Technicalities of deficit with no scale change?

Options
Hello, I'd like to start off by saying that I am thrilled with the results I've been getting on the nutrition and body change fronts. Couldn't be happier there.

This question is out of pure curiosity as to what is physically happening to my body on an ongoing basis as I continue to eat on a slight calorie deficit, while maintaining my scale weight. To be clear I have never had a lot of/any scale weight to lose (2.5 kg absolute max, although I couldn't care less if that ever happens).

- 5'8" (173cm) at 132 lbs (60kg), just fine for me.
- Used to be skinny fat, but almost exactly 2 months ago, I completely overhauled my nutrition and fitness habits. Was ~23% BF, now probably around 21.5% based on comparing with example images.
- Work out for an intense 1 to 1.5 hours, 6 days a week (P90X, so mixture of strength and cardio)
- Have been weighing and eating mostly whole, nutritious foods, loads of veggies:
- at least 100g of protein a day,
- at least 35g of fibre a day
- about 2.5L of water a day.
- I have my daily calorie goals aimed at about a 250 calorie deficit, which *theoretically* is 0.5lb/week steady weight loss. That is, my Fitbit-calibrated TDEE is typically 2100 calories on a work day (1700 sitting still on my keester for 8 or 9 hours, 400 calorie one-hour morning workout), and I gross around 1750-1850 calorie intake a day.

Let's just say that I am trying my best to do things "textbook" based on what people have had success with,and most importantly, in the healthiest way possible. And it's working great for my personal goals of being fitter, stronger, more energetic, healthier. I am noticeably losing fat from my mid-section, and have gained a bit of upper body muscle (purely beginner gains, I don't expect mass gains to continue by any means while eating on a deficit).

Questions:
As my scale weight literally has not budged week to week over the last 10 weeks (not counting daily slight +/- 0.5 fluctuations), always hovering 60.0kg, what exactly does it mean to my body to be eating at a calorie deficit at this point?

Am I losing a bunch of fat, then replacing that lost fat in a continuous fashion with the exact same weight of muscle, gram for gram (but only as much as possible given the energy my body requires from consuming body mass due to the deficit)?

What if I continue to eat at a deficit along with my current nutrition/fitness regimen over a longer period of time? Doesn't *something* need to eventually be broken down to continually feed that calorie deficit, or has my metabolism fine tuned itself for the slightly smaller amount of fuel I am giving it each day to maintain its current physical state? At some arbitrary point down the road will my scale weight actually begin to drop steadily every week (for better or for worse)?

I guess a 250 calorie deficit also isn't a huge margin of error to play with if my food weighing vs exercise calorie estimates are just slightly inaccurate and I come out even Steven with my TDEE over the weeks and months. It seems unlikely to be that error prone if it is generally on the correct side, although granted, it is really just a ballpark estimation when it comes to calories burnt doing strength training (317? 350? 403?... :/). I just count 350-400 for the hour and half depending on my perceived effort and minutes spent. Is this too high an estimate closing my deficit gap?

I know my body is not some unique conundrum that manages to defy all logic, so my inquisitive, logical mind would like to understand what is happening to my body as the days, weeks, and months go by. The goal here is not to change anything (unless I've described a horrible terrible lifestyle decision above ;)), but just to understand how this is possible.

Thoughts or theories?

Some of you might be tempted to say who cares if I'm getting the results desired, but I'd like to think I've gotten this far by caring enough to seek out resources and thinking things through thoroughly (alliteration!). I prefer to understand instead of blindly following.

Replies

  • ghsfitnesspal
    ghsfitnesspal Posts: 260 Member
    Options
    Oh interesting question, I hope you get some answers (sorry for not being able to help)
  • holly273
    holly273 Posts: 84 Member
    Options
    bump! OH MY GODDDD YOU'RE ME! I was so close to writing this exact same thread. i want answers!
  • EDollah
    EDollah Posts: 464 Member
    Options
    250 calories is a very small margin to work with.

    My first thought is that you may be misjudging your RMR. You can get this tested accurately a number of different ways. I had it measured by a device called a "Bod Pod", which also provides body fat %.

    I'm guessing Fitbit uses an estimate for RMR (I don't have one so I don't know for sure), using one of the many formulas, probably Mifflin-St. Jeor. Getting a more precise number will help you better create a plan.
  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    Options
    I'm not sure what the answer is, but I would recommend taking your measurments and seeing if there is any change there. It's POSSIBLE that you're putting on muscle, which is more dense than fat (takes up less room), so, while you're getting smaller, you wouldn't be losing any scale weight.
  • grandevampire
    Options
    250 calories is a very small margin to work with.

    My first thought is that you may be misjudging your RMR. You can get this tested accurately a number of different ways. I had it measured by a device called a "Bod Pod", which also provides body fat %.

    I'm guessing Fitbit uses an estimate for RMR (I don't have one so I don't know for sure), using one of the many formulas, probably Mifflin-St. Jeor. Getting a more precise number will help you better create a plan.

    Yes, I agree that this could be it. I don't appreciate the degree of guesswork I've needed for pegging my goals. The sole reason I got the Fitbit was to get a slightly more accurate picture of my absolute TDEE (the 5 choices you get for daily activity using online calculators don't inspire much confidence in terms of accuracy, and the various outcomes can vary by 500 calories which is HUUUUGE when you're....not huge. :P). The Fitbit taught me that there is no way in heck I am burning 2400 calories a day on a work day even if I do like to think I do "intense sport 6 days a week". Maybe if I spent half my day doing said sport. Haha.

    I guess now that I feel that I can SEE some progress with my eyes, I have some more confidence to play around "for educational purposes". I could presumably lower my calories by 50-100 a day just to test my body's reaction to it. I don't want to do anything that will result in actual detriment (i.e. not being able to give training my all due to lack of fuel).

    That's another thing, for people who are on 500 (or 20%) calorie deficits, do you still feel like you can train to your max, or do you feel some limitations but accept that weight loss is more important at this point than going 110% to make fitness progress all the time? When I haven't eaten enough at a given point in the day, I do feel pretty immediately that I'm flagging and am not as sprightly/responsive (more cranky), so I think I am on the boundary of some physical need (maintaining my weight?). I'm curious about the *feeling* that people who lose weight steadily over time have, is the deficit perceptible? Or maybe the effect depends on how close you are to optimal weight? That is, does a "minimum" tolerable weight for each person exist and 60kg is just mine now and forever? Again, this is perfectly fine and healthy, I just want to know where I stand and why my body hasn't followed the same trajectory as projected.
  • grandevampire
    Options
    I'm not sure what the answer is, but I would recommend taking your measurments and seeing if there is any change there. It's POSSIBLE that you're putting on muscle, which is more dense than fat (takes up less room), so, while you're getting smaller, you wouldn't be losing any scale weight.

    I confirm that I am overall smaller in size (more compact). But doesn't muscle consume even more fuel than fat, thus using up my static deficit calorie input even faster than before? With my metabolism definitely up (evidenced by general body temperature, energy level, etc), I would think the same calories wouldn't go as long a way as the fatter me. Unless again, it's a coincidence and all the changes are perfectly balancing each other out and resulting in rock steady scale weight. Just seems...curious...
  • grandevampire
    Options
    bump! OH MY GODDDD YOU'RE ME! I was so close to writing this exact same thread. i want answers!

    Haha, I lol'd at this. I'm glad there's another me out there pondering the meaning of all this ("The results are in amigo, what's left to ponder?" -Hansel).

    And high five for us getting all fit and stuff! Amiright?
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    since i started insanity i only go on the scales for a laugh! i put on scale weight but got smaller, so must have lost bodyfat.

    my question would be, why does it matter what the scale says if you are happy when you look in the mirror?!
  • JeanMBK
    JeanMBK Posts: 728 Member
    Options
    bump
  • grandevampire
    Options
    since i started insanity i only go on the scales for a laugh! i put on scale weight but got smaller, so must have lost bodyfat.

    my question would be, why does it matter what the scale says if you are happy when you look in the mirror?!

    It doesn't matter. But I am someone who loves to understand things, many of which don't matter at all in a practical sense (whole days spent on Wikipedia, anyone?) So it is very interesting to me from a biological/physics question standpoint, even if it "doesn't matter" in my daily life. I simply want to know what is resulting in this outcome as opposed to the outcome of a steady decline in weight in so many others. I know this process is not magic. In some aspects a mystery, yes, but not magic.

    And yes, you could say I follow my scale weight as a laugh. I don't alter anything I do or how I feel because of it. The related question of eating at a deficit, however, is not necessarily as innocuous. As I mentioned, those calories I am not providing via food are coming from somewhere. If I continue to do this, my body could be 1) using itself up as fuel or 2) adjusting metabolism or 3) not doing anything because I'm not actually at a deficit despite thinking I am. Hence why I was wondering if I am replacing the precise amount of fat mass with lean body mass week in and week out, or is this all silly and due to misjudging my actual in/out, some other explanation I haven't thought of, etc.

    If I find a satisfactory explanation, I will just say "Ahhh.", and that'll be it.
  • grandevampire
    Options
    since i started insanity i only go on the scales for a laugh! i put on scale weight but got smaller, so must have lost bodyfat.

    my question would be, why does it matter what the scale says if you are happy when you look in the mirror?!

    It doesn't matter. But I am someone who loves to understand things, many of which don't matter at all in a practical sense (whole days spent on Wikipedia, anyone?) So it is very interesting to me from a biological/physics question standpoint, even if it "doesn't matter" in my daily life. I simply want to know what is resulting in this outcome as opposed to the outcome of a steady decline in weight in so many others. I know this process is not magic. In some aspects a mystery, yes, but not magic.

    And yes, you could say I follow my scale weight as a laugh. I don't alter anything I do or how I feel because of it. The related question of eating at a deficit, however, is not necessarily as innocuous. As I mentioned, those calories I am not providing via food are coming from somewhere. If I continue to do this, my body could be 1) using itself up as fuel or 2) adjusting metabolism or 3) not doing anything because I'm not actually at a deficit despite thinking I am. Hence why I was wondering if I am replacing the precise amount of fat mass with lean body mass week in and week out, or is this all silly and due to misjudging my actual in/out, some other explanation I haven't thought of, etc.

    If I find a satisfactory explanation, I will just say "Ahhh.", and that'll be it.

    The answer could also prove to be relevant to the question that I have had since I started looking into how all this works, that surely someone eating at a reasonable deficit (REASONABLE! not actual starvation) forever couldn't linearly lose weight into oblivion, could they? There must be a minimum weight at which your body will naturally begin to resist dropping below, by slowing down other functions? Knowing when and how that happens will help me make sure I'm no where near that.

    Anyway, I personally find this all fascinating not only out of interest, but because it ties into daily applications.
  • BeantownSooner
    Options
    One possible suggestion given the 10 week stall it to flip the script a bit on your calorie intake. As you know with P90X it recommends more fuel. Perhaps ADD 200 Calories for 2 - 3 weeks to see if it gets things moving again. 2 Tbsp of PB or an extra Olive Oil will get you there. I always find that when doing P90X the more I eat the more effective it is shedding fat lbs.

    Just a thought
  • grandevampire
    Options
    One possible suggestion given the 10 week stall it to flip the script a bit on your calorie intake. As you know with P90X it recommends more fuel. Perhaps ADD 200 Calories for 2 - 3 weeks to see if it gets things moving again. 2 Tbsp of PB or an extra Olive Oil will get you there. I always find that when doing P90X the more I eat the more effective it is shedding fat lbs.

    Just a thought

    I wouldn't even characterize it as a "stall", as I have been this weight for about 10 years, regardless of my type of diet or activity (I never used to care or watch what I ate). It is oddly just kind of my body's favourite scale reading I guess.

    For a while, before getting the Fitbit, I thought that maybe I was perhaps underestimating my TDEE and went with eating 2000 to 2100 calories a day (it was surprisingly hard work for me to not to forget to keep eating...but kept that up for a few weeks), and my weight hovered around 60.4kg... Not a lot, but a meaningful change over 2 weeks considering I am otherwise consistently around 60.0kg (unless the extra food I was eating each day weighed 400g. :P). But then I got the Fitbit, found out I don't move all day long and went with that TDEE reading - 250 kcal, and right back down to 60.0kg like clockwork.

    I may up it again for a bit, not for scale weight reasons (again, that is of no importance in and of itself), but to build a bit more muscle, train harder, and as you said, be able to burn off fat faster after.

    ETA: That would be eating at my estimated TDEE, btw. So is this telling us that a 250 calorie deficit is not having meaningful impact on my body besides hindering my performance and ability to build muscle (and therefore burn the fat)? Still trying to figure out what a calorie deficit even means in my situation. Surely there is a diff between eating at a 250 calorie deficit and eating at TDEE?