Masking Weight Loss

deannasawyer

Hey guys. I've been lurking for a long while and while I've got a pretty good handle on the basics, I do have a question.

Quick bulleted facts:

• I use a food scale unless I am eating an entire package of something.
• If I honestly have no clue of what I ate for calories (eating out, for example), then I estimate as high as I can and Quick Add. I'd rather estimate high than low.
• I use Quick Add if I can't find a correct entry, and will use the volume entry if it matches the nutrition facts even though I weighed grams. I never measure volume; it's more work than the scale.
• I go by my weekly calorie average rather than daily calories. My appetite is too all over the place to eat the same amount daily (some days I might net 500 after exercise, other days 2000). My average over the week is usually net 1100-1350 calories.
• I take one maintenance week a month.
• I eat back exercise calories.
• I'm trying to lose the 30lbs I've slowly gained since I got married in 2018.
• Slight TMI, but I'm one of those weirdos who only has a BM once-twice a week. Always have.
• I just changed from a copper IUD to a hormonal one a month ago.

The weight dropped pretty quickly the first 6 weeks, then slowed to around 0.5lbs/week for 4 weeks, and for the last 4 weeks my trending weight hasn't budged. Which would lead me to think that maybe my Fitbit is overestimating exercise calories and I'm actually eating closer to maintenance. Or I'm eating more when I eat out than even my high estimate.

But... I look thinner than I looked a month ago, and my old clothes fit better. Is it likely that water retention/digestive contents could mask an entire month's worth of loss, or is the culprit probably my logging?

PAV8888

-- are you taking daily or weekly weigh ins for your weight trend?
-- are you using an app that allows you to play with the days that your trend takes into consideration (just to see how different lengths of time would affect things)... I believe that only libra allows you to do that easily (happy scale and trendweight don't as far as I know... others may or may not)
--how close to your estimates was the fitbit - MFP vs trend weight loss combination during the 4 weeks of steady loss excluding very fast and very slow times.

You can export calories burned from Fitbit for the month. you can look at total calories logged as eaten by mfp. Then look at the total difference. Divide by 3500 should give you the expected weight change. How close was your actual? What percentage of total calories burned are a reasonable "error estimate"? For short time periods I've had this climb to over 10% but taken at a yearly average level when logging food intake normally it, consistently, does not even reach 5% for myself.

Can hormones and digestive contents mask 0.5/week results? ABSOLUTELY. You could even be a month later above where you were a month before yet losing at 0.5/week. 0.5/week is less than 2.5lbs. Just hormonal water retention averages more than that.

Weight trend HIDES some of that variation though, and makes it more likely to see the real underlying movement. If your weight trend taken at slightly different times (play with starting and end points a bit), well if the weight trend is consistently flat... we can probably conclude that it is flat WEIGHT WISE.

Frankly the most likely explanation ESPECIALLY if matched to visible changes is.... your last bullet point which could hint in a considerable difference in terms of circulating hormones and base water retention.

Logging is one aspect. Individual differences from statistical average are another. Consistent logging is more important than absolutely accurate logging. Consistent logging allows you to make decisions even if the values are off. Mind you, I always find it easier to be consistent by striving to be accurate... but that's me!

Unless you're in a hurry... where I would suggest that you should not be... it doesn't sound like you're heading in the wrong direction, so the path is not in need of either hasty or large revisions. Tweek gently (or not at all) and seek to bias changes to things you see yourself continuing to do long term. Cause the 30lbs came from the long term, and they will only stay away long term if you persist in thinking long term!

AmyDahlTorres

Hi! Consider that muscle weighs more than fat by volume; you are getting leaner while building that muscle.

Xerogs

deannasawyer wrote: »

look thinner than I looked a month ago, and my old clothes fit better. Is it likely that water retention/digestive contents could mask an entire month's worth of loss, or is the culprit probably my logging?

How much are you working out and are you doing muscle building activities?

I know when I exercise more and start lifting my weight loss will plateau for quite a while. I definitely notice my body changing and clothes fitting better during that time. Plus working out causes some inflammation and water retention but in my experience it will taper off.

Water retention and digestive contents can make weight fluctuate. There is definitely a difference pre and post BM weight for me but its only a 1lb or two at the most. I am pretty regular so I don't know how it would be for someone who doesn't go as often as I do.

fatty2begone

@deannasawyer Thank You for posting. You are describing me to a T at the present. (Well almost no birth control for me... almost 54 ) I hope others will have more ideas and/or comments. I too am not in a rush and not freaking, but curious and definitely want the scale to trend down eventually.

Patience is a virtue. (I pray for virtue )

AnnPT77

OP, I've even had my weight trending app (Libra) trend line think I was maintaining or gaining for around a month, when I was actually losing very slowly. That, as a woman without hormonal weirdness in the picture (I'm in menopause, long since). If I were you, I'd assume water retention was a lot of what's going on, whether from the hormonal changes, exercise, or any of a number of other possible reasons. Bodies are weird.

Logging is a possible reason, but unless you eat out constantly and are way wrong (which you shouldn't be, maybe/probably, by guessing high). As far as validating Fitbit, PAV is right about using your data as a test, but if you want others' opinions, we'd need to know your height/weight/age and something about your daily life activity and exercise. You don't mention the nature of your exercise: Trackers are better at estimating some activities than others.

PAV's questions should help MFP's with giving you possible explanations, too.

AmyDahlTorres wrote: »

Hi! Consider that muscle weighs more than fat by volume; you are getting leaner while building that muscle.

True, as a generality . . . but muscle mass gain is sadly quite gradual.

She's only seemingly been at this for 14 weeks. In 14 weeks, for a woman under ideal conditions*, a quarter pound of muscle mass gain per week would be a really good result. For someone in a calorie deficit like OP, we'd expect it to be even slower. Even 3 pounds in 14 weeks would be quite surprising, in a significant calorie deficit, IMO.

* Ideal conditions would be a calorie surplus, a well-designed progressive strength training program faithfully performed, good nutrition (especially but not exclusively adequate protein), favorable genetics, relative youth, probably relative newness to strength training. For men, half a pound a week would be good, since maleness also tend to be favorable.

On the bodyweight scale, pretty much no realistic pace of muscle gain will hide what most would consider a minimum satisfying rate of fat loss, when fat loss is a significant priority (i.e., half a pound a week), especially for women. I wish it were otherwise.

Strength training is still worth doing, for a variety of reasons, though.

deannasawyer

@AnnPT77 Oh, sorry! I completely forgot the stats. 30 years old, 5'4", currently 128lbs (starting weight 138lbs). I realize I'm already a healthy weight, but I spent 14 years being 113lbs and I prefer that weight for me. It's also the size that all my many, many clothes accumulated through the years are. My work is a mix of desk and investigating/assisting on the factory floor, so I get between 3500-6500 brisk steps per day at work.

Now, my exercise is only cardio 2-3 times per week (1 hour brisk walk with some periods of jogging mixed in). I restarted exercising in February after a several-month hiatus. I haven't restarted weight training yet. Around that time I also got a very stressful promotion and in the last month have had to [temporarily] radically shift my diet to accommodate an acid reflux flare-up. So it's possible that some of this may be water retention from stress on my body. As you said, bodies are weird. But 5lbs though?


@PAV8888
I'd like to say that I'm weighing in daily, but it's really more every 2-5 days (whenever I happen to remember before I've eaten). I've been tracking my weight trend in Libra.

I totally didn't realize you could export Fitbit calories for the month. That's super cool. So I just did as you said and subtracted my calories eaten for the last month from my calories burned for the last month and found out, well, A, I have apparently miscalculated what my maintenance is and B, I should have lost 4.9lbs. According to Libra, however, my trend line is pretty flat for that time period, with a small period of gain/loss in the middle. My logging might not be perfect when hubby and I eat out, but I would think there's no way that could account for such a huge discrepancy. I'd have to be off by 17,150 calories, which I know is impossible. But I'd think 5lbs of extra water retention would also not be likely? Unless that's a side effect of the IUD, which I suppose is possible.



Should I just continue what I'm doing and see what next month looks like? If my base water retention has changed, at some point it would have to even out and I'd start losing again. I would think.

Thank you guys so much for your in-depth responses. I really appreciate your help.

peggy_polenta

fitbit is giving your gross calories. not your calories from the actual actual excercise. so if it tells you you have burned 400 calories during your work out, you (maybe would have burned 100 if you just sat there...so its really only 300 net burn, example only) so if you are eating back based on your excercise burn, you may be over eating back. my fitbit is pretty accurate for total daily calorie burn which is what i look at. not calories burned from excercise.

deannasawyer

peggy_polenta wrote: »

fitbit is giving your gross calories. not your calories from the actual actual excercise. so if it tells you you have burned 400 calories during your work out, you (maybe would have burned 100 if you just sat there...so its really only 300 net burn, example only) so if you are eating back based on your excercise burn, you may be over eating back. my fitbit is pretty accurate for total daily calorie burn which is what i look at. not calories burned from excercise.

I only eat back exercise calories according to the adjustment given by MFP, not the fitbit itself.

PAV8888

So you've now entered the .... trial and error phase

The expected burn is a statistical average based on two stats: the expected base metabolic rate and the expected burn of the activities Fitbit detects. it is accurate for most people but, I bet you know what I am going to say... less accurate for some and very inaccurate for a very few.

Then you have logging inaccuracies. I think we can take as a given that I am probably someone who logs, let's just say more "militantly" than many. When I was losing weight aggressively, while obese, with a high TDEE and achieving just under 1.5lbs a week, I was actually logging the food before it entered my mouth in order to avoid "errors".

I now don't log as militantly yet I usually list the gram weight of what I've eaten (while logging loosely at maintenance), while people who are trying to actively lose list items as cups and spoons and a couple of slices

I've gone back and added up a mega bag of Oh'Henry chocolate clusters after it was gone a couple of days in... because.. well, there's legit reasons why I was obese... and the perfectly logged on the scale *but after the fact* bag was short something like 72g which was almost 10% of the bag!

With zero incentive, not even being hungry, heck WANTING to be accurate, and 8 years of training, and the bag was still short. And it's not the first time I've double checked and found items "missing". It is EASY to leave things out. Condiments. Seasonings. Coffee. Oil Spray. Zero calorie items that aren't 0 Cal when you move past the sub 5 Cal quantity posted on the label on purpose so that they can legally call themselves 0Cal.

So yes. Logging will be somewhat inaccurate and, of course, the more you rely on others (eating out etc) the more inaccurate it is.

This is not a "OMG there is nothing I can do I might as well give up". Errors do set off against other errors when there is no bias and the wash is fine in the long run. Short term there might be more variation. Long run it will balance out and you can take action if you remain consistent in your habits.

In your case you DO have a smoking gun. The hormonal IUD. Don't forget that. Plus your personal habits. Plus you're not actually weighing every day to multiply the sample data points.

If you didn't have a smoking gun I would simply say that you might have to start taking a discount on your fitbit TDEE. HOWEVER. You've also confirmed to me that you're at a normal weight. And trying to go deep into normal weight territory.

This is where you are today: https://www.smartbmicalculator.com/result.html?unit=1&hf=5&hi=4&wl=128&us=1&ua=30&ue=0&gl=

2022 = 30y - 2018 = married = 4 years of weight gain ; we're down to 26yo when gain starts. Maybe you spent 14 years at 113 since you were 12.... but from the perspective of someone ALMOST at Ann's age only the years between 22 and 26 count in my books... so you've got just about a 50-50 between your super low target and the smack dab in the middle of normal weight where you're at.

Yeah, I *would* give my goals a double think but even if you do decide to pursue the shape and weight you want... FAST is NOT and option especially if you add "safe" in the picture.

So yes, continue to aim for small deficits and continue to think about maintenance. Really. the absolute worst thing you can do for yourself is to engage in this weight loss and not anticipate that you will have to spend JUST AS MUCH TIME AS YOU'RE SPENDING LOSING, actually, twice or three times as much time, first trying to control any hormonal rebound overeating and then making sure you don't have creep up over time taking place again. You may spend a year losing... but the 50-50 mark for not regaining lost weight is at the 5 year point.

Life and priorities change, other people around you become more sedentary... it is easy to have the weight gain over time and easier still if you've just finished losing.

I'll let granny Ann say more. but all that your calculations show is that you're perhaps clocking in at slightly below your average cat of your stats when it comes to caloric expenditures.

Ann is a mysteriously good calorie burner... I'm a 2-3% below average on average You are still discovering how far off you may be because some of it is just being off, but some of it IS in fact water retention and all that!

So, the only real question from your figures would be whether you should pull the trigger to accelerate weight loss, i.e. push harder. At a BMI of 22... NOT something I would do.

Beyond that accumulate the data because down the road it would be helpful to have an independent measurement (fitbit) and a correction factor that you can use to estimate how much you're burning both for more precise weight loss but also for maintenance...

deannasawyer

@PAV8888 Yeah, I keep looking over my food logs and I can't see where the errors might be (aside from eating out about once/twice a week... which I admit could account for some of it). My husband and I really enjoy eating out so it is something that I'm going to have to learn to manage. I suspect that's where the creep came from in the first place. I was very food insecure for most of my life.

I'm really not trying to be difficult; I want to do this right. I eat a surplus usually twice a week, but if MFP's weekly average feature works right I should still have an average deficit of 300-500 calories. I weigh/log before I eat, because I'd never remember otherwise. I *do* use slices for bread, but not cheese or meat. Measuring cups and spoons are a waste of time and dishes, so I exclusively use my food scale for non-liquid ingredients/foods. I don't use condiments. I take my tea and coffee with no cream/sugar and don't drink any other caloric beverages.

I agree that losing 1.25lb/wk like I did the first 4 weeks was too fast, and certainly the 4.9lbs for a month that fitbit - mfp projected is way too fast for my weight, especially given my already very high body fat percentage (34.7%). The doctor did say that I needed to lose some body fat as having body fat percentage that high put me at risk for developing issues, but I've heard that losing weight too fast causes you to lose muscle. It was not my intention to lose so quickly. I thought I was maintaining at 1500+exercise (also based on the inBody scan I had done at the doctor's) with a BMR of 1196. But maybe that would make fitbit's estimate off? Maybe fitbit assumes my BMR is higher.

I probably shouldn't double down on my deficit as that seems unhealthy to do. But at the same time since I'm not seeing loss, I don't really want to reduce my deficit either. I feel a little stuck.

AnnPT77

deannasawyer wrote: »

@AnnPT77 Oh, sorry! I completely forgot the stats. 30 years old, 5'4", currently 128lbs (starting weight 138lbs). I realize I'm already a healthy weight, but I spent 14 years being 113lbs and I prefer that weight for me. It's also the size that all my many, many clothes accumulated through the years are. My work is a mix of desk and investigating/assisting on the factory floor, so I get between 3500-6500 brisk steps per day at work.

Now, my exercise is only cardio 2-3 times per week (1 hour brisk walk with some periods of jogging mixed in). I restarted exercising in February after a several-month hiatus. I haven't restarted weight training yet. Around that time I also got a very stressful promotion and in the last month have had to [temporarily] radically shift my diet to accommodate an acid reflux flare-up. So it's possible that some of this may be water retention from stress on my body. As you said, bodies are weird. But 5lbs though?


@PAV8888
I'd like to say that I'm weighing in daily, but it's really more every 2-5 days (whenever I happen to remember before I've eaten). I've been tracking my weight trend in Libra.

I totally didn't realize you could export Fitbit calories for the month. That's super cool. So I just did as you said and subtracted my calories eaten for the last month from my calories burned for the last month and found out, well, A, I have apparently miscalculated what my maintenance is and B, I should have lost 4.9lbs. According to Libra, however, my trend line is pretty flat for that time period, with a small period of gain/loss in the middle. My logging might not be perfect when hubby and I eat out, but I would think there's no way that could account for such a huge discrepancy. I'd have to be off by 17,150 calories, which I know is impossible. But I'd think 5lbs of extra water retention would also not be likely? Unless that's a side effect of the IUD, which I suppose is possible.



Should I just continue what I'm doing and see what next month looks like? If my base water retention has changed, at some point it would have to even out and I'd start losing again. I would think.

Thank you guys so much for your in-depth responses. I really appreciate your help.

I think 5 pounds of water retention is possible, in your specific situation. I don't know that I think it's likely, but I'm sure my gut feel for probability is biased by my personal situation (no hormones, low stress, blah blah blah). (I've occasionally seen a woman here say that her hormonal weight gain around ovulation and/or pre-period is as much as 7 pounds, and you just did something hormonally . . . interesting . . . to your body. Plus increasing exercise part way through this 14 weeks (potential water retention), plus increased job stress (potential water retention), plus acid reflux (inflammation? if so, maybe water retention). You've got a lot going on there! )

Since your goal is to reduce body fat, you don't want to lose too fast (as you've said you know). I think what you wrote, that I bolded in the quote, might be a good plan. I get that you want to get back to your happy weight, but with so many wild cards in your hand at this point, and at a weight that isn't currently an acute health threat to you, throwing an increased calorie deficit in might not be ideal from a cumulative stress standpoint.

Even one more full menstrual cycle could be enlightening, in terms of trend . . . especially if some of those other sources of variability settle down to some kind of steady state.

It's true that your Fitbit could overestimate your all-day calories. It's just giving you a personalized estimate, still based on research, yet still pretty much just what they think would be true for the average person similar to you (in personal characteristics and movement). Most of us are close to average, but we may not be exactly average (could be either high or low), and it's possible (just lower probability statistically) to be off surprisingly far from average.

I'm assuming that your body fat percent is not known to Fitbit? (I'm a Garmin user. My profile on Garmin doesn't include BF%.) I put your stats into the Sailrabbit TDEE calculator **. I'm not suggesting you get your calorie estimates from something like that (less personalized that Fitbit), but an interesting thing about Sailrabbit is that it lets you compare multiple research-based calorie estimating formulas for BMR/RMR. Three of the formulas do not use BF%, and 3 others do.

** https://www.sailrabbit.com/bmr/

In your case, 2 of the 3 formulas that use BF% think that your BMR/RMR could be around 100 calories lower (round number) if your BF% truly is 34.7%, as compared with formulas that don't use BF%. As you doubtless know, much other estimating of calorie expenditure is done via a multiplier of BMR/RMR. The implication may be that your BF% might be a little higher than average for your age/height/weight demographic.

That further suggests to me that if Fitbit doesn't know your BF%, it could estimate your BMR/RMR a little on the high side based on the assumptions about population-average BF% at your height/weight/age (and I'd expect MFP might do likewise). No guarantees, though, just pure speculation - more goes into it than BF%, and it's complicated . . . and it's all estimates! For sure, I'd point out that - unlike you - I don't know what weight you were at when you got that BF% estimate, and that does make a difference, potentially, even at a level of speculation.

As an aside, if you can get yourself into a (near-)daily routine of get up, use bathroom, weigh in in same state of (un)dress each day, record in Libra, your trend lines are likely to be more statistically meaningful faster.

If what you'd really, really like long term is to be smaller (fit those clothes), and be at a lower body fat percent . . . that weight training thing could be your friend, when you have time and will to fit it in. As I mentioned before, gaining mass is a gradual thing, but it does gradually result in being overall smaller at any given weight.

As an added bonus, strength develops faster than mass - quite fast at first - and strength is useful in daily life, tends to make movement/exercise easier and more fun, etc.

There's a little bit of BMR/RMR increase just from having more muscle mass, less fat mass at any given weight . . . but those are pretty small numbers. I can't prove it, but I'd guess the TDEE increase from being stronger (so movement is easier and more fun) is a more meaningful contributor to the overall calorie-burn picture.

This is a total aside, but PAV mentioned that I'm "a mysteriously good" li'l ol' calorie burner (terms I've used of myself in other posts). I suspect but can't prove that that has something to do with my having a little lower body fat percent than MFP and my Garmin assume, based on my age/weight/height (I'm age 66/about your current weight/5'5").

Sailrabbit hints that the average woman my age/size might be believed to have a body fat percent around 32%, when I think mine's probably really more like 24-25%. Garmin and MFP both estimate my all-day calorie needs several hundred lower than nearly 7 years of calorie counting has led me to believe true. I don't think BF% is the sole reason my TDEE is higher than they both expect, but I speculate that it's part of the picture. It's unusual for estimates to be that far off (it's around 25-30% off in my case), low probability, but it can happen.

In your case, though . . . I'm not sure you have the data you need yet to be certain what your calorie level should be. Too many variables - the recent changes! Like you, I would think the base water retention would level out, and if fat loss is happening (hidden by that water), it should show up in the next month-ish, assuming nor more addition of confounding variables. Hold on for another month - sounds like a decent idea in that context, but obviously that's up to you.

Keep us posted, if you feel up to it? This is quite interesting!

PAV8888

So being stuck when you suspect there may be hormonal water retention taking place is... Not a terrible place to be especially if you have no exigency to lose fast which you do not. in fact it would be counterproductive for you to go fast.

Dexa scans are the gold standard at 1.5% error rate approximately. 1.5% of body fat that is!

If your 34.7 came from a dexa scanner it would mean 33.2 to 36.2 body fat.

How much is the inBody error rate? All other things being equal? Did you have a BM the morning of your scan? Did you not exercise or what have you I believe it's 24 hours or so before the scan?

Don't take statistical averages to be gospel

Also, again, you're raising the issue of optimal goals. Weight loss is the faster way to reduce fat. But toned hard body is a different story

I hear frustration. Yet you're not at body weights we're bold moves and quick losses are they go to option.

Frustration signals lack of sustainability.

Please look at the part above where I'm discussing just about the worst thing you can do for your body composition

And the worst thing you can do for your body composition is rapid lost followed by rebound regain.

Pretty much one of the most common things when people push too hard why not deliberately planning and doing everything they can to ensure soft landing into maintenance and long term follow up

PAV8888

I'll quickly address one thing Ann raised. Both mfp and Fitbit do not use body fat which is too difficult to calculate accurately and unknown by most people. They both use the Mifflin formula which is a more modern sample than the 1918 Harris Benedict sample.

To consider both average height for men and women has changed since the Harris sample, and households come with appliances.... Now if you're a smaller stature woman or man with less body fat the Harris may be more reflective of you than if you're closer to average and of higher body fat where Mifflin is probably closer.

It is still a fitted curve and not everyone fits the thing perfectly!🤷🏻‍♂️

Again though it has nothing to do with a person who ought to be looking at a 5-year Horizon to avoid regain and who confronted with lack of progress in a month is feeling strained... Because drumroll : they are probably pushing too hard for their current situation

The worst case scenario is rebound regain which is almost guaranteed the minute one gives up in disgust because they can't succeed, do this anymore, because things changed in life, etc, etc.

Make it fun easy and engaging and a continuous quest for health. The results will follow.

Everything you say does not indicate at this time to put the foot on the gas

If I would believe for a minute that it would be entertained I would possibly even suggest taking the foot off the gas

1200 net is not very high, especially for a person who eats out

PAV8888

Back in the days there used to be a sticky about lean people trying to get leaner various threads on recomp may also be useful

deannasawyer

@PAV8888 @AnnPT77

You guys are amazing. As a lurker, you were practically hero status already for me, but having your thoughtful input on my situation has been extremely helpful.

I'm not sure on the margin of error for the InBody model they use at the doctor's office, but I would think that if my doctor is using it as a benchmark then it would have to be fairly accurate? She does a full battery of tests (even an EKG!) for each two-part physical and she gives an hour and a half for the analysis portion so I would hope she's putting a lot of thought into what she uses for tools. That could just be me being hopeful. No exercise or BM prior to the scan; I was sedentary at the time and at my SW of 138.

I think what I will do is give it one more month at my current speed and see what happens with my weight. If I start losing quickly again I'll back off on my deficit a little bit. If I'm still trending flat or gaining, though, I'm not sure what I'll do. I guess tighten up my zigzagging calories a little bit and get back to weight training sooner. I'll use this month as an opportunity to improve my daily weight logging, though. As you said, that should give me better data to work with.

You're right, the last thing I want to do is rebound and I shudder to think what my BF% would look like after rapid loss/gain. I don't mind if loss takes a bit longer than I expected, especially given that my shape does seem to be changing despite the number on the scale staying the same.

PAV8888

I am looking at a paper that says inbody good substitute for dexa.
2 days of testing over 24-72h "low standard error of measurement for BF% ranging from 0.77% to 0.99%.

Obviously at 0.99% the methods are producing repeatable results. At 0.77%... not as much.

Unbiased visual... probably as effective as inbody

Next time you're going for a scan... you would have to keep initial conditions similar. Lack of BM is a major potential un-equalizer..

Female body fat is higher than male. I am still having some trouble reconciling a 32% to 36% number with you being well within normal weight in terms of BMI. Is it possible? Absolutely. but worth re-confirming?

So secondary confirmation would be relatively easy measurements such as waist to height and waist to hip ratios.

Feel along your pelvis to the very top of the iliac crest bone. then to lowest rib. mark half way point on skin. use mirror to position tape level all around. breathe normally. measure on the unforced exhale without pulling on the tape

Similarly waist to hip ratio.

Do either or both provide backing to the 32%+ number?

AnnPT77

deannasawyer wrote: »

@PAV8888 @AnnPT77

You guys are amazing. As a lurker, you were practically hero status already for me, but having your thoughtful input on my situation has been extremely helpful.

I'm not sure on the margin of error for the InBody model they use at the doctor's office, but I would think that if my doctor is using it as a benchmark then it would have to be fairly accurate? She does a full battery of tests (even an EKG!) for each two-part physical and she gives an hour and a half for the analysis portion so I would hope she's putting a lot of thought into what she uses for tools. That could just be me being hopeful. No exercise or BM prior to the scan; I was sedentary at the time and at my SW of 138.

I think what I will do is give it one more month at my current speed and see what happens with my weight. If I start losing quickly again I'll back off on my deficit a little bit. If I'm still trending flat or gaining, though, I'm not sure what I'll do. I guess tighten up my zigzagging calories a little bit and get back to weight training sooner. I'll use this month as an opportunity to improve my daily weight logging, though. As you said, that should give me better data to work with.

Keep in mind that if you resume weight training, it would be reasonable to expect some scale-weight "gain" from water retention for muscle repair.

Different people show different patterns, for that. Me, when I resume strength training seasonally, I tend to gain about 2 pounds and hold onto it until I stop my (3 days a week) strength training in the Spring. I've seen others say they may gain 7 pounds when starting strength training, or see the water weight cycle on an off with training days. I'd say, expect a jump, then learn from what you observe.

You're right, the last thing I want to do is rebound and I shudder to think what my BF% would look like after rapid loss/gain. I don't mind if loss takes a bit longer than I expected, especially given that my shape does seem to be changing despite the number on the scale staying the same.

If your shape is changing (in a good way) something good is happening. There are various possible explanations/outcomes, but one possibility is that you're setting up for a "whoosh" (sudden drop of water weight). We'll hope, eh?

Let us know how it plays out, if you feel up to it.

PAV8888

AnnPT77 wrote: »

If your shape is changing (in a good way) something good is happening.

In all the (my) verbiage don't forget the above! You may not be seeing it on the scale right now but you're NOT at a standstill either.

deannasawyer

@PAV8888 My doctor called it "normal weight obesity", or rather, said I was approaching it. My skeletal muscle mass was lower than the healthy range and my body fat higher than that range for my weight. I just dug out 2021's folder, and my scan last year reflected 31% BF, but I hadn't weighed quite as much then either (and apparently hadn't reached my "I've had enough" point yet).

I'm at work right now so can't do the reconfirmation at the moment, but I'd hope being 10lbs down from that point that my BF% is lower than what it was. I'll check it out when I get home.

@AnnPT77
Thanks for the heads-up about the weight training and water retention. I'll keep that in mind when I resume. Also, I like the idea of setting up for a "whoosh". Not sure it'll happen, but I can hope. Not seeing the progress in number form is so maddening, because it makes it very difficult to see where I am and make adjustments.

AnnPT77

deannasawyer wrote: »

@PAV8888 @AnnPT77

You guys are amazing. As a lurker, you were practically hero status already for me, but having your thoughtful input on my situation has been extremely helpful.

I'm not sure on the margin of error for the InBody model they use at the doctor's office, but I would think that if my doctor is using it as a benchmark then it would have to be fairly accurate? She does a full battery of tests (even an EKG!) for each two-part physical and she gives an hour and a half for the analysis portion so I would hope she's putting a lot of thought into what she uses for tools. That could just be me being hopeful. No exercise or BM prior to the scan; I was sedentary at the time and at my SW of 138.

I think what I will do is give it one more month at my current speed and see what happens with my weight. If I start losing quickly again I'll back off on my deficit a little bit. If I'm still trending flat or gaining, though, I'm not sure what I'll do. I guess tighten up my zigzagging calories a little bit and get back to weight training sooner. I'll use this month as an opportunity to improve my daily weight logging, though. As you said, that should give me better data to work with.

You're right, the last thing I want to do is rebound and I shudder to think what my BF% would look like after rapid loss/gain. I don't mind if loss takes a bit longer than I expected, especially given that my shape does seem to be changing despite the number on the scale staying the same.

FWIW, there are other ways you can evaluate body fat levels (all imperfect, some more so than others . . . but if they converge on similar values, that may be suggestive of something). For example, here a a couple of random threads where people are discussing various body fat "calculators":

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10835996/body-fat-percentage-calculators-accuracy
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10833599/body-fat-calculator-us-navy-method/p1

There are also sites (web search will find a bunch) with photos of people at various body fat percentages.

None of that is remotely precise, but it's another input. I'm not advocating them, I'm just pointing out that they exist.

I agree with PAV that your 34.7% number seems on the high side for your personal/demographic details, but it doesn't sound as improbable to me as it seems to sound to him . . . maybe just from a context of being female myself? . . . especially if you have a history that includes some of yo-yo or extreme dieting, limited/no athletic activity, very sedentary lifestyle, etc.

138 pounds at 5'4" is BMI 23.7, up toward the upper end of normal BMI, and it's not unusual for relatively inactive women to have some extra body fat when close to the upper end of normal BMI. It'd be around 90 pounds of LBM, which doesn't seem crazy low to me for a 5'4" woman, maybe not low at all. Also, you do mention feeling best at 113, which is BMI 19.4, pretty close to the bottom end of normal BMI range. Do you have narrow hips (bone spacing), shoulders? Small hat size? Narrow wrists, small hands/feet?

PAV makes a good point about considering waist circumference and waist/height ratio, too.

deannasawyer

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Also, you do mention feeling best at 113, which is BMI 19.4, pretty close to the bottom end of normal BMI range. Do you have narrow hips (bone spacing), shoulders? Small hat size? Narrow wrists, small hands/feet?

Very much yes to all of the above, except for feet and shoulders. I wear a size 4 ring, extra small hats, under 5" wrist. My entire fist disappears in my husband's hand, easily.

At 113lbs, I not only like the way I look, but I feel healthier, more energetic, less sluggish. I went from being very active (run every day, hike every weekend, 12k+ steps at work, farm work during free time) prior to being married to extremely sedentary (sub-2k steps save for the occasional neighborhood walk and no more active hobbies) and with much more access to food. I'm not surprised at all that my body fat percentage is as high as it is (err.. was.. hoping it's less now). I didn't just gain weight on top of my muscle mass, I also lost muscle mass and replaced it with fat.

AnnPT77

deannasawyer wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Also, you do mention feeling best at 113, which is BMI 19.4, pretty close to the bottom end of normal BMI range. Do you have narrow hips (bone spacing), shoulders? Small hat size? Narrow wrists, small hands/feet?

Very much yes to all of the above, except for feet and shoulders. I wear a size 4 ring, extra small hats, under 5" wrist. My entire fist disappears in my husband's hand, easily.

At 113lbs, I not only like the way I look, but I feel healthier, more energetic, less sluggish. I went from being very active (run every day, hike every weekend, 12k+ steps at work, farm work during free time) prior to being married to extremely sedentary (sub-2k steps save for the occasional neighborhood walk and no more active hobbies) and with much more access to food. I'm not surprised at all that my body fat percentage is as high as it is (err.. was.. hoping it's less now). I didn't just gain weight on top of my muscle mass, I also lost muscle mass and replaced it with fat.

Of course it is - the bolded. I may not have the timeline clear, but roughly: You were at 138, now at 128, so 10 pounds down. You mention losing fast the first month, but likely some of that was water weight and a decrease in average digestive contents, just from eating less. I won't guess at that (the fraction that would've been water/waste), but a minority.

Then you lost about 4 pounds in the 2nd month, so it sounds like "fast" in the first month was averaging about 1.5 pounds a week - probably faster than sensible for your then-current weight, but not full-bore nutty-aggressive. Sounds like you may've ramped up exercise (walking/jogging) somewhere along the line, which - even though it isn't formal strength training - will've given your body a hint that your muscle mass is not an unwanted/expendable resources.

A fair fraction of the 10 pounds will've been fat, certainly. No need to catastrophize about it - you're making progress toward your goals.

deannasawyer

In case anyone is curious, after about a month and a half of being stuck at 128, 2 pounds finally dropped off this past week. Crossing my fingers that from here on out I'll resume seeing steady loss like I did before the stall.

TMI Alert

I have been bleeding since a week after the IUD went in so definitely some hormonal shenanigans which are likely to blame for the standstill.

AnnPT77

deannasawyer wrote: »

In case anyone is curious, after about a month and a half of being stuck at 128, 2 pounds finally dropped off this past week. Crossing my fingers that from here on out I'll resume seeing steady loss like I did before the stall.

TMI Alert

I have been bleeding since a week after the IUD went in so definitely some hormonal shenanigans which are likely to blame for the standstill.

Quite possibly some inflammation related to that as well, so overall honestly not surprising.

Thanks for coming back to give an update: I always wonder what the next stage of people's stories turns out to be. I hope you have a smooth course going forward!

deannasawyer

Unfortunately, my course has not been very smooth.

After a low of 125lbs and some change (yay!), I had a week where three events led to going over my calories by quite a bit. My weekly average came out to around 1500 calories/day, which should have just been a tad over maintenance. Even if I underestimated one or more of those meals, I couldn't possibly have underestimated by more than 1-2000 calories total. So NBD.

Except the scale ticked up to 129, which is higher than it's been March. Which I expected given the large meals. More waste, probably water retention from increased sodium, etc. Problem is it stayed that way. It's been 16 days since the hike to 129 and I'm still bouncing between 129 and 127lbs. So for the last week I set my goal to 900 calories in the hopes of just seeing the trend budge (since that should have been a whole pound of loss -- easier to see). Expectation being that as soon as I start trending downward again, I'd go back to 1200 calories. That didn't work, as anyone might have expected, because 900 net is too low for me and led to a binge that brought my weekly average back to 1200/day anyway.

I know 1200 is not my maintenance calories. My tested BMR is 1186, so that wouldn't make sense. Based on my average rate of loss being 0.5lb/wk at 1200 calories, sedentary maintenance is probably a little over 1400. And 1200 was working... albeit in a trend of plateau/whoosh/plateau/whoosh according to Libra (which is probably what caused the initial confusion in this thread to be honest).

I'm very frustrated to be 6 months into my journey and be back where I was mid-March. Should I try reverse dieting back to maintenance for a while and then cut again? Or am I just relying way too much on the math and I should just hunker down and expect that it won't always make sense?

AnnPT77

I

deannasawyer wrote: »

Unfortunately, my course has not been very smooth.

After a low of 125lbs and some change (yay!), I had a week where three events led to going over my calories by quite a bit. My weekly average came out to around 1500 calories/day, which should have just been a tad over maintenance. Even if I underestimated one or more of those meals, I couldn't possibly have underestimated by more than 1-2000 calories total. So NBD.

Except the scale ticked up to 129, which is higher than it's been March. Which I expected given the large meals. More waste, probably water retention from increased sodium, etc. Problem is it stayed that way. It's been 16 days since the hike to 129 and I'm still bouncing between 129 and 127lbs. So for the last week I set my goal to 900 calories in the hopes of just seeing the trend budge (since that should have been a whole pound of loss -- easier to see). Expectation being that as soon as I start trending downward again, I'd go back to 1200 calories. That didn't work, as anyone might have expected, because 900 net is too low for me and led to a binge that brought my weekly average back to 1200/day anyway.

I know 1200 is not my maintenance calories. My tested BMR is 1186, so that wouldn't make sense. Based on my average rate of loss being 0.5lb/wk at 1200 calories, sedentary maintenance is probably a little over 1400. And 1200 was working... albeit in a trend of plateau/whoosh/plateau/whoosh according to Libra (which is probably what caused the initial confusion in this thread to be honest).

I'm very frustrated to be 6 months into my journey and be back where I was mid-March. Should I try reverse dieting back to maintenance for a while and then cut again? Or am I just relying way too much on the math and I should just hunker down and expect that it won't always make sense?

If I were you, I'd probably try to hold steady at the calorie level you find sustainable (doesn't trigger compensatory over-eating) and know has produced gradual loss in the past (though it would also be fine to inch back up toward maintenance and hang out there for a bit, if that's psychologically easier for you at this point).

I'm saying this as someone who not long back went through losing around 10-15 vanity pounds crazy-slowly (effective deficit around 100-150 calories, over more than a year's time). There was a stage where even Libra (my weight-trending app of choice) thought I was maintaining/gaining for a whole month, when I knew I was eating at a slow-loss intake. IIRC, I didn't even have any major high-calorie days in that time period, which would've made the false plateau/gain look even more misleading (and I'm fully in menopause, so I don't have any hormonal water-weight cycling in the picture). Sure enough, with patience, the expected loss eventually showed up on the scale, at around the 5-6 week mark.

IMO, slow loss - even the half pound a week - is ultra likely to look like plateau-whoosh, because (if you're similar to me) daily water fluctuations are routinely in the 2-3 pound range (even without major high-calorie days), and that can mask half a pound a week of fat loss on the scale for a surprisingly long time. Eventually, the peek-a-boo breaks through when the fat loss is more than that maybe 3 pound range . . . but how long it will take is pretty unpredictable IME.

Bodies are weird. 🤷‍♀️

deannasawyer

@AnnPT77 Thank you for sharing your experience. That makes a lot of sense. I think what I'll do is hang out at maintenance for a little bit (because if I'm being honest, after 6 months of this I am ready for a break) and then resume 1200 calories/day in a few weeks and try to be a bit more patient. Hearing that your Libra trend thought you were gaining for a whole month when you were actually losing is comforting, since I'm probably in that boat right now. If I can maintain a loss of 0.5lb/wk, I should be at goal weight around next January-ish. Longer than I would have liked, but more sustainable.

The hard part will be figuring out how to eat at maintenance, so I guess I can use this short period as practice. I completely changed how I eat when I started eating at a deficit and I've gotten used to that.