Just started dieting and exercising and no weight loss

Also, which no one has mentioned, assuming you really are eating 1500-2000 calories, that's pretty low for a guy your age and size. 2000 maybe--I haven't run your stats--but 1500 is a deficit for me and I'm a small woman old enough to be your mom, so you'd actually want to eat MORE than that to get enough nutrition.

Try it your way for a few weeks if you must. But really, counting calories works. Even if you have to jot down what you eat and enter it later.

I may not be counting calories but I have estimated the amount I am eating. There is no way am eating above 2000 calories. I even estimated the calories I could eat from snacks.

And no I do not own a smartphone. I do not have the money for one.

The scale reflects how good you are with your estimations. If it isn't moving down you're eating more than you think you are. Save yourself a lot of aggravation and start using a food scale.

Not everyone has to count calories to lose weight. (I didn't) It's only been a week. Give it some more time. If you aren't losing weight without tracking your intake after several weeks....start counting calories.

This content has been removed.

If you're convinced that you're eating at a deficit, why do you think you aren't losing weight?

I am a 23 year old male. I am 6 ft tall and I weigh 237 lbs. I just started dieting and exercising in an effort to lose 50 lbs. I do 30 min of cardio everyday and I use a heart rate monitor to make sure I am in my target heart rate zone. I also do strength training at my local gym 3 times a week. As for my diet I do not count calories because I have tried that before and that failed. I do know however that I am getting somewhere between 1500-2000 calories per day. I do eat egg whites, vegetables, brown rice, boneless chicken, turkey sandwiches with whole wheat bread and fruit. Am I doing anything wrong that would cause me not to see any results my first week? Is it too early to be worried?

If you are 6 feet and 237# 1500-2000 is probably not a reasonable goal for you. I am 5'5' and #173 and my base metabolic rate is 1700 so I need to net at least that just to properly function. With your height and weight you probably need to make sure you are netting at least 1800-2000. Also its only been a week.. Keep up the good work and be patient.

This content has been removed.

Why is this forum filled with so many agnostics? Because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it won't work for someone else. Not everyone has the time, patience or resolve to count every single calorie in what he eats. Calorie counting is never even 100% accurate. Do you think a serving of almonds accurately has 140 cals just because it is written at the back? Truth is you are either going above or below and you don't even know it. I've estimated for the past one month and I've lost 16 pounds. I don't know about you but it is sure as hell working for me.

OP clearly stated he is estimating his calorie intake and NOT losing weight though. So estimating is clearly not working for him... I'm not sure what your point is? So estimating is working for you, good for you. But it's not working out so well for the OP... so what would you have him do?

If you don't count your calories you cannot possibly know how much you're eating.

agree totally

Why is this forum filled with so many agnostics? Because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it won't work for someone else. Not everyone has the time, patience or resolve to count every single calorie in what he eats. Calorie counting is never even 100% accurate. Do you think a serving of almonds accurately has 140 cals just because it is written at the back? Truth is you are either going above or below and you don't even know it. I've estimated for the past one month and I've lost 16 pounds. I don't know about you but it is sure as hell working for me.

Don't be mad at the results you don't get from the work you don't do - period!

It seems unfair, I know, it didn't take this much effort to put on the extra weight so why do overweight people have to work twice as hard to lose it? It's really a commitment to being healthy and about a lifestyle change.

If "estimating" has worked my thoughts are that you started with a lot to lose and therefore by being mindful you dropped weight because of the shock to your body. I work 50 - 60+ hours/week, gym 6 days a week, have a SO I am committed to plus friends and family . . . . I am busy but I find the time to meal prep and plan because it's either be lazy now or regret that I had McDonalds three days from now . . . it's my choice. It takes time to get used to - the weight didn't go on overnight and it won't come off over night.

If you can estimate your way to weight loss, good for you, but for the majority of us it simply just doesn't not work that way - calories in < calories out, and I know I can't guess that number.

@Ninkyou My post was in response to some posters not to OP but to answer your question clearly OP just started, I think it might be a little too early to say what works and what doesn't. @JackieO524 I know exactly what it means, there are several dictionary connotations.

Definitely log your food. The calories are really just a guideline but an effective one. About the only way I could see you "winging it" would be if your calorie burn was excessive enough to compensate for any fluctuation in your eating habits. Even then the only way to know you're at that level would be seeing the results without any sort of real tracking.

Personally I've found it takes about two weeks before I see any impact from any fitness changes I make. But once it starts the results are pretty noticeable and immediate after that. That's one more reason to log your food and exercise. You know you need a calorie deficit to see the results you're looking for. If it takes a couple weeks before the scale backs that up you'll need the numbers just to know your formula is right.

One last note. I don't count every peanut or weight my cereal in the morning. An honest ballpark figure works well for me. I frequently pick a food item that's close to what I'm looking at and using that number. I ate a corn dog yesterday and had no idea what brand it was. Looked at a couple entries for comparison and picked one that felt comparable to what I ate. Was the calorie count right? Probably not. Close enough? Yup and the scale seems to have agreed with my decision. Logging doesn't have to be a chore but it's definitely a valuable tool and worth the time.

One last note. I don't count every peanut or weight my cereal in the morning. An honest ballpark figure works well for me. I frequently pick a food item that's close to what I'm looking at and using that number. I ate a corn dog yesterday and had no idea what brand it was. Looked at a couple entries for comparison and picked one that felt comparable to what I ate. Was the calorie count right? Probably not. Close enough? Yup and the scale seems to have agreed with my decision. Logging doesn't have to be a chore but it's definitely a valuable tool and worth the time.

^^^^ this - Right on!

I do the same thing. I don't have a lot of weight to lose but I find that if I am diligent recording everything I eat, if the calorie #s aren't 100% accurate it will be close enough that I can still get a good deficit going and get that scale moving too

Another point of this strategy (or lack thereof) is when you make the logging easier, you're more likely to stick with it too.