How long did it take you to see results?

Lala478910

I've been doing keto for 3 weeks, cut calories down to 1400-1800 per day. I previously was not tracking calories but it was over at least 2000 per day. I stopped drinking alcohol. I am 270 pounds so I have a lot to lose.

I'm adding in walking this week.

I have not seen any weight loss at all. Just wondering if anyone else had this experience and if so, how long did it take to see results.

Hiawassee88

https://www.myfitnesspal.com/nutrition-facts-calories/ketogenic-diet-100-easy-recipes

Waaaay back in my day, I did keto. Here's some recipes for you. Watch your fat portions. Underestimating fat calories is easily done. I remember dropping it like it was hot. I lost at least 10 lbs the first month and then it leveled off to an average of 5 lbs per month.

AnnPT77

Hang in there. It's great that you're making positive changes, but realistically it can take up to 4-6 weeks to really start seeing what effect our changes are making. Weight loss IMO is a game of patience and persistence. (I'm in year 7 of maintaining after about a year of loss. Long time. Takes dogged persistence, sometimes.)

More specific yammering from me about your question and my answer:

Define "see"? If you're weighing daily under consistent conditions, the answer might be different than if you're weighing less frequently under varying conditions. If you're using a weight trending app, that might give you better hints, but it still works best with consistent daily weighing and at least a month of data.

(Weighing under consistent conditions = something like first thing in the AM, after bathroom before eating/drinking, same state of (un)dress.)

On top of that, individual results will vary. If you start new exercise, or change your eating (such as get more veggies/fruits and fluids rather than eating the same foods in smaller quantities), it can take longer to show up. A few women who have monthly cycles only see a new low weight once a month, at a particular point in their cycle, even when losing fat at a reasonable pace. The influence of hormones can be that weird, although that's not the most common pattern.

Generally, folks around here who've done this for a while recommend going for 4-6 weeks on any new routine, then looking at average weight loss per week over the whole time. For women who have monthly cycles, it can be important to compare weight at the same relative point in at least two different cycles. If the first two weeks look unusual (fairly common), throw out those 2 weeks from your average, and go another couple of weeks.

If you were maintaining your weight on over 2000, let's say 2200 on average (just for example), that would imply that 1400-1800 would be an 800 calorie daily deficit (around 1.6 pounds of fat loss per week roughly) to a 400 calorie daily deficit (around 0.8 pounds of fat loss weekly).

I don't know about you, but for me, my routine daily water retention and digestive contents fluctuations (not fat!) can be 2-6 pounds, so realistically fat loss could play peek a boo on the scales with that for at least 2-3 weeks, even weighing daily under consistent conditions . . . and I'm in menopause, so no hormonal weirdness.

But, to answer your actual question, I cut calories stupid far at first, to my own detriment although by accident, and saw loss on the scale within a couple of weeks (as a menopausal woman losing too fast).

Are you noticing any differences in clothes fit or careful tape measurements of multiple body parts? Sometimes loss will show up there when water weight weirdness is masking progress on the scale.

(Don't try to manipulate your water retention, if you're generally healthy. Water weight shifts are part of how a healthy body stays healthy. Our bodies know what they're doing in that space: We shouldn't mess with that.)

I totally get that this is frustrating, but hang in there. Some people find that they have a "stall and whoosh" pattern where they see nothing much on the scale for a while, then a substantial drop . . . and that pattern repeats. If you're new to this, you'll figure out your patterns with time. (Our patterns can even change over the course of life or at different times during weight loss.)

I hope you'll see the reward for your efforts soon. Please don't be discouraged! This is very much a "monitor and adjust" kind of thing. You'll succeed if you keep working at it, analyzing, and adjusting.

Best wishes!

PAV8888

how often do you weight. is your scale on carpet or on an unyielding surface? have you experienced any episodes of...err... increased urination?

do you use keto strips to see whether you are successfully keeping your carbs low enough to be on keto? Are you using the term keto generically for low(er) carb?

How large of a deficit is 1400-1800 for you? What was your *actual* average Caloric intake per day these past 3 weeks once you include EVERYTHING, bites, licks, drinks, and even inhaled aroma for each and every day?!!!! (ok: inhaled aroma doesn't actually have calories so you DON'T have to log that! lame joke. Sorry! )

I can personally cut from over 3500 to 3100; but my maintenance level given my current activity level and physical make up is in the high 2900's. So at 3100 I would continue to slowly gain and I would have to average at 2900 or lower to slowly start losing.

tomcustombuilder

At 270 you were taking in a lot more than 2,000 calories so possibly you’re also taking in a lot more than 14-1800 every day consistently. If no loss in another week or so I’d revisit your actual counting and tracking accuracy.

AnnieH_4512

Hey girl!! Keto gal here myself. One of the first things you need to take into consideration is your age and your lifestyle. When I first started doing the keto diet, I was in my early 30s, walked every day, and everything just melted away very quickly. I’m getting back into it pretty seriously now, but now I am 43 and it’s taking a little longer for the keto affect to kick in. Also try to sneak in as many snacks as you can, as sometimes I experience a lack of weight loss due to the fact I’m not eating as much. Cheese sticks, sugar-free jello cups, any veggies that you love, etc. Please feel free to add me!

Lala478910

Thanks all! And yes, I'm sure I was eating way over 2000 calories, I just never measured so I am not sure the exact amount... I started tracking/measuring everything on myfitnesspal so it's as close to accurate as I can be now. I will keep trying to do better and not give up!

I'm weighing myself on the same scale, at the same time, in the same location.

PAV8888

Accurate and consistent logging is an acquired skill. I prefer to be as accurate and consistent as I can because then I can maximize what I eat consistent with meeting my goals.

Accuracy is not necessary. Consistency is, if you want to use logging to help with your decisions.

No longer increasing in weight is already a win and is much better than a continued upward trajectory. That I can attest to, personally!

Faster is not always better but if after several weeks you're not seeing reasonable progress then the answer will be to either tighten your logging or drop your target calories.

Not necessarily both as the desired end result is a reasonable and sustainable deficit you can adhere to long term.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

neanderthin

PaulDalen wrote: »

it was over at least 2000 per day. I stopped drinking alcohol. I am 270 pounds

You look female and young, so at 270 you were likely eating a LOT more than 2000 calories per day. I'll be that you were at more like 3-4K calories. You will lose.

There is a large group of weight loss surgeons that advocate a high protein/low fat/very low carb diet instead of the high protein/high fat keto diet. Take a look at that. Very high fat diets can be hard on your body after several months.

The amount of protein required in this type of diet would be unreasonable considering both other macronutrient's are so low leaving protein to make up the lions share of total calories and keto diets are not high protein like you've indicated. Maybe link to where Dr's are advocating this, I'd be interested out of curiosity. High fat diet are not hard on the body and I think a little bias is slipping in here. Very low calories diets (800 is used a lot) under supervision is generally the route taken pre surgery.

sjl0210

Sometimes eating more (healthy eating) can help you lose weight. Just eat a lot of proteins, work out and drink alot of water. You should see results every week, at least on the weightscale

cmriverside

stianjl wrote: »

Sometimes eating more (healthy eating) can help you lose weight. Just eat a lot of proteins, work out and drink alot of water. You should see results every week, at least on the weightscale

Elaborate on your reasoning, please.

First, we don't know that s/he is eating the amount stated. "Tracking" food doesn't mean that is the actual amount due to all kinds of factors involved in tracking food on this site.

But more than that - she's 270 pounds. That's in the life-threatening/crisis averting range for a lot of people. 1400-1800 is sufficient for her, she's got a lot of fuel already on board. The "eat more to lose more" thing really only comes into play once someone is nearing a healthy body weight/BMI and/or if they are already eating at the lowest calorie amount (like 1200 for female, 1500 for male.) Are you talking about raising daily calories, or adding in a couple hundred more for exercise, or having a planned over-calories day once in a while? I mean, your advice is pretty vaguely phrased.

Also, "eat a lot of proteins, work out and drink a lot of water?" Well, that's specific.

So, would you explain why you said what you said?

neanderthin

cmriverside wrote: »

stianjl wrote: »

Sometimes eating more (healthy eating) can help you lose weight. Just eat a lot of proteins, work out and drink alot of water. You should see results every week, at least on the weightscale

Elaborate on your reasoning, please.

First, we don't know that s/he is eating the amount stated. "Tracking" food doesn't mean that is the actual amount due to all kinds of factors involved in tracking food on this site.

But more than that - she's 270 pounds. That's in the life-threatening/crisis averting range for a lot of people. 1400-1800 is sufficient for her, she's got a lot of fuel already on board. The "eat more to lose more" thing really only comes into play once someone is nearing a healthy body weight/BMI and/or if they are already eating at the lowest calorie amount (like 1200 for female, 1500 for male.) Are you talking about raising daily calories, or adding in a couple hundred more for exercise, or having a planned over-calories day once in a while? I mean, your advice is pretty vaguely phrased.

Also, "eat a lot of proteins, work out and drink a lot of water?" Well, that's specific.

So, would you explain why you said what you said?

Eating more might mean low calorie dense foods, a volume thing, but not sure, but your right eating more calories when someone is 270 is not a solution.

celestialsecrets7232

I noticed if I eat more often, my metabolism works better. Eating 3 meals plus 2 snacks per day speeds up my metabolism. When I only ate 2 meals per day and no snacks, I never lost weight that week.

cmriverside

celestialsecrets7232 wrote: »

I noticed if I eat more often, my metabolism works better. Eating 3 meals plus 2 snacks per day speeds up my metabolism. When I only ate 2 meals per day and no snacks, I never lost weight that week.

Metabolism works just as efficiently with two meals as it does with five "meals." There were other factors at play in that week that you haven't considered - not the least of which are calories, salt, sleep, travel, food choices (carbs, fats, protein, fiber, alcohol,) activity and exercise. It's all about how much I eat over a period of time (longer than a week,) not the timing or number of times per day.

Welcome to the forums! I learned here and with other research that a lot of what I believed was just diet myths.

ninerbuff

OP if you aren't losing, it's just basically because you're not counting calories correctly. Start there first and foremost. It doesn't matter what diet you do. It still comes down to calories in/out for weight loss/gain/maintenance.

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

Seeing results might take a while. Seeing results while being on the big side takes longer than when you're a slim person. If you're slim 4lbs might make a difference between having a small muffin top and not. 4lbs on a larger person are probably not very visible at first. But please, do hang in there. Others have given you great advice. You've made the first steps, and by the look of it you have chosen a not too big deficit. Give it time, practice patience. You will get there

celestialsecrets7232

cmriverside wrote: »

celestialsecrets7232 wrote: »

I noticed if I eat more often, my metabolism works better. Eating 3 meals plus 2 snacks per day speeds up my metabolism. When I only ate 2 meals per day and no snacks, I never lost weight that week.

Metabolism works just as efficiently with two meals as it does with five "meals." There were other factors at play in that week that you haven't considered - not the least of which are calories, salt, sleep, travel, food choices (carbs, fats, protein, fiber, alcohol,) activity and exercise. It's all about how much I eat over a period of time (longer than a week,) not the timing or number of times per day.

Thanks! I think it's calories...when I skip a meal, I get ravenous and overeat. It's hard to control my appetite when I have 2 meals a day. Eating smaller amounts, more often, keep my blood sugar more even.

cmriverside

celestialsecrets7232 wrote: »

cmriverside wrote: »

celestialsecrets7232 wrote: »

I noticed if I eat more often, my metabolism works better. Eating 3 meals plus 2 snacks per day speeds up my metabolism. When I only ate 2 meals per day and no snacks, I never lost weight that week.

Metabolism works just as efficiently with two meals as it does with five "meals." There were other factors at play in that week that you haven't considered - not the least of which are calories, salt, sleep, travel, food choices (carbs, fats, protein, fiber, alcohol,) activity and exercise. It's all about how much I eat over a period of time (longer than a week,) not the timing or number of times per day.

Thanks! I think it's calories...when I skip a meal, I get ravenous and overeat. It's hard to control my appetite when I have 2 meals a day. Eating smaller amounts, more often, keep my blood sugar more even.

That makes sense. I go back and forth. Sometimes I think, "Two big meals! That works!" then I find myself snacking, "Snacking all day! That seems better!" It's all a big head game for me.