Calories In Versus Calories Out = CRAP!

I did not have a loss this week

Try fiber. Maybe prunes?

There are a large number of reasons why you may not be experiencing a weight loss.

1: With a deficit as extreme as you are citing your body may be in starvation mode and actually holding on to everything it can.

2: Your sodium intake may be pretty high and you're retaining a lot of water.

3: Fat may be being converted into muscle which is a good thing, but won't hit the scales.

Generally speaking one week is to small of a sample period. I've often had times where I wouldn't lose anything for a week, and the next week I would drop 5 pounds, despite little to no change in diet/exercise. Give it some time, see what happens.

Oh my god.

1: With a deficit as extreme as you are citing your body may be in starvation mode and actually holding on to everything it can.-No. No it is not. This is not true.

2: Your sodium intake may be pretty high and you're retaining a lot of water.- Very likely.

3: Fat may be being converted into muscle which is a good thing, but won't hit the scales.- This is not physiologically possible. This is completely untrue.

Although yes, give it more time.

Just a light correction. Fat is not converted to muscle. Your fat cells shrink and never go away. Muscle is "built" due to tearing of fibers during resistance training.

Exactly. Thank you. SMH

Besides, you are in a caloric deficit (a ridiculous one possibly); you are not gaining muscle.

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 [/b} 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.

I bolded the part that stuck out for me . . . you are doing it wrong. 1) That's a crazy large deficit and I'm uncertain how you're even getting to a deficit as large as you say. 2) There are many reasons why you may or may not have a loss from 1 week to the next including water weight and bloating. 3) how are you coming up with your estimated calorie burns and how are you measuring your foods and how accurate are you actually being?

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.

I get why you're saying what you're saying and I agree but not 100%. It's not really crap, it does make sense and work. There are weeks when I don't lose anything but did well work out wise and calorie wise and then the next week I lose 2-3 pounds. Losing weight doesn't work like we'd like, it's some give and some take. You could be retaining water, you might have had a bit more sodium than you realized and that's why the scale isn't showing anything different.

If you haven't already, I'd suggest using a measuring tape as well-inches don't lie but the scale can.

I completely agree with you. I seem to lose in weeks. Last week I lost, this week nothing. I"m so not sweating it (like i did in the beginning) because I KNOW i'll see a loss next week. It's a long process, the weight didnt get put on overnight, it dont expect it to come off overnight

Same for me. It's so inconsistent week to week, but when you average out my loss on a monthly basis, it's 4.5 lbs per month and my goal is set at 1 lb per week. It works itself out, but you just need to give it time. LOTS of time.

Have you tried a low carb/clean foods approach?

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

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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?