Well, ok then...

Mapes84
Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
For the past two months, I have been obsessively monitoring my my macros, with an emphasis on a high protein, lower carb diet in conjunction with 6 days a week of strength training/4 days a week of cardio (this is by design- I'm in Phase 2 of Livefit Trainer at the moment). After not losing a single pound, nor a single inch, in TWO MONTHS, I started re-evaluating the high-protein thing, wondering if it isn't the right thing for my body (I have been experiencing a multitude of digestive issues I won't get into). For the past week or so, maybe even out of frustration, I have added back a significant number of carbs. Mostly high quality carbs (oatmeal, brown rice, etc), but there have been a few less than ideal tidbits thrown into the mix (i.e. I had sushi rolls with white rice one night, I may have eat a square of dark chocolate here and there). I have been keeping my calories around the 1500 mark, and not eating back exercise calories. Lo and behold, after less than one week of making this change, I am down 3.5 lb. I expected to see a slight increase in water weight, if nothing else, due to reintroducing more carbs (and yes, I do realize the decrease I am seeing is equally likely to be water weight). This defies all of the logic behind the plan I have been following. I have no idea whether eating this way will continue to work in my favor, but it is certainly more enjoyable than what I was doing before, and for the first time in over a month, I am feeling optimistic. Thoughts, anyone?

Replies

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    The plan you were following initially? Were you eating at a defecit or just monitoring macros?
  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    I'm also wondering how much protein I would need to consume going forward to maintain muscle mass...I don't want to lose a bunch of muscle tone as a result of cutting back on the protein (I was previously eating anywhere from 100-150 grams a day). I really do not enjoy eating a lot of chicken and fish, so keeping that number "up there" has been super challenging.
  • captivatedlife
    captivatedlife Posts: 60 Member
    Congratulations! Remember, we all follow different theories of weight loss/maintenence - and your body may react to different food differently. I was ready in Shape or Self or Fitness or something about Jada Picket Smith and she all but apologized because she ate a high-ish carb diet as opposed to the new fad of low carb... and I say this as a semi-low carb person!
  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    Oh, good point. Maybe this is my "whoosh". The whoosh is a mysterious thing. I've heard many people say alcohol kicked theirs into gear, so go figure.
    herrspoons wrote: »
    Dat whoosh?

    Also, may have been underestimating the calories in the high protein diet?

    Other than that, I got nothin'.

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Mapes84 wrote: »
    I'm also wondering how much protein I would need to consume going forward to maintain muscle mass...I don't want to lose a bunch of muscle tone as a result of cutting back on the protein (I was previously eating anywhere from 100-150 grams a day). I really do not enjoy eating a lot of chicken and fish, so keeping that number "up there" has been super challenging.

    0.8-1g protein per lb of LBM

    And alcohol - dehydrates
  • esjones12
    esjones12 Posts: 1,363 Member
    I measure and weigh my food. I workout like crazy (strength and cardio) and eat back those calories. I keep an eye on my macro balance (50/30/20 - carb/fat/protein) but I do not obsess over it or get into the nitty-gritty.

    The only time I have trouble losing weight is when I eat too much.
  • maxit
    maxit Posts: 880 Member
    The other consideration is that if the "digestive woes" with your original plan included constipation, introducing more fiber most likely led to better elimination.
  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    So for the first four weeks, the plan stated I did not need to be counting calories just follow her food list which consisted of a s-ton of protein, veggies, etc. - but I was counting calories anyway, because I wanted to. I ended up eating in the 1400-1600 range, with a few stray days here and there approaching 1800 (usually in conjunction with like a leg day or something along those lines). The second phase of the plan (which I'm doing now) provided a calorie calculator (this is on bodybuilding dot come by the way), and it recommended I eat about 1500 on "low-intensity" days, and around 1800 on days when I'm working larger muscle groups (i.e. legs, chest). Again, I have eaten in that 1800 range a few times, but not on the reg. I know the whole deal about MFP over-estimating burns for basically everything workout related, so I tend to ignore those estimates.
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    The plan you were following initially? Were you eating at a defecit or just monitoring macros?

  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    Yeah. There's definitely that.
    maxit wrote: »
    The other consideration is that if the "digestive woes" with your original plan included constipation, introducing more fiber most likely led to better elimination.

  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    Mapes84 wrote: »
    So for the first four weeks, the plan stated I did not need to be counting calories just follow her food list which consisted of a s-ton of protein, veggies, etc. - but I was counting calories anyway, because I wanted to. I ended up eating in the 1400-1600 range, with a few stray days here and there approaching 1800 (usually in conjunction with like a leg day or something along those lines). The second phase of the plan (which I'm doing now) provided a calorie calculator (this is on bodybuilding dot come by the way), and it recommended I eat about 1500 on "low-intensity" days, and around 1800 on days when I'm working larger muscle groups (i.e. legs, chest). Again, I have eaten in that 1800 range a few times, but not on the reg. I know the whole deal about MFP over-estimating burns for basically everything workout related, so I tend to ignore those estimates.
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    The plan you were following initially? Were you eating at a defecit or just monitoring macros?
    So you weren't counting calories but think it was around 1500-1800, working out a tonne

    were you at least weighing solids and measuring liquids? because if you weren't losing weight chances are you were eating more than you thought...


  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    Mapes84 wrote: »
    So for the first four weeks, the plan stated I did not need to be counting calories just follow her food list which consisted of a s-ton of protein, veggies, etc. - but I was counting calories anyway, because I wanted to. I ended up eating in the 1400-1600 range, with a few stray days here and there approaching 1800 (usually in conjunction with like a leg day or something along those lines). The second phase of the plan (which I'm doing now) provided a calorie calculator (this is on bodybuilding dot come by the way), and it recommended I eat about 1500 on "low-intensity" days, and around 1800 on days when I'm working larger muscle groups (i.e. legs, chest). Again, I have eaten in that 1800 range a few times, but not on the reg. I know the whole deal about MFP over-estimating burns for basically everything workout related, so I tend to ignore those estimates.


    That right there was the problem. Caloric deficit equals weight loss.
  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    No, I WAS counting calories, sorry if I was confusing. And yes, I have been measuring everything.

    [/quote]
    So you weren't counting calories but think it was around 1500-1800, working out a tonne

    were you at least weighing solids and measuring liquids? because if you weren't losing weight chances are you were eating more than you thought...


    [/quote]

  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Mapes84 wrote: »
    So for the first four weeks, the plan stated I did not need to be counting calories just follow her food list which consisted of a s-ton of protein, veggies, etc. - but I was counting calories anyway, because I wanted to.


    That right there was the problem. Caloric deficit equals weight loss.

  • MaggieLoo79
    MaggieLoo79 Posts: 288 Member
    Were you weighing the proteins? I had learned the fist/palm size portion for protein and boy was I surprised when I started actually weighing it. Turns out what I thought was 4-5oz of chicken was closer to 8-9oz. Yikes!!! :'(
  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    Shocking, isn't it? Nobody tells you that a chicken breast you buy from the store is nowhere near a "serving size"! Yes, I have been weighing- I'm terrible at estimating, so I have to!
    Were you weighing the proteins? I had learned the fist/palm size portion for protein and boy was I surprised when I started actually weighing it. Turns out what I thought was 4-5oz of chicken was closer to 8-9oz. Yikes!!! :'(

  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    edited February 2015
    Mapes84 wrote: »
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Mapes84 wrote: »
    So for the first four weeks, the plan stated I did not need to be counting calories just follow her food list which consisted of a s-ton of protein, veggies, etc. - but I was counting calories anyway, because I wanted to.


    That right there was the problem. Caloric deficit equals weight loss.
    Missed that.
  • terar21
    terar21 Posts: 523 Member
    If you were having digestive issues, there's a good change that could be the problem. I have a sensitive stomach (but my taste buds dgaf). I go through a wide range of digestive problems a few times a month and it definitely affects my weight. I keep a pretty steady diet and I can shoot up a good few pounds for days before it works itself out. That may have had something to do with it. If you were around 100-150 for protein, where were you at for carbs and fat?
  • azulvioleta6
    azulvioleta6 Posts: 4,195 Member
    edited February 2015
    maxit wrote: »
    The other consideration is that if the "digestive woes" with your original plan included constipation, introducing more fiber most likely led to better elimination.

    Or more fat--that might help too.
  • Mapes84
    Mapes84 Posts: 60 Member
    terar21 wrote: »
    If you were having digestive issues, there's a good change that could be the problem. I have a sensitive stomach (but my taste buds dgaf). I go through a wide range of digestive problems a few times a month and it definitely affects my weight. I keep a pretty steady diet and I can shoot up a good few pounds for days before it works itself out. That may have had something to do with it. If you were around 100-150 for protein, where were you at for carbs and fat?

    I was trying to do roughly 40 protein/30/30- I was less strict with balancing the 30/30 part, as long as I was hitting 40.
  • ana3067
    ana3067 Posts: 5,623 Member
    a) constipation easily leads to not losing weight. I didn't lose while I wasn't drinking enough water because a combo of not being regular and retaining water. I still lost inches thouhg, but it was more noticeable once I increased my water intake.

    b) how were you weighing your meat? Raw, cooked? What kind of entries did you use for these measurements?

    c) a 200 calorie range could easily mask scale weight losses. What was your weekly average, as in the number your app tells you you averaged every week? How often were the 1800 days? It would probably be beneficial if you made your diary public.

    d) if your protein sources were also higher in sodium, e.g. cured or canned, that would increase water weight retention. Sometimes too much sodium also just makes me constipated if I don't drink enough water, thus going back to (a).

    I've consumed upwards of 180g of protein (current goal is 125ish) and I've never had problems relating to protein specifically, all these variables have been able to explain my lack of results.

    also, how recently did you join MFP? Some people have reported not losing much when they first started, I'd guess because they also introduced exercise for the first time - i.e. water weight retention.
This discussion has been closed.