Exercise Calories - SO FRUSTRATED, NEED HELP!!!!!

Options
2

Replies

  • KarenBorter
    KarenBorter Posts: 1,157 Member
    Options
    really good info in this threat. I worry about this too ... and yes, men lose differently then women due to a lot of things :) I have a male friend at the gym and he is constantly reporting to me "oh, I lost 5lbs last week" i am like WTF dude ... you suck! LOL and I have male friends on my list here who are doing the same thing.

    As far as the increase in weight, yeah, I wouldn't sweat it ... give your body a rest and try weighing again in a couple of days I bet that weight comes off.
  • TateFTW
    TateFTW Posts: 658 Member
    Options
    Tate, I assume you're a man?

    Yep.

    For the record, the statement I made about water weight was meant in a very general sense, and not gender specific. People tend to throw the idea of water weight at anything they can't explain. Personally, I just accept that I don't know nearly enough to explain most fluctuations in weight, and in the end I just want to keep trending downwards. Also, I certainly agree that losing 1 lb/day is abnormal and will probably be atributable to something other then pure fat loss.
  • kennedar
    kennedar Posts: 306 Member
    Options
    I weigh myself daily - I know it is not recommended here, but otherwise I would eat like a pig at the start of the week and then not eat at all at the end, so it helps me - and I have found that certain days I tend to weigh more than others. I tend to lose weight in large amounts (1 - 2 pounds) from monday morning till thursday morning and then have small gains friday morning until sunday morning. I am sure it has something to do with how I am eating those days and the amount of water I consume on the weekends (not nearly enough). Anyways, my point was that our bodies do things in funny ways and we might not always understand them. As long as you are trending down, that is what matters. Small gains are frusterating, especially when you are that close to your goal, but you know you are doing everything right or else you would not have lost the 87 pounds you already have. Which by the way, is pretty freaking amazing!
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    Tate, I assume you're a man?

    Yep.

    For the record, the statement I made about water weight was meant in a very general sense, and not gender specific. People tend to throw the idea of water weight at anything they can't explain. Personally, I just accept that I don't know nearly enough to explain most fluctuations in weight, and in the end I just want to keep trending downwards. Also, I certainly agree that losing 1 lb/day is abnormal and will probably be atributable to something other then pure fat loss.
    Well, the OP is on the same birth control I'm on, so I can speak pretty knowledgably about the fluctuations is causes. It's a bear!

    I agree sometimes water weight is blamed when it shouldn't be, but there are times it really is the case. This week, I gained 2 pounds despite eating very carefully and exercising. I can honestly say, my food intake did not cause a 2-pound gain. And although I'm drinking as much water as usual, I'm not needing the bathroom nearly as often, so it's going somewhere. ;-)

    Plus, one week I did not exceed my calories and the scale was showing down all week. Then I had dinner at Panera. The calories were reasonable, but check the sodium in their food. The next morning, I was up 5 pounds! It went away, though. Definitely water weight from too much sodium.

    So, it definitely happens.

    And, keep in mind that men lose more quickly than women in general because of several factors, from more muscle mass to the fact that women have a built-in fat layer that allows us to healthily carry a baby to term.
  • Connie48
    Connie48 Posts: 190 Member
    Options
    Just to throw something different in the mix, I read the book Body Fat Solution by Tom Venuto and its very eye opening in regards to calories/exercise/food. I personally don't agree with MFP "eat your exercise calories" (at least for me,) everyone is different though.
    I do think in your case it may be water retention. I can gain 3lbs overnight, but lose it 2 days later, escpecially if I"ve been training hard or switched up my routine.

    So, say you are at 1,200 calories and you burn 1,000 (which I often do -- 1,400 this past Saturday), you don't think it's right to eat any of those exercise calories?

    Just saying I think MFP should be used as a "guild line", not a be all/do all of calories burned/consumed. JMO of course, and we all know if one wants to lose wt you have to create a calorie deficiet(sp?) IMO adding back calories burned kinda defeats the purpose, of course one could argue that it all depends on how many calories you're burning. Bottom line everyone has to do what they think is right. The only reason I responded to the OP was because she seemed so frustrated. I usually keep my diet/calorie opinions to myself because it can be a touchy subject
  • clipsychic
    clipsychic Posts: 99
    Options
    My concerns too.

    Bumping to revisit later.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    Just to throw something different in the mix, I read the book Body Fat Solution by Tom Venuto and its very eye opening in regards to calories/exercise/food. I personally don't agree with MFP "eat your exercise calories" (at least for me,) everyone is different though.
    I do think in your case it may be water retention. I can gain 3lbs overnight, but lose it 2 days later, escpecially if I"ve been training hard or switched up my routine.

    So, say you are at 1,200 calories and you burn 1,000 (which I often do -- 1,400 this past Saturday), you don't think it's right to eat any of those exercise calories?

    Just saying I think MFP should be used as a "guild line", not a be all/do all of calories burned/consumed. JMO of course, and we all know if one wants to lose wt you have to create a calorie deficiet(sp?) IMO adding back calories burned kinda defeats the purpose, of course one could argue that it all depends on how many calories you're burning. Bottom line everyone has to do what they think is right. The only reason I responded to the OP was because she seemed so frustrated. I usually keep my diet/calorie opinions to myself because it can be a touchy subject

    I don't go out of my way to eat them back, but if I'm hungry, I eat them. The daily calories are already a significant deficit, so eating them back is still a deficit.

    Anyway, I tend to lose more most weeks when I eat more. Example: One week, counting my calories burned and daily allowance, I had about 1,800 calories left over on WI day. I lost .5 pounds. The next week, I actually went over by 400 (still a deficit, mind you, but a smaller one) and lost 1.5. I've been on WW and counting calories long enough to tell you that is definitely a pattern for me and has been my experience for a long time.

    Of course, everyone will have a different experience, but eating the exercise calories is not necessarily going to result in a smaller loss for everyone. People need to see what works for them.
  • H_82
    H_82 Posts: 418 Member
    Options
    Just in the regards to the HRM, I didn't want one w/ a chest strap either b/c I thought it would just get in the way or be uncomfortable. I'm a runner & do a lot (or what I think is a lot) of cardio. I don't even notice the chest strap. Also found that the treadmill was 100 calories too high compared to what I was really burning... which, of course everyone knows that machines aren't accurate when it comes to that, since everyone is different. I've only had my HRM for a short time, but I love it & think it was a great investment!
    Good luck!
  • abi_bennett
    abi_bennett Posts: 8 Member
    Options
    Maybe it's the muscles that you're gaining? Obviously, that counts as weight.

    But other than that, i'm not sure :S

    x
  • twingirls05
    twingirls05 Posts: 52
    Options
    I don't really think I'm gaining muscle b/c I'm not doing strength training and stuff like that. Running doesn't really cause a lot of muscle to form.

    I do think a lot of it is water weight b/c my "real" weight obviously doesn't fluctuate that drastically from eating healthy and exercising. I'm anxious to see where I am on Friday (just to weigh in again and see if it comes back off). Maybe I should just change my weigh in day...lol! I have been able to buy some Medium tops and a few size 8 pants....so I know that I'm losing somehwere! I haven't done measurements in a really long time, maybe I should do that again.

    Honestly, if I don't lose 10 more lbs, I won't be super upset. When I was at my lowest (158), that was 6 years ago and pre-children. If I can run and maintain even where I'm at now, I would be happy. Sometimes I think my body where it is. Before MFP, I had maintained my weight for 9 months (even though I was trying to lose).

    I'm going to play around with my calories this weekend. I'm doing a 16 mile run. I plan on eating an additional 700-900 calories that day...first off all, I'm starving ALL day long after those runs and my 300 calorie banana chocolate smoothie from Starbucks is always a yummy treat after almost 3 hours of working out! Ha! But, my legs will likely be a bit sore from that run too. So, we'll see how I do next week!

    Thanks for the all the input. Looks like a lot of people benefitted from this thread!
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    Options
    there are 2 things to keep in mind with regards to your pre-pregnancy weight. 1 is that running (and most forms of exercise that stress the orthopedic systems of the body) forces your body to increase bone density. This is a good thing, it means the bones are harder to fracture and you have more calcium to draw on during times of need (the body uses calcium during muscle use to close the actin/myocin bridge in a muscle causing the contraction phase, without calcium, you can't contract muscles.). But it also leads to small weight gains. So after a year of running, you're bones are probably a few lbs heavier. This is especially important in women who are at much higher risk of osteoporosis as they age. 2 is muscle density. Even though you aren't gaining muscle "bulk" by running (distance running), your slow twitch (endurance) muscles still become more dense to compensate for the increased work load. This is NOT a short term gain, but over a year or so, you can put on 5 to 10 lbs of muscle mass without ever seeing a physical change because of muscle mass gains.

    So being 10 or 15 lbs heavier, without changing your measurements or fat % is very reasonable and realistic. And it's also good, because it's not fat, it's lean tissue and bone, which means a healthier you.

    Take endurance athletes for instance, usually for their body measurements, they are heavier than you would think.
    Another example is the weight of an elderly person. Usually they are 10 to 20 lbs lighter than they were (gaining fat not withstanding) 20 or 30 years earlier. This is largely due to loss of bone (and muscle) mass as we age.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    Just in the regards to the HRM, I didn't want one w/ a chest strap either b/c I thought it would just get in the way or be uncomfortable. I'm a runner & do a lot (or what I think is a lot) of cardio. I don't even notice the chest strap. Also found that the treadmill was 100 calories too high compared to what I was really burning... which, of course everyone knows that machines aren't accurate when it comes to that, since everyone is different. I've only had my HRM for a short time, but I love it & think it was a great investment!
    Good luck!

    Why do you automatically assume that the HRM is more accurate?

    I always find it amusing that many people will dismiss the machine numbers out of hand, and yet accept numbers from an HRM without question. They are both estimates.
  • aprilgicker
    aprilgicker Posts: 395 Member
    Options
    Water can be the biggest cause. My husband can gain as much as 10lbs of water stress after a set of runs.
    And if you are in a fluctuation stage of your weight loss maybe you need to work on your upper body too. add some more muscle to burn the last 10 off.
    And something else to consider is to switch to measurement or percent BF for your last stage. You sound like you are in Great shape and you wouldn't want to ruin it by losing the muscle you need to stay fit because you want to lose the last 10. You have to use your HR monitor to keep up with you cals. which you already do.
    Good Luck
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    Just in the regards to the HRM, I didn't want one w/ a chest strap either b/c I thought it would just get in the way or be uncomfortable. I'm a runner & do a lot (or what I think is a lot) of cardio. I don't even notice the chest strap. Also found that the treadmill was 100 calories too high compared to what I was really burning... which, of course everyone knows that machines aren't accurate when it comes to that, since everyone is different. I've only had my HRM for a short time, but I love it & think it was a great investment!
    Good luck!

    Why do you automatically assume that the HRM is more accurate?

    I always find it amusing that many people will dismiss the machine numbers out of hand, and yet accept numbers from an HRM without question. They are both estimates.

    Yes, but the HRM constantly monitors my actual heart rate while the machine does not. My elliptical tells me I'm burning 1,000 calories every 45 minutes. I assure you: I'm not. My HRM says I'm burning about 400-450 in that same amount of time. Yes, I believe the HRM over the machine.
  • H_82
    H_82 Posts: 418 Member
    Options
    Just in the regards to the HRM, I didn't want one w/ a chest strap either b/c I thought it would just get in the way or be uncomfortable. I'm a runner & do a lot (or what I think is a lot) of cardio. I don't even notice the chest strap. Also found that the treadmill was 100 calories too high compared to what I was really burning... which, of course everyone knows that machines aren't accurate when it comes to that, since everyone is different. I've only had my HRM for a short time, but I love it & think it was a great investment!
    Good luck!

    Why do you automatically assume that the HRM is more accurate?

    I always find it amusing that many people will dismiss the machine numbers out of hand, and yet accept numbers from an HRM without question. They are both estimates.
    I think the HRM IS more accurate than the machine b/c I don't constantly have my hands on the heart rate part of the machine. The HRM has a constant reading. Also, it lets me know what I'm burning while doing things other than machines, where otherwise I would have no clue. Maybe they are both estimates, but I'm sure the HRM is a bit more accurate than the machine....In my personal opinion.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    Just in the regards to the HRM, I didn't want one w/ a chest strap either b/c I thought it would just get in the way or be uncomfortable. I'm a runner & do a lot (or what I think is a lot) of cardio. I don't even notice the chest strap. Also found that the treadmill was 100 calories too high compared to what I was really burning... which, of course everyone knows that machines aren't accurate when it comes to that, since everyone is different. I've only had my HRM for a short time, but I love it & think it was a great investment!
    Good luck!

    Why do you automatically assume that the HRM is more accurate?

    I always find it amusing that many people will dismiss the machine numbers out of hand, and yet accept numbers from an HRM without question. They are both estimates.
    I think the HRM IS more accurate than the machine b/c I don't constantly have my hands on the heart rate part of the machine. The HRM has a constant reading. Also, it lets me know what I'm burning while doing things other than machines, where otherwise I would have no clue. Maybe they are both estimates, but I'm sure the HRM is a bit more accurate than the machine....In my personal opinion.

    (I meant to quote you and accidentally almost reported you! lol)

    I agree with everything you said. And I wasn't even thinking about doing non-machine exercise when I answered. I only use my elliptical when I cannot exercise outside. Otherwise, I'm swimming, jogging/walking/hiking outside somewhere, rollerblading, doing yoga ...

    None of those are on machines.
  • H_82
    H_82 Posts: 418 Member
    Options
    Also, the machines give you results of the average person. I guarantee that if you & I did the same exact workout, say on the treadmill, the calories would come out the same....and I highly doubt that that would be true.
  • JDMPWR
    JDMPWR Posts: 1,863 Member
    Options
    Sodium intake plus water retention but most importantly if you are running a mile in 10 minutes you are not burning 100 cals. Invest in a hrm. I run a mile in around 7 minutes and I barely burn 90 cals.
  • ChubbieTubbie
    ChubbieTubbie Posts: 481 Member
    Options
    Sodium intake plus water retention but most importantly if you are running a mile in 10 minutes you are not burning 100 cals. Invest in a hrm. I run a mile in around 7 minutes and I barely burn 90 cals.

    That's not necessarily true. I bike with a friend and we both wear HRMs to track calories burned---I consistently burn 225 cals in 15-17 minutes and she only burns around 150. We're different sizes and in different levels of fitness.

    As for the OP--I hit a point where I was gaining a bit instead of losing, and after I upped my calories a bit (200 a day) the weight started coming off again, so I'd wager to say you should eat just a bit more and see if that works for you. What works for one person may not work for another, so it's best to just try different things until you see what works for you and your metabolism.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    Sodium intake plus water retention but most importantly if you are running a mile in 10 minutes you are not burning 100 cals. Invest in a hrm. I run a mile in around 7 minutes and I barely burn 90 cals.

    I have an HRM. I burn 100 calories in 10 minutes with some exercises, including the elliptical. The amount of time she takes to run a mile is not directly connected to how many calories she's burning. Weight, fitness level, speed, hills, etc., all play into it. You can't know she's not burning 100 calories in 10 minutes just because you only burn 90 in 7.

Categories