How do I loose weight?

harmonyh10

So I have been on various diets for the past two years working on losing the weight from having kids. Most recently I have been on WW and they had me at the lowest points setting. Now I am not perfect for sure but do track daily and have for over a year now and mostly stay within the points range they gave me daily and always stayed within my weekly and exercise points totals.

Over the course of the last 18 weeks that I was on WW I lost a total of 2lbs.

When figuring out what the calorie total was for most days for me on WW I was taking in around 1,000 calories a day. Which I think is what is wrong with my ability to lose weight now.

I have read the road map thread and decided I'm going to set my calories at 1,600 and keep them there through February to see if that helps. But question is...do you think that a higher calorie diet will help to 'reset' my metabolism and get me losing weight again?

TavistockToad

Lose weight, you want to LOSE weight.

and yes, 1600 should be fine.

secretlobster

You're a female with 40lbs to lose... Yeah I'd say 1600 is a good calorie goal to shoot for. I'd be surprised if you didn't lose ("LOSE") weight if you're consistently eating 1600 calories.

sunnyside1213

First, this is life style change, not a diet. Upping my calories doesn't work for me. I eat my TDEE less 20% for a total of 1043 calories a day. I eat clean, gave up sodas, try never to eat processed foods, drink lots of water, and try to keep moving.

royvee

I have been using My Fitness Pal, recording everything I eat daily. I filled out the form they have for profiles and it gave me a suggested calorie total. I am also using a food scale. If the cereal box states 58 grams of cereal in a serving, that's all I pour in the bowl.

It has made me more cognizant of how many calories I am eating and, that if I don't want to run out of available calories before the end of the day and get too hungry, I have to be careful how much I eat each time I eat something.

I have been on diets since my teenage years and lost weight then gained it back plus some more. At one point, I weighed 415 pounds and lost down to 285. I then gained back to 340 when I started with My Fitness Pal and the food scale. I also incorporated walking into my daily regimen, which allows me to eat a little more than I would be able to just with dieting. It also seems to rev up my metabolism, which makes me burn more fat.

I don't know if that would work for you or not because everyone is different, but I have lost 75 pounds so far, and I don't feel deprived as I always did before after dieting for awhile. Another thing that works for me is that I added a small portion of dark chocolate each day after lunch, so I am placating my sweet tooth without adding a bunch of calories (the amount I eat comes to about 85 calories).

The key thing is to find what works for you. If any or all of the above helps you, feel free to try it. Above all, good luck and keep plugging away. Even if you falter, pick yourself up and start again. Perserverance will win out over the extra weight.

harmonyh10

Sorry about the usage of the work loose vs lose.

Thanks for the replies, also feel free to view my diary and make any suggestions that you think would be helpful. I feel like this will never happen for me.

psuLemon

Keep in mind it may take a few months for your body to fully adapt, especially since you have been on a lot of LCD's for the past few years. Inevitably, your RMR probably adapted to a much lower calorie level. So give it time. I would also suggest altering your macro's to include more protein in your diet. And weight training can help with your metabolism.

belladonna786

Lose weight, you want to LOSE weight.

and yes, 1600 should be fine.

secretlobster

Keep in mind it may take a few months for your body to fully adapt, especially since you have been on a lot of LCD's for the past few years. Inevitably, your RMR probably adapted to a much lower calorie level. So give it time. I would also suggest altering your macro's to include more protein in your diet. And weight training can help with your metabolism.

This is the problem with people who say "I can't eat over 1000 calories or else I gain weight". They eat as low as they can for a while, then bump their calorie intake by a few hundred, and as soon as they see an inevitable spike in weight (the body's natural reaction to a change in diet), they feel like they've failed. I don't think I've ever heard from someone who transitioned out of a very-low-calorie diet and failed if they gave it at least 4-6 weeks to stabilize.

Edit: OP, I'm close to your age (will be 30 in February) and I ate about 1000 calories on average for a few months. Metabolism really took a hit. Had to continue eating around 1200 calories a day because I was convinced I'd gain weight if I ate any more. Did that for another year or two. Finally transitioned to a 1600-1800 calorie diet, and two years later, I haven't gained any weight. There are weeks I don't exercise at all if I'm really busy. You are obviously a different person than I am, with a different routine, but it's not usually necessary for a 30 year old female to eat so few calories in order to lose weight or maintain a healthy weight.

Amberonamission

I think I'd die on 1000 calories. WW really puts you on that low? I am shocked by that. Way back in the day WW used to have this thing called the core program. A list of foods that you can eat plenty of. And then a few points in the day for stuff off the list. I still try to stick to this list of foods. But, I keep my calories under 1500 unless I put in a crazy workout (over 1000 calories burned).

amdahwd

If only I had back every dollar I wasted at Weight Watchers!

I was perfect with my logging and measuring and weighing and still was not losing anything. I was so discouraged. Then I found MFP and started counting my calories, eating healthier (because with WW, it was not always about health for me, it was about points), and it has worked!

Just answer the questions MFP asks you when you join and follow those calories for awhile and see what happens - bet you will be surprised!

weird_me2

I suggest that you be very accurate about weighing and measuring your foods when you can. If you are eyeballing portions, you could be way off. Like, on the apple, did you really measure 1 C of chopped apples, or did you just have an apple and log it as that? This is where weighing could play a big factor because a lot of apples are huge. One apple could actually be closer to 2 or 3 cups chopped. Yeah, an apple isn't a ton of calories, but if you're off by 50 on that, then 100 on your lunch and another 50 here and there, it adds up and can really slow your losses.

Also, don't use generic listings in the tracker, especially for restaurants. The subway 6" chicken breast with no cheese is about 100 calories more than the listing you used. The Ruby Tuesday petite sirloin is about 75 more calories. This info was obtained easily from the restaurant websites. The generic listing for 2 cabbage rolls seems low to me, too, because the last time I made them, I used a "diet" recipe and it was still about 175 calories per roll. If you are making something yourself, input it in the recipe builder, it's great. If you are eating at a restaurant, use the info from their website.

Lrdoflamancha

Well first off if your weight is loose, you need to get a phillips screw driver and tighten it! If you want to lose weight then 1600 calories sounds about right!

weird_me2

I think I'd die on 1000 calories. WW really puts you on that low? I am shocked by that. Way back in the day WW used to have this thing called the core program. A list of foods that you can eat plenty of. And then a few points in the day for stuff off the list. I still try to stick to this list of foods. But, I keep my calories under 1500 unless I put in a crazy workout (over 1000 calories burned).

No, they don't really. Their lowest points setting would technically put a person at 1000 calories per day if they ate no fruits or veggies and a lot of junk. They also allow anyone at the lowest setting to pick if they want to stay that low or raise their points by up to 3, which is at least another 120 calories. They allow "free" fruits and veggies, plus foods higher in protein and fiber aren't as pointy as foods higher in white carbs and fat. I've known of people on the lowest points setting who were eating 1400-1600 calories per day. Honestly, WW and MFP aren't all that different, and WW actually does give healthy eating guidelines. I would recommend it to someone who has no concept of what eating healthy really is about, which seems to include a lot of newbies on here. WW actually gives a person a goal to choose whole grains and lean protein, have at least 2 servings of low fat dairy per day, and to have at least 5 servings of fruits and veggies.

david081

Look at how accurately you are measuring calories in. If you don't have one, get a digital scale and measure everything. And, of course, don't lie to yourself, as I did for years..

Good luck..

Amberonamission

I think I'd die on 1000 calories. WW really puts you on that low? I am shocked by that. Way back in the day WW used to have this thing called the core program. A list of foods that you can eat plenty of. And then a few points in the day for stuff off the list. I still try to stick to this list of foods. But, I keep my calories under 1500 unless I put in a crazy workout (over 1000 calories burned).

No, they don't really. Their lowest points setting would technically put a person at 1000 calories per day if they ate no fruits or veggies and a lot of junk. They also allow anyone at the lowest setting to pick if they want to stay that low or raise their points by up to 3, which is at least another 120 calories. They allow "free" fruits and veggies, plus foods higher in protein and fiber aren't as pointy as foods higher in white carbs and fat. I've known of people on the lowest points setting who were eating 1400-1600 calories per day. Honestly, WW and MFP aren't all that different, and WW actually does give healthy eating guidelines. I would recommend it to someone who has no concept of what eating healthy really is about, which seems to include a lot of newbies on here. WW actually gives a person a goal to choose whole grains and lean protein, have at least 2 servings of low fat dairy per day, and to have at least 5 servings of fruits and veggies.

I will say about WW is that I didn't really have any idea how many calories I was taking in. Until I did the core program I didn't know what the better choices even were.

Weighing my food in grams and recording every bite has been a life changer for me. Although I will give WW props for giving me the core list in the first place.

kmc2211

Change your mind set as well. If you think it will never happen for you, you are setting yourself up to fail. The mind is a powerful thing. You can do this! Good luck

mdcoug

I think I'd die on 1000 calories. WW really puts you on that low? I am shocked by that. Way back in the day WW used to have this thing called the core program. A list of foods that you can eat plenty of. And then a few points in the day for stuff off the list. I still try to stick to this list of foods. But, I keep my calories under 1500 unless I put in a crazy workout (over 1000 calories burned).

No, they don't really. Their lowest points setting would technically put a person at 1000 calories per day if they ate no fruits or veggies and a lot of junk. They also allow anyone at the lowest setting to pick if they want to stay that low or raise their points by up to 3, which is at least another 120 calories. They allow "free" fruits and veggies, plus foods higher in protein and fiber aren't as pointy as foods higher in white carbs and fat. I've known of people on the lowest points setting who were eating 1400-1600 calories per day. Honestly, WW and MFP aren't all that different, and WW actually does give healthy eating guidelines. I would recommend it to someone who has no concept of what eating healthy really is about, which seems to include a lot of newbies on here. WW actually gives a person a goal to choose whole grains and lean protein, have at least 2 servings of low fat dairy per day, and to have at least 5 servings of fruits and veggies.

This. I think their recent changes on trying to make meeting the General Health Guidelines (I think that's what they called it) be more important than those guidelines had previously been, are helping. I do still think that too much importance is placed on the points though, but maybe that's because I had been doing WW for so many years.

fgodfrey56

you may be playing fast and loose, but I am sure you want to LOSE weight.

harmonyh10

I suggest that you be very accurate about weighing and measuring your foods when you can. If you are eyeballing portions, you could be way off. Like, on the apple, did you really measure 1 C of chopped apples, or did you just have an apple and log it as that? This is where weighing could play a big factor because a lot of apples are huge. One apple could actually be closer to 2 or 3 cups chopped. Yeah, an apple isn't a ton of calories, but if you're off by 50 on that, then 100 on your lunch and another 50 here and there, it adds up and can really slow your losses.

Also, don't use generic listings in the tracker, especially for restaurants. The subway 6" chicken breast with no cheese is about 100 calories more than the listing you used. The Ruby Tuesday petite sirloin is about 75 more calories. This info was obtained easily from the restaurant websites. The generic listing for 2 cabbage rolls seems low to me, too, because the last time I made them, I used a "diet" recipe and it was still about 175 calories per roll. If you are making something yourself, input it in the recipe builder, it's great. If you are eating at a restaurant, use the info from their website.

Not to nit pick, but I added the subway right of the Subway website, when I did the create a sub option? Same with RT petite steak I chose that one after looking at their site.

harmonyh10

Oh and thank you all for your input.