Why Aren't I Losing Anything?

Options
littlemissunderstood
littlemissunderstood Posts: 50
in Health and Weight Loss
I finally got a gym membership a little under two weeks ago and I have been getting my money's worth. I go almost every day. The only days I haven't gone were when I did a bootcamp class and it hurt to walk let alone work out and another day when the fire alarm went off and they wouldn't let anyone in. I even went yesterday even though I had a cold and it made me nauseous. I do either 45 minutes on the arc trainer OR a 45-60 minute long class + 20-30 minutes on the arc trainer.

I lost 1 measly pound in the first week, but the next two days I was super stressed and sleep deprived so I ended up going over my allotted calories though I'm fairly certain I didn't go far enough over to actually gain much weight if any. I shot up 6lbs over night and have only gone down 1 or 2 since. I know it's mathematically impossible and I'm just gaining water weight or my muscles are storing glycogen or something but it's just so discouraging. I feel like I should be losing more considering I'm working so hard at it : (.

That said, I suppose I do look more toned. My mom commented on my arms and to me my stomach seems over so slightly flatter. But I really want something concrete to go by and I think I should be losing.
«1

Replies

  • Iceprincessk25
    Iceprincessk25 Posts: 1,888 Member
    Options
    Have you been using a measuring tape??
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    Options
    2 weeks is not enough time to evaluate a new routine. Everyone does things differently. And we have no idea what your nutrition plan is like, what your deficit is, what your statistics are, what you realistically can expect to lose given your current situation...etc.

    In other words, there's no way for us to answer your question in any reasonable fashion. If you're eating healthy, eating at a modest deficit, exercising, giving your body a rest day, getting enough rest, and drinking enough water, then trust the plan, give it a few months. and then evaluate.
  • healthydoseofglitter
    healthydoseofglitter Posts: 532 Member
    Options
    make sure you drink enough water and watch your sodium intake .. also give it some time, you will get there
  • mckennamom
    mckennamom Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    I agree with IcePrincess, check your measurements. Also, make sure that you weigh in at the same time every day. I notice a big difference if I weigh in in the afternoon. I try to only measure in once a week at the same time. (Before breakfast and after using the restroom) I have weighed in at night and then again the next morning and I could be 3-4 lbs lighter in the AM.
  • Jbonar
    Jbonar Posts: 29 Member
    Options
    Also from looking at your food diary, you need to eat more. I know it sounds backwards, but most days your are barely netting 1000 calories (food eaten less exercise). That's not enough fuel for your body to operate it's normal activities.
    AND, two weeks may not be enough time to evaluate. Patience! :)
  • wpij25
    wpij25 Posts: 161
    Options
    use a measuring tape...you do need to eat more...and two weeks is not enough time, have patience with yourself relax and enjoy the changes your body is making :happy:
  • joannepearson
    joannepearson Posts: 6
    Options
    Firstly, I think you need to eat more. You are not even getting 1000 calories a day, which means your body will go into starvation mode, and start eating away at muscle and retain the fat because you are not getting enough fuel for the fat you are trying to burn.

    Secondly, I would definitely be using rest days. You need to give yourself and your body time to develop, and by going to the gym every single day you aren't allowing your body to recover and develop properly.

    And lastly, I think you should give yourself more than 2 weeks to try and gauge and weight/size loss.

    xx
  • bizco
    bizco Posts: 1,949 Member
    Options
    I agree with Jbonar's post. Your metabolism is out-of-whack and in starvation mode. Plus, you're eating way too many carbs and hardly any protein. When you're exercising as much as you are, your body needs increased amounts of protein.
  • littlemissunderstood
    littlemissunderstood Posts: 50
    Options
    http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2009/03/mtyhbusters-starvation-mode.html read that, it is very good for clearing up the misconceptions about starvation mode. And yes, I do get labs done to make sure I'm getting enough nutrients and then supplement/adjust accordingly. Right now I take tons of vitamin D and some iron.

    As for the protein, yes, I need to be getting more. I'm vegan so it's tough but I think I need to replace some fruit and junk with beans and nuts. Will do. However, don't see how it will make me lose significantly more weight.

    I don't see how I can be doing too much exercise. I don't do strength training every day which is what you're really supposed to give yourself a rest from. On the biggest loser, for example, they exercise practically all day.

    I'm not sore after exercising and I'm not starving. I will wait longer before further evaluating my plan. Thanks for the feedback.
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    Options
    That isn't an article, it's a blog, which means the person who wrote it can write whatever they want and get away with it. That's not a weight loss expert, or a Registered Dietitian who wrote it (I've been acquainted with her for her whole time on MFP). After doing quite a bit of research into how the body handles large calorie deficits, I'll say one thing with absolute certainty. The body can enter starvation mode, making it harder to lose weight (especially fat), the percentage of weight lost through lean tissue canabalization goes up, the percentage of energy converted to adipose fat does go up, the metabolic rate does go down, and immune function does go down. This is what starvation mode is defined as. It's not defined as the inability to lose weight, or anything to do with 1200 calories, or lack of micro-nutrients.

    read through this research, then think about it a bit. I've done a ton of research into this. Starvation mode is real, people have odd conceptions of it, that may be false but the true term starvation mode is real.

    http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=/PNS/PNS54_01/S0029665195000255a.pdf&code=9d7151f1b3d4573be4a6c55bf429b91c


    I have more research if you want it. But this one is the most clear, concise, and easy to read study I've found. I've also read the whole Minnesota study, it's LOONG. And very boring, but I read it. Some of the conclusions mentioned in that blog are taken out of context, and she fails to mention many others. The biggest one that comes to my mind is the reduction in mental faculties and the obsessive behaviors that develop after long term starvation diets (note a starvation diet, and starvation mode are two completely separate things having distinctly different attributes)

    Here's the quote of the conclusion of the study (which summarized a number of other well regarded scientific research projects done on the topic)
    In the early stages of starvation an increase in adipose tissue lipolysis (possibly due to a
    decrease in plasma insulin) and fat oxidation are key steps which probably then lead to a
    reduction in glucose oxidation. However, gluconeogenesis continues to provide glucose
    for utilization by neural and other tissues, which does not appear as net whole-body
    glucose oxidation. In association with this increase in lipolysis in the early stages of
    starvation there is a small rise in resting energy expenditure, but this reverts to a
    decreased energy expenditure after 72 h without food.
    With more prolonged undernutrition, total energy expenditure falls but the mechan-
    isms of this are not fully understood. Although one would expect a reduction in
    food-induced thermogenesis in prolonged undernutrition, there is a lack of convincing
    evidence that this occurs. It is clear, however, that in more controlled experimental
    conditions glucose-induced thermogenesis is diminished in undernutrition. The mechan-
    isms underlying this effect and the improved metabolic efficiency during refeeding
    remain to be elucidated.

    In layman's terms this says. It's well proven that for the first 72 hours the body does not feel the effects of underfeeding or starvation with regards to resting energy expenditure (REE, AKA resting metabolic rate) and in fact both REE and fat burning goes up. After that 72 hour window, the REE drops below normal and adipose fat storage (body fat) goes up as well. This is, as we can well see, starvation mode folks.

    I say none of this to make anyone uncomfortable or to attack any person, I'm only trying to prove a concept that I believe in through research and study. I'm more than open to debate, as long as that debate has it's roots in facts and science, and not opinion. I'm not closed minded about this stuff. If a well documented study came out tomorrow disproving all of this, and it was repeatable science, then I'd strongly consider (and probably adopt) it's conclusions.
  • dubmav
    dubmav Posts: 17
    Options
    Interesting read. Thank you.
  • TrainerRobin
    TrainerRobin Posts: 509 Member
    Options

    http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=/PNS/PNS54_01/S0029665195000255a.pdf&code=9d7151f1b3d4573be4a6c55bf429b91c

    The link doesn't work. Do you recall the name of the article or do you have a working link?
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    Options

    http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=/PNS/PNS54_01/S0029665195000255a.pdf&code=9d7151f1b3d4573be4a6c55bf429b91c

    The link doesn't work. Do you recall the name of the article or do you have a working link?

    sorry, must be cached, I uploaded it as a pdf (hope it's not illegal to do this)

    try this link.

    https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BwjKw54QZoQ6MmVhOGYxNTUtMjA5Yy00YTRlLThkOGMtNDQxM2E2MGYxODQz&hl=en&authkey=CNbY7ZsG
  • littlemissunderstood
    littlemissunderstood Posts: 50
    Options
    Interesting, I have seen conflicting studies but haven't really taken the time to look at them carefully. I just feel like I'm eating too much when I eat all of my exercise calories. Sure, I like to. I wouldn't be on this site if I didn't like eating lol. But I'm just not generally physically hungry for that much. Also, I am incredibly frustrating. I've been gaining weight for a long time and I can't seem to lose more than 5-6lbs no matter what I try. I used to be soooo skinny. Do you happen to know how many calories are recommended? Everyone is all over the golden 1200 net calories rule. Does it have any basis? I was also wondering about theories about sleep being largely related to weight gain? I find it very hard to sleep before 12. Even when I get up early and exercise lots. I'm thinking of doing melatonin therapy to see if that helps.
  • amysambora
    amysambora Posts: 219
    Options
    Honestly, I don't think you HAVE to be exercising like crazy. I don't think there's any benefit in forcing yourself to go to the gym every day, even when you're sick. That is NOT good for you, especially when you're not eating enough. Plus, that's not a sustainable lifestyle change. You can't keep busting your gut at the gym every day for the rest of your life. If your muscles are that sore, they could be retaining fluid while they heal, causing the number on the scale to stay the same or even go up (not sure if that's the exact scientific explanation, but I know if I've worked out hard and my muscles are sore, my weight is always up the next day)

    In regards to calories, trust MFP - you have all the tools you need here. If you've correctly entered your details into MFP (your age, height, weight, and activity level), it will tell you how many calories you should be eating. I've lost almost 5kg (10lbs) just by sticking to my calorie allotment and adding in some additional exercise. I didn't go crazy with the exercise, didn't join a gym, I just started adding in some additional activity, like a workout video one day, a brisk walk the next, Pilates the next etc. I logged the exercise into MFP and I ate most of the calories back, so my NET calories were as close to 1200 as possible. And it worked. If I'm hungry, I eat, especially if I've exercised. If I happen to be at 1300 calories, that's ok, the world won't end. You just have to LISTEN to your body, there is no magic number that will cause the weight to drop off. As a rule, however, you shouldn't go UNDER 1200. That is the minimum recommended amount for women. You don't have to stay that low if it's not enough for you, and you definitely shouldn't go under it.

    And most importantly, the scale is not the be all and end all. Your weight can fluctuate during the day due to all sorts of reasons. It's really not the best indicator of your size. As others have said, take measurements, and if people are telling you you're looking more toned, take that compliment! It's an achievement! Hang in there, and think of this as a LONG TERM lifestyle change, not a quick fix. You'll get there!!!
  • sarahTV
    sarahTV Posts: 65 Member
    Options
    It took me a full 17 days before I lost anything...well, that is not totally true, I lost INCHES, but not pounds. Don't put all your faith in the first few weeks..this is when your body is adjusting to exercise and a lower calorie diet, in the next month, you'll notice a LOT more and in the next 4-6 months, you'll be ecstatic! Try not to stress about 1 or 2 lbs, look at the big picture!
  • littlemissunderstood
    littlemissunderstood Posts: 50
    Options
    It took me a full 17 days before I lost anything...well, that is not totally true, I lost INCHES, but not pounds. Don't put all your faith in the first few weeks..this is when your body is adjusting to exercise and a lower calorie diet, in the next month, you'll notice a LOT more and in the next 4-6 months, you'll be ecstatic! Try not to stress about 1 or 2 lbs, look at the big picture!

    thanks for the encouragement :) I hope you're right!
  • kwardklinck
    kwardklinck Posts: 1,601
    Options
    Another thing to consider is that if you're working the same muscle groups every single day, your muscles are retaining water for protection. Try bumping up your calories a little bit and maybe take a 2 day break from exercise and see if the weight comes off. When you exercise, try to work different muscle groups on alternating days. Your muscles won't get so sore if you do that.
  • kimwig
    kimwig Posts: 164
    Options
    Here's the quote of the conclusion of the study (which summarized a number of other well regarded scientific research projects done on the topic)
    In the early stages of starvation an increase in adipose tissue lipolysis (possibly due to a
    decrease in plasma insulin) and fat oxidation are key steps which probably then lead to a
    reduction in glucose oxidation. However, gluconeogenesis continues to provide glucose
    for utilization by neural and other tissues, which does not appear as net whole-body
    glucose oxidation. In association with this increase in lipolysis in the early stages of
    starvation there is a small rise in resting energy expenditure, but this reverts to a
    decreased energy expenditure after 72 h without food.
    With more prolonged undernutrition, total energy expenditure falls but the mechan-
    isms of this are not fully understood. Although one would expect a reduction in
    food-induced thermogenesis in prolonged undernutrition, there is a lack of convincing
    evidence that this occurs. It is clear, however, that in more controlled experimental
    conditions glucose-induced thermogenesis is diminished in undernutrition. The mechan-
    isms underlying this effect and the improved metabolic efficiency during refeeding
    remain to be elucidated.

    In layman's terms this says. It's well proven that for the first 72 hours the body does not feel the effects of underfeeding or starvation with regards to resting energy expenditure (REE, AKA resting metabolic rate) and in fact both REE and fat burning goes up. After that 72 hour window, the REE drops below normal and adipose fat storage (body fat) goes up as well. This is, as we can well see, starvation mode folks.


    In ref to SHBoss's post...
    Just clarifying your layman terms of the science quote.

    The science in the quote you note talks about increase in lipolysis (ie the breakdown of lipids in fat storage to free fatty acids for use in energy production), but it does not mention an increase in fat storage (reduction in lipolysis or change in biochemical pathways leading to fat storage) following that 72 hrs.

    Is that bit not actually in the science quote you gave, as they layman terms quote seems to state that (ie you say fat storage increases). Or am I reading that incorrectly.
  • kimwig
    kimwig Posts: 164
    Options
    http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=/PNS/PNS54_01/S0029665195000255a.pdf&code=9d7151f1b3d4573be4a6c55bf429b91c
    Just to clarify - having read the article to get a broad view of its content - this is primarily about starvation (that is fasting over an extended period of time), rather than the reduction in calories (not nutrition - if the correct food is eaten).

    It seems that most often on the forum people refer to starvation mode to people who are on a reduced calorie (but hopefully correct nutrition) food intake.

    I am sure you have other (extensive) research for those on a reduced calorie (good nutrition) diet, but I am not sure that one can use an article that is most specifically related to extended fasting or starvation to address people saying they are in "starvation mode" when they are not fasting over an extended time.
    Or am I misinterpeting what you have included the article for. Just curious (scientific mind, always curious)

Categories