Frustrated with the science!!

stefaniem76
stefaniem76 Posts: 37 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I want to preface this post with my knowledge and love of feeling good and healthy with the changes I have made in my lifestyle. I eat very well, am always satisfied and love what I cook and eat. I have found a love of Zumba, and proud of how I am doing things I never thought I would be able to do. But now to the frustration...

I lost weight over the years by dieting (mostly weight watchers). I was once 100 pounds overweight. I am now 40 pounds overweight. I fluctuated in that 60 pound weight loss for years (sometimes as high as gaining back almost the entire 60 pounds). I would go back on WW and lose some weight (never getting lower than where I am right now). Then last year I re-committed and lost about 14 pounds (that I had gained between WW stints) that got me to where I am now. I of course gained that weight back when I went off, and I knew I needed to STOP dieting. I needed to change the way I ate, even the way I thought about food. I needed to start moving more, exercising. When I began my research, and I call it research because I looked into the science behind the weight loss. I was told in no uncertain terms it's calories in vs calories out when it comes to weight loss. Sure, you should be eating for health and eating nutritiously, but for weight loss, calories in vs calories out.

I have been eating clean for about 5 months, and started working out daily (nothing crazy, an hour of Zumba 4 days a week and the rest is mostly walking exercises, or some light hand-held weights). I lost the 14 pounds I gained back within the first 30 days. But I have lost maybe 1.7 pounds since. How is this happening (or not happening) when I have been concentrating so much on the SCIENCE??? It just doesn't make sense.

For example - This week.

17684 calories burned

10325 calories eaten

-7,359 deficit

That should be a 2 pound loss, right? According to science. I lost 0.4. I am not looking for a magic 30 pound loss overnight, and I am absolutely not saying I don't want to work for it. It's just incredibly frustrating to know that I am doing all the work and I am giving it all I've got and science is failing me.

Thanks for letting me vent.

Replies

  • Greenrun99
    Greenrun99 Posts: 2,065 Member
    See one thing most of us learn the hard way is your body doesn't care about your numbers.. Sure MFP will tell you, hey you should weigh 30 lbs lighter in 5 weeks.. but you gain weight.. Your numbers you should lose 2 lbs.. guess what.. NOT happening..
    You need to lessen your deficit to get your body on the same page as your mind.. so in other words, eat more... toss that 2 lb a week number out, you can't do that anymore.. you could when you were 100 lbs overweight, but those days are gone.. welcome to realistic weight loss per week (.5 to 1 lb).. so eat a bit more, see what happens, if nothing, eat some more, see what happens.. (rinse and repeat)
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    You say you lost 14 lbs in the first 30 days.

    30 days

    14 lbs = 49,000 calories That would have been an average calorie deficit of 1,633 for each of those first 30 days. It's unlikely you did this. Most of that weight was water weight, not pure fat loss.

    So, perhaps you need to calculate the number for the entire 5 month period.

    5 months = 153 days

    15.7 lbs = 54,950 calories

    That would be a calorie deficit of 359 per day during that 5 month period and that's a moderate calorie deficit.

    Perhaps now, you've actually lost 15.7 lbs in actual fat unlike during the first 30 day period where it was mostly water. These are actually fairly good numbers.

    Now if that's not the case, other things to look at of course are:
    1. Precisely weighing and logging food (no guessing)
    2. Knowing that most people far overestimate exercise calories burned. I've seen people log 60 mins of moderate walking as 600 calories. Unless you're obese, those number are likely closer to 300.
    3. Incorrect approximation of your BMR and thus less than effective deficit numbers (not as many calories under each day as you assume).
    3. Metabolic condition that can only be diagnosed by a doctor.

    Finally, it is recommended to add in weight training to weight lose regimens since that sort of activity can help maintain lean muscle mass and restrict weight loss to fat as much as possible.
  • BrainyBurro
    BrainyBurro Posts: 6,129 Member
    let's examine water/fluid intake.

    8 x 8 = 64 ounces

    64 ounces = 1/2 gallon

    1/2 gallon of water weighs 4lbs.

    so if you drink your fluids for the day and don't pee/sweat much of it out (due to sodium or whatever), your weight is going to only be accurate to within 4 lbs.

    do you see why a 2lb discrepancy is nothing to worry about?
  • corgicake
    corgicake Posts: 846 Member
    It's probably either backlash from dieting too hard or some manner of shenanigans that's the domain of a doctor and not us. Try running maintenance calories for a few weeks and start rolling again unless you've seen other things to suggest this one is a doctor's problem.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,043 Member
    2 things.

    Weight loss isn't linear.

    You're overestimating your calorie burn.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • PHATFOBIA
    PHATFOBIA Posts: 15
    Doctors know **** all about nutrition and the real science of dieting, bodyfat regulation & storage etc. I agree with the other guy who said you need to eat MORE. Its counter-intuitive but there you have it. Your metabolism has been compromised by too long a time doing low-cal dieting. Calories-in-calories-out is a fallacy in the sense that (1) the human body does not operate in the linear fashion suggested by mathematical equations, those sums you are doing are a wild approximation at best; (2) not all calories are equal in terms of their effect on the metabolism; and (3) your prolonged history of low-cal dieting has to have affected your hormone levels which also **** with the relevant systems of the body for body weight fluctuations. Check out what Layne Norton has to say about 'metabolic damage' its spot on in terms of the 'science' which so many others seems to misrepresent or dumb down to the point that its meaningless. Unfortunately the biochemistry and hormonal profile of someone such as yourself who weighs Xkg but used to weigh a whole lot more is always going to be massively different to that of someone who has always weighed Xkg without too many fluctuations.
  • Espressocycle
    Espressocycle Posts: 2,245 Member
    One potential problem: you are not existing in a lab. Your measurements of calories eaten and calories burned may not be accurate and, especially closer to goal, even small miscalculations add up. So, before you reevaluate your plan, recheck your measurements. Audit your intake - I thought I was doing everything right a while back, but I wan't measuring and it turned out I was putting almost double the milk and cereal into the bowl as I thought.

    It's harder with the burn - heart rate monitors are suggested, but they can't account for fitness levels and other variables that affect energy expenditure. Trial and error may apply here.
  • Spokesman
    Spokesman Posts: 7 Member
    I would agree with all that has been said here. As for my opinion. I believe your calorie count is off. Both with your intake and with what you are accounting for, as for your exercise. As for my food I measure and wiegh everything I eat. I also eat six to seven times a day depending on amount of calories I need to take in.
  • stefaniem76
    stefaniem76 Posts: 37 Member
    I guess I should have mentioned that I wear a HRM and a FitbitOne daily. I am actually using those numbers for calorie burn, as MFP is way over.
  • magerum
    magerum Posts: 12,589 Member
    tumblr_mbnr4h7Duw1rqfhi2o1_500.gif
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    You should look up the brown fat study. It explains why 3,500 calories does not equal a pound for everyone.
  • QuilterInVA
    QuilterInVA Posts: 672 Member
    FitBit was far from accurate for me. I changed to Body Media and now I'm doing better. Does your HRM have the chest strap? Otherwise it is also questionable. j

Categories