anyone else have way more than expected weight loss?

hortensehildegarde wrote: »

heybales wrote: »

Just be aware the calculations for a deficit for 1 lb being 3500 calories ONLY applies if it is fat that is lost.

But unless you have reasonable deficit, eating enough protein, and doing total body resistance training - you are losing muscle mass too.

And muscle when used as energy source is only 600 calories per lb. It's MUCH easier to lose a lb of muscle than a lb of fat.

So don't be too thrilled if the math seems way off. Like if it seems by accurate food and exercise logging, you have on average a 1000 cal deficit weekly, and should have 2 lb weekly loss, and you are getting 4 lb loss, then you are losing muscle, along with the water that is stored in it, as part of that 4lbs.
That will suck big time later, if not sooner.

But you give no indications of amounts and time factors for anyone to really comment if it's good or bad, water weight or not.

OMG I didn't even think of that- THANK YOU. Sheesh that's a little terrifying. I keep my deficit MFP goal at anywhere from 1.5 to .5. I'd never go to 2lb/wk cause that puts me at 1200 and there is no way I'm about to average per week that low. I will lose around 4/wk IF I eat consistently according to the .5-1.5 numbers. Typically I eat more average per week for what MFP puts me at for maintenance and still lose 1-2 per week. It's been that way since early September when I started back with attempting logging.

How do I stop from losing muscle? I'll eat anywhere from 1350-3k a day during the course of a week (unless I get stupid tired and fall asleep then sometimes I have silly low days like 800 cals, but I think that's happened all of maybe twice in the last 2 months. Two weeks ago I was on vacation for about 2 weeks and I think doing about 2-4k a day and fairly well maintained or maybe lost a bit during that time while swimming leisurely a couple hours a day and walking 3-5 miles a day).

I guess I just assumed if I was eating around 1,700/2k/day average I wouldn't need to worry about muscle loss but now you have given me new food for thought. I do have a relatively heavy protein intake as protein along with fat and veggies is what keeps me satiated the best.

Are you aware that the MFP eating goal is based on you doing NO exercise.
You tell MFP your daily activity level outside of exercise, no exercise accounted for until you actually do it.

So if you do are going for weight loss goal amount of 1.5 - 0.5, that's great. But if you aren't logging exercise, then that deficit is taken from a false underestimated maintenance level, your maintenance on days you exercise is actually bigger, probably much bigger now. That's what the deficit should be taken from, that's what MFP would be trying to do.

So if you are losing 4 lbs weekly with what you think is a deficit of 250 - 750 - then you are creating a much bigger deficit.

And for 4 lbs to actually be fat, you'd have to be creating a deficit of 2000 calories daily between your maintenance and your eating level.

So if eating 1700-2000 daily, do you really think you are burning 3700 - 4000 calories daily?

Unlikely. Therefore you are losing muscle mass already.

How do you stop it - take a reasonable deficit from what you burn in total.
That means you have to log your exercise done so that MFP is starting the math with what you are likely burning daily.
Then reach your daily goal.

If truly obese, you could support a 2 lb weekly goal, but the 1200 that is the eating goal - is ONLY on rest days. And that's only if Sedentary outside of exercise. If kids and constant movement after work, or work isn't 40 hr desk job - then not actually Sedentary, but Lightly Active.

You've basically been using MFP wrong as a tool.
A tool used wrong may at best end up not doing it's function very well, or it may have no good use, or at worst it may hurt you.
Guess where you have fallen?

Oh yeah, if not doing any exercise you can count on 20% of your lost weight being muscle mass - that is average found in studies of big weight loss and no resistance training.
- That of course slows your metabolism down having less muscle, not massive amounts, but still. And since now moving around less mass daily, you burn less that way too.
- That all means your eating level is lower than needed, though it of course has to lower too.

The database is more accurate for calorie burn on walking & running than a HRM would be - IF you really did the pace you selected for the time given. Anything else without a specific intensity level (speed) is the unknown one.

So yes, you confirm a more reasonable deficit by eating more, or not eating so little in other words.

Normally one could take your results and accurate eating logs and do the math like I did to calculate best daily maintenance figure, but that only applies if what you lost is fat only.

As to how you figure out how to eat more to lose slower, any of those methods will work. You also may be logging food higher than reality, "to be on the safe side" as many say. But doing so many things "to be on the safe side" has now caused a deficit to put you NOT on the safe side.

hortensehildegarde wrote: »

Believe me, I am not complaining. The best I can figure is either I have a way faster base metabolism than the average for the calculators (i.e. more than average muscle), I am much more regularly active than I think, or I am HORRIBLE at guessing calories for the few things I do not weigh.

Other than that I can only figure I have got a tapeworm or some other horrific medical condition.

I'd guess it's likely a combination of the first three and not that I am actually dying, but I'd like to hear from others who have the same issue. Is it maybe just because I've only lost about a fourth of what I need to lose and am still obese so it's still coming off like hotcakes?

The heavier you are/farther away from ideal weight, the faster it will come off--- at first-- because your body has the extra fat stores to spare. As you get lighter, it will slow down and require more precision and effort.