Two + Months in, not a pound gone

kethry70

For those interested in the study I mentioned, here it is: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2005.79/full

The gist is that two sets of women were given two different isocaloric diets (calculated 400 daily deficit) -- they both had the same amount of protein (20%) but one had 60% carbs and 20% fat (the low fat diet) and one had 40% carbs and 40% fat (the high fat diet). Half of the women were insulin sensitive and half were insulin resistant.

For the insulin sensitive women, those on the low fat (LF) diet lost nearly twice as much weight as their high fat (HF) counterparts -- 13.5% of their initial body weight versus 6.8%. For the insulin resistant women, it was nearly the exact opposite. Those on the HF diet lost 13.4% and those on the LF lost 8.5%. The differences in losses could not be accounted for in differences in resting metabolic rate, activity level, or intake.

That to me shows very clearly that it's not just about sheer caloric amount. That how one creates their caloric deficit can produce vastly different results based on their own circumstances.

but the key here is that they ALL lost weight. So, yes, the weight less differed but the caloric deficit still worked to a degree. The OP should still be losing some weight (even if something is metabolically off) if she is in a caloric deficit and has been for 2 months

lblair31374

See, I totally change my intake depending on whether or not I've worked out. I don't eat back all of my calories (probably half) and I'm losing, slow but steady.

I would look at trying that. I think eating the same amount of calories no matter what may be a hindrance.

Since you're not going to show us the diary (no judgement), I do have questions. Is your intake generally healthy? Are you being honest about what (not how much) is going into your body? Whole grains, vegetables, fruits, lean meats, good variety? Avoiding too much starch and fried foods? This will make a big difference.

LifeWithPie

OP at this point I am beginning to wonder why you won't open your diary? Multiple people have requested it in order to help you. I'm not trying to be accusatory but what is your reasoning for not wanting to?

I'm aware that looks suspicous and I have been lurking around for a while so I expected that. The reason I haven't is because I have a fantastic nutritionist who I meet with every two weeks. We go over my diary every time.

I'm confused. Then why did you post here in the first place asking for help? What was the point? You already have a 'fantastic nutritionist' to guide you.

????

_HeartsOnFire_

OP at this point I am beginning to wonder why you won't open your diary? Multiple people have requested it in order to help you. I'm not trying to be accusatory but what is your reasoning for not wanting to?

I'm aware that looks suspicous and I have been lurking around for a while so I expected that. The reason I haven't is because I have a fantastic nutritionist who I meet with every two weeks. We go over my diary every time.

I'm confused. Then why did you post here in the first place asking for help? What was the point? You already have a 'fantastic nutritionist' to guide you.

????

This...

Is it a nutritionist or a registered dietitian...There is actually a huge difference.

lindsey1979

For those interested in the study I mentioned, here it is: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2005.79/full

The gist is that two sets of women were given two different isocaloric diets (calculated 400 daily deficit) -- they both had the same amount of protein (20%) but one had 60% carbs and 20% fat (the low fat diet) and one had 40% carbs and 40% fat (the high fat diet). Half of the women were insulin sensitive and half were insulin resistant.

For the insulin sensitive women, those on the low fat (LF) diet lost nearly twice as much weight as their high fat (HF) counterparts -- 13.5% of their initial body weight versus 6.8%. For the insulin resistant women, it was nearly the exact opposite. Those on the HF diet lost 13.4% and those on the LF lost 8.5%. The differences in losses could not be accounted for in differences in resting metabolic rate, activity level, or intake.

That to me shows very clearly that it's not just about sheer caloric amount. That how one creates their caloric deficit can produce vastly different results based on their own circumstances.

but the key here is that they ALL lost weight. So, yes, the weight less differed but the caloric deficit still worked to a degree. The OP should still be losing some weight (even if something is metabolically off) if she is in a caloric deficit and has been for 2 months

I don't think that's the key. If that's all you took away from it, wow.

Yes, they did lose weight. But depending on how you manipulate the numbers, I imagine there would be groups that would maintain and others would lose. Either way, how the deficit was created resulted in vastly different weight loss numbers. So, it's totally possible that if the OP adjusts her macros or something else, she could start losing again. Given how heavy she is, she likely has IR -- so that 50% carb macro could be blocking her weight loss, like it does for many people who have IR.

If she's very confident in her thyroid issues, then that would be my next suggestion -- cutting back the carbs and eliminating all high GI carbs in particular. Then, see if she starts to drop weight on her calories.

geekishgirl

I'm confused. Then why did you post here in the first place asking for help? What was the point? You already have a 'fantastic nutritionist' to guide you.

????

This is what I've been wondering! No one is trying to say your nutritionist isn't good or change your opinon of her. But you go over your diary with her and she doesn't have any answers. Maybe someone here can think of something she hasn't.

nicca_jb

I'm going to jump in just for a moment. I'm not a nutritionist, but have a close friend who is (seriously) and who's looked this over. I also have struggled with weight loss in the past and FINALLY found a solution that seems to be working (10 lbs later). Here are my $0.02 - and for what it's worth, I'm at high risk for diabetes myself what with family history, so *type* of food is becoming as important as *amount* of food for me.

First, CICO is truth, with the caveat that certain metabolic disorders can play heavily into how or why you retain fat. If you have one, you adjust for it or take medication as needed. If you don't, the only real reason for not losing at all is miscalculation somewhere. Look closely at what you're logging.

**I will state outright that I don't weigh my food and I'm not the best example in that regard. I pay close attention to labels, but slip up a little on numbers here and there. I eat some crap at times, log it as accurately as I can, and move on.

Second, eating too little might help you drop weight, but is extremely unhealthy, so I'm glad to hear you've upped intake. You've already done the numbers. Averaging TDEE on a per-week basis by using a digital activity log--in my case, Fitbit, and I know you have a BodyMedia--and setting my eating goals based on that average has worked wonders for me. For example, last week's average TDEE was 2200. Since my calculated BMR is 1520, I should be aiming for between 1520 and 1700 in order to see a difference. I also feel okay eating a little more on more active days, as I know I need the fuel and I know I won't eat as much the next day.

Is your BodyMedia syncing directly to your MFP diaries, by the way?

Third, I cut out a few things I knew were doing me in, such as cream and sugar in my coffee and having more than one caffeinated drink a day. I don't much like cookies and candy, so that wasn't an issue, but I *do* love breads and pastas. I'm eating less of those and getting more protein (I was woefully low when I started).

While the basic truth is CICO, as mentioned, processed carbs are "comfort foods" for me which means I will eat more of them if they're on the table AND, because of my need to pay attention to blood sugar, the fact that they have a high glycemic index is a red flag no-no icky badness. A freaking baguette has a glycemic index of 95. NINETY. FIVE. *sigh* I can still have a piece, but gone are the days of tearing off pieces of bread and soaking them in olive oil. I might do it once every year or so.

Fourth, I'm taking a GNC Women's vitamin daily. I feel better for it and it helps me focus and be more active.

Fifth, stop overthinking. Just do.

I hope some of this info helps. Feel free to friend me - my diary is open *to friends*.

Francl27

Bad logging. Your diary doesn't mean a thing if it's not accurate. Weigh everything.

Also, 20% protein seems really low coming from a supposedly 'great' nutritionist.

Janette3x4

My THS is .4 and my Dr. (whom I plan to fire soon) tells me this is fine. It is what brought me here, so that I could see what I was really eating! I gain and gain and gain, and only when I keep my CI to a strict (weighed) 1500 with 2 hours of 3.5mph walking per day, do I stop gaining, and then just sit here, at 150lbs. I am on nothyroid meds yet. Argh!

She is NOT going to open her diary! You who keep pestering about it know why. But we can offer support anyways. OP- I hope you get it figured out soon so you can begin to lose the weight! Don't let the naggers get to you. There are people on her that will help you in the ways you need and want. Thank you for your post.

kethry70

but the key here is that they ALL lost weight. So, yes, the weight less differed but the caloric deficit still worked to a degree. The OP should still be losing some weight (even if something is metabolically off) if she is in a caloric deficit and has been for 2 months

I don't think that's the key. If that's all you took away from it, wow.

Yes, they did lose weight. But depending on how you manipulate the numbers, I imagine there would be groups that would maintain and others would lose. Either way, how the deficit was created resulted in vastly different weight loss numbers. So, it's totally possible that if the OP adjusts her macros or something else, she could start losing again. Given how heavy she is, she likely has IR -- so that 50% carb macro could be blocking her weight loss, like it does for many people who have IR.

If she's very confident in her thyroid issues, then that would be my next suggestion -- cutting back the carbs and eliminating all high GI carbs in particular. Then, see if she starts to drop weight on her calories.

That's not all I took away from the information. But, what is key to the current situation is that the OP should in fact lose weight eating at a deficit even if at an impaired rate. Esp since she said she usually hits 40% carbs vs the recommended 50% carbs (which is the same as all the IR/LC study participants).

Also, she is not diagnosed with IR so while I agree it is not unlikely for her to have it, I would assume she has been tested for it since they supposedly tested for everything under god's little acre.

What I'm getting at s basically Occam's Razor- the simplest explanation is usually the truth. The simplest explanation is that she is eating at TDEE through errors in logging

P.S. I actually know all about the importance of eating a reduced carb diet for weight loss and health with IR - I have PCOS and IR and have my macros set to approx 25% (though I usually eat a little more) . I usually eat less than 100 net carbs a day

lindsey1979

but the key here is that they ALL lost weight. So, yes, the weight less differed but the caloric deficit still worked to a degree. The OP should still be losing some weight (even if something is metabolically off) if she is in a caloric deficit and has been for 2 months

I don't think that's the key. If that's all you took away from it, wow.

Yes, they did lose weight. But depending on how you manipulate the numbers, I imagine there would be groups that would maintain and others would lose. Either way, how the deficit was created resulted in vastly different weight loss numbers. So, it's totally possible that if the OP adjusts her macros or something else, she could start losing again. Given how heavy she is, she likely has IR -- so that 50% carb macro could be blocking her weight loss, like it does for many people who have IR.

If she's very confident in her thyroid issues, then that would be my next suggestion -- cutting back the carbs and eliminating all high GI carbs in particular. Then, see if she starts to drop weight on her calories.

That's not all I took away from the information. But, what is key to the current situation is that the OP should in fact lose weight eating at a deficit even if at an impaired rate. Esp since she said she usually hits 40% carbs vs the recommended 50% carbs (which is the same as all the IR/LC study participants).

Also, she is not diagnosed with IR so while I agree it is not unlikely for her to have it, I would assume she has been tested for it since they supposedly tested for everything under god's little acre.

What I'm getting at s basically Occam's Razor- the simplest explanation is usually the truth. The simplest explanation is that she is eating at TDEE through errors in logging

P.S. I actually know all about the importance of eating a reduced carb diet for weight loss and health with IR - I have PCOS and IR and have my macros set to approx 25% (though I usually eat a little more) . I usually eat less than 100 net carbs a day

The only problem with that logic is that she's had the same result with her previously calculated 1300 and now has the same result with her 2500. To me, that says something else is up. After all, even if she were grossly off on her 1300, then she should be grossly off on her 2500 and she should have gained. But, she didn't. To me, this says there is something else going on beyond mere caloric values.

She also said she didn't have her A1C tested, which is the standard for IR. And, I'm not sure if she's had all her thyroid labs checked or not. From her responses, it doesn't sound like she's that engaged with the actual tests, but just goes on whether her doctor says it's "fine".

As for the deficits and calculations, I lost 2.2 lbs over 3 months on an average daily deficit of over 700. I'd also had my RMR checked and although it was slightly lower than normal, it wasn't 700 lower than normal. That was what pushed me personally to look into other issues.

Once things got sorted out and I got properly diagnosed and treated and ate a good diet for my issues, I lost completely like a "normal" person -- in line with those calorie deficits. But, not before. So, that's why I say that you can have vastly different numbers and I've found that when thyroid and IR involved, it greatly skews things.

jonnythan

So, for me it is not as simple as caloric deficit = weightloss, unfortunately.

This is false.

Open your diary.

You are eating too much food. Period, end of story.

kethry70

The only problem with that logic is that she's had the same result with her previously calculated 1300 and now has the same result with her 2500. To me, that says something else is up. After all, even if she were grossly off on her 1300, then she should be grossly off on her 2500 and she should have gained. But, she didn't. To me, this says there is something else going on beyond mere caloric values.

She also said she didn't have her A1C tested, which is the standard for IR. And, I'm not sure if she's had all her thyroid labs checked or not. From her responses, it doesn't sound like she's that engaged with the actual tests, but just goes on whether her doctor says it's "fine".

As for the deficits and calculations, I lost 2.2 lbs over 3 months on an average daily deficit of over 700. I'd also had my RMR checked and although it was slightly lower than normal, it wasn't 700 lower than normal. That was what pushed me personally to look into other issues.

Once things got sorted out and I got properly diagnosed and treated and ate a good diet for my issues, I lost completely like a "normal" person -- in line with those calorie deficits. But, not before. So, that's why I say that you can have vastly different numbers and I've found that when thyroid and IR involved, it greatly skews things.

I missed that she hasn't an A1C- that in and of itself makes me question her doctor's intelligence though I agree she doesn't seem to be engaged in thinking for or advocating for herself. I actually agree that she could still have IR or thyroid issues.

But, she said she started at 1300 as her goal. But we have no way of knowing how tightly she was logging much less if she was weighing foods nor how long she was at that lower goal- could've been a week for all we know. Also, I have seen more than once that guessing or eyeballing can literally lead to errors in the 1000 kC range. No exaggeration. So, if her logging is better than it was then but still not accurate, that could filll the gap- esp since she has started exercising.

Be that as it may, her reticence to reveal her diary when asking for help leads me to believe that the truth is that her logging is probably neither complete nor accurate. There is no good reason to not let people see her diary if she has been telling the truth about ehr consistency and her goals

sirabbadon

Semi-serious suggestion. Maybe you are sleep-eating. Setup a video camera and record yourself sleeping every night for a week. Just maybe, you'll find those magic calories that you've been missing. /joke

lindsey1979

I missed that she hasn't an A1C- that in and of itself makes me question her doctor's intelligence though I agree she doesn't seem to be engaged in thinking for or advocating for herself. I actually agree that she could still have IR or thyroid issues.

But, she said she started at 1300 as her goal. But we have no way of knowing how tightly she was logging much less if she was weighing foods nor how long she was at that lower goal- could've been a week for all we know. Also, I have seen more than once that guessing or eyeballing can literally lead to errors in the 100Kc range. No exaggeration. So, if her logging is better than it was then but still not accurate, that could filll the gap- esp since she has started exercising.

Be that as it may, her reticence to reveal her diary when asking for help leads me to believe that the truth is that her logging is probably neither complete nor accurate. There is no good reason to not let people see her diary if she has been telling the truth about ehr consistency and her goals

I disagree with you on the diary thing. I've seen some people give great advice on it, but I've seen a lot more people just tear people down on it. I've seen some go as far to make downright false and misleading representations on it. So, I can understand someone reticence to open it up to just everyone.

In the end, I think the logging accuracy has to come first when you're seeing no results. Then, look at results after faithful and accurate logging and see where it leads you.

datleprechaun

The fact you won't open your diary speaks volumes. You don't even need to say anything else. You know you eat too much, you know EXACTLY what the problem is. What it actually comes down to is that you don't actually want help, you either want attention/validation or you want to find an excuse that you can use to justify your weight. Maybe at first you wanted to lose weight but now you've reached a point where you're not losing weight eating the way you want so you want a reason to give up. Sorry not sorry.
There is nothing else to the posts OP is making. Move on everyone.

katemcneill107

Ask your doctor to do a Candidia test. Candidia is something that very few doctors, nutritionists, anyone ever thinks of but is the reason why a lot of people can not lose weight. I had the same problem, found out I had candidia, starting taking medicine and I have lost three pounds in three days!

cydulrich

My friend is a doctor, and she was very obese. She volunteered for a study where she went away with others to a clinic in AZ and they were put on a 500 calorie a day diet and did light workouts. She gained weight. Turned out she had a hormone imbalance that made her metabolism non-existent. She now is seeing a Chiropractor that specializes in weight loss. She has lost 22 pounds in 5 weeks. He keeps her on a strict diet that he designs for each patient himself. She goes to his office 3 times a week and they do a workout. She seems to like it, but says the diet is very boring and restricted.

DivineChoices

I don't want to be rude, but I have a lot of friends, women, in your exact situation who have Hashi's or PCOS.
It is not as simple as cals in, cals out for them.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the incidence of PCOS and Hashimoto's does not support the number of people on MFP who claim to have these disorders. Again, I could be wrong but it seems like every time I turn around someone else is posting about how they can't lose weight because they have PCOS. If a physician diagnoses it, fine, but if not... it's just an excuse.

I have PCOS. I was diagnosed about a year ago. I suspected for a couple years, but I've had the symptoms for MANY MANY years. I have many PCOS "Cysters" as friends here on MFP and our goals varying GREATLY. Some girls do better with low-carb. Some girls do better with a bigger caloric deficit. I've stuck with MFP defaults AND fitbit adjustments and I'm losing weight. BUT I am super anal about weighing EVERYTHING and logging. I try not to eat back ALL of my exercise calories (fitbit adjustments). So not EVERYONE you meet with PCOS will have the same complaint.

Cheers!

jonnythan

Ask your doctor to do a Candidia test. Candidia is something that very few doctors, nutritionists, anyone ever thinks of but is the reason why a lot of people can not lose weight. I had the same problem, found out I had candidia, starting taking medicine and I have lost three pounds in three days!

Let's not start telling people to tell their doctors how to do their jobs.