Calories In Versus Calories Out = CRAP!

Options
13567…10

Replies

  • snowfox1
    snowfox1 Posts: 128 Member
    Options
    Have you tried a low carb/clean foods approach?
  • KeriA
    KeriA Posts: 3,275 Member
    Options
    I agree with you. I had a deficit for many months and didnt lose. I realized I was eating under my BMR for more than a year. I started to eat between my BMR and my TDEE and am finally losing. Yes slowly but losing. I have never eaten that poorly but I do think other factors such as the quality of the calories affects weight loss. I lost about 29 pounds on the MFP settings and then stalled out. I tried everything. Changing up my exercise, lowering calories and I have been improving quality all along. I have lost about 10 pounds since I upped my calories to above my BMR. I am finding that increasing my general activity level seems to help my weight loss more than exercise. When I can I try to exercise an hour a day 6 days a week. One or two weeks without a loss can be explained away but not 9 months of a deficit.Yes I did lose inches and reduced my bodyfat percentage during this time but didn't lose weight.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    I did not have a loss this week despite the fact that I have been eating at a calorie deficit of between 800 and 1800 per day for the entire week. I haven't worked out as much but I have still worked out moderately 3 times this week. This is what I hate about traditional weight loss advice. It is simply not a matter of calories in versus calories out! Well it sure isn't for me! I have never had any real success with WW, Jenny Craig, Gloria Marshall and even dieticians for this reason. With the dieticians advice to eat more wholegrains like brown rice and whole wheat bread, I have been twice, and both times I gained weight!! It is very disheartening.

    I guess it just means I have to work a lot harder than what I have been. Which is something I have never really done. So here goes to working harder and seeing what the results bring. I just thought I would post this for others who might be in the same boat.

    OP, if you can ignore everything you said in your first paragraph and just concentrate on the stuff from the second paragraph, you may well be on your way to seeing some success. It really is cals in vs cals out, and if you're not seeing results its because you're not tracking correctly or you're eating back more exercise cals than you've burned. Try harder
  • iAMsmiling
    iAMsmiling Posts: 2,394 Member
    Options
    No one has suggested a cleanse yet?

    WTF? Slackers.
  • testease
    testease Posts: 220
    Options
    Hey! A few months ago I bought a book called "The Smarter Science of Slim" by Jonathon Bailor. I have to say it was a great read which gives you underpinning knowledge about how the body handles macronutrients and it disproves the calories in vs calories out theory backed up by a lot of scientific evidence. It goes into depth about eating more but eating smarter and doing less but more effective eccentric exercise. I recommend checking out the reviews on Amazon.

    Jen xx

    your body can defy the laws of thermodynamics? This guy needs the Nobel Prize.
  • bullisnn82
    bullisnn82 Posts: 110
    Options
    you're prob not eating enough - that's the most common mistake chics make on this site
  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,229 Member
    Options
    Hormones. Estrogen impacts water retention which temporarily skews weight.

    That is just one reason why it might seem as if its not working for you.

    Another reason is cortisol. Having to perform strenuous activity in large calorie deficits creates stress for the body and its reaction to this is to produce copious amounts of cortisol which will impact how effectively your body uses calories (in other words, you won't burn as many calories for the same activities as someone of equal size with low-levels of cortisol).

    Stop assuming you know everything. If it seems like it is not working, it is because you are doing something wrong. Educate yourself before you declare something to be false that has been proven by science.
  • escloflowneCHANGED
    escloflowneCHANGED Posts: 3,038 Member
    Options
    Content of the calories can be more important than the absolute number.
    If I have too many carbs but still at or below target, weight loss can slow to a crawl.
    Upping fat and reducing carbs speeds things up again.
    An uptick in salt can mess everything up.

    Everything you said is wrong

    Agreed!
  • iulia_maddie
    iulia_maddie Posts: 2,780 Member
    Options
    You are most likely overestimating how many calories you use in a day and underestimating how much you eat in a day.
    Are you sure you are logging everything accordingly? You say you dont work out much, how did you achieve a 1800 deficit? What did you eat that day?
  • GauchoMark
    GauchoMark Posts: 1,804 Member
    Options
    your body can defy the laws of thermodynamics? This guy needs the Nobel Prize.

    Dude, you have OBVIOUSLY not been on MFP long enough... Don't you know that the 2nd law doesn't exist here? Its been disproved many, many times in this very forum.
  • fishgutzy
    fishgutzy Posts: 2,807 Member
    Options
    Content of the calories can be more important than the absolute number.
    If I have too many carbs but still at or below target, weight loss can slow to a crawl.
    Upping fat and reducing carbs speeds things up again.
    An uptick in salt can mess everything up.

    Everything you said is wrong
    It is not wrong for me. I need to watch carbs more than fat. All calories are not created equally.
    I cannot do the even split that the government says we should. That sends my cholesterol, triglycerides and blood sugar into unhealthy territory. But keeping carbs low works better for me. I do let it float some as a percentage rather than a fix gram count. Low carb purists set a 100g or lower count. But on days I do over 2K+ of exercise, whole grain crackers and cheese are a nice treat,
    Still, the higher my carbs are the slower the weight loss.
  • angieleighbyrd
    angieleighbyrd Posts: 989 Member
    Options
    800-1800? Is that a day or in a week?
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    Fat loss really is about calories in and calories out. But just tracking your food and exercise won't necessarily give you a correct picture of "in" and "out". You need to know how many of those calories are being absorbed, and how many calories you burn at rest and during exercise. Things like BMR and TDEE calculators can tell you what the average person of your age and size would burn, but it could be off a little or a lot on an individual basis. They are good starting points, but only trial and error are likely to get you a really good guesstimate. Even heart rate monitors can be way off depending on your fitness level and whether you stay in the aerobic zone during your whole workout.

    But it's good to remember that weight loss can often be about more than just calories. Because weight is not all fat. If you are eating something that is causing you to bloat up you can carry a lot of weight in water. And exercise or drinking more will not always get rid of it. Sometimes you need to find the source and eliminate it from your diet.

    Contrary to the popular quoting from bodybuilding sites, people really are as unique as snowflakes.
  • fatfrost
    fatfrost Posts: 365 Member
    Options
    DanaDark is right. Water intake can vary your weight up to 3.5 lbs in each direction. Also a week isn't the right period to measure. Try a month and then check back.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Options
    your body can defy the laws of thermodynamics? This guy needs the Nobel Prize.

    Dude, you have OBVIOUSLY not been on MFP long enough... Don't you know that the 2nd law doesn't exist here? Its been disproved many, many times in this very forum.

    1st law of thermodynamics: nobody talks about thermodynamics.

    2nd law of thermodynamics: nobody talks about thermodynamics!

    you got that?
  • angieleighbyrd
    angieleighbyrd Posts: 989 Member
    Options
    I did not have a loss this week

    so what?

    Exactly! I worked my *kitten* off a few weeks ago and didn't have a loss. I did have a loss with inches though so I was satisfied. Take your measurements.
  • cmcollins001
    cmcollins001 Posts: 3,472 Member
    Options
    Content of the calories can be more important than the absolute number.
    If I have too many carbs but still at or below target, weight loss can slow to a crawl.
    Upping fat and reducing carbs speeds things up again.
    An uptick in salt can mess everything up.

    Ummm...nope. Its either nope, or I'm a very special case...and I'm not a special anything. So, nope.

    Carbs have nothing to do with weight loss if you're eating at a deficit. I'm losing on average 10lbs a month and eating just as many carbs as ever. I'm losing just fine.
  • Bellren
    Bellren Posts: 14
    Options
    Overall, it all depends on LONG TERM. Complaining about a single week is like claiming the sun exploded simply because its no longer in view.

    This.
  • GauchoMark
    GauchoMark Posts: 1,804 Member
    Options
    Content of the calories can be more important than the absolute number.
    If I have too many carbs but still at or below target, weight loss can slow to a crawl.
    Upping fat and reducing carbs speeds things up again.
    An uptick in salt can mess everything up.

    Everything you said is wrong
    It is not wrong for me. I need to watch carbs more than fat. All calories are not created equally.
    I cannot do the even split that the government says we should. That sends my cholesterol, triglycerides and blood sugar into unhealthy territory. But keeping carbs low works better for me. I do let it float some as a percentage rather than a fix gram count. Low carb purists set a 100g or lower count. But on days I do over 2K+ of exercise, whole grain crackers and cheese are a nice treat,
    Still, the higher my carbs are the slower the weight loss.

    so trading carbs for fat doesn't affect your cholesterol?
  • testease
    testease Posts: 220
    Options
    It is not wrong for me. I need to watch carbs more than fat. All calories are not created equally.
    I cannot do the even split that the government says we should. That sends my cholesterol, triglycerides and blood sugar into unhealthy territory. But keeping carbs low works better for me. I do let it float some as a percentage rather than a fix gram count. Low carb purists set a 100g or lower count. But on days I do over 2K+ of exercise, whole grain crackers and cheese are a nice treat,
    Still, the higher my carbs are the slower the weight loss.

    sucks that you abused food and wrecked your body. But your information is still false for the vast majority of people.

Categories