I hate these posts but, what am i doing wrong?

Options
dawnna76
dawnna76 Posts: 987 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
for that last year i have flucuated around 195lbs give or take a few. over the holidays i did get as high as 203 but was back down to 195 as of 4 weeks ago. since then i have not lost a single ounce. i eat 1800 calories a day. sometimes eating back what i burn, sometimes not depending on appetite.

I weigh all my food on a food scale and i wear a heart rate monitor to get a more accurate account of calories burned during exercise over what MFP suggets. i run three days a week (about 15 miles a week at this point) and weight train on two of those running days as well. the other days are a mix of zumba, cycling and cross circuit training (bodyweight HIIT stuff) i rest sundays.

everything i have ready says i should be seeing results. i have cross checked MFP and TDEE to figure out a calorie goal. I just dont get it. I have been working out 4-6 days a week for over a year and while I am slimmer (not a whole lot but at least a size) the scale doesnt budge. I just odnt get it!

any ideas on what I should do?
«13

Replies

  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    Options
    herrspoons wrote: »
    Eat 1600. Don't claim back exercise.

    Agreed. Your metabolism might just be slower than average. Eat less for awhile and see if you start to see progress. Sometimes it's a game of trial and error to figure out what works for you.
  • KylaDenay
    KylaDenay Posts: 1,585 Member
    Options
    Maybe decrease your calorie intake a little bit. Trial and error.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    Is 1800 the number that MFP gave you when you put your stats in for one pound per week?

    herrsppons advice sounds good...

    can you open your food diary?

    do you use the generic entries in the MFP database or the USDA ones?
  • dawnna76
    dawnna76 Posts: 987 Member
    Options
    diary is open.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    sorry I just noticed that your diary is already open..

    Your logging looks good.

    I did notice that you are eating back 100% of your calories burned, which is putting your at 2100 a day....typically, a lot of the calories burned estimates can vary wildly. So if you think you are burning 300 a day and eat those 300 back then you could be consuming an extra 2100 calories a week and not even knowing it.

    I would suggest just eating to 1800 and not record exercise calories...

    OR

    herrspoons advice of going to 1600 and no exercise calories...
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry I just noticed that your diary is already open..

    Your logging looks good.

    I did notice that you are eating back 100% of your calories burned, which is putting your at 2100 a day....typically, a lot of the calories burned estimates can vary wildly. So if you think you are burning 300 a day and eat those 300 back then you could be consuming an extra 2100 calories a week and not even knowing it.

    I would suggest just eating to 1800 and not record exercise calories...

    OR

    herrspoons advice of going to 1600 and no exercise calories...

    This, although I think 1800 with no exercise first, and if after a month you still don't see loses then try reducing further to 1600.
  • BWBTrish
    BWBTrish Posts: 2,817 Member
    Options
    herrspoons wrote: »
    Eat 1600. Don't claim back exercise.

    I would try this for sure


  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry I just noticed that your diary is already open..

    Your logging looks good.

    I did notice that you are eating back 100% of your calories burned, which is putting your at 2100 a day....typically, a lot of the calories burned estimates can vary wildly. So if you think you are burning 300 a day and eat those 300 back then you could be consuming an extra 2100 calories a week and not even knowing it.

    I would suggest just eating to 1800 and not record exercise calories...

    OR

    herrspoons advice of going to 1600 and no exercise calories...

    This, although I think 1800 with no exercise first, and if after a month you still don't see loses then try reducing further to 1600.


    I agree with this 100%. If you're not currently losing, you should see a drop @ static 1800. You can always go a little lower if you need to.
  • blankiefinder
    blankiefinder Posts: 3,599 Member
    Options
    I would double check your settings, that seems like a high calorie allowance. Do you have yourself set for the right activity level (not including exercise you are logging)? IE sedentary, lightly active, etc? Go through the goals process and update them just in case there's a glitch. If it's not that, then you're eating too many calories for your individual body.
  • AskTracyAnnK28
    AskTracyAnnK28 Posts: 2,834 Member
    Options
    Well, on the bright side, you discovered your maintenance calories - so that's a good thing!

    Like mentioned, eat 1600 calories instead. Or eat 1800 and don't log the exercise.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    blankiefinder wrote: »
    I would double check your settings, that seems like a high calorie allowance. Do you have yourself set for the right activity level (not including exercise you are logging)? IE sedentary, lightly active, etc? Go through the goals process and update them just in case there's a glitch. If it's not that, then you're eating too many calories for your individual body.

    this is solid advice too ...

    although just going to 1600 to 1800 with no exercise calories would probably have same affect...
  • beemerphile1
    beemerphile1 Posts: 1,710 Member
    Options
    blankiefinder wrote: »
    I would double check your settings, that seems like a high calorie allowance. Do you have yourself set for the right activity level (not including exercise you are logging)? IE sedentary, lightly active, etc? Go through the goals process and update them just in case there's a glitch. If it's not that, then you're eating too many calories for your individual body.

    My thoughts also, 1800 seems high. My wife is 195# and at 1200.
  • Nice2BFitAgain
    Nice2BFitAgain Posts: 319 Member
    Options
    beemerphile1 wrote: »
    blankiefinder wrote: »
    I would double check your settings, that seems like a high calorie allowance. Do you have yourself set for the right activity level (not including exercise you are logging)? IE sedentary, lightly active, etc? Go through the goals process and update them just in case there's a glitch. If it's not that, then you're eating too many calories for your individual body.

    My thoughts also, 1800 seems high. My wife is 195# and at 1200.


    1200 @ 195# seems LOW to me. I'm 150# and eat 1500 to lose (without eating back calories burned)

    I would think if OP stuck to 1800 without eating back calories she would see progress. If not, drop to 1700 without eating back calories burned and so one... until OP sees progress. But do give each change a good 3-4 weeks to work before making more changes



  • holly55555
    holly55555 Posts: 307 Member
    Options
    You don't need to eat exercise calories back if you chose an activity level in the beginning that includes your exercise. MFP doesn't make this very clear. If you put that you are lightly active, for example, because you workout 1-3 times a week, MFP already has calculated that into your calorie allowance. There is no need to eat them back!

    I agree with everyone else and just don't eat them back. You are eating at maintenance right now. :)
  • dawnna76
    dawnna76 Posts: 987 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry I just noticed that your diary is already open..

    Your logging looks good.

    I did notice that you are eating back 100% of your calories burned, which is putting your at 2100 a day....typically, a lot of the calories burned estimates can vary wildly. So if you think you are burning 300 a day and eat those 300 back then you could be consuming an extra 2100 calories a week and not even knowing it.

    I would suggest just eating to 1800 and not record exercise calories...

    OR

    herrspoons advice of going to 1600 and no exercise calories...

    Thanks I think i am just going to try the 1800 for a while and not eating back the exercise calories. although there may be days i have to as I am training for a marathon and on my long run days i can burn upwards off 700+ calories according to my heart rate monitor and i just ned the extra fuel or i feel light headed.
    beemerphile1 wrote: »
    blankiefinder wrote: »
    I would double check your settings, that seems like a high calorie allowance. Do you have yourself set for the right activity level (not including exercise you are logging)? IE sedentary, lightly active, etc? Go through the goals process and update them just in case there's a glitch. If it's not that, then you're eating too many calories for your individual body.

    My thoughts also, 1800 seems high. My wife is 195# and at 1200.

    I would literally fall over dead with the amount of exercise i do ( 6 days, intense effort) if i only ate 1200 calories. maybe if all i did was sit at my office and nothing else, but I know from expierence that amount is just way to low!
    holly55555 wrote: »
    You don't need to eat exercise calories back if you chose an activity level in the beginning that includes your exercise. MFP doesn't make this very clear. If you put that you are lightly active, for example, because you workout 1-3 times a week, MFP already has calculated that into your calorie allowance. There is no need to eat them back!

    I agree with everyone else and just don't eat them back. You are eating at maintenance right now. :)

    I actually choose lightly active to get that amount but I am actually more active than that, but i figured it would build in a little more deficite if i underestimated my activity.

  • hamoncan
    hamoncan Posts: 148 Member
    Options
    I switch to adding high fat stuff like nuts and berries to my diet when I seem stalled and it seems to do the trick. It might have nothing to the nuts or the fat itself so much as its some type of significant change. Lately I'm sick of chicken and letting my protien levels slide a bit and again I seem to have started losing a little faster again.
  • honkytonks85
    honkytonks85 Posts: 669 Member
    Options
    I agree with the others. Weight loss is a numbers game. If you're not losing the first thing is to look at cutting calories. Also take into consideration fluctuations and stalls that are pretty common and can happen over weeks.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    Options
    I would definitely try the 1800 for at least a month.
  • karaanalunea
    karaanalunea Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    Also, bear in mind that any muscle you build weighs more than the fat it replaces. So you can be considerably slimmer and more compact without changing your actual weight on the scale
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    Options
    blankiefinder wrote: »
    I would double check your settings, that seems like a high calorie allowance. Do you have yourself set for the right activity level (not including exercise you are logging)? IE sedentary, lightly active, etc? Go through the goals process and update them just in case there's a glitch. If it's not that, then you're eating too many calories for your individual body.

    What everyone else said, plus this.

Categories