Why all the trouble when it's all about a calorie deficit?

mmargarette

I'm not pinpointing to anyone or anything and I'm not being a hater. I'm just really wondering why this and that are being done when losing weight is all about having a calorie deficit. Meaning you can eat whatever you want and still lose weight. This is what most people say. Right now, I'm struggling to lose. So I really don't know what to believe in. But right now I'm trying to change my mindset that it's really all about a calorie deficit.

If any of you are wondering, I've tried (and/or doing) the paleo lifestyle for a month but inconsistent (cheat days). I kinda stopped right now. But I think I'm going to get back on it next week. Maybe loosen things up by going primal. I've thought about keto but I think the carb restriction is too low for me so yeah.

My workout routine is a kettle bell circuit from fitnessblender. The 20-40min ones.

My stats: 5'2, 19yo, 120lbs (GW: 110) Tummy is the only thing that gets fat legit.. really need to do something about that

EmmieBaby

Thing is (for me at least) its not just about the calories, its also about the fats, carbs and protein I consume. I can hit my calorie mark eating nothing but carb but I wont lose anything...I will bloat.

you need to find the right balance, every meal should have a protein, fat and carb. (eggs with fruit and avocado as an example)

try going on iifym.com and find out how many calories (fats. carbs and protein) you need to consume (with and without workout calories)

also for fat loss, weight lifting (AKA lifting heavy) has done wonders for my body.

p.s cute kitten!

viglet

Calorie deficit will definitely help you loose weight. I think "all the trouble" comes in when you are trying to create a lifestyle that promotes good health and fitness.

So yes, I could eat 1200 calories of pure bacon everything and still loose weight. But chances are, my body would look terrible naked and I would feel awful.

Personally, I think that everyone needs to just decide what their ultimate goal is. If your ultimate goal is to weight a certain number, then just eat at a deficit and eventually you will get there. But if your goal is look a certain way and have a certain fitness level, then there is a bit more science behind that (how many calories you are eating, what your macronutrient goals are, what type of exercises you are doing).

In the end, I think that whatever a person is aiming for, commitment is the number thing. Even myself, I know what I need to do to reach my goals, but I often lack the commitment to follow through.

RGv2

A) You don't have a lot of weight to lose. What is your goal loss per week set at?

Just noticing your logging looks to be pretty inconsistent. You've only logged 1 full day in the past 8 (that's as far back I went.

C) You can eat most whatever you want, and if you're in a deficit you'll lose, but logging is what helps us understand if we're in a deficit or not.

Ainar

Because people like to over-complicate things, that's really the nature...

Anyways, 5'2 and 120? I don't even think you should be losing now. Go 10 - 20% above maintenance cals and lift heavy to build muscle. At this point losing any more fat will not make you look any better. Getting toned will tho. And that will most likely also get ride of rest of fat at tummy.

MeanderingMammal

I'm not pinpointing to anyone or anything and I'm not being a hater. I'm just really wondering why this and that are being done when losing weight is all about having a calorie deficit. Meaning you can eat whatever you want and still lose weight.

It's a massive, and lucrative industry, but as an industry it needs new ideas that can be sold to susceptible consumers.

People who buy diet plans, whether paleo, atkins, weight watchers, blended grasses or pineapple only, will buy new diet plans because the previous one hasn't given them everything that the googly eyed marketeers managed to convince them they'd get.

mmargarette

A) You don't have a lot of weight to lose. What is your goal loss per week set at?

Just noticing your logging looks to be pretty inconsistent. You've only logged 1 full day in the past 8 (that's as far back I went.

C) You can eat most whatever you want, and if you're in a deficit you'll lose, but logging is what helps us understand if we're in a deficit or not.

A) A pound per week would be great! Max of 1.5

Sorry! I've thought of stopping on calorie counting recently because I feel like it's frying my brain. But I'll get back to it asap

Greenrun99

Your body doesn't always believe in math. You need to experiment with your numbers.. just because a calculator says so doesn't mean your body cares.

SezxyStef

A) You don't have a lot of weight to lose. What is your goal loss per week set at?

Just noticing your logging looks to be pretty inconsistent. You've only logged 1 full day in the past 8 (that's as far back I went.

C) You can eat most whatever you want, and if you're in a deficit you'll lose, but logging is what helps us understand if we're in a deficit or not.

this...I eat whatever I want in reasonable portions and stay in goal and lose weight consistently.

ETA: I also log very accurately by weighing my solids, measuring my liquids and choosing the correct entries.

RGv2

Because people like to over-complicate things, that's really the nature...

Anyways, 5'2 and 120? I don't even think you should be losing now. Go 10 - 20% above maintenance cals and lift heavy to build muscle. At this point losing any more fat will not make you look any better. Getting toned will tho. And that will most likely also get ride of rest of fat at tummy.

Agreed. That's why I asked what the goal entered into MFP was. Goal cals is something like 1350, which for the OP, is right around BMR if they were sedentary.

OP, listen to above. It's doubtful that you really need to lose anymore fat as much as you need to add some muscle mass.

mmargarette

Because people like to over-complicate things, that's really the nature...

Anyways, 5'2 and 120? I don't even think you should be losing now. Go 10 - 20% above maintenance cals and lift heavy to build muscle. At this point losing any more fat will not make you look any better. Getting toned will tho. And that will most likely also get ride of rest of fat at tummy.

I know I'm at a healthy weight but it's REALLY my tummy. From 27 it became 30. My hips got bigger too. My jeans don't fit me anymore I swear. The only things that have kept going are my jeggings. From my P.E. fitness test, my waist to hip ratio is at a high risk. The rest of my body parts are healthy thin/lean. It's really the tummy. That's why I need to lose!!! I'm doing kettlebell workouts if that counts as lifting or what. Don't want to spend on a gym membership to really lift barbells and what not. Sorry!

RGv2

A) You don't have a lot of weight to lose. What is your goal loss per week set at?

Just noticing your logging looks to be pretty inconsistent. You've only logged 1 full day in the past 8 (that's as far back I went.

C) You can eat most whatever you want, and if you're in a deficit you'll lose, but logging is what helps us understand if we're in a deficit or not.

A) A pound per week would be great! Max of 1.5

Sorry! I've thought of stopping on calorie counting recently because I feel like it's frying my brain. But I'll get back to it asap

1-1.5 per week is way too aggressive. Your daily caloric goal is right at BMR if you're sedentary. See my other post. you probably don't need to lose anymore fat but add some muscle mass.

RGv2

Because people like to over-complicate things, that's really the nature...

Anyways, 5'2 and 120? I don't even think you should be losing now. Go 10 - 20% above maintenance cals and lift heavy to build muscle. At this point losing any more fat will not make you look any better. Getting toned will tho. And that will most likely also get ride of rest of fat at tummy.

I know I'm at a healthy weight but it's REALLY my tummy. From 27 it became 30. My hips got bigger too. My jeans don't fit me anymore I swear. The only things that have kept going are my jeggings. From my P.E. fitness test, my waist to hip ratio is at a high risk. The rest of my body parts are healthy thin/lean. It's really the tummy. That's why I need to lose!!! I'm doing kettlebell workouts if that counts as lifting or what. Don't want to spend on a gym membership to really lift barbells and what not. Sorry!

Kettlebells are mostly cardio, IMHO.

You're 19...is it possible you're growing into your adult body?

TavistockToad

I'm not pinpointing to anyone or anything and I'm not being a hater. I'm just really wondering why this and that are being done when losing weight is all about having a calorie deficit. Meaning you can eat whatever you want and still lose weight. This is what most people say. Right now, I'm struggling to lose. So I really don't know what to believe in. But right now I'm trying to change my mindset that it's really all about a calorie deficit.

If any of you are wondering, I've tried (and/or doing) the paleo lifestyle for a month but inconsistent (cheat days). I kinda stopped right now. But I think I'm going to get back on it next week. Maybe loosen things up by going primal. I've thought about keto but I think the carb restriction is too low for me so yeah.

My workout routine is a kettle bell circuit from fitnessblender. The 20-40min ones.

My stats: 5'2, 19yo, 120lbs (GW: 110) Tummy is the only thing that gets fat legit.. really need to do something about that

why all the trouble? because poeple are impatient, and they expect magic 'biggest loser' type results... so weight loss that would realistically happen in 3-6 months is expected in 3-6 weeks... patience and consistany are key - along wth the deficit - but most people fail because they dont give it long enough!

Galatea_Stone

Lift weights or do some form of strength training, eat at maintenance and slowly recomp. You will lose inches. You can also eat at a slight deficit (.5 pound/week) and lower your body fat a little more. This is a good option if you want to have smaller dimensions. Or you can eat at a slight surplus, add muscle over the next year or so, and then cut. Depending on the look you're going for, I wold recommending considering a bulk at some point.



5'2" at 120 is not the same as 5'7" at 120. You are smack in the middle of normal and can go either way depending on the look you want. You are not underweight.

Jruzer

My personal take is that people like to have a framework to use. It can be much easier, at least when you are starting, to follow a strict set of guidelines laid down by someone else. Cut out carbs, or fat, or don't eat after a certain time, or drink shakes, etc.: these are all proscriptions that can be followed. And if it works, great!

For me, when it finally *clicked* that it was in fact all about calories, that's when the magic happened. I had total freedom to do what I wanted and didn't have to follow a silly set of rules. With MFP and other apps, extensive food databases available at your fingertips, a plethora of information about BMR/RMR/TDEE, and fitness trackers everywhere, "counting calories" is almost trivial. Losing weight isn't trivial or easy, but the tools are.

Iwishyouwell

Because people like to over-complicate things, that's really the nature...

Anyways, 5'2 and 120? I don't even think you should be losing now. Go 10 - 20% above maintenance cals and lift heavy to build muscle. At this point losing any more fat will not make you look any better. Getting toned will tho. And that will most likely also get ride of rest of fat at tummy.

Depending on her LBM and frame size, at that height she could potentially still have at least 10 lbs of excess fat on her body. And at 5'2" 10 lbs is a lot.

Don't just tell somebody to stop losing fat if you're not educated about their current body composition

The OP is in a better position to ascertain whether they still have excess, unsightly fat than you do from internet diagnosis based off an arbitrary number that tells you nothing about her current body fat percentage.