1030 cal and not losing! why! ?
Replies
-
Thanks again for all your comments.
1. My calorie counting is very accurate. My "servings" are based on my own recipes prepared (everything weighed) and divided accordingly.
2. Thanks for encouragement in muscle training.
3. I have lost 300g this week.
4. I weigh (today) 62.4. My goal is 60. I've lost 2.5kg
I feel encouraged to hear I'm not alone with the low calorie requirements...but I will see my doctor and have tests done as well!
It's so good to get feedback and a call to patience!
Wish you all the same as well! !
0 -
Oh...and just for the info. I based my calorie intake on sedentary lifestyle and only eat back 1/3 exercise cals (if at all)0
-
OP, not sure if this has been said yet, but you need more protein, way more. You are not even meeting your 50 gram goal (which is much too low to start with) I would suggest you use the carbs as a max and the protein and fat goals as minimums.0
-
Undereating for an extending period of time results in metabolic shut down and starvation/preservation response from the body. You gain more when you eat more because your body is going "Oh Thank God!" and holding onto everything so it can survive. If you're going to refeed, you have to give it at least 2-3 weeks to balance out, and not turn back on it when you see a couple pounds on the scale.
If you had marginal thyroid problems before, this is likely only making it worse. I think it's time to get a full physical and work with a nutritionist, because if 1030 is your intake, and you're exercising on top of that, you're living in eating disorder land and could get very sick trying to turn it around on your own.
People fail to understand that the answer to losing weight is not 100% cutting out food. Our bodies need a basic, minimum level of food every day to function.0 -
-1
-
I don't do well with cheese or eggs . How about beans?0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Hamburgtexan wrote: »Thanks again for all your comments.
1. My calorie counting is very accurate. My "servings" are based on my own recipes prepared (everything weighed) and divided accordingly.
2. Thanks for encouragement in muscle training.
3. I have lost 300g this week.
4. I weigh (today) 62.4. My goal is 60. I've lost 2.5kg
I feel encouraged to hear I'm not alone with the low calorie requirements...but I will see my doctor and have tests done as well!
It's so good to get feedback and a call to patience!
Wish you all the same as well! !
- don't log your exercise as mfp overestimates
- increase your protein as its a hunger suppressant and aids weight lose, stops you losing muscle which in turn makes you more efficient at burning calories.
- maybe up the calories a touch but stay below your maintenance numbers
Terry
0 -
OP if you are not losing weight then you are not in a deficit. You are doing something wrong, weigh ALL solid foods and measure liquids only!!
Plus 1030 calories is not enough. I don't base whether I am hungry or not, my body needs fuel. I'm 5'2, 45 years old, when I am in a deficit I eat between 1600-1900 calories depending exercise calories.0 -
Sorry if your not losing then you are not in a deficit. So that means you are not accurate and your diary proves that.Hamburgtexan wrote: »Thanks again for all your comments.
1. My calorie counting is very accurate. My "servings" are based on my own recipes prepared (everything weighed) and divided accordingly.
2. Thanks for encouragement in muscle training.
3. I have lost 300g this week.
4. I weigh (today) 62.4. My goal is 60. I've lost 2.5kg
I feel encouraged to hear I'm not alone with the low calorie requirements...but I will see my doctor and have tests done as well!
It's so good to get feedback and a call to patience!
Wish you all the same as well! !0 -
herrspoons wrote: »Hamburgtexan wrote: »I'm at a healthy weight but at the top end of BMI.
Maybe it is just slow going when you are trying to adjust a little. Thanks. That's encouraging.
P.s. unfortunately, when I surpass 1100cal. I gain.
I have a really really efficient metabolism. I just don't need much. Have healthy hair and nails etc.
Or you're consuming more calories than you think and burning less. This is the more likely scenario.
Likely this.
Also, since you are already slim, check out the "stickies" at the beginning of "The School of Strout" group. They explain the unique difficulties of being fairly slim and trying to get leaner. I am so very familiar with the struggle, and it is definitely a real struggle. Please read this group's posts!
0 -
Just gonna say here that if you're metabolism was "efficient", then burning off 1100 calories at 5'2" shouldn't be an issue. Apparently it is since I have 2 friends at work who are 5'1" and eat well over 1500 calories a day and maintain just fine.
If you've been eating low cal your whole life, then you more than likely have a lower BMR, less lean muscle and any dieting at all slows your metabolic rate significantly. So realistically if you're not losing at all, you're eating more than you need to to support the metabolic needs you currently have. Which means you're not that efficient metabolically or as you think.
Add in some physical activity even if it's just walking for 30 minutes a day. Also, ensure you're getting enough rest since fat is burned exclusively at rest. Lack of sleep is a big factor for people who don't lose weight.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Hamburgtexan wrote: »Thanks again for all your comments.
1. My calorie counting is very accurate. My "servings" are based on my own recipes prepared (everything weighed) and divided accordingly.
2. Thanks for encouragement in muscle training.
3. I have lost 300g this week.
4. I weigh (today) 62.4. My goal is 60. I've lost 2.5kg
I feel encouraged to hear I'm not alone with the low calorie requirements...but I will see my doctor and have tests done as well!
It's so good to get feedback and a call to patience!
Wish you all the same as well! !
So, you ARE losing. I've noticed that people often post a thread like this just before they see a loss, then update the thread to show the loss at some point. I think it was 6 days between your OP and todays note showing you lost 300g. That is a decent loss, IMO, considering you have just a few pounds to lose. You lost about 10 ounces, right?
0 -
Hamburgtexan wrote: »I've been eating quite on target. I've always known that I have a frustratingly efficient metabolism. But I don't understand how I can not be losing weight with what I eat! ?
I would be thankful for some constructive input! Thanks
One thing I have found out that needs to be done based on my personal experience. Log everything! Don't leave a single thing out even if you don't think it matters. It really does! Make sure if you eat that small dove chocolate square log it!
Another thing is to change up your exercise routine. If you only run maybe try something else for several weeks. Your body gets used to certain exercise and then of course that doesn't help at all in the area of weight loss. This is called muscle confusion. For an example when I was a lot heavier, I worked where I had to walk a lot, like several miles a day. I couldn't understand way I didn't lose weight. Well my body was so used to that type of exercise that it wasn't going to help me any. I had to do something different. Still now years later, and weighing over 100 pounds less than I did then, I still have to change up my workout routine, or I won't continue to loose so I can reach that final goal weight.
This confusion thing goes for your diet as well. There is a thing called carb confusion, this you would only do maybe 3-5 days at a time. Like eat as few carbs as you can and more protein and then switch it back, but do it regularly. It's all a matter of keeping your body guessing so it can't get used to any one thing.
The muscle and carb confusion is not just something I am making up, this has come from the advice of my personal trainer, other runners and fitness people and I do this myself regularly and have had some major success.
Sorry this is so long.0 -
Humans evolved in a time when there were bumper harvests and famines, long winters to get through. Bodies evolved to survive this. If there is plenty of food, it will store fat in case of lean times, which of course never come these days, but your body is operating as if it were 10,000 years ago.
Eat too little on a consistent basis and your body will think its a famine, and slow down your metabolism to conserve what little food there is, so you don't lose those last few pounds. Eat a bit more and that goes to fat, emergency storage, but only temporarily. Keep eating a bit more and your matabolism will speed up again, lose the weight you gained, and more, but it takes a few weeks, not a few days.
I think you are eating too little.0 -
I would say have a doctor look at your thyroid and your blood sugar at the very least. Make sure there's not something funky going on that you don't know about. Then I would suggest either bodyweight training or weight lifting.0
-
Just switching up exercise to something different may be all you need. But I agree with everybody that your calorie intake is too low. Eat more: lean meats, veggies and fruits.0
-
itsbygrace76 wrote: »Hamburgtexan wrote: »I've been eating quite on target. I've always known that I have a frustratingly efficient metabolism. But I don't understand how I can not be losing weight with what I eat! ?
I would be thankful for some constructive input! Thanks
One thing I have found out that needs to be done based on my personal experience. Log everything! Don't leave a single thing out even if you don't think it matters. It really does! Make sure if you eat that small dove chocolate square log it!
Another thing is to change up your exercise routine. If you only run maybe try something else for several weeks. Your body gets used to certain exercise and then of course that doesn't help at all in the area of weight loss. This is called muscle confusion. For an example when I was a lot heavier, I worked where I had to walk a lot, like several miles a day. I couldn't understand way I didn't lose weight. Well my body was so used to that type of exercise that it wasn't going to help me any. I had to do something different. Still now years later, and weighing over 100 pounds less than I did then, I still have to change up my workout routine, or I won't continue to loose so I can reach that final goal weight.
This confusion thing goes for your diet as well. There is a thing called carb confusion, this you would only do maybe 3-5 days at a time. Like eat as few carbs as you can and more protein and then switch it back, but do it regularly. It's all a matter of keeping your body guessing so it can't get used to any one thing.
The muscle and carb confusion is not just something I am making up, this has come from the advice of my personal trainer, other runners and fitness people and I do this myself regularly and have had some major success.
Sorry this is so long.
That kinda sounds like 'bro science', no?
0 -
You aren't actually counting your calories correctly...or you are binging some days, no such thing as starvation mode0
-
You evidently are not looking for help. Throughout this post you have rejected everyone's input. There are incredibly helpful people taking time to consider the issue you posted and offer thoughtful, experience based suggestions and observances. It's too bad you cannot use this help.0
-
At your height you should be eating around 1300-1400 calories to lose weight. Not eating enough stops your metabolism from working properly and you will not lose weight.0
-
Just gonna say here that if you're metabolism was "efficient", then burning off 1100 calories at 5'2" shouldn't be an issue. Apparently it is since I have 2 friends at work who are 5'1" and eat well over 1500 calories a day and maintain just fine.
If you've been eating low cal your whole life, then you more than likely have a lower BMR, less lean muscle and any dieting at all slows your metabolic rate significantly. So realistically if you're not losing at all, you're eating more than you need to to support the metabolic needs you currently have. Which means you're not that efficient metabolically or as you think.
Add in some physical activity even if it's just walking for 30 minutes a day. Also, ensure you're getting enough rest since fat is burned exclusively at rest. Lack of sleep is a big factor for people who don't lose weight.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Thanks for this Niner. I've been on a stall for a year now and I think it's lack of sleep. I will try it and see.
0 -
snowflake954 wrote: »Just gonna say here that if you're metabolism was "efficient", then burning off 1100 calories at 5'2" shouldn't be an issue. Apparently it is since I have 2 friends at work who are 5'1" and eat well over 1500 calories a day and maintain just fine.
If you've been eating low cal your whole life, then you more than likely have a lower BMR, less lean muscle and any dieting at all slows your metabolic rate significantly. So realistically if you're not losing at all, you're eating more than you need to to support the metabolic needs you currently have. Which means you're not that efficient metabolically or as you think.
Add in some physical activity even if it's just walking for 30 minutes a day. Also, ensure you're getting enough rest since fat is burned exclusively at rest. Lack of sleep is a big factor for people who don't lose weight.
Thanks for this Niner. I've been on a stall for a year now and I think it's lack of sleep. I will try it and see.
Agree with this! One of my biggest stalls came and since I only catch 3-5 hours a night, after exhausting every other reason, this was the culprit.0 -
Liftng4Lis wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »Just gonna say here that if you're metabolism was "efficient", then burning off 1100 calories at 5'2" shouldn't be an issue. Apparently it is since I have 2 friends at work who are 5'1" and eat well over 1500 calories a day and maintain just fine.
If you've been eating low cal your whole life, then you more than likely have a lower BMR, less lean muscle and any dieting at all slows your metabolic rate significantly. So realistically if you're not losing at all, you're eating more than you need to to support the metabolic needs you currently have. Which means you're not that efficient metabolically or as you think.
Add in some physical activity even if it's just walking for 30 minutes a day. Also, ensure you're getting enough rest since fat is burned exclusively at rest. Lack of sleep is a big factor for people who don't lose weight.
Thanks for this Niner. I've been on a stall for a year now and I think it's lack of sleep. I will try it and see.
Agree with this! One of my biggest stalls came and since I only catch 3-5 hours a night, after exhausting every other reason, this was the culprit.
Glad to see this post. My husband has cut his eating considerably this year, but is overworking and sleeping only 3-6 hours per night. I keep telling him adequate sleep is as important as diet and exercise.0 -
Liftng4Lis wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »Just gonna say here that if you're metabolism was "efficient", then burning off 1100 calories at 5'2" shouldn't be an issue. Apparently it is since I have 2 friends at work who are 5'1" and eat well over 1500 calories a day and maintain just fine.
If you've been eating low cal your whole life, then you more than likely have a lower BMR, less lean muscle and any dieting at all slows your metabolic rate significantly. So realistically if you're not losing at all, you're eating more than you need to to support the metabolic needs you currently have. Which means you're not that efficient metabolically or as you think.
Add in some physical activity even if it's just walking for 30 minutes a day. Also, ensure you're getting enough rest since fat is burned exclusively at rest. Lack of sleep is a big factor for people who don't lose weight.
Thanks for this Niner. I've been on a stall for a year now and I think it's lack of sleep. I will try it and see.
Agree with this! One of my biggest stalls came and since I only catch 3-5 hours a night, after exhausting every other reason, this was the culprit.
Well, my 9 month old still wakes in the night. Guess I'm screwed then lol.0 -
Hamburgtexan wrote: »
I went back to see what you meant with "servings" . I only eat homemade food. Soo I weigh all the ingredients the recipe and divide the finished dish into servings. That is how the serving is measured. So I know the calories are accurate.christinev297 wrote: »Your diary has a lot of "servings", cups and spoon measurements. Do you use a food scale?
That doesn't sound accurate unless what you're making is homogeneous. For example, if you're making something with meat mixed in, how do you know how much meat you ate versus whatever else is mixed in with it?0 -
I have like a 1month in. DEficit caloric and still in the same weight i think i calculate bad so can someone help me im still eating. 2340ckal 234c 175p 78fat 5-10' height 210-pound i have 28 years thx..0
-
If your body really doesnt need more than 1200 calories a day, then in the last 10 days you have only burned 2000 calories below your daily need. That doesnt equal a pound unfortunately. It will eventually catch up, but just take longer. I would switch up your exercise. Your body has become used to your running. Do something different. Walk with some intervals of running. Weight training is a good idea but remember as you build muscle,it weighs more than fat. You may see a weight gain initially but it will work in the long run for you. We have to be in this for the long run. My body is very much like yours. If other people ate like I do, they would be really skinny. It is beyond frustrating and maddening and so not fair! But, we have to keep working it regardless or we will gain weight. The only thing that can ever give us more calories is more muscle so just keep at it! You will win!0
-
tephanies1234 wrote: »
That doesn't sound accurate unless what you're making is homogeneous. For example, if you're making something with meat mixed in, how do you know how much meat you ate versus whatever else is mixed in with it?
How does this matter as long as all servings are consumed at some point? I mean, the calorie count might not be exactly on the button for a single day, but if everything is correct in the recipe entry, then over the week (or half a week, or week and a half or whatever) it will balance out once the number of servings made have been logged.
You can't be exactly sure about what winds up in anything you make in more than one portion - cookies, stir fry, salads, pizza... If avoiding all non-homogenous premade food entirely and making everything that you eat single-serving is what works for you, that's fine, but imo, it doesn't matter if one is on point down to the calorie every single day, because it will (and does) work out in the long run.
As long as there's no non-random distribution (picking out all of the M&Ms from trail mix and feeding the rest to your boyfriend, for example), then statistically, even group servings should balance out - sometimes you might have a little bit more or a little bit less than you think, but the standard dev should be a fairly normal curve.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions