one... freaking... pound...
Replies
-
OP, there's a popular example of weighing a half cup of oatmeal and finding it to be quite a bit higher than the published weight of the serving. You have a food scale, use it for everything except freely pouring liquids such as milk. Heck, if they listed the thing by weight on nutritional info, I'd weigh it
Someone mentioned not being able to find the link on logging accurately, here it is:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1234699-logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide
Thank you. That post was incredibly helpful. I didn't realize we had the ability to edit the database entries and then have them show up as our own for use later.0 -
Eating below your BMR, as you may know, is not sustainable and does not encourage steady weight loss. It stalls metabolism further and from what I've read in many months of participating in this forum, it is very common for people to eat at a similar level to what you're doing, not lose weight, be advised to eat more, and after eating more, find that they are losing weight much faster.
Eating below BMR causes a cortisol release, and I did not look at your diary, but even eating back your exercise calories, if your diet is deprived of dietary fat you will experience a cortisol release, as well as the effects of both leptin and grehlin.
Forgive me for my "wait... what?" reaction, but eating back the exercise calories really does seem counter-intuitive. A few other people have asked me the same thing and my first thought was "of course not! Exercise isn't an excuse to overeat!"
However, dietary fat isn't a problem. I've got my macros set as 50% protein, 40% fat, 10% carbs. My problem is usually getting enough protein.0 -
Hi, OP.
As a starter, and perhaps my stab at answering the question and the only part of this that won't annoy you, I don't know. The reason I don't know--which others have suggested, but there's been this long analysis anyway--is that two data points don't mean anything.
Staying away from the scale has been hard. There have been a few times that I've had to forceably argue with myself about getting on the scale "just to check". Sometimes it's a trigger, sometimes not.Who knows if the first weight was artificially low, or--especially--if the second weight was artificially high, in essence if you were on a fluctuation up when you happened to weigh.
That's a doubly frustrating part for me, and yes something I'm trying to take into account. Historically, when I'm going to have fluctuations like that, they're not just a pound or two. I've watched the scale bounce up 5-7 pounds in one day, and then that weight doesn't go away. That scares me, and not for ED reasons but because I know that even for healthy eaters, that is NOT normal.On logging, I didn't go into your diary beyond the past day, but this is what I noticed. You indicated before that you thought the "generic" entries with the counts based on "leg" or some such were the ones to use if you eat unbranded meats. They aren't, and I think they aren't likely to be accurate. Now, again, I don't think there's necessarily a problem to solve and I logged with estimates like this for a few months and lost fine, so I think the focus on precision you find here can be overstated or may apply more for people who need to use narrower margins (-10% of TDEE or thyroid issues, for example), but I like to use the tool as well as possible, so I found it really helpful to learn this. The best entries to use for unbranded, unprocessed whole foods are generally the MFP-input entries from the USDA without asterisks.
Another responder was kind enough to post the link to the MFP accurate logging thread, which helps a LOT. I hadn't realized that we had the ability to adjust nutritional info and to have it saved as the ones we've personally created or fixed. That's going to go a long way in helping me be more accurate with my logging.0 -
Eating below your BMR, as you may know, is not sustainable and does not encourage steady weight loss. It stalls metabolism further and from what I've read in many months of participating in this forum, it is very common for people to eat at a similar level to what you're doing, not lose weight, be advised to eat more, and after eating more, find that they are losing weight much faster.
Eating below BMR causes a cortisol release, and I did not look at your diary, but even eating back your exercise calories, if your diet is deprived of dietary fat you will experience a cortisol release, as well as the effects of both leptin and grehlin.
Forgive me for my "wait... what?" reaction, but eating back the exercise calories really does seem counter-intuitive. A few other people have asked me the same thing and my first thought was "of course not! Exercise isn't an excuse to overeat!"
However, dietary fat isn't a problem. I've got my macros set as 50% protein, 40% fat, 10% carbs. My problem is usually getting enough protein.
Um, eating back exercise calories is fuel....
MFP builds in your deficit, assuming that you will do NO exercise.
Person 1 is given a goal of 2000 calories, they do no exercise and eat 2000 calories so they'll properly lose weight, right?
Person 2 is given a goal of 2000 calories, they burn off 500 so now they can eat 2500. 2500 - 500 = 2000 calories. So they still meet their goal and will lose weight, right? How would that be overeating. Wouldn't netting 1500 potentially be under eating for said person?
Can a larger person get away with skipping it...ya, but the closer you get to your goal weight the more you need that fuel if you exercise. Again, how would that be overeating?0 -
Eating below your BMR, as you may know, is not sustainable and does not encourage steady weight loss. It stalls metabolism further and from what I've read in many months of participating in this forum, it is very common for people to eat at a similar level to what you're doing, not lose weight, be advised to eat more, and after eating more, find that they are losing weight much faster.
Eating below BMR causes a cortisol release, and I did not look at your diary, but even eating back your exercise calories, if your diet is deprived of dietary fat you will experience a cortisol release, as well as the effects of both leptin and grehlin.
Forgive me for my "wait... what?" reaction, but eating back the exercise calories really does seem counter-intuitive. A few other people have asked me the same thing and my first thought was "of course not! Exercise isn't an excuse to overeat!"
However, dietary fat isn't a problem. I've got my macros set as 50% protein, 40% fat, 10% carbs. My problem is usually getting enough protein.
BMR is the minimum amount of energy that your body requires for organs to function properly. If your energy consumption nets below that amount, then your body must draw upon stored fat. However, body fat is also a required organ. Once your body fat slips below a certain percentage, your body will distribute the energy demand on all required organs, and not just body fat alone. This is a stressful state for the body. Cortisol is released to make the body perform more efficiently to lessen the energy demand.
Basically, if you don't give your body the energy it needs to make all of your organs work, then your organs will become weakened. That is basically what happens as a result of anorexia. You are presently eating just a little above BMR while exercising, creating a total energy demand that deprives your body of the minimum energy it requires to function.0 -
Hello. First of all, I should say that you are an excellent writer, and I enjoyed your subtle sense of humor. Thanks for sharing your experience. I think we can all relate to times when we felt good about following a healthy eating plan but it didn't show at the scale. Not everything is under our control. But I'm glad to see that you are going to keep up your exercise. You are toning and building muscles with each visit...so good for you! More and more, I've come to believe that the mental component is as important as the physical one. Your mind has to be right with this weight loss journey and fully committed. I am making "a fresh start" again in my attempt to lose 15 pounds. We'll see if I can stick with it this time. As an aside, I'll just share that I started eating gluten-free six years ago, and it's make a big difference for me (less joint pain in knees and wrists). My sisters are also eating gluten-free (its a genetic condition) and have had even better results.
Keep up the good work!0 -
Are you eating your exercise calories back?
Ah. I see. Based on my report function, my thresshold still shows up as 1780, and I've had 3 instances in 30 days where I've gone significantly over, enough to cancel out the exercise for that day.
What I can't log in my exercise charts is the circuit training. It only provides for the reps of each exercise and doesn't show calories burned the way cardio does.
Lifting weights doesn't burn much in the way of calories unless you are doing it crazy cardio style. Hence no calories listed. BUT, overall, resistance is better than cardio because you are building muscle that will increase your metabolism.
And exercise calories or not is up to you. I don't eat them back unless my net is then under 1,000. I still average 1300 cals a day because my weekends aren't great in terms of food choices, booze and skipping the gym.
0 -
Um, eating back exercise calories is fuel....
Ok... honest question, how does that differ from the fuel we're eating normally, or the fuel from body fat? I always thought that part of the point of exercise, aside from increasing metabolism and building muscle, was to help create a larger daily caloric deficit.MFP builds in your deficit, assuming that you will do NO exercise.
Person 1 is given a goal of 2000 calories, they do no exercise and eat 2000 calories so they'll properly lose weight, right?
Person 2 is given a goal of 2000 calories, they burn off 500 so now they can eat 2500. 2500 - 500 = 2000 calories. So they still meet their goal and will lose weight, right? How would that be overeating. Wouldn't netting 1500 potentially be under eating for said person?
Honestly, I don't know. I was under the impression that when dieting, you should never drop below 1200 calories.Can a larger person get away with skipping it...ya, but the closer you get to your goal weight the more you need that fuel if you exercise. Again, how would that be overeating?
I guess because I've seen too many other posts on other boards where people attempt to justify "extras" because they've exercised that day. "Oh, I ran half a mile so that lets me have this can of Coke/cookie/doughnut/extra helping/massive slice of cheesecake."
And this confusion just adds to my problems with the calories in < calories out mantra, since that just indicates that the bigger the deficit, the better. So I understand it from a goal weight perspective, and understand why eating more would be required by someone like Michael Phelps who's burning through 7,000 calories a day just in exercise alone. It's harder to understand from a weight loss perspective, at least for me.0 -
It doesn't. No one argues you need to eat your calorie you burn this minute in food taken in this minute but for some reason if you make the time span 24 hours and the energy need a 'workout', calorie timing/source is important to people. If you put in MFP that you're "very active" you don't have to eat back. If you put in that you're sedentary with workouts, you do. There is no difference. Your TDEE is your TDEE. If you need more food for blood sugar regularity or something, that's timing you can manage but for 'fuel', it's more analagous to gas in a tank. It's all mixed, not dated.Um, eating back exercise calories is fuel....
Ok... honest question, how does that differ from the fuel we're eating normally, or the fuel from body fat?0 -
It's not true that the bigger the deficit the better, although many, many people believe that. Especially for someone with a history of restrictive eating problems, you want to be careful not to buy into that message, since it could be triggering for you.And this confusion just adds to my problems with the calories in < calories out mantra, since that just indicates that the bigger the deficit, the better. So I understand it from a goal weight perspective, and understand why eating more would be required by someone like Michael Phelps who's burning through 7,000 calories a day just in exercise alone. It's harder to understand from a weight loss perspective, at least for me.
The goal shouldn't be to eat as little as possible -- if it were, we could all just fast for a week and drop a ton of weight, and of course it doesn't work that way. The goal should be to eat as many calories as possible while still losing weight. Your body needs the nutrition that comes along with those calories, and if you restrict too much, you're not adequately fueling your body or giving it what it needs to function optimally.
Think of it this way: if you get sick and the doctor prescribes you medicine, you won't get better faster if you double up on the dose for half the time. You won't lose weight faster and faster if you keep increasing your deficit.0 -
Ok... honest question, how does that differ from the fuel we're eating normally, or the fuel from body fat? I always thought that part of the point of exercise, aside from increasing metabolism and building muscle, was to help create a larger daily caloric deficit.
It is. For example, it's really common to figure out your TDEE (or what you were eating before dieting if you were at maintenance calories or close to it) and then decide to cut 500 calories per day for a one pound loss/week and then try to up exercise to lose more, up to about 2 lbs. However, the way MFP figures your deficit if you tell it you want a 2 lb loss is to ignore the exercise you say you are going to do and create the whole deficit from cutting calories (cutting up to 1000/day from what you would eat for maintenance without exercise). What that means is that if you've asked for the whole 2 lb goal and want to actually split the burden between cutting calories and exercising, you should eat back exercise calories. But when you do you need to be aware that MFP tends to estimate high. (So in other words, if you do this, eat back some percentage of them, not usually all unless you have other reason to trust them.)
Some people say why not cut the full 1000/day and exercise for even more of a deficit, but that goes back to why you shouldn't aim for more than a 2 lb/week deficit in the first place (for most people, not extremely obese people doing a dr supervised diet or various other exceptions). Too high a deficit isn't sustainable for most, risks taking muscle more than a more moderate deficit, and could well be more triggering for someone with an ED, I'd guess, but I'm not an expert there.
That said, if you are aiming for a lower calorie deficit (for example, 1 lb) and want to see if you can boost your loss by exercising some, I see no reason to eat back calories unless you want to or unless they get really high. (I'm assuming here that the person in question can reasonably aim for 2 lbs/week.)0 -
My first thought was normal water fluctuation (from cortisol or new exercise or estradiol or whatever). 5 lb fat loss in a month would be fantastic. One salty restaurant meal the night before your 2nd weigh-in could have masked 4 lb of fat loss. The down side of infrequent weighing is you don't see your individual fluctuation pattern, although I understand all the good reasons for weighing monthly.
Don't stop what you're doing. Add monthly measurements. Perhaps like your "reference jeans," have a standard, measured, low-sodium meal (that you truly enjoy!) the night before you weigh-in. Stay fully hydrated. And this is the most important part: weigh at a consistent time in your menstrual cycle. That has the potential to mask another 5lb of fat loss with water retention. If it is really obvious to you when you ovulate, weigh-in 10 days after that. That's usually my lowest weight of the month. More obvious would be 5 days after the start of menses, but you get the idea.
As a female fluctuation example, when I am reducing, I spike at the same weight four Monday's in a row, even when my 7-day trailing average shows a steady decline. (I drink wine on weekends plus same food calories.) My trendline is a steep decline from ovulation to menses and pretty flat after menses to the next month's ovulation. All the comments about accurate logging and weighing everything that you consume, even liquids, helped me tons. Good luck and stick with it. It gets easier.0 -
You should at least eat back a portion of your exercise calories. I say portion because they aren't always accurate....I eat back every single one and then some (sometimes) because i'm using a HRM so I figure it's the most accurate I can get.
One thing that helped me was always remembering that you exercise to be fit, and diet to lose weight.
I run because it's good for my body and mind. I eat less to try to drop the last few pounds.
Don't exercise thinking you're going to lose all this weight, I think it puts people in the wrong mindset.
Remember that MFP already puts you at a deficit to lose weight, so you don't even need to exercise, you just do it so your body stays healthy and strong. So you CAN eat those back, in fact you should in order to keep your body healthy.0 -
And this is the most important part: weigh at a consistent time in your menstrual cycle. That has the potential to mask another 5lb of fat loss with water retention. If it is really obvious to you when you ovulate, weigh-in 10 days after that. That's usually my lowest weight of the month. More obvious would be 5 days after the start of menses, but you get the idea.
Not that I would ever wish dying during childbirth on anyone, but one of the awesome side-effects of that was having to have my uterus and one ovary removed. No more PMS!! :laugh:
Seriously though, I do still have something of a cycle because the one ovary I have left still functions normally... supposedly. So I do have to keep that in mind, though it's not nearly as bad as it would be if everything was still intact.0 -
Ok... honest question, how does that differ from the fuel we're eating normally, or the fuel from body fat? I always thought that part of the point of exercise, aside from increasing metabolism and building muscle, was to help create a larger daily caloric deficit.
For me the point of calorie counting is to maintain a caloric deficit in which to lose weight at a reasonable rate. The point of exercise is to increase my fitness level and strength. These are two seperate goals. The weight loss goal requires I remain in a regular deficit, the strength and fitness goal requires that I exercise and that exercise needs to be fueled.
If I want to maintain a 500 calorie daily deficit and I don't exercise I eat 1800 calories since my TDEE for that day would be about 2300. If I do an hour of cardio and some lifting and burn 400 calories then I eat 2200 calories since my TDEE for that day would be about 2700. In both cases my caloric deficit remains 500 and I lose weight at the same rate, in the case of exercising I had the added benefit of fitness and strength gains. If I did NOT eat back those calories I would be pushing my deficit to 900 which would be too much and a point at which I was risking muscle loss and decreased athletic performance...I wouldn't be able to maintain that for long and I would find myself getting weaker over time, making it more difficult to bring intensity to my workouts and not making any progression in my fitness.
I eat back my exercise calories. My calorie goal is 1800 but most days I am eating 2200 because of exercise. Here is my weight loss over the last 4 months.
In addition to steady weightloss I have seen endurance and strength gains including being finally able to do pull-ups.0 -
Um, eating back exercise calories is fuel....
Ok... honest question, how does that differ from the fuel we're eating normally, or the fuel from body fat? I always thought that part of the point of exercise, aside from increasing metabolism and building muscle, was to help create a larger daily caloric deficit.MFP builds in your deficit, assuming that you will do NO exercise.
Person 1 is given a goal of 2000 calories, they do no exercise and eat 2000 calories so they'll properly lose weight, right?
Person 2 is given a goal of 2000 calories, they burn off 500 so now they can eat 2500. 2500 - 500 = 2000 calories. So they still meet their goal and will lose weight, right? How would that be overeating. Wouldn't netting 1500 potentially be under eating for said person?
Honestly, I don't know. I was under the impression that when dieting, you should never drop below 1200 calories.Can a larger person get away with skipping it...ya, but the closer you get to your goal weight the more you need that fuel if you exercise. Again, how would that be overeating?
I guess because I've seen too many other posts on other boards where people attempt to justify "extras" because they've exercised that day. "Oh, I ran half a mile so that lets me have this can of Coke/cookie/doughnut/extra helping/massive slice of cheesecake."
And this confusion just adds to my problems with the calories in < calories out mantra, since that just indicates that the bigger the deficit, the better. So I understand it from a goal weight perspective, and understand why eating more would be required by someone like Michael Phelps who's burning through 7,000 calories a day just in exercise alone. It's harder to understand from a weight loss perspective, at least for me.
I explained it in the 2nd quote. As long as you meet your daily goal, you'll lose weight. If your daily goal is 1600 calories (to safely lose x amount of lbs), whether you get there by eating 1600 calories, or eating 2000 and burning off 400 = 1600.....it's still 1600.
As far as the food being different.... as a person gets closer to their goal weight, their TDEE will drop, thus they cannot handle larger deficits, thus the food they eat back from exercise calories is fuel. The energy stores aren't there anymore to handle a huge deficit.
Take myself for instance...
If I set for 1lb per week I get a goal of 1800 calories. A hard workout for me could be 500-700 calories, thus leaving me with 1100-1300 calories to get through the rest of my day on. That would a deficit of almost 1000 calories per day. I wouldn't be able to fuel my body for the rest of the day at only 1100-1300 calories. Now if I add 500-700 from my exercise I get 2300-2500 calories to get through the rest of the day. Much more doable, leaves me in the same deficit, and I get the benefit from my workout.
Nobody is "justifying" extra calories. They earned them, so they are enjoying them.0 -
Honestly I consider the idea that the purpose of exercise is to have a larger calorie deficit to be a very negative and dangerous attitude to hold. Exercise should not be about starving yourself, exercise should be about building a stronger version of yourself and you aren't going to be able to do that if you don't fuel it appropriately.
If you do heavy exercise loads and don't eat your calories back you will actually end up damaging and catabolizing your own muscle.
If all successful healthy weight loss was was to build the largest caloric deficit possible then you would be eating nothing but broccoli and attempting to run marathons daily. Sadly I think in all seriousness some people DO think that is something to strive for. Its not, that is horrible for you and will end up just tearing your body down rather than building it up.0 -
For people who don't hit the 1200 floor MFP applies, they can retain their desired deficit and weight loss rate WITH eating back. But if you hit 1200, your goal is reduced. If you 'eat back' you're assuming that reduced goal is still your maximum deficit, despite that you're burning more.
Put differently- Why is it ok for someone who burns say 2200 via their BMR+NEAT to carry a 1000 calorie deficit per day but not someone who burns 2200 via BMR+NEAT+exercise? There is no difference. NEAT is activity. Exercise is activity. It's semantics.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions