Do I need to stop eating back the calories?

So I have been on my journey for about a year and I lost 30lbs. I was eating 1200 calories and doing cardio 5 times a week. Well now I have been doing the same but more cardio and strength training. I figured I would do what the myfitness stated and eat back the calories from the cardio but now I am not losing weight. I am set for 1270 calories a day, burn 500, eat 500 back finish day with about 1700 calories. Now here is the problem for the last two months I have been doing this and even though I see muscle forming a bit I am no longer losing pounds. So my question is should I be eating back those calories or stay at 1270 a day?

Thanks,
Chrystal
«1

Replies

  • sbrown227
    sbrown227 Posts: 16 Member
    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.
  • Mikej77
    Mikej77 Posts: 112
    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.

    Stay off the scale, take body measurements or even get an accurate body fat% reading. I have seen progress pics of woman doing weight training, dropping INCHES off thier trouble areas but gaining numbers on the scale.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    When did you begin resistance training?
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    If you are not losing and eating back the cals then most likely you are either burning less than you think you are or eating more than you think you are. The only other option would really be water retention due to the addition of strength training, maybe a few ounces of new muscle would be possible too, if you are new to lifting.

    I would suggest eating 50-75% of the cals back, unless you are using a HRM then 75-100%, and to use a kitchen scale to weigh solid foods (precooked) and measuring cups for liquids.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    So I have been on my journey for about a year and I lost 30lbs. I was eating 1200 calories and doing cardio 5 times a week. Well now I have been doing the same but more cardio and strength training. I figured I would do what the myfitness stated and eat back the calories from the cardio but now I am not losing weight. I am set for 1270 calories a day, burn 500, eat 500 back finish day with about 1700 calories. Now here is the problem for the last two months I have been doing this and even though I see muscle forming a bit I am no longer losing pounds. So my question is should I be eating back those calories or stay at 1270 a day?

    Thanks,
    Chrystal

    if you can 'see muscle forming' its not because you are building muscle, just that you are losing fat so you see muscle definition. ignore the scale, losing fat is better than scale weight!
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    I figured I would do what the myfitness stated and eat back the calories from the cardio but now I am not losing weight. I am set for 1270 calories a day, burn 500, eat 500 back finish day with about 1700 calories. Now here is the problem for the last two months I have been doing this and even though I see muscle forming a bit I am no longer losing pounds.

    It is unlikely you are gaining appreciable muscle mass. Most likely your loss has slowed down due to over-estimating the number of calories burned. You can try eating back only half the calories, and see if that makes a difference for you.
  • tmpecus78
    tmpecus78 Posts: 1,206 Member
    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.

    Muscle does NOT weigh more then fat. A pound is a pound, regardless of what it is made up of. A pound of muscle occupies less space then a pound of fat, due to the fact that is it more dense.
  • Daws387
    Daws387 Posts: 46 Member
    A few things...and i apologize if you already do some of these things.

    When you weight yourself, I would do so once a week at the same time of day, preferably the morning after peeing and before eating or working out. If you weight yourself directly after strength training it will be higher because of your temporary pump (i'm sure there's some scientific reason that an expert could explain lol)

    Make sure you are accurately recording your calories consumed and burned. I guess scan barcodes when possible and try to stick with foods that have available nutrition facts over some homemade foods. Of course if you cook for yourself than that makes life easier too. When you do any exercise (even strength training), maybe use a heart rate monitor to keep track of how many calories you're burning.

    The way MFP is set up is you're supposed to eat back your calories, but you're able to set it up to lose a certain amount of lbs per week. They say btwn 2 and 3 lbs is the healthiest and safest, but do whatever you want.

    From what I know if takes a long time to build muscle, especially for women. On average, if you did strenght training consistently for a year, you would probably only gain 5-10 lbs of muscle at the most (please don't quote me on those numbers, do some research on it, thats just an estimate). So it's kind of understandable that you're not losing lbs. Someone posted earlier that you should measure inches. This is true because fat takes up more space than muscle, so if you're losing inches then you're losing fat, and at that point the scale isn't really that important.

    My last and final thing...if you can, start keeping track of your body fat %. That's another good way to tell if you're losing fat even if you're not losing lbs. I have one of those digital scales that also shows bf % from wal-mart for like 30 bucks. I don't take the numbers serious, I'm more focused on the downward trend over time.

    I'm no expert, so if anything I said is absolutely wrong and detrimental, someone please call me out on it :)

    Hope this helps, you're doing a great job! Good luck on your journey!
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.

    Muscle does NOT weigh more then fat. A pound is a pound, regardless of what it is made up of. A pound of muscle occupies less space then a pound of fat, due to the fact that is it more dense.

    come on you know what they mean.... By your logic you and I then weigh the same because 1 lb of you = 1 lb of me.
  • SailorKnightWing
    SailorKnightWing Posts: 875 Member
    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.

    Muscle does NOT weigh more then fat. A pound is a pound, regardless of what it is made up of. A pound of muscle occupies less space then a pound of fat, due to the fact that is it more dense.
    Muscle weighs more than fat by volume because it's more dense. A weightlifter will take up less space than an obese person of the same weight.
  • MomChemist
    MomChemist Posts: 19 Member
    I found the calories burned estimates on MFP were quite high for me. When I switched to a heart rate monitor, I found I was burning about HALF of what MFP said on my regular bike rides. I don't know if that is typical, since biking is definitely really dependent on type and quality of bike, as well as the type of terrain.
  • Daws387
    Daws387 Posts: 46 Member
    The only other option would really be water retention due to the addition of strength training.

    I agree with this! Make sure you are drinking enough water...8-12 cups per day, maybe more since you're pretty active. IMO, drinking water fights water retention, even though that sounds counter productive. The body retains water because it may not getting enough to begin with. Once the body is getting enough water, and some, then it will start to release the excess water out of your system. You'll pee a lot, but oh well haha. Also, try not to go over on your daily sodium intake, I hear that can cause water retention also.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    come on you know what they mean....

    I don't. The only way that phrase makes any sense as commonly used is if people think they are gaining the same volume of muscle as they are losing of fat, which is ludicrous.

    Apart from that, the densities of the two aren't even all that different, less than 20% apart.
  • xSirensSong
    xSirensSong Posts: 615 Member
    Hi there! I was having this same issue when I first started using MFP (it's been a while ago, & I quit and came back somewhere along the way), but this time I consulted a dietician about my calorie intake. She said for my weight, height, activity level, I should be eating between 1700-1900 calories a day, with the lowest she was comfy with being 1400. She instructed me not to eat back my exercise calories. I've been seeing steady progress since then.
  • Holly_Roman_Empire
    Holly_Roman_Empire Posts: 4,440 Member
    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.

    Stay off the scale, take body measurements or even get an accurate body fat% reading. I have seen progress pics of woman doing weight training, dropping INCHES off thier trouble areas but gaining numbers on the scale.

    This. Stop thinking about the scale. Focus on your fitness achievements and goals and revel in your awesomeness instead of getting down about not losing weight.
  • chrisdavey
    chrisdavey Posts: 9,834 Member
    what do your pics, measurements, feel of pants progress results say?
  • grimendale
    grimendale Posts: 2,153 Member
    come on you know what they mean....

    I don't. The only way that phrase makes any sense as commonly used is if people think they are gaining the same volume of muscle as they are losing of fat, which is ludicrous.

    Apart from that, the densities of the two aren't even all that different, less than 20% apart.

    If you don't think a 20% difference in volume is significant, then you've clearly never had a soda explode in the freezer (and that's only about an 8% volume difference).
  • SchroederNJ
    SchroederNJ Posts: 189 Member
    On a scale, a pound of gold weighs the same as a pound of feathers
  • Canuname
    Canuname Posts: 182 Member
    sbrown227 said:

    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.
    tmpecus78 said:
    Muscle does NOT weigh more then fat. A pound is a pound, regardless of what it is made up of. A pound of muscle occupies less space then a pound of fat, due to the fact that is it more dense.

    Semantics. That is exactly what they were saying. They just didn't say by volume, however they did not say one pound of fat weighs less than one pound of muscle and most everybody can understand they were talking about volume.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    If you don't think a 20% difference in volume is significant, then you've clearly never had a soda explode in the freezer (and that's only about an 8% volume difference).

    If your body was made from a rigid metal exterior, that might have been relevant.
  • Canuname
    Canuname Posts: 182 Member
    At the end of the day it is how you feel and look that matters, not what you weigh. If you are losing inches and firming up your body and your fat % is going down you are winning. Weight is just a number. How you feel and what you are able to do is what matters.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    If you don't think a 20% difference in volume is significant, then you've clearly never had a soda explode in the freezer (and that's only about an 8% volume difference).

    Right, because a huge volume of expanding gas is a good analogy for muscle and fat in the human body.

    20% is a huge difference, that is 1/5, not sure in what instance 20% isn't a large difference. In weight it would be the difference in being 200 lbs or 240, that is quite a large difference to me.
  • SailorKnightWing
    SailorKnightWing Posts: 875 Member
    If you don't think a 20% difference in volume is significant, then you've clearly never had a soda explode in the freezer (and that's only about an 8% volume difference).

    If your body was made from a rigid metal exterior, that might have been relevant.
    I'd say it's pretty relevant.

    155-lbs-before-and-after.jpg
    (That's not me, I found it on Google.)
  • Canuname
    Canuname Posts: 182 Member
    I think these pictures of fat and muscle speak to the difference.

    v6Hsr0L.jpg

    fat-v-muscle.jpg

    and what she said ^^^^^^^^^^
  • JLatham325
    JLatham325 Posts: 105 Member
    Most days I eat back my exercise calories and I still lose weight.

    HOWEVER, I strongly urge you to invest in a heart rate monitor if you don't already have one. Once I got my Polar heart rate monitor, I saw what I was ACTUALLY burning, which was about half of what the machines will tell you that you burned. Once I had a more accurate reading of what I was burning on a day to day basis I dropped the weight
  • lynn1982
    lynn1982 Posts: 1,439 Member
    If you're adding muscle, you will not see weight loss because muscle weighs more than fat. You will, however, see a decrease in inches.


    HAHAHAHAH...I can't believe I just read this. Are we really still posting this?? One pound of feathers weighs the same as one pound of cement. It's the same with fat and muscle... "dense": People, that i the word you're looking for!!!

    I haven't read any of the other responses, so I may very well be repeating what someone else has said, but from where are you getting your calorie burns? If you're also getting them from MFP then they very well could be off.
  • jclark0523
    jclark0523 Posts: 47 Member
    There are so many different opinions on this so I really can't say for sure what is the best way to go about it. I did however get my metabolic rate checked professionally so I would be more accurate in what I was targeting. I can only speak for what was recommended for me as male and it has been working. I was told in order to lose 2 lbs a week I should get a 500 cal deficit through diet and create the other 500 through exercise. If I burn more than 500 through exercise, then eat back enough to keep it as close to 500 as possible.
  • Congrats on your loss! Wonderful start of your journey! I myself am at the same loss amount as you and find sometime I need to eat part of the calories back, sometimes I stop losing because I'm not eating enough, and sometimess I need to eat them all back. If you're burning a lot of calories it won't hurt you to eat them, but play with it a little to find how many work for you. Many normal tatctics for some reason don't work on me. Also absolutely measure your inches. When the scale stops usually they start going. Good luck!
  • Daws387
    Daws387 Posts: 46 Member
    Here's a simple way to look at the whole muscle weighs more than fat FACT. 1 cubic foot of muscle will weigh more than 1 cubic foot of fat. Canuname's illustration is very helpful as well.
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    come on you know what they mean....

    I don't. The only way that phrase makes any sense as commonly used is if people think they are gaining the same volume of muscle as they are losing of fat, which is ludicrous.

    Apart from that, the densities of the two aren't even all that different, less than 20% apart.

    If you don't think a 20% difference in volume is significant, then you've clearly never had a soda explode in the freezer (and that's only about an 8% volume difference).

    :laugh: