3 weeks and 3 pounds??? Really?

The weight may have come off drastically before but did it stay off? Life style changes cause slower but more long term (for many) weight loss.

Also, there are 52 weeks in a year so although it seems like you will be decaying before your 50 lbs come off, that is less than a year at a pound per week.

You need to make sure your net calories are at or above 1200. If your net calories are below 1200 then your body can go into starvation mode and keep storing fat as fuel. Good luck and stick with it!

Actualy when I started working out the last time I GAINED five pounds in the first three weeks.....so, congrats on the three pounds....keep doing what's right and it'll come off! Wait a couple more weeks......it'll all of a sudden start falling off! Also, I'd take measurements! Hope it helps =D

Change something up. Change the amount of type of exercise. Also, check your salt uptake. High salt can derail weight loss. Are you tracking all calories? You may not be getting enough calories to match all of your exercise. These are all things you should evaluate.

HI! Sometimes your weight loss might be better if you have a slow start. A lot of people have lost 3 or 4 pounds a week for two weeks and then nothing for a month or two. Give yourself a couple more weeks and be sure to drink lots of water!! Best of wishes to you!

Good job on the 3 pounds you should be proud of it. The reason you may be losing weight more slowly this time is that you are gaining muscle which weighs more than fat so that would add some weight back, but this is a good thing as muscle burns more calories than fat. Make you sure you are taking measurments. Inches are more important than the pounds on the scale.

But if it doesnt- at a lb a week you will be at your goal less than a year from now, so unless you plan on dropping dead soon, I would say, tough noogies, it's better than gaining.

This made me chuckle.. sorry.. LOL

So I have been eating healthy and exercising for a little over 3 weeks now and have only lost 3 pounds. I know it's "healthy" to lose a pound a week, but at this rate, I will only get to my goal when I am dead and the fat just decays off me. Anytime I have ever lost weight before I have always had drastic losses in the begining. Which kept me really motivated. I am sticking to my 1200 calories a day, working out and sometimes eating those calories back. Not all the time though. I drink anywhere from 68-84 ounces of water a day too. I have alot to lose, 50 or so pounds, so why is it coming off so slowly? I'm open to any and all suggestions!!
Thanks!

Ok, I have lost 6lbs since January 7th; frustration doesn't even start to describe what I feel!!!!! I have been doing 1200 cals too because I have a goal to reach by August. Today I weighed in just for kicks!!! Nothing again! So I was walking back to my desk and decided to talk to my co-worker, which was a personal trainer and had his own gym; we both currently work for a nutrition company. I work out at work, in the gym, running a route by my job and doing a lot of sprinting in the parking lot. This is what he sees. He doens't see my long runs on Saturdays nor my 30DS or Crossfit workouts. I told him my dilemma and he asked me a few questions. I answered them and then he said let me see what you're eating, so I proceed to log on to MFP an show him. His response, "Holy s*** girl, your body is hanging on to fat because it doesn't know when or if it'll get fed again!!!" "That's your problem right there!" He said he's never written out a program for an active woman that's under 1600cals because below that the body is not consuming enough to get through those workouts. He also suggested pushing my body when I'm working out to a fat burning zone; so I'll be investing in a HRM. So needless to say I told hiim I was going to do 1400cals and he said, nope, do 1600 and I didn't budge so I told him I would try 1500 cals and he said he didn't agree but that I could try that.
So maybe your body is thinking its starving and hanging on to the fat as well, hence why you're not loosing. Just thought I'd share my story because I'm in the same boat. I'm going to at least give it a try for a week to see what happens. Good luck to you!!

But if it doesnt- at a lb a week you will be at your goal less than a year from now, so unless you plan on dropping dead soon, I would say, tough noogies, it's better than gaining.

This made me chuckle.. sorry.. LOL

lol they're right. slow change means longterm change. i'd love to be losing a pound a week and i eat right and exercise 7 days a week!!

there is no.... "one rule for all" on this....... some will drop more weight faster than others............... yep thats crap.......... but thats the truth!

stick to what you are doing..... keep the net cals over 1200.... and keep going with it...... it WILL HAPPEN !

good luck

I've said this before and I know that some people disagree, but the whole eating back your calories is senseless. If you're eating them back, you're essentially undoing what exercise you put in that day. I think that if you're trying to maintain, you'd want to "eat back", not if you're trying to lose.

You may have said it before but that doesnt make it true. The MFP tool is designed for you to eat your calories when you exercise and it is the furthest thing from senseless. If you don't believe me- click your "goals" button (on the bar under the Tabs). On the left hand side you will see your GOAL calories listed as NET.

And here is why you should be eating the majority of those calories back:

MFP works a bit differently than most calorie/point counters. Most nutrition plans incorporate workouts into your overall activity level- ie I have a desk job, but if I workout 5 days a week most plans would put me at "lightly active". This would figure into my daily calorie goal - so most nutritionists would probably recommend that I eat 1500-1800 calories everyday, regardless of my workout. MFP has you manually account for specific workouts or anything outside your normal level of activity, so you get a lower "starting goal" everyday (so you continue to lose regardless of whether or not you workout), but when you workout more, you should be eating more.

This is where NET calories come into play. There is an equation on your homepage:

GOAL FOOD -(minus) EXERCISE =(equals) NET

Your goal, as far as MFP is set up, should be to get your NET calories to match your GOAL calories. The NET calories are a way of taking exercise into account, so that you eat enough to fuel your workout.

This has in turn become known as "eating your exercise calories" and is highly controversial because people believe that less calories = higher weight loss. But for many, if you do not eat enough on a daily basis, your body begins to shut down your metabolism so as to stave off possible hunger/starvation not only effectively stopping loss but also causing gains anytime one goes even minimally over on calories. This is known as starvation mode but it is NOT starvation.

You do NOT have to exercise to lose weight, and MFP is set up accordingly. But the flip side of this coin is that you are really meant to eat the majority of these calories that you expend or risk running a dangerously high deficit.

Hope this made sense, please let me know if you have any questions.

Emrogers...I am sooooo completely in your boat!!! I wasn't losing on 1200 so I upped mine to 1330...I finally lost 1lb...that's it! So after reading your comment I am thinking I just might need to go a little higher...The right calorie amount thing is soooo frustrating. Especially when you see everyone esle losing steadily every week...

I've said this before and I know that some people disagree, but the whole eating back your calories is senseless. If you're eating them back, you're essentially undoing what exercise you put in that day. I think that if you're trying to maintain, you'd want to "eat back", not if you're trying to lose.

You may have said it before but that doesnt make it true. The MFP tool is designed for you to eat your calories when you exercise and it is the furthest thing from senseless. If you don't believe me- click your "goals" button (on the bar under the Tabs). On the left hand side you will see your GOAL calories listed as NET.

And here is why you should be eating the majority of those calories back:

MFP works a bit differently than most calorie/point counters. Most nutrition plans incorporate workouts into your overall activity level- ie I have a desk job, but if I workout 5 days a week most plans would put me at "lightly active". This would figure into my daily calorie goal - so most nutritionists would probably recommend that I eat 1500-1800 calories everyday, regardless of my workout. MFP has you manually account for specific workouts or anything outside your normal level of activity, so you get a lower "starting goal" everyday (so you continue to lose regardless of whether or not you workout), but when you workout more, you should be eating more.

This is where NET calories come into play. There is an equation on your homepage:

GOAL FOOD -(minus) EXERCISE =(equals) NET

Your goal, as far as MFP is set up, should be to get your NET calories to match your GOAL calories. The NET calories are a way of taking exercise into account, so that you eat enough to fuel your workout.

This has in turn become known as "eating your exercise calories" and is highly controversial because people believe that less calories = higher weight loss. But for many, if you do not eat enough on a daily basis, your body begins to shut down your metabolism so as to stave off possible hunger/starvation not only effectively stopping loss but also causing gains anytime one goes even minimally over on calories. This is known as starvation mode but it is NOT starvation.

You do NOT have to exercise to lose weight, and MFP is set up accordingly. But the flip side of this coin is that you are really meant to eat the majority of these calories that you expend or risk running a dangerously high deficit.

Hope this made sense, please let me know if you have any questions.

Oh bless your heart...

Well since you're not a physician nor a nutritionist AND I never said that I was confused about anything, I actually don't have any questions for you. But thanks for offering.

Your view point and the MFP guideline is based on the belief in "starvation mode" and that 1200 calories is the minimum number for all adult humans which makes no sense since we're all built differently. I, however do not buy into starvation mode if your body is fed regularly and with the appropriate nutrients (which mine is). I can certainly post articles like this one: http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501, but I tend to care more about results than theory and as the part of my quote that you didn't include stated: I've lost 27 lbs in 5 weeks. I'm healthy, well fed and exercise regularly. You may be totally content losing less than 40 lbs in what seems like well over 6 months (going by your join date), but clearly the OP is not.

I'm sure she'll eventually do what she feels is best for her based on everyone's thoughtful responses.

Have a nice day.

tsgaddy,

You have 100 pounds to lose. It might get harder when you get closer to your goal. There is plenty of evidence on this website that suggests so.

I suppose we'll have to wait and see. I feel confident in saying that it won't be at the rate that you've been going, however. But different strokes for different folks.