I don't lose weight- scientific miracle?

123457»

Replies

  • albertabeefy
    albertabeefy Posts: 1,169 Member
    "During the study, only 27 of 151 urine ketone measurements were greater than trace, with one participant accounting for all 7 occurrences of the highest urine ketone reading (large160)."

    So on in that regard only a small percentage of participants were actually in ketosis. Now argue what you will, but if you're not in ketosis you're not on a ketogenic diet especially when the ratios aren't near any standard ketogenic diet such as classic or Atkins induction phase.
    Again, you show you don't understand ketosis and urine ketone readings. It's well-known that urine ketone readings REDUCE to trace as people keto-adapt. That's why at the end they are all practically at 'trace' instead of 'greater than trace', and earlier on more were at 'greater than trace'.

    Of the three types of ketones (acetate, acetoacetate, and beta-hydroxybutyrate) produced by your body, ketostix only measure acetoacetate. This is extremely important to understand, because it turns out that your body produces different quantities of these different types of ketones depending on how long you’ve been in ketosis. If you’ve been in ketosis for a while, you’re going to see a reduction in the “intensity” of what you register on your ketostix ... (Sources: Precision Xtra Ketone Test Strips, Ketostix, Volek/Phinney: The Art and Science of Low-Carbohydrate Living)

    Regarding the ratio of carbohydrate, yes it was 12% at week two but under 10% at the end of the study. And all intervals showed the total CHO to be under 50g (44.6g was the maximum mean, and it went down to 33.8 by study end) - which virtually all experts agree WILL get you into ketosis. (Reference, "The Ketogenic Diet, Lyle McDonald"). To suggest they weren't in ketosis simply because the ratio isn't 'optimum' is completely incorrect.
    At any rate I give up... You're obviously defensive, but if you opened up just a little you might be able to make more progress on your goals. Good luck.
    I'm not defensive - I'm simply correcting obviously-incorrect information from someone who posts opinion from poorly-understood studies and/or articles. If you were correct there'd be no issue.
  • ereck44
    ereck44 Posts: 1,170 Member
    To the OP, you are eating the same things every day? Bleh!
    Also we don't know how long you have tried to lose weight. One month, one year? 20 years?
    As the body ages, it loses the ability to store proteins. Not sure if you are having decreased hormone levels or other factors that might inhibit your weight loss? Are you active? Do you use assist devices?
    Are you on any medicine that might help inhibit weight loss, ie. steroids like prednisone, or antibiotics?
    Have you been on a low calorie diet for a long time? have you been a yo-yo dieter?
    One day of logging makes it difficult for the average mfp friend to see what is really going on. Can't believe that you don't eat out once in a while or have family gatherings/birthdays where other food is available.
    just a few questions for starters.

    My advice for starting out is to get a kitchen scale and weigh everything that you put in your mouth in grams and cross reference with the mfp library. Log for a few months, check protein levels and sodium levels. then report to us how you are doing.

    Good luck.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • littlecrystal
    littlecrystal Posts: 110 Member
    I have not read all the arguments post the original post, but 2 things spring into my mind:

    1. If you dieted for a long time and ate consistenly low calories, your body may have gone into slow metabolism and just tries ot accumulate all fat while you eat more. I would try to up the calories (consistently) and would generally keep about 200kcal below your TDEE level.
    2. With all the vegan stuff, it is very easy to uncerestimate seeds and nuts and dried fruits without even noticing. Perhaps this?

    I wish you best of luck!
  • fullercorp
    fullercorp Posts: 37 Member
    hi, me again. all the keto talk, head spinning. I even tried THAT for a while. you can't believe how hard it is for a human to avoid carbs completely but anyway......
    ravenstar- went to doc, completely normal blood panel, no thyroid issue, low Vit D but typical for most adults
    Ereck - I don't take any medications, I have changed my diet over time and my ED was really too long ago to still impact me all these years later (16 yrs ago). clearly my metabolism is slow BUT (and this is why I jokingly called my post 'miracle') I haven't known anyone (personally) who changed their diet, cut calories and didn't lose. (and know that people that know me- like my boss- who see what I eat have said 'yeah, that is weird you aren't thinner'). additionally, my cube mate started eating JUST like me and dropped 50 pounds over 7 months this past fall which was ....great.
    Honestly, I felt crazy and probably wasted a lot of time telling myself what a lot of people on here and elsewhere say: I eat more than I think. So I did a spreadsheet only to discover, nope, I really am eating low calorie. (and no I don't use a food scale and that may be a gigantic error but I didn't think if you were vegetable based, you needed to. If I eat a medium artichoke vs a medium large artichoke, am I going to be way off?) so I went to a nutritionist who said your blood panel doesn't indicate a thyroid condition but you should go get Synthroid because you have indeterminate metabolic issues (because most people WOULD be losing weight). My GP did a broader blood panel and said you don't have a thyroid issue and (responsibly) we aren't giving you Synthroid. (I didn't want the drugs for the record)
    Once you rule out a medical condition, it HAS to be too many calories, even IF that is 1300 or 1400 calories? THAT, I guess is my question to those of you on here who have tried different things.
  • martinel2099
    martinel2099 Posts: 899 Member
    1) This is accurate. Staying in a calorie deficit makes weight loss possible.

    2) Being a vegan, a vegetarian, giving up soda, eating low carb, low sugar, etc. does not mean you are in a calorie deficit.

    3) Drinking water all day is okay - if you're that thirsty.

    4) Meal timing, size, etc. are not needed - you just need to have a calorie deficit for the day. You can eat out, eat a large meal, and snack - as long as you stay in your calorie deficit for the day.

    5) Working out is really good for staying healthy, but not necessary to lose weight. It helps some people keep their deficit.

    6) Logging is a good start. Do you weigh with a scale & measure with measuring cups/spoons all the food you eat?


    ETA: Making "massive lifestyle changes" will certainly improve your health - but doesn't mean you're in a calorie deficit.

    This!!#!!
    [/quote]

    This post is money, take her advice.
  • lrmall01
    lrmall01 Posts: 377 Member
    (and no I don't use a food scale and that may be a gigantic error but I didn't think if you were vegetable based, you needed to. If I eat a medium artichoke vs a medium large artichoke, am I going to be way off?)

    IMHO, yes you can still be way off.

    For example - this website says 1 med artichoke (120g) = 64 calories. http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2308/2

    This one says 1 large artichoke (162g) = 76 calories. http://caloriecount.about.com/calories-artichokes-i11007

    So if you are logging the first artichoke but eating the second artichoke, there is about a 18% error. If you think you are eating 1300 calories, but have an 18% error you could be eating up to 1530 calories in reality.

    The only way to accurately know is to weigh how many grams of artichokes you are eating and log the calories associated with that number of grams.

    If you really want to know how much you are eating, get a digital food scale and measure everything for 1 month. I'm willing to bet that you'd lose weight.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    (and no I don't use a food scale and that may be a gigantic error but I didn't think if you were vegetable based, you needed to. If I eat a medium artichoke vs a medium large artichoke, am I going to be way off?)

    IMHO, yes you can still be way off.

    For example - this website says 1 med artichoke (120g) = 64 calories. http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2308/2

    This one says 1 large artichoke (162g) = 76 calories. http://caloriecount.about.com/calories-artichokes-i11007

    So if you are logging the first artichoke but eating the second artichoke, there is about a 18% error. If you think you are eating 1300 calories, but have an 18% error you could be eating up to 1530 calories in reality.

    The only way to accurately know is to weigh how many grams of artichokes you are eating and log the calories associated with that number of grams.

    If you really want to know how much you are eating, get a digital food scale and measure everything for 1 month. I'm willing to bet that you'd lose weight.
    This is excellent advice. One of the best decisions I made was getting a food scale. I even carry a small one in my purse to weight my fruit at my desk because....well....all the pears I eat each afternoon look like they are the same size to me, but they really are not.

    Same with those bananas that all look to be the same size, and anything else we eat.
  • fullercorp
    fullercorp Posts: 37 Member
    i see an Ozeri digital scale on Amazon- is that fine? and then i need a book to reference with calorie counts? (see, this is why i eat as little as possible, food is so un-fun). i just want a tube of goo like an astronaut
  • albertabeefy
    albertabeefy Posts: 1,169 Member
    You know what also happens when you go on caloric restrictive diets? Your BMR adapts by decreasing...
    You mean like on the < 800 kcal per day diet that you're recommending? BMR drops tremendously on that - and not NEAR as much on any diet with a moderate deficit.
    therefore reducing the demand for glucose which consequently reduces the need for ketogenesis. BMR reduction is clearly marked in these participants by an 8% reduction in resting heart rate. To suggest that ketosis occurred in diabetics without blood sugar dropping significantly (which is kinda a big deal in ketosis) or any significant traces of ketones in urine during 16 weeks of a 10/30/60 diet is freakin absurd.
    I have NO idea what you're rambling on about now. Are you saying that ketosis didn't occur in these participants? Because if you are suggesting that, you're absolutely incorrect - as evidenced by the urine ketone measurements throughout the study. They were eating under 50g of carbohydrate per day, they were obviously in ketosis (based on the urine samples) and blood sugar levels did drop significantly.

    FYI all it takes is TRACE ketones on urine samples to be in ketosis. Most start with higher levels, and it slowly drops. This is the way it works. Also of note, several research studies have shown that fat-loss often increases as urine ketone levels drop to trace.

    Please read the literature on the subject before making wild assumptions not based on evidence or fact.
  • albertabeefy
    albertabeefy Posts: 1,169 Member
    i see an Ozeri digital scale on Amazon- is that fine? and then i need a book to reference with calorie counts? (see, this is why i eat as little as possible, food is so un-fun). i just want a tube of goo like an astronaut
    That's a pretty good scale from all accounts. It's much more-precise than the old [very analog] one I use ... and if an old, outdated model worked well for me, this should work well for you.
  • lrmall01
    lrmall01 Posts: 377 Member
    and then i need a book to reference with calorie counts?

    MFP, as well as several other websites, have the calorie counts for you. You don't need a book unless you aren't going to use a computer or phone app to look up your foods.

    Here is a good read about how to do this: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1234699-logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide

    Good luck!
  • in_the_stars
    in_the_stars Posts: 1,395 Member
    "During the study, only 27 of 151 urine ketone measurements were greater than trace, with one participant accounting for all 7 occurrences of the highest urine ketone reading (large160)."

    So on in that regard only a small percentage of participants were actually in ketosis. Now argue what you will, but if you're not in ketosis you're not on a ketogenic diet especially when the ratios aren't near any standard ketogenic diet such as classic or Atkins induction phase.
    Again, you show you don't understand ketosis and urine ketone readings. It's well-known that urine ketone readings REDUCE to trace as people keto-adapt. That's why at the end they are all practically at 'trace' instead of 'greater than trace', and earlier on more were at 'greater than trace'.

    Of the three types of ketones (acetate, acetoacetate, and beta-hydroxybutyrate) produced by your body, ketostix only measure acetoacetate. This is extremely important to understand, because it turns out that your body produces different quantities of these different types of ketones depending on how long you’ve been in ketosis. If you’ve been in ketosis for a while, you’re going to see a reduction in the “intensity” of what you register on your ketostix ... (Sources: Precision Xtra Ketone Test Strips, Ketostix, Volek/Phinney: The Art and Science of Low-Carbohydrate Living)

    Regarding the ratio of carbohydrate, yes it was 12% at week two but under 10% at the end of the study. And all intervals showed the total CHO to be under 50g (44.6g was the maximum mean, and it went down to 33.8 by study end) - which virtually all experts agree WILL get you into ketosis. (Reference, "The Ketogenic Diet, Lyle McDonald"). To suggest they weren't in ketosis simply because the ratio isn't 'optimum' is completely incorrect.
    At any rate I give up... You're obviously defensive, but if you opened up just a little you might be able to make more progress on your goals. Good luck.
    I'm not defensive - I'm simply correcting obviously-incorrect information from someone who posts opinion from poorly-understood studies and/or articles. If you were correct there'd be no issue.

    Might be.
    Preconceived notions are the locks on the door to wisdom.
    ~ Merry Browne
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    hi, me again. all the keto talk, head spinning. I even tried THAT for a while. you can't believe how hard it is for a human to avoid carbs completely but anyway......
    ravenstar- went to doc, completely normal blood panel, no thyroid issue, low Vit D but typical for most adults
    Ereck - I don't take any medications, I have changed my diet over time and my ED was really too long ago to still impact me all these years later (16 yrs ago). clearly my metabolism is slow BUT (and this is why I jokingly called my post 'miracle') I haven't known anyone (personally) who changed their diet, cut calories and didn't lose. (and know that people that know me- like my boss- who see what I eat have said 'yeah, that is weird you aren't thinner'). additionally, my cube mate started eating JUST like me and dropped 50 pounds over 7 months this past fall which was ....great.
    Honestly, I felt crazy and probably wasted a lot of time telling myself what a lot of people on here and elsewhere say: I eat more than I think. So I did a spreadsheet only to discover, nope, I really am eating low calorie. (and no I don't use a food scale and that may be a gigantic error but I didn't think if you were vegetable based, you needed to. If I eat a medium artichoke vs a medium large artichoke, am I going to be way off?) so I went to a nutritionist who said your blood panel doesn't indicate a thyroid condition but you should go get Synthroid because you have indeterminate metabolic issues (because most people WOULD be losing weight). My GP did a broader blood panel and said you don't have a thyroid issue and (responsibly) we aren't giving you Synthroid. (I didn't want the drugs for the record)
    Once you rule out a medical condition, it HAS to be too many calories, even IF that is 1300 or 1400 calories? THAT, I guess is my question to those of you on here who have tried different things.

    I understand your frustration completely. When I was 50 pounds heavier, I knew I didn't eat perfectly, but 1600-1800 cals a day should NOT have resulted in gaining 10 pounds in a year. My husband saw how much less I ate than he, and was baffled as well why I continued to gain.

    After almost 2 years on here I have discovered some FACTS about my particular situation.
    1. At 50 yrs old, I must eat much less than I did at 30.
    2. Since I am partially disabled, I am not as active as others, therefore burn much fewer calories.
    3 Since I have PCOS, and am insulin resistant, I do not process carbs like a normal person.

    I did manage to lose over 50 lbs. It took a long time.
    I could only lose consistently if I keep my calories below the suggested limit on here and keep my total carbs below 40-50g. Keeping my carbs lower helps keep my hunger in check, so that I can stay below my calorie limit.
    Any carb-fest that I would have, like over the holidays, would result in a few pounds gained and several weeks of strict adherence to lose the gained weight.

    I plateaued for awhile, while eating around 1400 and moderate carb levels. Several months showed me that this was apparently my new maintenance level. I dropped down to 1200 again, and was able to get the extra 4 pounds that I had gained off. But then the weight loss stopped. Nothing for another month.

    I was able to lose another 5 lbs by doing the 5:2 intermittent fasting. I just couldn't mentally commit to lowering my every day calories as low as I needed to do to lose weight again, but I could manage to pick 2 days to eat at 500 calories, which gave me a necessary calorie deficit.

    A lot of life stress has been going on with me for the past 6 months, and I haven't been mentally able to do the 5:2 lately, but I know that if I can get back into that again, I can lose some more weight. I just need to find a way to deal with the current stress better, since it looks like it will be around for awhile.

    I do NOT suggest that anyone eat under the limit that MFP suggests, without checking with your doctor first. My doctors were fine with my limit and they all even said that I could go even lower.

    So, there is my story. You may find something that sounds like your situation, and hope that I have helped in some way.

    If you carry your extra weight in your midsection, you might have PCOS, or be insulin resistant and not realize it. Especially if you notice that in times that your carbs are higher, you gain weight, even if your calories are not higher.
    I haven't read all the comments, since this post was hijacked by the Keto argument, so someone may have already given you this suggestion.

    Just wanted to let you know that you aren't crazy if you find you aren't losing on 1300-1400 calories. There are plenty of us women out there than can't either. Despite what online calculators may tell you.

    Hang in there and listen to your body. You will figure it out.
  • AllyBlue77
    AllyBlue77 Posts: 58
    Hello, i searched the boards but i am not finding exactly what i am looking for (as everyone's experience is different, of course). I have been changing my eating over the course of years but during all of my adult life, my weight has stayed the same. I just saw a post wherein someone said 'if you create a calorie deficit you WILL lose'.....but what if you don't. ever. lose? i have been a vegetarian for 23 years, I gave up diet soda 10 years ago, i became a vegan about 4 yrs ago(i occasionally eat cheese but PARSE it out but NO other dairy), i eat a plant based diet that i supplement with two protein bars a day (they have whey but they are the only low carb, low sugar, tasty ones i liked), i drink water all day, eat little meals- try to eat every three hours or so. i don't snack, i don't binge, i don't eat out. i work out but inconsistently (like everyday for a month, then not for two weeks, then again for 3 weeks, etc and this has been the case since i was 20- i am now 44). i have logged my calories to be 1200 to 1400 cals a day. I am rarely hungry. I went to a nutritionist because i started to GAIN- she said i was eating too little, so i ate a little more.....and my weight is still the same. i been around 160 exactly my whole adult life (i am 5'4"- so yes, i am decidedly overweight and no, i am no big boned. i was a chubby kid and teen for reference BUT i ate JUNK JUNK JUNK until i was about 23 and had an ED until i was 28. now i eat like a monk and no change. my blood panel was totally normal. i take no medications (except starting this week Qsymia, which i know gets no love on this site). i have been thin at two points in my life (ha!) post breakup in which i basically became manically obsessed and all i did (LITERALLY) was work out all day and drink protein shakes. Science and MFP tells me nobody should have to live this way to lose some weight. (but it illustrates it IS possible for me- just not sustainable). I am not vying for the role of Wolverine in Xmen.
    so, any suggestions that i haven't heard ? has ANYONE else experience this? Made massive lifestyle changes and experience NO weight loss?

    Go to a doctor. And if they won't take you seriously, go to another one. Don't listen to the people on this board, they will tell you that you're lying or worse.

    My suspicion from the little bit of info you've given here is that you have a metabolism disorder like PCOS - likely triggered by the ED and worsened by veganism.

    YES! i second this..... finally i hear something smart.
  • in_the_stars
    in_the_stars Posts: 1,395 Member
    Lyle? Volek and Phinney? Okayyy...
  • fullercorp
    fullercorp Posts: 37 Member
    i have no indicators of PCOS but do have them for insulin resistance and as i said in my original post, i DID lose weight when i did all protein shakes which i believe had more to do with a super high protein diet than calories per se. there is just some instinctual feeling i have always had that carbs were doing me no favors. i have heard anecdotally about 5:2 but i have seen no literature or program about them. do you fast for 2 days? low cal? 2 days in a row? Honestly (and i have hinted at this in my other posts) when you talk about dramatically cutting calories, you get a lot of crap from people that swings from 'that is not necessary to lose weight' (except for SOME people it is) to 'um do you have a PROBLEM??'
    i know i have an incomplete diary but DebbieLynn's post taps in closest to what i am getting at.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    i have no indicators of PCOS but do have them for insulin resistance and as i said in my original post, i DID lose weight when i did all protein shakes which i believe had more to do with a super high protein diet than calories per se. there is just some instinctual feeling i have always had that carbs were doing me no favors. i have heard anecdotally about 5:2 but i have seen no literature or program about them. do you fast for 2 days? low cal? 2 days in a row? Honestly (and i have hinted at this in my other posts) when you talk about dramatically cutting calories, you get a lot of crap from people that swings from 'that is not necessary to lose weight' (except for SOME people it is) to 'um do you have a PROBLEM??'
    i know i have an incomplete diary but DebbieLynn's post taps in closest to what i am getting at.

    Given the IR you might find this thread interesting - while it focuses on PCOS, note the study I posted addresses IR related possible drop in metabolism.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1267806-hypo-pcos-smoothing-tdee-deficit-numbers?page=1#posts-20207358
  • in_the_stars
    in_the_stars Posts: 1,395 Member
    "During the study, only 27 of 151 urine ketone measurements were greater than trace, with one participant accounting for all 7 occurrences of the highest urine ketone reading (large160)."

    So on in that regard only a small percentage of participants were actually in ketosis. Now argue what you will, but if you're not in ketosis you're not on a ketogenic diet especially when the ratios aren't near any standard ketogenic diet such as classic or Atkins induction phase.
    Again, you show you don't understand ketosis and urine ketone readings. It's well-known that urine ketone readings REDUCE to trace as people keto-adapt. That's why at the end they are all practically at 'trace' instead of 'greater than trace', and earlier on more were at 'greater than trace'.

    Of the three types of ketones (acetate, acetoacetate, and beta-hydroxybutyrate) produced by your body, ketostix only measure acetoacetate. This is extremely important to understand, because it turns out that your body produces different quantities of these different types of ketones depending on how long you’ve been in ketosis. If you’ve been in ketosis for a while, you’re going to see a reduction in the “intensity” of what you register on your ketostix ... (Sources: Precision Xtra Ketone Test Strips, Ketostix, Volek/Phinney: The Art and Science of Low-Carbohydrate Living)

    Regarding the ratio of carbohydrate, yes it was 12% at week two but under 10% at the end of the study. And all intervals showed the total CHO to be under 50g (44.6g was the maximum mean, and it went down to 33.8 by study end) - which virtually all experts agree WILL get you into ketosis. (Reference, "The Ketogenic Diet, Lyle McDonald"). To suggest they weren't in ketosis simply because the ratio isn't 'optimum' is completely incorrect.
    At any rate I give up... You're obviously defensive, but if you opened up just a little you might be able to make more progress on your goals. Good luck.
    I'm not defensive - I'm simply correcting obviously-incorrect information from someone who posts opinion from poorly-understood studies and/or articles. If you were correct there'd be no issue.

    Might be.
    Preconceived notions are the locks on the door to wisdom.
    ~ Merry Browne

    I am correct. Once again... Lyle? Volek and Phinney? Okayyy...

Categories