If it's as simple as calories in vs calories out....

albayin

Everyone says that because it's supposed to be the science. If it doesn't work for you, you must do something wrong...it's the motto on this forum...

To me the hard part is to figure out the right number for yourself. We all have different hormone levels, different life styles and other stuff to stress about. It may sound as simple as "eating 1200 calories to accuracy you will lose weight" but it's not the right number for some who might need to go further but become very difficult to sustain...we are human and we make slips, and lack of consistency, so it's not that easy...

dfnewcombe

You need a dietitian, not a nutritionist: http://eatrightdc.org/dietitian-vs-nutritionist/

You may be able to contact the dietitian at the hospital where your surgery was performed- that would be where I would go first. The hospital should have a bariatric program that helps support the patient following discharge. And, if not, my question would be- why not??? Bariatric surgery is a high risk procedure and to be accredited, the organization needs to show it has met certain criteria to actually be performing the surgery. Is it accredited??

Daily weights are more about fluid status than actual weight loss or gain. It is true you need to eat at a deficit to lose weight, but the human body does have much ability to adapt to situations and will react to stressors- perhaps internal ones- that we may not be aware of. Keeping an accurate log of your intake and activity and exercise- will help reveal patterns and cycles over time that will help you identify what you need to do to achieve your optimal weight loss. Keep in mind, monitoring your daily weight may be important to look for signs of fluid retention.

Good luck!

catecholamine

i am sorry but WLS does not magically make you absorb percentages of macronutrients. Also, reading your profile it does not make you magically not absorb all of your calories. If you eat 100 calories of bread at 21 g of carbs you are absorbing 100 calories and 21g of carbs.

Just like everyone else. You should be EATING less calories because your portions are smaller because your stomach is smaller because well, you cheated the system and had surgery.

But you still absorb what you eat, just like the rest of us.

We cant explains why you lose/gain, but you know as well as we know the same denominator here is YOU.

'You arent being honest with yourself or us. You either arent being consistant, arent following doctors orders, arent excersizing, or are eating larger portions than you think.

Surgery or not, this is on YOU and with all the advice you just rebutt every thing so I doubt if you get it, but the problem is not the diet or calories it is YOU.

Um, are you stupid or something? Yes, it does cause me to malabsorb nutrients. That's like, the whole purpose of Duodenal Switch. They change where your digestive juices come in to come in at the end of the small intestines so food isn't broken down and macros aren't absorbed. Google it.
Fat malabsorption is so much that I have to take megadoses of fat soluable vitamins. I take 50,000iu of Vitamin D a day, for instance.

So again, no advice is good enough

trust me if there was a magic surgery that made us all absorb the perfect number of calories and macronutrients someone would be a rich surgeon and we would all be thin

any more excuses?

You already cheated your body and yourself by having surgery, you arent willing to listen to anyone, so if you know it all why are you here? Why are you logging?

Tell you what dont change your habits and sit around waiting on your majic surgery to work, what do we or your doctors know anyway?

Good luck to you.

Uh, what habits am I supposed to change?
I cheated my body? Are you kidding me? I wanted to cure my diabetes. And it did that. I made a huge step to change my life.
I've only completely changed my eating habits. I cut out all sugar because I absorb 100% of simple carbs since breakdown starts in your mouth. I cut out most complex carbs too, because I absorb more of them than fat. I eat high protein because I malabsorb a 40% of the protein I eat. I work hard to eat like I should. Even my roommate says he could never have the willpower to do like I do.
I have to be very careful with what I eat.
Sometimes I want a big salad, but I can't spare the stomach space. I need protein. Yesterday was a low day, but usually I get 100-120g like I'm supposed to. That means eating what I don't want to eat. But I do it because I want to be healthy.
So I really have no idea what habits you're referring to. FYI I've lost 70lbs since Jan.

catecholamine

Um, are you stupid or something? Yes, it does cause me to malabsorb nutrients. That's like, the whole purpose of Duodenal Switch. They change where your digestive juices come in to come in at the end of the small intestines so food isn't broken down and macros aren't absorbed. Google it.
Fat malabsorption is so much that I have to take megadoses of fat soluable vitamins. I take 50,000iu of Vitamin D a day, for instance.

Wow. You sound charming.

Well, she calls me a liar and tells me I'm gorging myself and not logging. She sounded real charming too.

From reading all your posts in this thread you sound very angry with quite the attitude. What was the point of starting it? A rant perhaps? Or sympathy? Can't figure it out.

I would say it's pretty obvious.
If it was as simple as people claim, only calories in VS calories out, I would be losing massive amounts of weight.
I physically can't gorge myself. Which means I'm unlikely to be lying in any major way on my diary. When I eat less, I lose less. When I eat more, I lose more. So if it was as simple as calories in VS calories out, how does that make any sense?

Ok I just looked through your diary and like I said you have cheated your body with this dumb surgery...you wanted a quick fix but you didnt want to change your habits

I see multiple taco bell/mcdonalds/fast food/fried foods/processed foods

one day you went to taco bell twice AND mcdonalds

Hell I am all for moderation and dont get me wrong I love the occasional fast food product.

Surgery is supposed to be a tool to get you on your way to learning and practising better habits and your not. So no wonder you are not losing, most days you eat like ****

that can add up. No wonder the nutritionist "knows nothing" she is probably recommending healthy foods that will give you the most nutritional; bang for the portion and you arent trying to hear that are you?

Geuss what? A moment on the lips a lifetime on the hips, eventually you stomach will adjust too its new self and because you havnt learned or listened the lbs will creep back on again.

Enjoy your crap food.

You're an idiot. I eat a high fat, high protein diet. Because I absorb 20% fat and 60% protein. I will eat a McDonalds burger without the bun. Or a single taco, and that's my carb splurge for the day (at 11 carbs). It's protein. I need protein. 150g fat = 30g absorbed. Without it, I can't absorb my vitamins, my hair gets dry and brittle, my skin dries out and flakes, I get acne, and I feel horrible.

Chevy_Quest

In To Learn.

zyxst

I have nothing to add, but I want to find this later.

LifeWithPie

Um, are you stupid or something? Yes, it does cause me to malabsorb nutrients. That's like, the whole purpose of Duodenal Switch. They change where your digestive juices come in to come in at the end of the small intestines so food isn't broken down and macros aren't absorbed. Google it.
Fat malabsorption is so much that I have to take megadoses of fat soluable vitamins. I take 50,000iu of Vitamin D a day, for instance.

Wow. You sound charming.

Well, she calls me a liar and tells me I'm gorging myself and not logging. She sounded real charming too.

From reading all your posts in this thread you sound very angry with quite the attitude. What was the point of starting it? A rant perhaps? Or sympathy? Can't figure it out.

I would say it's pretty obvious.
If it was as simple as people claim, only calories in VS calories out, I would be losing massive amounts of weight.
I physically can't gorge myself. Which means I'm unlikely to be lying in any major way on my diary. When I eat less, I lose less. When I eat more, I lose more. So if it was as simple as calories in VS calories out, how does that make any sense?

Well you're obviously a scientific anomaly then. You should call CNN. The world needs to know. Us mere mortals here on MFP obviously can't help you.

catecholamine

Oh, and by the way, what you think is "healthy foods" for me is not healthy. Even the nutritionist said to limit myself to 2 tablespoons of vegetables twice a day. Less than 60g carbs a day. Rest is protein.

catecholamine

Um, are you stupid or something? Yes, it does cause me to malabsorb nutrients. That's like, the whole purpose of Duodenal Switch. They change where your digestive juices come in to come in at the end of the small intestines so food isn't broken down and macros aren't absorbed. Google it.
Fat malabsorption is so much that I have to take megadoses of fat soluable vitamins. I take 50,000iu of Vitamin D a day, for instance.

Wow. You sound charming.

Well, she calls me a liar and tells me I'm gorging myself and not logging. She sounded real charming too.

From reading all your posts in this thread you sound very angry with quite the attitude. What was the point of starting it? A rant perhaps? Or sympathy? Can't figure it out.

I would say it's pretty obvious.
If it was as simple as people claim, only calories in VS calories out, I would be losing massive amounts of weight.
I physically can't gorge myself. Which means I'm unlikely to be lying in any major way on my diary. When I eat less, I lose less. When I eat more, I lose more. So if it was as simple as calories in VS calories out, how does that make any sense?

Well you're obviously a scientific anomaly then. You should call CNN. The world needs to know. Us mere mortals here on MFP obviously can't help you.

That explains the multiple posts every day on this forum about people who are eating at a deficit and not losing. It would seem a lot of people need to call CNN.

Dr__Girlfriend

There is such a thing as adaptive thermogenesis - if you're eating too far below your TDEE, your body will adapt and your resting metabolic rate will plummet drastically. If you're like me, it could drop to 400 kcals a day. Ever gained weight at 500 kcals a day? It blows. Don't put yourself too far below your TDEE for long periods of time.

10-20% is suggested for a cut.

You can use the calculators here -

www.iifym.com

Also, hormones, stress etc.. can have a huge effect on your weight loss. And if you are lifting weights like you should be, your weight may stay the same while you are losing dress sizes.

_KitKat_

Um, are you stupid or something? Yes, it does cause me to malabsorb nutrients. That's like, the whole purpose of Duodenal Switch. They change where your digestive juices come in to come in at the end of the small intestines so food isn't broken down and macros aren't absorbed. Google it.
Fat malabsorption is so much that I have to take megadoses of fat soluable vitamins. I take 50,000iu of Vitamin D a day, for instance.

Wow. You sound charming.

Well, she calls me a liar and tells me I'm gorging myself and not logging. She sounded real charming too.

From reading all your posts in this thread you sound very angry with quite the attitude. What was the point of starting it? A rant perhaps? Or sympathy? Can't figure it out.

I would say it's pretty obvious.
If it was as simple as people claim, only calories in VS calories out, I would be losing massive amounts of weight.
I physically can't gorge myself. Which means I'm unlikely to be lying in any major way on my diary. When I eat less, I lose less. When I eat more, I lose more. So if it was as simple as calories in VS calories out, how does that make any sense?

The truth is it is how the laws of energy work...calories absorbed -calories burned = negative number, you lose weight - positive number you gain - zero, you maintain.

That is the formula for the energy use that we call calories, it is math. Your math say 900 - 2000= +1100 instead of -1100; then you say 1600-2000= -400 (which is correct). Even figuring malabsorption in the 2 equations are not in a agreement on the basic principles of elementary school math.

The only thing I could think is when you believe you are eating 900, you are actually eating more calorie dense foods and misjudging portions and/or over estimating exercise burn. Also 4 oz. Is easy to gorge on, my favorite guacamole has almost 1900 calorie in only 6oz.

Calling someone stupid for just stating a mathmatically probable (near absolute) truth is ignorant. She wasn't saying you were lying, not understanding, and making an extremely common miscalculation is common here and the only logical answer to what you posted. Whether you like or agree with the math, it can and will stand on its own merits and dismissing it with anecdotal evidence will not effect the truth.

Dr__Girlfriend

Why eating less and exercising more is not always beneficial - (why one should eat less/exercise less, or eat more exercise more)

http://www.t-nation.com/diet-fat-loss/how-to-burn-stubborn-body-fat

catecholamine

There is such a thing as adaptive thermogenesis - if you're eating too far below your TDEE, your body will adapt and your resting metabolic rate will plummet drastically. If you're like me, it could drop to 400 kcals a day. Ever gained weight at 500 kcals a day? It blows. Don't put yourself too far below your TDEE for long periods of time.

10-20% is suggested for a cut.

You can use the calculators here -

www.iifym.com

Also, hormones, stress etc.. can have a huge effect on your weight loss. And if you are lifting weights like you should be, your weight may stay the same while you are losing dress sizes.

Nope, not lifting. I should be though. I'm just so damn tired all the time. I was pre-op too but it feels a little worse now. No energy. I try to walk, at least. Got a used fitbit zip yesterday so I can keep track of my steps and hoping it will spur me on to walk more. I know 400 calories is bad, but eating can just be such a damn pain. I have to eat all the time now and I hate it. Yesterday was a bad day, but the day before that, I got my protein in and did good. Just have to keep eating for success. Never thought pre-op that I'd come to hate eating so much, but christ it's an annoyance to have to eat ever 3 hours.

_KitKat_

There is such a thing as adaptive thermogenesis - if you're eating too far below your TDEE, your body will adapt and your resting metabolic rate will plummet drastically. If you're like me, it could drop to 400 kcals a day. Ever gained weight at 500 kcals a day? It blows. Don't put yourself too far below your TDEE for long periods of time.

10-20% is suggested for a cut.

You can use the calculators here -

www.iifym.com

Also, hormones, stress etc.. can have a huge effect on your weight loss. And if you are lifting weights like you should be, your weight may stay the same while you are losing dress sizes.

Gaining weight on 500 calories a day, would solve world hunger, adaptive thermogenisis happens but not to that extreme, try maybe tops 10% reduction. In a coma a doctor will give you your BMR, the coma patient will not start becoming fat. Also it takes roughly 600 per day just for normal organ function.

catecholamine

Um, are you stupid or something? Yes, it does cause me to malabsorb nutrients. That's like, the whole purpose of Duodenal Switch. They change where your digestive juices come in to come in at the end of the small intestines so food isn't broken down and macros aren't absorbed. Google it.
Fat malabsorption is so much that I have to take megadoses of fat soluable vitamins. I take 50,000iu of Vitamin D a day, for instance.

Wow. You sound charming.

Well, she calls me a liar and tells me I'm gorging myself and not logging. She sounded real charming too.

From reading all your posts in this thread you sound very angry with quite the attitude. What was the point of starting it? A rant perhaps? Or sympathy? Can't figure it out.

I would say it's pretty obvious.
If it was as simple as people claim, only calories in VS calories out, I would be losing massive amounts of weight.
I physically can't gorge myself. Which means I'm unlikely to be lying in any major way on my diary. When I eat less, I lose less. When I eat more, I lose more. So if it was as simple as calories in VS calories out, how does that make any sense?

The truth is it is how the laws of energy work...calories absorbed -calories burned = negative number, you lose weight - positive number you gain - zero, you maintain.

That is the formula for the energy use that we call calories, it is math. You math say 900 - 2000= +1100 instead of -1100; then you say 1600-2000= -400 (which is correct). Even figuring malabsorption in the 2 equations are not in a agreement on the basic principles of element school math.

The only thing I could think is when you believe you are eating 900, you are actually eating more calorie dense foods and misjudging portions and/or over estimating exercise burn. Also 4 oz. Is easy to gorge on, my favorite guacamole has almost 1900 calorie in only 6oz.

Calling someone stupid for just stating a mathmatically probable (near absolute) truth is ignorant. She wasn't saying you were lying, not understanding, and making an extremely common miscalculation is common here and the only logical answer to what you posted. Whether you like or agree with the math, it can and will stand on its own merits and dismissing it with anecdotal evidence will not effect the truth.

Let me rephrase. It is impossible for me to gorge myself because I don't eat big portions of anything that doesn't have lots of protein. I can't waste the space. That's why I don't eat lots of veggies....not enough protein. I've had some homemade guac, but only 2 tablespoons with about 5 pork rinds (no carbs) and I couldn't eat anymore. I don't eat that often because it's not dense enough in protein, even though the pork rinds have some. I have to eat lots and lots of meat and cheese. I actually kinda hate it. I miss veggies.

Dr__Girlfriend

I would say it's pretty obvious.
If it was as simple as people claim, only calories in VS calories out, I would be losing massive amounts of weight.
I physically can't gorge myself. Which means I'm unlikely to be lying in any major way on my diary. When I eat less, I lose less. When I eat more, I lose more. So if it was as simple as calories in VS calories out, how does that make any sense?

The truth is it is how the laws of energy work...calories absorbed -calories burned = negative number, you lose weight - positive number you gain - zero, you maintain.

That is the formula for the energy use that we call calories, it is math. You math say 900 - 2000= +1100 instead of -1100; then you say 1600-2000= -400 (which is correct). Even figuring malabsorption in the 2 equations are not in a agreement on the basic principles of element school math.

The only thing I could think is when you believe you are eating 900, you are actually eating more calorie dense foods and misjudging portions and/or over estimating exercise burn. Also 4 oz. Is easy to gorge on, my favorite guacamole has almost 1900 calorie in only 6oz.

Calling someone stupid for just stating a mathmatically probable (near absolute) truth is ignorant. She wasn't saying you were lying, not understanding, and making an extremely common miscalculation is common here and the only logical answer to what you posted. Whether you like or agree with the math, it can and will stand on its own merits and dismissing it with anecdotal evidence will not effect the truth.

That's a pretty gross oversimplification. You're forgetting hormones, insulin sensitivity and resistance, alpha-receptors and blood flow and how directly effect the process of fat loss, and adaptive thermogenesis. Some people do gain at 500-900 kcals a day because of metabolic damage or any other factor.

Mostly it is because their RMR is in the tank, which is still more kcal in than kcal out, because it is far below 1000 or even 700. Metabolic damage can be fixed, over time, but unfortunately that does mean a break from dieting, or being comfortable gaining at 1200 kcals for awhile until things get moving again.

It's important to think long term.

trinacrick

It is not incredulous that her doctor is not helpful nor knowledgeable post surgery. These types of surgeries are as trendy as Botox and money makers for medical personnel with very little training.....it's not always their specialty. They are making the bucks lining people up for these surgeries. That may or may not be the case here, but to assume that there are all of these things making her story somehow shady, is unfair.

Sad to read implications that someone "cheated" or was looking for a "quick fix." Many, many people have benefited from surgery to get to a healthier weight. The change in confidence alone is enough to turn things around and maintain a healthy lifestyle.

Dr__Girlfriend

Gaining weight on 500 calories a day, would solve world hunger, adaptive thermogenisis happens but not to that extreme, try maybe tops 10% reduction. In a coma a doctor will give you your BMR, the coma patient will not start becoming fat. Also it takes roughly 600 per day just for normal organ function.

The issue is really that it's physically impossible to consume the right amount of nutrients minerals and vitamins at low levels of calories.

If you eat 0-1000 kcal every day (or even more.. obese people can ABSOLUTELY be malnourished), and you're not hitting 100% of all your iron, vitamin A, etc.. that can add up over time and you can end up extremely malnourished.

Dr__Girlfriend

I don't think you're lying, for the record. I have gained at less, for months, due to serious damage from an eating disorder. I had to stick with it and eat at proper amounts (my TDEE!) and let my body come back to normal.

Now, after much patience, I am losing steadily at 1800 kcals per day.