I am trying to get these last 18 lbs off and nothing is work

Options
mrsdowney1110
mrsdowney1110 Posts: 6
in Health and Weight Loss
I am trying a new calorie ratio.. 1000 calories 10% of them being carbs (25g) 20% being fats (22g) and 70% protien (175g) This is my version of low fat low carb. Is anyone dong anything similar.. if so what kind of results are you getting?

Replies

  • eeeekie
    eeeekie Posts: 1,011 Member
    Options
    1000 calories sounds low. I'm assuming MFP didn't assign those to you?

    It would help everyone who will comment if you open your diary so they can evaluate it and tell you what they think is going on.
  • jeffrodgers1
    jeffrodgers1 Posts: 991 Member
    Options
    Too few calories. Your body will start to consume muscle which in turn makes it harder to burn fat.

    Your minimum consumption should be above 1200.
  • coop644c
    coop644c Posts: 20 Member
    Options
    are you working out? cardio? drinking lots and lots of water?
  • RNewton4269
    RNewton4269 Posts: 663 Member
    Options
    Definately eating too few calories. You body needs fuel to burn energy. Need to be at least 1200. I had to up my calorie intake recently to jump start my metabolism. It does work!
  • AggieCass09
    AggieCass09 Posts: 1,867 Member
    Options
    well the reason nothing is coming off is because you are eating too little. As you get closer to your goal a huge calorie deficit causes your body to hold on to everything...increase your calories by changing your settings on here to lose 1 lb/week. Also, make sure you are eating back ALL your exercise calories and are drinking water.

    Good luck. I posted a blog on this exact thing if you are interested, check out my blog.
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    Options
    I realize this isn't the question you asked, but you're likely eating too little. May help for you to read these threads that explain MFP, metabolism, and why it's VITAL to fuel the body properly. Good luck to you!

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/61706-guide-to-calorie-deficits

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/186814-some-mfp-basics

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/10589-for-those-confused-or-questioning-eating-your-exercise-calo

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/175241-a-personal-view-on-exercise-cals-and-underfeeding

    Edit: Also, that ratio of macros can get you into trouble. Likely far too much protein for your size, which can cause kidney issues. And far too little fat and carbs. Fat and carbs are necessary for many body systems (like the brain) and that ratio will not supply what's needed.
  • saphire76
    saphire76 Posts: 102
    Options
    I agree too few calories under 1200 your body holds onto the fat. I even upped mine to 1250.
  • jolteon00
    jolteon00 Posts: 89
    Options
    I thought this wasn't what the OP has been doing, but what she had in mind, and these "eat more, exercise more" posts aren't what she's looking for.

    I say keep that ratio but eat more like 1500 calories to jumpstart your metabolism. I haven't done a low-carb high-protein diet, but from what I've read you can apparently eat way more and still lose weight as long as it isn't carbs.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    I am trying a new calorie ratio.. 1000 calories 10% of them being carbs (25g) 20% being fats (22g) and 70% protien (175g) This is my version of low fat low carb. Is anyone dong anything similar.. if so what kind of results are you getting?

    That may be a little to low carb and high protein and low calories. the closer you are to your goal the smaller your caloric deficit should be. You should change your weekly loss goal to 0.5lbs/week (1lb/week at the most) and eat your exercise calories.
    With protein that high you can cause some kidney issues. High protein diets don't usually go above 60%, and a balanced diet only goes up to 30% calories from protein.

    did you get these ratios from a nutritionist or is it something you are trying on your own? If it is on your own I would advise you to talk to a nutritionist as they may be able to determine what would work best for your goals.
  • teri_cmc
    teri_cmc Posts: 21
    Options
    If it's man-made, don't eat it! Stick to the outside edge of the grocery store (produce, meat, etc.) and don't go down the aisles... Also, I've found that eating smaller amounts but more often (like every 3 hours) works really well for boosting the metabolism. Also agree with the others that you need at least 1200 calories!
  • mrsdowney1110
    mrsdowney1110 Posts: 6
    Options
    My trainer bumped me from 675 to 1000 so i thought i was doing well. But It actually made me gain weight. So i was thinking maybe i needed to drop my carbs way lower.... i guess it wasn't my calories i was concerned about but my carb protien ratio.
  • mrsdowney1110
    mrsdowney1110 Posts: 6
    Options
    The think is i am a very small person. I am 5 ft 1 with a naturally thin frame meaning i look best at about 85 lbs. I only eat foods that can spoil and then fat free or low fat and low carb/ high fiber foods. I just can't get this last little bit off.. it's driving me crazy i've been in a slump since i bumped up my calories to the 1000.
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    Options
    My trainer bumped me from 675 to 1000 so i thought i was doing well. But It actually made me gain weight. So i was thinking maybe i needed to drop my carbs way lower.... i guess it wasn't my calories i was concerned about but my carb protien ratio.

    Unfortunately, many trainers have little to no education in nutrition. What are his/her qualifications for nutritional advice? I would be wary of any trainer suggesting that few calories, IMO. Unless you are under 5', you almost certainly require more cals than that on a daily basis and DEFINITELY when you work out.

    If you were on 675 cals, it's very possible you were in a famine response (READ the 700 cals thread please). If that is the case, then yes, when you initially increase cals you will likely see a gain. But after your body adjusts and begins to come out of famine response (or starvation mode), then you will begin to lose again.
  • brookesready
    brookesready Posts: 52 Member
    Options
    My trainer bumped me from 675 to 1000 so i thought i was doing well. But It actually made me gain weight. So i was thinking maybe i needed to drop my carbs way lower.... i guess it wasn't my calories i was concerned about but my carb protien ratio.

    I would consider getting a new trainer..
  • mrsdowney1110
    mrsdowney1110 Posts: 6
    Options
    I am woring out right now i am doing light cardio.. i can get back to strength training in a 2 weeks once i've recovered from surgery. I drink tons of water and only eat foods that i make from scratch. I already bumped my calories from 675 to the 1000 so i thought i was doing good there. I was losing weight at the 675.. but now that i did that i have gained weight and can't take another oz off.
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    Options
    The think is i am a very small person. I am 5 ft 1 with a naturally thin frame meaning i look best at about 85 lbs. I only eat foods that can spoil and then fat free or low fat and low carb/ high fiber foods. I just can't get this last little bit off.. it's driving me crazy i've been in a slump since i bumped up my calories to the 1000.

    Even at 5'1", with your stats, your BMR is about 1160. Add in activity level of just sedentary, and your maintenance calories are at least 1400. I find it hard to imagine that at 5'1", even with a TINY frame, that 85 lbs is a healthy weight for you. That's just my opinion, but I would rethink it. As I said, if you were at 675 cals before, it's almost guaranteed that you were in a famine response mode and would have gained weight temporarily when increasing cals.

    At any rate, even with 20 lbs to lose, you should have a deficit of no more than 250 cals per day, for 1/2 lb weight loss per week. And you definitely need to be adding calories for your exercise. So I would guess that a cal goal of no less than 1150 is appropriate, WITHOUT exercise accounted for.

    PS - Hi to another Coloradan - I'm just about 30 minutes from you. :tongue:
  • mrsdowney1110
    mrsdowney1110 Posts: 6
    Options
    Well my little sister has my frame and looks amazing at 83 lbs. If she wasn't so short she could be a bikini model. I on the other hand have had 2 kids and just want to not have a unhealthy waist to hip ratio. I've got 34 on the hips and 29 on my waist and a 30inch underbust. so my trainer said i could easily lose 15 lbs and it be no problem.
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    Options
    Well my little sister has my frame and looks amazing at 83 lbs. If she wasn't so short she could be a bikini model. I on the other hand have had 2 kids and just want to not have a unhealthy waist to hip ratio. I've got 34 on the hips and 29 on my waist and a 30inch underbust. so my trainer said i could easily lose 15 lbs and it be no problem.

    Well, that's probably the difference - children! :laugh: After children, most women's hips are wider than they were previously, or wider than someone else at the same size who hasn't had children - and not because of fat. The actual spaces between joints are bigger after pregnancy, and losing weight won't change that. Just something to keep in mind.

    You may do ok at that weight, I just wouldn't set it as a firm goal. We really can't expect to have the exact same body we had before children. This may be another good thread for you to read that discusses goal weights (there's a chart on the 2nd page that might help give perspective) -

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/181080-mfp-s-most-common-user-pitfall-to-avoid
  • mrsdowney1110
    mrsdowney1110 Posts: 6
    Options
    Well my little sister has my frame and looks amazing at 83 lbs. If she wasn't so short she could be a bikini model. I on the other hand have had 2 kids and just want to not have a unhealthy waist to hip ratio. I've got 34 on the hips and 29 on my waist and a 30inch underbust. so my trainer said i could easily lose 15 lbs and it be no problem.

    Well, that's probably the difference - children! :laugh: After children, most women's hips are wider than they were previously, or wider than someone else at the same size who hasn't had children - and not because of fat. The actual spaces between joints are bigger after pregnancy, and losing weight won't change that. Just something to keep in mind.

    You may do ok at that weight, I just wouldn't set it as a firm goal. We really can't expect to have the exact same body we had before children. This may be another good thread for you to read that discusses goal weights (there's a chart on the 2nd page that might help give perspective) -

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/181080-mfp-s-most-common-user-pitfall-to-avoid

    thank you. you've been very helpful
  • Grokette
    Grokette Posts: 3,330 Member
    Options
    My suggestion is to up the fat intake and lower the protein a little bit. Make sure the 10% of carbs are all vegetables and maybe a few berries.

    My ratios are typically as follows:

    10% carbs
    30% protein
    60% fats

    And for the record, I don't count calories.

Categories