one... freaking... pound...

Linnaea27

I haven't been using that method. The way I do it is to log all food eaten first and keep it within (or as close to within) my limits as possible, then log exercise afterward. I'm not eating back what I've exercised because those calories "don't count" in my mind... and by that, I mean they don't count toward daily INtake or provide me a buffer zone. If I didn't exercise, I'd still be in a 500 - 600 calorie per day deficit, which is why I thought a one pound loss over a month was lower than it should be.

OK, this clarifies something I thought of when I started reading this thread originally. Please try to forgive my use of your numbers, but given what you mentioned about your own calculations in your OP, this stuff is sticking out at me and I think it may be a good part of the problem.

If your BMR, your calorie need for just existing without moving at all, is ~1700; your current maintenance TDEE is ~2300 with light exercise included (IMO, "light exercise" activity level is something even people with sedentary jobs do in their day-to-day life, NOT including any intentional exercise); and you are eating around 1780 for a 500-cal deficit *before* any intentional exercise, but are sometimes well under that number; AND you do not eat exercise calories back, **you are not getting enough calories to sustain your body.** If you burn say 400 calories at the gym and eat 1700 or so that day to stay under your calorie goal before any exercise has taken place, then your net calories that day will be 1300 (if not less because of calories burned during non-exercise activity like shopping, playing with your child, etc.). That means you'll have eaten 400 calories below your BMR.

Eating below your BMR, as you may know, is not sustainable and does not encourage steady weight loss. It stalls metabolism further and from what I've read in many months of participating in this forum, it is very common for people to eat at a similar level to what you're doing, not lose weight, be advised to eat more, and after eating more, find that they are losing weight much faster. Basically, I think you are not eating enough to sustain healthy weight loss. I know thermodynamics and numbers are very difficult for you to think about, but please seriously consider eating at least half your exercise calories back. I strongly suspect you would find you'd lose the weight faster that way.

I don't know why no one has pointed this out yet in 5 pages of discussion. I believe eating *enough* during weight loss, rather than eating as little as possible, is the key to doing this healthily and sensibly. Have you read through other threads on eating 1200 or so calories and not losing weight? They are common here and what I'm suggesting is frequently advised and frequently works.

Personally, when I was losing weight, I ate most or all of my exercise calories back and lost weight faster than predicted by the averages. I know you said you don't believe in eating exercise calories back, but it is real energy expended by your body and your body needs fuel!

I'm sorry to say that I'm seeing a lot of red flags for current ED issues still. Are you presently working with a professional of some kind to assist in recovery/mental health surrounding your body image and weight?

Jbarbo01

This is going to be unpopular advice but if you really want to lose lbs...I might stop exercising besides light exercise like walking or biking and just really tighten your diet. I've had more success on the scale not exercising than I do when I exercise intensely specifically weight and resistance training. Yes I know its good for you but I think when you demand a lot of your body like muscle building its hard for it operate on a calorie deficit so sometimes its less likely to let go of the weight. Your body will also hold a ton of water in your muscles during recovery. So I'd say calm down on the exercise, drink a lot of water, and really tighten your counting and i mean measuring EVERYTHING consistently and see if that helps.

WBB55

Honest question... how far do you trust the packaging and the food database?

I don't trust it IN THE SLIGHTEST. I use this website (http://nutritiondata.self.com/) or the USDA food database for my fresh foods. And the manufacturer or restaurant's website. This one has some odd vegies and spices and things the other ones don't (http://wholefoodcatalog.info/foods/).

However, you yourself said you measured the butter by the tablespoon. I didn't mean to doubt your accuracy. I just personally weigh in grams (twice!) things that are more than 5 calories per gram.

hope002

No, you're not. Dunkin donuts, pizza, chipotle, Italian sausage, and 5 guys all within a few days. low carb or not fat is fat, sodium is sodium, fast food is fast food. I'm not trying to be rude, but I find when I am not successful and I "don't know why", it's usually because I am not being honest and trying my best. And "honestly" a little sugar would probably be better to consume than a half cup of heavy whipping cream everyday. You need to find a professional to help you come up with a nutrition plan, not an endocrinologist. If your bloodwork is normal, that means there's nothing physically wrong with you it doesn't matter where in the normal range you are. You should accept that and do what you need to do to move forward. Again please don't take offense, I'm just trying to make you be honest with yourself I was hoping to sign on here and find that you took some of our advice.

While I agree with everything you said about fast food, I have to say you are wrong about the normal range blood work.
I had my blood checked by 3 physicians - all said in normal range. I insisted to get sent to a endocrinologist, who put me on 100mg Syntroid and now I feel much better. I was told that the normal range physicians use is very wide and I was at the bottom end.

UsedToBeHusky

Eating below your BMR, as you may know, is not sustainable and does not encourage steady weight loss. It stalls metabolism further and from what I've read in many months of participating in this forum, it is very common for people to eat at a similar level to what you're doing, not lose weight, be advised to eat more, and after eating more, find that they are losing weight much faster.

Eating below BMR causes a cortisol release, and I did not look at your diary, but even eating back your exercise calories, if your diet is deprived of dietary fat you will experience a cortisol release, as well as the effects of both leptin and grehlin.

laurie04427

This is going to be unpopular advice but if you really want to lose lbs...I might stop exercising besides light exercise like walking or biking and just really tighten your diet. I've had more success on the scale not exercising than I do when I exercise intensely specifically weight and resistance training. Yes I know its good for you but I think when you demand a lot of your body like muscle building its hard for it operate on a calorie deficit so sometimes its less likely to let go of the weight. Your body will also hold a ton of water in your muscles during recovery. So I'd say calm down on the exercise, drink a lot of water, and really tighten your counting and i mean measuring EVERYTHING consistently and see if that helps.

This approach works for me too. And I try not to stress over the weight loss. Not sure if keeping the stress down helps it along or not (metabolically etc) but that's what I've been doing.

Good luck OP.

Linnaea27

Could the answer be as simple as you're not weighing your butter an oils, but are instead measuring their volume? I'm honestly, and in no way meaning to be anything but 100% supportive here, I don't mean to trigger your anger. But personally I weigh in grams all my butter and fats. I don't trust the volume measurements of anything, personally.

Is it fair to assume that the way things are logged in MFP, with the pre-entered food database, that those calculations have already been made? Butter is 4oz per stick, 8 tablespoons, so 1/2oz per tablespoon. I have a food scale already and do use it when there's going to be a bigger variation between volume and weight (like with shredded cheese... is that a packed half cup or a lightly sprinkled half cup?).

Honest question... how far do you trust the packaging and the food database?

This is why I get frustrated with people in general on here insisting on extremely precise weighing and measuring all the time. While I do weigh and measure my food for accuracy and imprecise estimations are a problem for many, calories themselves are only a measure of potential energy and as such are approximate to some degree! Who knows if that food was 100 calories or 109 calories? Who knows if walking up that particular road with those particular hills burned 150 calories or 163? It's not a perfect measurement and these small differences may not be real, and unless the calculations and measurements are grossly inaccurate, will not affect a person's progress. I think.

And what if one carrot had more sugar than the other carrot? Or there was one more piece of shrimp in one bowl of soup than the other? They'll have different calorie contents but there is no way to know the true calorie value of every piece of food we eat because we can't stick each specific food in a calorie-measuring machine before eating it. No use worrying quite so much, everybody! (OP, this isn't directed at you specifically, it's directed at a big chunk of MFP culture and crowd-knowledge.)

That one's been bugging me for months! :explode:

yo_andi

This isn't simply an "eat less" or "exercise more" response, it is a thoughtful response based on the information you are giving that you perhaps need to reduce your calorie level if you want to lose more weight. I am assuming that you have weight to lose and remain in a healthy BMI with my response here. If you are close to the lower end of a healthy BMI then your body may be telling you that you are at a good level and no further weight loss is to be desired.

I'm not anywhere near a healthy BMI, something that a not-so-nice doctor made clear to point out to me when I went to him for help. I'm starting in a place where nearly everyone else I see on every other message board boasts about having lost 10-15 pounds by now, often by doing LESS than I'm doing.

Also, if you are only using a number on a scale to dictate your success that is also a very inaccurate measure, because you are not taking into account that you MAY have lost 5 pounds of fat and GAINED 4 pounds of muscle, which would be very desirable. Do you have a hand-held body fat analyzer or have you ever had your body fat percentage accurately measured by a professional?

While it's possible I've gained muscle, it's far more likely that I've gained muscle TONE instead. In my mind, 4lbs of muscle is a lot to put on in a month and my circuit training has been in the 30-45lb range. I don't have a fat analyzer, but I do have a mirror . Most of my problem is all in my torso, but I certainly wouldn't complain to see my thighs trim down.

Rest assured you didn't put on 4 lbs of muscle in a month. Chances are that you are eating more than you think you are, due to not weighing/measuring your food. Also, you're likely overestimating caloric burn. That said, great job on the workouts. Remember, weight loss is rarely linear or predictable unless you control, almost scientifically, for every possible variable.

Good luck and keep at it. It'll happen.

Linnaea27

Eating below your BMR, as you may know, is not sustainable and does not encourage steady weight loss. It stalls metabolism further and from what I've read in many months of participating in this forum, it is very common for people to eat at a similar level to what you're doing, not lose weight, be advised to eat more, and after eating more, find that they are losing weight much faster.

Eating below BMR causes a cortisol release, and I did not look at your diary, but even eating back your exercise calories, if your diet is deprived of dietary fat you will experience a cortisol release, as well as the effects of both leptin and grehlin.

So basically cortisol release/excess is implicated in slowing metabolism, overstimulated appetite/stress-eating, and increased body fat. Ugh!

miata3lady

I do not know for sure it will help you, but when I get to a point I am not losing, I change something. (Sometimes I skip a day exercising, other times I eat something that would not normally be on my diet just for fun. Are you drinking enough water? Are you drinking sodas? Also you have to eat enough food to burn the cals - I have a really big problem with that - I hope you will start losing, because it is very frustrating and as for me I tend to say why am doing this if I am not going to lose weight. Have you checked for loss in inches. Are you watching the other areas like sugar - sodium - etc. etc. Keep exercising and posting everything you eat and it will come off, may just take a while. I hope something I have said will help you, keep believing in yourself.

meridianova

I follow low carbing, so there is no sugar in my coffee (and I've trained the coffee shop people on how to make it). It's seriously just coffee and cream... that's it.

I'm already eating whole, unprocessed foods.

No, you're not. Dunkin donuts, pizza, chipotle, Italian sausage, and 5 guys all within a few days. low carb or not fat is fat, sodium is sodium, fast food is fast food. I'm not trying to be rude, but I find when I am not successful and I "don't know why", it's usually because I am not being honest and trying my best. And "honestly" a little sugar would probably be better to consume than a half cup of heavy whipping cream everyday.

I'll give you everything else, but where have you seen me consuming half a cup of heaving whipping cream every day? I don't put sugar in my coffee because I don't like it sweetened. That's got nothing to do with dieting and everything to do with how I've liked my coffee since I was a teenager. Dunkin' Donuts uses a light cream for their coffee that's close to half & half.

You need to find a professional to help you come up with a nutrition plan, not an endocrinologist. If your bloodwork is normal, that means there's nothing physically wrong with you it doesn't matter where in the normal range you are. You should accept that and do what you need to do to move forward. Again please don't take offense, I'm just trying to make you be honest with yourself I was hoping to sign on here and find that you took some of our advice.

Maybe I've watched too many doctor shows, but throughout my life I've had too many instances where "normal" test results failed to show a decidedly NOT normal situation (I had a doctor yell at me because when I was pregnant, none of the tests they did indicated I was having twins until they did the big ultrasound, and everyone went into panic mode). Just because a test says "normal" doesn't mean something else isn't wrong. It may just be looking at the wrong things. Prior to today, nobody ever mentioned to me to ask for a cortisol test. Nobody ever mentioned to me that losing an ovary could contribute to slow weight loss. So yes, I'm taking the advice into account on a lot of fronts, everything from better logging to what things to discuss with a doctor.

Mr_Knight

First of all, if you're not familiar with In-n-Out, they're not your typical burger joint.

I've in SoCal for a long time and am very familiar with I-n-0. The nutritional information is at best +/- 20%, so if you want to eat there, and be sure you're not going over, add 20% more calories than it says you're eating (or just put in "1.2" for the number of servings).

I think that restaurants probably do usually give out portions larger than their specs but in general if all our estimates are 'plus or minus X%' accurate (which is true even of database foods like an apple), the pluses and the minuses cancel out and you're ok with logging the original estimate value.

The errors are neither evenly nor randomly distributed - they are strongly biased towards under-reporting calories.

Mr_Knight

Honest question... how far do you trust the packaging and the food database?

The guidelines are that package labeling has to be within 20%, and because there are penalties for selling less than advertised, the errors pile up on the under-reporting side.

But none of this should matter, because if you truly were eating "whole, unprocessed foods" (which you most definitely are not) you wouldn't have any packages to look at.

nomeejerome

OP:
I mean this in the nicest way possible… please seek help to address the behaviors associated with your eating disorder. You may not have all active symptoms, but it is evident that you continue to struggle with some major issues in relation to it.

tycho_mx

It's really simple. Either your caloric intake is higher than you think, or your daily burn rate is lower than you think.

I don't mean to be disrespectful here - I don't think you're stupid or negligent. Just personal experience: my BMR (and all derivatives such as TDEE, etc.) is lower than the average from the models. I simply have a low metabolism - low body T, low resting heart rate, low respiratory rate. I made the nurse freak out last time I was donating blood since my HR was below 40 - normal in my case! Based on MFP calculators, my "maintenance" calories are off by about 200 daily. More if I work out a lot and count each and every one (and I use an ergometer, very little error on the output side of the equation).

It really is an issue of math: if you're not trending (accepting normal variabilities, I can gain 4 lb in a day between water/glycogen) in the direction you think you should be heading, the estimates are wrong. In most of us we simply are bad at estimating our portions, but in your case it could be that your BMR is not accurate.

MFP and the rest of the online calculators are not doctors. They are not labs. They are not physiologists. They can only give you a generic answer. You need a better one because something doesn't work? Get a proper assessment. Not cheap, unless you volunteer for some sort of study (I did that, twice now).

cahf

Hey, I think another way to think about it is that YOU LOST A POUND! Things are going in the right direction! You feel better, you are more fit and strong. I just started 4 weeks ago and lost 7 pounds so far (a record for me in the last decade of going the other direction). I can tell you what has been working for me at age 41. I changed the calorie goals because I know from previous experience that if I eat what is expected I don't lose weight. So I started with a goal of 1600 calories, and have eaten back many of my exercise calories. I usually exercise a lot, but have really stepped it up in the last 4 weeks. I cut out nearly all refined sugar except for some random ice cream splurges. My average in a given week has been under my calorie goal. I think cutting out sugar has made a HUGE difference for me because I'm not crazy hungry anymore. I find it far easier to make healthy conscious choices if I'm not crazy hungry. I have been eating lots of fruits, veges, and whole grains and doing the "salad in a jar" thing on sunday nights has made it so much easier for me to eat a healthy salad every day for lunch. GOOD LUCK, you are doing great. You are making healthier choices. I think it just is hard to lose weight. As I said to my husband "if it were easy, I would have done it already".

meridianova

The guidelines are that package labeling has to be within 20%, and because there are penalties for selling less than advertised, the errors pile up on the under-reporting side.

But none of this should matter, because if you truly were eating "whole, unprocessed foods" (which you most definitely are not) you wouldn't have any packages to look at.

I think the line people draw in relation to "whole, unprocessed foods" is large and gray. If you want to be technical, eating that way means you never set foot in a grocery store, never eat anything that can't be consumed straight off the plant/vine. I've seen some people consider anything that has to go through any kind of stages to make it edible for humans could be considered processed. That would rule out most meat, all dairy, tea, coffee, or grains. That doesn't leave you with much.

I've always defined "unprocessed" as "can you tell what the food started out as before it got to you?" Meat, fresh fruits and veggies, rinded or hard cheeses, eggs, rice, milk, and cream all count because the processing they're going through makes them safe for human consumption. And all of those foods are going to have a package for transport, so they're going to carry their nutritional information with them too.

But once you start getting into the boxed, bagged, or canned foods, like cereals, pastas, potato chips, cookies, sports drinks, sodas, frozen desserts, pre-made frozen meals, frozen fruits and veggies, that's where manufacturers can screw with things and add HFCS or a ton of sodium.

So if you want to argue that my broccoli and snow peas are processed because they've been shucked off the vine or cut into florets, then a pre-weighed amount is put into a bag or container for sale, fine.

meridianova

OP:
I mean this in the nicest way possible… please seek help to address the behaviors associated with your eating disorder. You may not have all active symptoms, but it is evident that you continue to struggle with some major issues in relation to it.

This is the first time things have flared (mentally) this badly in many, many years. Then again, this is the first time I've opened myself up to these kinds of discussions, ever. I internalize a lot of things, and I've never been good at "leaning" on anyone else. I'm good at asking questions to get information, not so much with asking for real help.

So... yeah... these wounds are far more raw than even I anticipated.

WalkingAlong

Honest question... how far do you trust the packaging and the food database?

The guidelines are that package labeling has to be within 20%, and because there are penalties for selling less than advertised, the errors pile up on the under-reporting side.

But none of this should matter, because if you truly were eating "whole, unprocessed foods" (which you most definitely are not) you wouldn't have any packages to look at.

If we start rounding up all our calories assuming the labels are wrong, we may as well just log things as is (less math) and just lower our calorie intake goal, knowing we're eating a lot more than we think. Which I think is true even of people who swear by their food scales. No one is immune to forgetting to log some things or from picking the wrong food item from the database or picking one with wrong info or mis-converting something's units. It doesn't matter much if you let the scale be your guide and forget all the undereating fear. Or if you be more patient, assuming things are moving, just not at the pace we think is warranted.

nomeejerome

OP:
I mean this in the nicest way possible… please seek help to address the behaviors associated with your eating disorder. You may not have all active symptoms, but it is evident that you continue to struggle with some major issues in relation to it.

This is the first time things have flared (mentally) this badly in many, many years. Then again, this is the first time I've opened myself up to these kinds of discussions, ever. I internalize a lot of things, and I've never been good at "leaning" on anyone else. I'm good at asking questions to get information, not so much with asking for real help.

So... yeah... these wounds are far more raw than even I anticipated.

If you go to the following website, they have an 800 number that you can call or you can click to chat if you are more comfortable with that option.

http://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/find-help-support

Wish you the best.