fustrated that nothing is changing

floppybackend

Im just under 13 stone 5'2" 54 peri menopausal. Since January I have been exercising, cutting down. I dont drink alcohol, I dont eat after 6pm, Ive recently cut down on my dairy, Im careful what and how much I eat due to reflux. My portions are smaller than before. I eat more protein.

I have PT and exercise with swimming x3 times a week total (and I put a lot of effort in)and spend a lot of time on my feet.

Yet my weight is the same, to confirm too my size is exactly the same too. (I was so upset to measure myself earlier to check this)

I would of thought my body would of lost at least half a stone since January for goodness sake

The exercise is exhausting me and I do ache loads so I am putting effort in. My PT is excellent and really works me. I cannot do anymore it takes 2 days to recover and I have to work etc. (Yes, I need to discuss this with him).

Its like my body is fighting to hold onto my fat. My sleep is excellent and my stress level is normal. There is nothing physically wrong with my all my bloods are good. I recently had full tests and everything is good.

Husband cant understand he is fit and skinny and is also puzzled to why I havent lost any weight. I should be around 9.5 stone

Without going onto a total fast and starving myself (which will really mess me up) is there any hope that I will get to size 12 in my lifetime again?

I need some help on this please.

csplatt

I didn’t notice you saying anything about counting calories. Have you been doing this, considering that’s what MFP is for?

cmriverside

Right, csplatt.

I looked at her FOOD diary here and it is blank.

Ms. Floppy, without a ballpark idea of your food intake you won't be inclined to eat less - which is what is needed to lose weight.

You can't out-exercise your fork. If you haven't lost any weight in six months, you need to eat less.

BostonBill99

Floppy,

Been at this my whole life (I am 69). Lost over 100 lbs…twice, and gained it back. This time, I am down 53 lbs and I think I have found the secrets - planning and sacrifice. You must plan your meals every day for the next day, never exceed 2000 calories. Limit your carbs; my daily carbs are less than 1/4 of my total caloric intake, sometimes 1/8. I gave up bread and starches (potatoes, etc.) Fasting doesn't work, been there. Starving yourself makes your body switch to survival mode after the first few days and again, you'll lose nothing AND get sick. You need a new mindset - its not the same old game. Your PT is great, but you need to plan to eat and eat your plan, and limit the carbs. It will work.

cmriverside

Fasting doesn't work, been there. Starving yourself makes your body switch to survival mode after the first few days and again, you'll lose nothing AND get sick.

This is not true. There is no "survival mode" that halts weight loss. You might feel fatigued, but not sick in a few days. Longer term fasting (like more than 24 hours) isn't a good weight loss strategy but not for the reason stated.

I think BostonBill probably has found what works for them (and indeed cutting back on processed carbs is a good strategy) but it isn't the cutting back it's the total amount. You don't have to give up bread and potatoes, but they do need to fit into your daily calorie allotment. 2000 calories might be too many for this 5'2" middle aged woman asking the question. I don't know - but 2000 as an absolute is not true. Her number might be somewhere around 1500.

spiriteagle99

If you are not losing weight, then you know what your current calorie maintenance level is. Log your meals and all snacks for a few weeks to see how many calories you are eating. Then reduce that amount by 250-500 calories as a daily goal. Weigh or measure every bite, at least at first. Estimating amounts does not work well, because people tend to underestimate how much they are eating and overestimate how many calories they burn with exercise.

You may actually be losing some weight, but the heavy exercise you are doing may be causing your body to retain water to rebuild muscle. If your weight is fluctuating a lot, that may be why.

AnnPT77

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10940516/fustrated-that-nothing-is-changing

Fat loss is directly about the calories, specifically eating fewer of them than we burn. We burn some just being alive, more of them from jobs and home chores, then maybe some more from exercise.

We don't necessarily need to count the calories in order to get them to the right level, but we need to get them to the right level, or fat loss won't happen.

Cutting down eating isn't sufficient, necessarily. It has to be cut down enough, in calorie terms, to be lower calories than what we burn. If you've been weight stable since January, you've been averaging weight-maintenance calories.

I register that you've made dietary improvements. Personally, partly from insight gained about my own eating from counting calories myself, I know that I could reduce portion sizes, make it a point to eat plenty of protein, and still eat enough calories to maintain weight, or even gain. I "ate healthy" for years - vegetarian, adequate protein, whole grains, other whole foods, lots of veggies - and stayed fat.

Some of the things you list are good to do, getting more exercise, getting enough protein, limiting alcohol which is calorie dense (and technically a poison in surprisingly low doses). All of that is health promoting, generically speaking.

Exercising lots won't necessarily cause weight loss, either. In my late 40s, close to your age, I went from basically a couch-lump to a competing athlete, gradually over the course of a couple of years. I worked out hard 6 days most weeks. I got stronger, I got fitter, I got healthier . . . and didn't lose any weight. I was eating lots of healthy foods, too . . . just too many calories of them, approximately weight-maintenance calories.

Since you say "The exercise is exhausting me and I do ache loads", I'd add this: Too much exercise, in context of one's current fitness level, is counter-productive for weight loss. There's a phenomenon usually called "energy compensation" in the relevant research. (Some similar terms are exercise compensation or calorie compensation.)

It's nuanced, but the basic idea is that when we overdo, we get systemically fatigued, so move less in daily life, perhaps in subtle ways. We may compensate in noticeable ways, like resting/sleeping more; but it can be nearly unnoticed things like less spontaneous movement (think things like changing posture as we sit at a desk, fidgeting, etc.) or losing interest in doing high-effort non-exercise hobbies or home projects. Research has shown that fidgety people burn up to low hundreds more calories daily than otherwise similar people - just from the fidgeting, let alone those other things. That's significant.

For most people, non-exercise daily life activity burns more calories than our exercise sessions. If we overdo the exercise sessions, we can effectively wipe out some of the exercise calories. That's what I mean by "counter-productive". That's energy compensation.

I'm not trying to say "fidget more". That would be dumb. I'm suggesting managing your exercise load to further your goals. For weight loss, the sweet spot tends to be an overall exercise schedule that is energizing for the rest of our day(s), not fatiguing, other than maybe a few minutes of "whew" right after the exercise. Building up exercise volume gradually is a good approach.

Misery is optional, and trying miserable things in pursuit of a bigger goal tends to be discouraging, increase the odds of giving up. Give it some thought.

As someone who's still a recreational athlete (with some coaching education BTW), I'd observe that over-exercising isn't the best route for improving fitness either. A manageable challenge, with a bit of a stretch toward that challenge, is IMO the right kind of zone for fitness improvement.

Recovery - the time between the useful stresses of exercise - is where the magic happens, the body rebuilding better than before. If we short-change the recovery, we limit fitness progress, too. Elite athletes work very, very hard, even sacrifice some other goals, in order to maximize fitness . . . but even they don't throw themselves off a cliff of excess. It's still a manageable challenge, just one with sacrifices in other parts of life, sacrifices us regular folks wouldn't make.

As context, I started seriously losing weight at around your age. I was 59. I was menopausal, hypothyroid (medicated), had been overweight/obese for literal decades. I was very near your current weight. I was 183 pounds, 13st 1, but I'm a little taller, 5'5". I exercised a lot, probably at least as much as you are now, but I'd been doing a similar amount for around a dozen years at that point.

For me, calorie counting was the perfect method: I could dial in the number of calories I needed to eat to lose at a sensibly moderate pace, and take into account a varying exercise schedule as I did so.

In eating terms, I'm certain there's a space between what you're doing now, and "starving yourself". While you almost certainly need to eat fewer calories, that doesn't mean less food volume. Exactly what to eat to stay mostly full and happy the majority of the time, plus ideally get good overall nutrition . . . that's individual, but you can figure that out. You can find that calorie level experientially.

I'm not sure what a size 12 is where you are, since sizing standards vary between countries, but yes, you can get there as long as your bone structure allows that with a healthy amount of remaining body fat (because we do need some).

I'd strongly encourage you to start logging food here, and get a starting calorie goal from MFP for a moderate weight loss. A pound a week would be reasonable, at your current weight. Just log what you're eating now, and see how that compares to the goal, being completely honest with yourself. For most of us, some easy calorie cuts jump out quite quickly, when we log and review our diaries periodically.

Work your way toward that calorie goal, to get close, say +/- 50 on average daily, choosing foods you enjoy, that are practical and affordable, that keep you reasonably full most of the time, and that ideally add up to reasonable overall nutrition.

You don't necessarily need to calorie count forever: That's an individual choice. But doing it consistently for a month or so will give you the insight you need to manage your calorie intake more in line with your weight goals. If you still have regular menstrual cycles at this point in peri, go for at least one full cycle, to compare body weight at the same relative point in at least 2 different cycles. Otherwise, hormonal water retention can distort results.

If you lost roughly a pound a week on average over that whole time period at your starting calorie goal, that's the right calorie goal. If it was slower, or not at all, adjust downward by a moderate amount, and go for another round of 4-6 weeks. If it was much faster (yes, that can happen), eat more, because fast loss isn't health-promoting.

If I were you, I'd also give some thought to the exercise schedule. Some muscle soreness is normal at first, but it should back off to a mild, kind of taut feeling - not totally neutral, but not routinely unpleasantly painful. Overall, like I said, shoot for a total exercise mix that's energizing, not exhausting.

TL;DR: It's the calories. Smaller portions may not do it, increased exercise may not do it. Better nutrition is a good plan, but still may not get calories where they need to be. Find a way to reduce the calories. It will involve changes of habits, but it needn't be constantly miserable. It requires effort, but the right effort.

Totally honestly, speaking as someone who reached a healthy weight and has stayed there for 9+ years since loss: The quality of life improvement is more than worth the effort.

I'm cheering for you to succeed, sincerely!

floppybackend

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/48640683#Comment_48640683

I used to log a lot but havent in a long while. I have added in today as a typical day.

floppybackend

Thank you. Yes we eat extremely well here from scratch and mainly organic. We live on a farm so good quality meat, good and plentyful veg and salads. Im big into planning and having a good healthy fridge. I am so much more careful with carbs and starches compared to a few years ago. Compared to my eating say 1 year ago my portion size is a lot smaller.

PAV8888

Eating a smaller portion is neither necessary nor sufficient in order to eat less calories.

What is in the portion counts.

The balance of calories in and out determines the direction of your weight.

Intense exercise may or may not burn more calories than less intense activity when you consider the totality of the week.

Understand: this is not discussing what is better for your short or long term health.

I'm just stating than one hour of intense exercise that knocks you into "I'm dragging myself though the day" status for two days MIGHT get your total caloric burn over the two days to something less, not something more, than what you might have burned by less intense activity.

Potentially.

I.e. this is not something that is known to have happened but something that you should consider whether it has happened.

Also exercise burns seldom give permission for extra eating.

Again not advocating to not exercise.

Just advocating that Calories are what determine the trajectory and if the trajectory is most important the caloric balance needs to move to primacy in terms of your consideration.

Jthanmyfitnesspal

@floppybackend : Several people above supported me when I posted just about the same frustration! Sometimes that scale just won't move! It sucks! (Search through my posts and you'll find it.)

And, yes, it gets harder as we get older because our bodies can shut things down quite effectively (cold hands, etc.). But, also if you find my posts, eventually I started losing weight again and I've gotten my 22lbs off since January. As my pals say above, it requires careful tracking and limiting of what you eat. I found that I had to eat close to my minimum calorie plan eating only a few 100 extra calories even for bigger workouts. (I also swim!)

The good news is that you're only trying to lose 1 stone, not 5. I would suggest setting MFP up with your stats, put the activity level to sedentary, then add in for your swims, walks, or whatever (perhaps linking an Apple watch or other fitness tracker), being conservative in how much of those calories you eat back. If you feel you aren't going to be satisfied while trying to lose -1lb/week, set it for -0.5lb/week.

Get out the cup measures and food scales and become a logging nerd like the rest of us here.

Best of luck!

PAV8888

Earlier today I said:

Also exercise burns seldom give permission for extra eating.
Again not advocating to not exercise

A fairly important word is missing changing my intended meaning: also exercise burns seldom give permission for excess (as in excessive) extra eating.

It sure sounded nicer in my head!

Given that I am an advocate of eating back the actual amount of additional calories generated by exercise such that one ends up achieving one's reasonably selected deficit — and not either a much smaller or much larger deficit… the missing word and change in meaning were unintentional!

Given how wholesome your diet appears to be I would suggest, at the very least, some trial logging concentrating in particular on higher calorie items.

Weighing how much coleslaw I used for my salad at the fish and chip shop a couple of days back (53 Calories worth) was much less of a concern as opposed to weighing the dressing "on the side" that I added to that slaw mix (and which I also used to dip my chips in!)… cause the dressing was 189 Calories all by itself…

Jthanmyfitnesspal

@PAV8888 gets it. It pays to refeed conservatively.