss as a quick project with an end date is psychologically appealing, but true weight management is a lifetime endeavor, and patience is useful.

Wishing you much success, whatever course you choose!

**https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10761904/under-1200-for-weight-loss/p1

kshama2001

darleenturner wrote: »

Doing over 10,000 steps a day, Jillian Michael's 30 day shred and other hiit classes. On 1200 calories. Stayed the same this week. I know I'm building muscle

New exercise water retention. I GAINED seven pounds when I started weight lifting. Patience!

Are you eating back your exercise calories?

Ara_the_halfelven

I agree with yirara that these activities don't build muscle, you need to do strength training with progressive overload. As for why you're not losing weight, the most likely reason is that you are eating more calories than you think you are. Its easily done, but you can't outrun a poor diet.

age_is_just_a_number

You lose weight in the kitchen.
You gain muscle with exercise — more specifically resistance training.

Jthanmyfitnesspal

I can burn an extra 500-1500kcals per day through cardio. Does that help me lose weight? I've decided the answer is no, for the following reason:

I generally go into about a 25% calorie deficit when I need to cut a few pounds. I do it a few times a year, in fact. Yes, I burn extra calories when I work out, but I eat those calories back so I'm still in about a 25% calorie deficit overall. In fact, when I go big one day (e.g., a 6 hour hike), my biggest challenge is not to overeat as it makes me extra hungry!

Doing the exercise helps in many ways, better mental health being just one of the payoffs. But, it doesn't really help you lose weight. That comes purely from your calorie deficit.

cwolfman13

Water retention from new exercise.

Also, are you accounting for exercise with more calories? 1200 calories is a baseline aggressive calorie target that also assumes no exercise...all of that exercise combined with an already steep calorie deficit is going to be a huge stress on your body and raise cortisol levels which can also impede weight loss. It can, and usually ultimately does result in greater fatigue day to day where you end up moving less in general as your body tries to conserve energy (calories) too.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

janejellyroll

tsazani wrote: »

Diet and exercise using the energy balance model has a 99% failure rate.

You can't outrun a bad diet.

What data is this statement based on?