Pounds vs. inches?! What do you think?

gale1089
gale1089 Posts: 67
in Health and Weight Loss
First off, I'm finally starting to lose weight!!

For the past few months I've been super strict about eating clean, sticking to my macros and working out 4-6x per week (mostly lifting weights). During that time I was losing inches, but not any weight.

For the past few weeks, I've been a little more lenient... worrying less about carbs and focusing more on just meeting my daily caloric needs (eating back exercise cals as well). I've been eating more and exercising less (about 3-5x per week). I've laid off the weights (though I still do strength training) and focused more on HIIT and pilates. I've been much happier and i'm actually starting losing pounds now!

I did my daily weekly weigh in this morning and have lost more weight (:happy: ) but my measurements are all still the same. I'm worried that I'm losing muscle since I haven't been working out as hard? What does your body lose when you lose weight but not inches? Could the fat have come from somewhere I'm not measuring? Should I be concerned or just go with it?

Replies

  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    losing inches is WAY better than losing scale weight... noone can see the number on your scales, but everyone can see you looking slim & sexy in a pair of skinny jeans when you've lost inches!
  • gale1089
    gale1089 Posts: 67
    losing inches is WAY better than losing scale weight... noone can see the number on your scales, but everyone can see you looking slim & sexy in a pair of skinny jeans when you've lost inches!

    I know. Weird that it took me months to realize this! I've been so worried about the number on the scale, and now I just feel stupid that I was so focused on that and not measurements.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,030 Member
    Inches lost trumps weight loss on a scale. Unless one posts their weight on their foreheads daily, most people wouldn't never know or care. But they do notice if you look smaller or have a different physique.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • staystrong_314159
    staystrong_314159 Posts: 43 Member
    You may have just had more food in your stomach from the night before since you said that you're eating more now. Try eating a light dinner and then check the results in the morning.
  • Cazzyxo
    Cazzyxo Posts: 104 Member
    Would much rather lose inches!! Couldn't care less about the scale if I was losing inches, If you look slimmer what does it matter what the number says??
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    losing inches is WAY better than losing scale weight... noone can see the number on your scales, but everyone can see you looking slim & sexy in a pair of skinny jeans when you've lost inches!

    I know. Weird that it took me months to realize this! I've been so worried about the number on the scale, and now I just feel stupid that I was so focused on that and not measurements.

    yet in your OP you said you stopped doing what was losing you inches, in favour of what was losing you scale weight....?
  • Nicola0000
    Nicola0000 Posts: 531 Member
    Inches every time!!!
  • gale1089
    gale1089 Posts: 67
    I realize that measurements are much more important... but do you guys think I'm losing muscle since I had no change in measurements but a change in weight?
  • FaithfulToIt
    FaithfulToIt Posts: 23
    DITTO on what everyone said scale weight is nothing inches tell the tale you know. And your scale weight could be water or any number of things.
  • DrMAvDPhD
    DrMAvDPhD Posts: 2,097 Member
    I realize that measurements are much more important... but do you guys think I'm losing muscle since I had no change in measurements but a change in weight?

    No. If you've backed off on your lifting, your muscles have stopped retaining as much water since they don't need it to heal. There is no reason that lifting would've prevented fat loss, that is controlled 100% by diet.
  • Katrina_vw91
    Katrina_vw91 Posts: 232 Member
    Inches wins!
  • TrailRunner61
    TrailRunner61 Posts: 2,505 Member
    Definitely inches!
    I go to water aerobics in the colder months and weighed 138ish when the class ended the previous winter. I worked out all summer, biking, swimming, walking, running, etc., and was up to 144 lbs. I'm short and all of the 'charts' were saying I should weigh around 120, so I was frustrated and didn't understand why I wasn't losing weight. Anyway, I go back to class in the fall and everyone gasped and said, you're so skinny! I was stunned since I weighed more than I did when class ended. It was nice but I was embarrassed! They were insisting that I lost weight and I'm standing there telling them that I weighed more! I got home and got out the measuring tape and wow, the inches really had gone down. Later, my girlfriend told me that she thought I had lost at least 20lbs. :) So yeah, I'll take inches over pounds any day!
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    I realize that measurements are much more important... but do you guys think I'm losing muscle since I had no change in measurements but a change in weight?

    No. If you've backed off on your lifting, your muscles have stopped retaining as much water since they don't need it to heal. There is no reason that lifting would've prevented fat loss, that is controlled 100% by diet.

    this
  • GlassslippersAndFairyDust
    GlassslippersAndFairyDust Posts: 518 Member
    I agree with inches but I have a question. Can someone explain to me why sometimes the scale doesn't reflect a weight loss but you lose inches and of course your clothes fit looser? If you're losing inches, then there is less of you. So I guess I'm having a problem wrapping my head around something/someone being smaller but still "weighing" the same. Thanks in advance for explaining. :flowerforyou:
  • Katla49
    Katla49 Posts: 10,385 Member
    I agree with inches but I have a question. Can someone explain to me why sometimes the scale doesn't reflect a weight loss but you lose inches and of course your clothes fit looser? If you're losing inches, then there is less of you. So I guess I'm having a problem wrapping my head around something/someone being smaller but still "weighing" the same. Thanks in advance for explaining. :flowerforyou:

    Muscle weighs more than fat and takes up la smaller volume of space.
  • GlassslippersAndFairyDust
    GlassslippersAndFairyDust Posts: 518 Member
    I agree with inches but I have a question. Can someone explain to me why sometimes the scale doesn't reflect a weight loss but you lose inches and of course your clothes fit looser? If you're losing inches, then there is less of you. So I guess I'm having a problem wrapping my head around something/someone being smaller but still "weighing" the same. Thanks in advance for explaining. :flowerforyou:

    Muscle weighs more than fat and takes up la smaller volume of space.


    I get that but since I understand that you can't gain muscle mass with a calorie deficit then the muscle was already there when the fat presumably melts off resulting in losing inches. But why not on the scale since the lean muscle hasn't increased due to calorie deficit? Just trying to understand. To me when you put something on a scale and you haven't gained muscle mass but you've lost fat (presumably) then I would think the scale would reflect the loss.
  • Runningcircuits
    Runningcircuits Posts: 182
    I agree with inches but I have a question. Can someone explain to me why sometimes the scale doesn't reflect a weight loss but you lose inches and of course your clothes fit looser? If you're losing inches, then there is less of you. So I guess I'm having a problem wrapping my head around something/someone being smaller but still "weighing" the same. Thanks in advance for explaining. :flowerforyou:

    Muscle weighs more than fat and takes up la smaller volume of space.


    I get that but since I understand that you can't gain muscle mass with a calorie deficit then the muscle was already there when the fat presumably melts off resulting in losing inches. But why not on the scale since the lean muscle hasn't increased due to calorie deficit? Just trying to understand. To me when you put something on a scale and you haven't gained muscle mass but you've lost fat (presumably) then I would think the scale would reflect the loss.

    Bump! This is the exact question I have. In the past 26 days, I have lost 6" over my body, but only about 2 pounds. I have been doing a variety of Jillian's circuit training DVDs using 3-5lb weights.
  • GlassslippersAndFairyDust
    GlassslippersAndFairyDust Posts: 518 Member
    I agree with inches but I have a question. Can someone explain to me why sometimes the scale doesn't reflect a weight loss but you lose inches and of course your clothes fit looser? If you're losing inches, then there is less of you. So I guess I'm having a problem wrapping my head around something/someone being smaller but still "weighing" the same. Thanks in advance for explaining. :flowerforyou:

    Muscle weighs more than fat and takes up la smaller volume of space.

    Oh, and I respectfully disagree that "Muscle weighs more than fat." A pound is a pound. Muscle takes up less room than fat pound for pound because it's denser but you are correct in saying it does take up a less space.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    I agree with inches but I have a question. Can someone explain to me why sometimes the scale doesn't reflect a weight loss but you lose inches and of course your clothes fit looser? If you're losing inches, then there is less of you. So I guess I'm having a problem wrapping my head around something/someone being smaller but still "weighing" the same. Thanks in advance for explaining. :flowerforyou:

    Muscle weighs more than fat and takes up la smaller volume of space.


    I get that but since I understand that you can't gain muscle mass with a calorie deficit then the muscle was already there when the fat presumably melts off resulting in losing inches. But why not on the scale since the lean muscle hasn't increased due to calorie deficit? Just trying to understand. To me when you put something on a scale and you haven't gained muscle mass but you've lost fat (presumably) then I would think the scale would reflect the loss.

    Bump! This is the exact question I have. In the past 26 days, I have lost 6" over my body, but only about 2 pounds. I have been doing a variety of Jillian's circuit training DVDs using 3-5lb weights.

    Most likely your muscles are retaining water for repairs and that's masking the fat loss.

    Another possibility is that the fat is preferentially coming off of a smaller area - that would produce a big measurement change per lb of fat lost. For example, I went through a phase where the bulk of the fat I was losing was coming off of my arms - lost two inches from each bicep in about a week while the rest of me stayed the same. Only dropped about a lb. in that time.
  • missing75
    missing75 Posts: 26 Member


    Muscle weighs more than fat and takes up la smaller volume of space.


    I get that but since I understand that you can't gain muscle mass with a calorie deficit then the muscle was already there when the fat presumably melts off resulting in losing inches. But why not on the scale since the lean muscle hasn't increased due to calorie deficit? Just trying to understand. To me when you put something on a scale and you haven't gained muscle mass but you've lost fat (presumably) then I would think the scale would reflect the loss.

    Bump! This is the exact question I have. In the past 26 days, I have lost 6" over my body, but only about 2 pounds. I have been doing a variety of Jillian's circuit training DVDs using 3-5lb weights.

    Same here: I've been eating around 1200 calories (max. 1300) for 5 days doing lots of exercise (3miles LS's dvds twice a day) and I've gained 1.8kg but I've lost 2 inches in my thights. I'm sure I've checked-in my calories correctly because I've been doing it for 2 months... How's that possibile?
  • 89nunu
    89nunu Posts: 1,082 Member


    Muscle weighs more than fat and takes up la smaller volume of space.


    I get that but since I understand that you can't gain muscle mass with a calorie deficit then the muscle was already there when the fat presumably melts off resulting in losing inches. But why not on the scale since the lean muscle hasn't increased due to calorie deficit? Just trying to understand. To me when you put something on a scale and you haven't gained muscle mass but you've lost fat (presumably) then I would think the scale would reflect the loss.

    Bump! This is the exact question I have. In the past 26 days, I have lost 6" over my body, but only about 2 pounds. I have been doing a variety of Jillian's circuit training DVDs using 3-5lb weights.

    Same here: I've been eating around 1200 calories (max. 1300) for 5 days doing lots of exercise (3miles LS's dvds twice a day) and I've gained 1.8kg but I've lost 2 inches in my thights. I'm sure I've checked-in my calories correctly because I've been doing it for 2 months... How's that possibile?

    All water weight. As someone said earlier, your muscles hold on to water for repair. This is more prominent when you just started a new routine but also happens when you have been working out for weeks/months/years. Nothing to worry about

Categories