Cutting Calories & Still Feeling Satisfied?
itsjustdawn
Posts: 1,073 Member
OK, so I have been doing this for almost 3 weeks and the scale is barely moving. If you check my diary, you will see I am set at 2000 calories, but find myself going over more than not. Even though not every day in my diary is filled in, I have stuck to less than 30g carbs, except for 1 day, which was logged. I actually just realized I haven't eaten out since I started LCHF. I was eating out at least once a week prior to starting. Go me I guess.
So the point of my post - if I drop down 200 calories to 1800, I am afraid I won't feel as satisfied in between meals. I am horrible at explaining myself, sorry. I am actually only eating like 5 times a day, but it's the butter, oil, HWC that are jacking up the cals. I'm just afraid that setting myself at 2000 is why I am not losing...
I have tried to cut back on the processed meat (this will be blasphemy, but I cut out the bacon), and also cut a little back on the cheese. Maybe there is an oil-based tasty dressing I can make to replace the Ranch with? I am totally down with hitting up Pinterest for ideas. Just don't make me cut out my Feta *tear*
Also, telling me to ignore the scale is not going to help. The number is what motivates me. Inches will take a lot longer to lose, which will only discourage me even more. I am sure I am not alone in that.
Thanks for the suggestions!
So the point of my post - if I drop down 200 calories to 1800, I am afraid I won't feel as satisfied in between meals. I am horrible at explaining myself, sorry. I am actually only eating like 5 times a day, but it's the butter, oil, HWC that are jacking up the cals. I'm just afraid that setting myself at 2000 is why I am not losing...
I have tried to cut back on the processed meat (this will be blasphemy, but I cut out the bacon), and also cut a little back on the cheese. Maybe there is an oil-based tasty dressing I can make to replace the Ranch with? I am totally down with hitting up Pinterest for ideas. Just don't make me cut out my Feta *tear*
Also, telling me to ignore the scale is not going to help. The number is what motivates me. Inches will take a lot longer to lose, which will only discourage me even more. I am sure I am not alone in that.
Thanks for the suggestions!
0
Replies
-
I am actually only eating like 5 times a day,
There's half your problem. 300 calories is not a meal, it's a snack. Eat 2 or 3 meals. Eat until you're full/satisfied, and try to eat enough that you're good until the next meal and don't snack. For example, my calorie goal is set to 1850. I generally only eat 2 meals. It's not uncommon for one of my meals to be upward of 1,000 calories, but then I'm not hungry again for 8-12 or more hours.
Ranch dressing is fine, just don't use so much. You have 4 tablespoons logged. That's a quarter cup of dressing. Do you really need that much on a salad with a base of 3 cups of spinach? That seems like your stuff would be drowning in it. If you "need" it to drown out the flavors in the salad, then reconsider the contents of your salad. If you don't like spinach, then don't eat spinach. Use romaine instead, or forego the salad altogether.
There are also several days where you don't even break 1,600 calories. I bet if you look at your calorie intake report and your weekly average, you'll find you're right about at a 2,000 calorie a day average, even if you go over some days.
Do you need to reduce your calories to 1,800? Maybe. Your profile shows weight goals as far down as 130lb. Is that reasonable for your height? If so, that means you're on the shorter end (5'6" maybe?), and so, 2,000 might very well be too much for you. Is that 2,000 for sedentary, or does it include activity? If it's sedentary, then it may be too much. If it includes activity, then it may be about where you need to be.
Will you be satisfied on 1,800 calories? I don't see why not. The days you go over seem to be the days you tend to have more dressings and condiments. Are you satisfied on those lower calorie days? Try easing up on the dressings. That should be an easy place to drop some of the calories.
You'd be surprised how fast inches can drop off. I know a number of people who have lost inches upon inches in just a couple of weeks, and the scale never moved.
Also, has the scale really not moved? By "not moved" do you mean you weighed 180 3 weeks ago, and you weight 180 today? Or do you mean you weighed 180 3 weeks ago, and you weight 178 today? The latter is movement, and suggests that you're actually pretty close to where you should be, calorie-wise.
A common complaint I've seen is people saying the scale "hasn't moved," but in reality, they've lost 3-4lbs. They see it as "not moving," though, because it's not the big losses some people see when switching to this way of eating. Those aren't realistic to expect, especially if you're not coming from a diet of McDonald's super-size meals or somesuch.0 -
itsjustdawn wrote: »OK, so I have been doing this for almost 3 weeks and the scale is barely moving. If you check my diary, you will see I am set at 2000 calories, but find myself going over more than not. Even though not every day in my diary is filled in, I have stuck to less than 30g carbs, except for 1 day, which was logged. I actually just realized I haven't eaten out since I started LCHF. I was eating out at least once a week prior to starting. Go me I guess.
So the point of my post - if I drop down 200 calories to 1800, I am afraid I won't feel as satisfied in between meals. I am horrible at explaining myself, sorry. I am actually only eating like 5 times a day, but it's the butter, oil, HWC that are jacking up the cals. I'm just afraid that setting myself at 2000 is why I am not losing...
I have tried to cut back on the processed meat (this will be blasphemy, but I cut out the bacon), and also cut a little back on the cheese. Maybe there is an oil-based tasty dressing I can make to replace the Ranch with? I am totally down with hitting up Pinterest for ideas. Just don't make me cut out my Feta *tear*
Also, telling me to ignore the scale is not going to help. The number is what motivates me. Inches will take a lot longer to lose, which will only discourage me even more. I am sure I am not alone in that.
Thanks for the suggestions!
I am not going to speak the rest, really, other than to say, up your fats - eat to satiety, not to the macro...
Carbs are a limit. Period. You could try dropping to 25...or even 20... Just as a few weeks experiment.
Protein is a range based on your lean body mass (everything in your body that isn't fat) so that you can maintain muscles.
Fats are filling in the gaps. If you are full, you do not need to eat until you hit this.
In the beginning (first 4-6 weeks), my calories were through the roof because my body needed the extra calories to convert my system to burning fats and because it has to heal metabolically. it is still doing this. So I did not have a calorie limit at all. Some days I would eat 1300 calories. Some days I would eat 2500-3000 calories. I learned to listen to my body for hunger again! It was amazing. Let me repeat:
I DID NOT SET A CALORIE LIMIT.
I had whatever random number MFP put in there, because let's face it, all of these numbers are random, because MFP doesn't know what your metabolism is, what your true body fat is, what items slow your metabolism, what speeds you up, what your true activity level is, whether you're a youthful 60 or an ancient 25.... So, if your metabolism isn't utterly broken, try listening to your hunger, with your carb limit in mind, and ignore that calorie number. At least until you determine whether your metabolism can fix itself. 3 weeks is not enough to do anything.
Okay, sorry for ranting...
What I really wanted to respond was - "inches will take a lot longer to lose."
That simply is not automatically true. I had a period where I lost absolutely NOTHING on the scale, and I lost enough inches to go down a pants size. This way of eating burns fat... It BURNS fat... So it doesn't really work like any weight loss program you've ever tried before. I lost internal fat. The kind that slowly kills your organs. And now my skin is saggy, but I still LOOK THE SAME, really. Maybe a little off here, a little off there, etc. Nothing noticeable to me...
Since then, I've stalled myself out since the beginning of April, due to heaven knows how many factors...but I FEEL BETTER and all, so I know if I just keep plowing on, the scale will catch up... We get impatient, but they say it takes a good 4-12 weeks to see progress from any changes. An initial burst of water weight happens with some folks when starting to eat low carb...but not everyone. And your changes may be minute. You just have to be patient and modify your thinking. Particularly with eating this way, pictures and measurements are more important than the scale's report.
So basically, slow down, take a deep breath, and do some NSV (non-scale victory) evaluations. What has changed? Nothing is a quick fix, at least nothing safe or healthy... So practice patience...persevere...and do an honest evaluation. The first thing for me was the clearing of my mental fog. Followed by energy. And better sleep... And calmed cravings. How have you WON?0 -
I am 54 years old and I am 5'2". I have my calories set for 1370. I am active so I eat more than the typical 1200 calories that MFP gives. My carb macros are set at 171 but I usually get about 150. I am also averaging about 50-55 grams of fat per day (I eat cheese, yogurt bars, nuts, bacon, but I am not into the cakes, cookies, chips etc. - I feel like garbage when I eat what we commonly refer to as "junk foods." My macros for protein is 69 and I usually come close to that. I have lost about 11 pounds in 5 weeks. I am basically just walking for exercise (I have a fitbit and strive to get my 10,000 steps per day). I also do some planking to build my core, but aside from that I also move around a lot when I get home. I don't know if any of this is helpful. They say it's all calories in and calories. Not sure what MFP suggest for you but I would look at that first.0
-
I am 54 years old and I am 5'2". I have my calories set for 1370. I am active so I eat more than the typical 1200 calories that MFP gives. My carb macros are set at 171 but I usually get about 150. I am also averaging about 50-55 grams of fat per day (I eat cheese, yogurt bars, nuts, bacon, but I am not into the cakes, cookies, chips etc. - I feel like garbage when I eat what we commonly refer to as "junk foods." My macros for protein is 69 and I usually come close to that. I have lost about 11 pounds in 5 weeks. I am basically just walking for exercise (I have a fitbit and strive to get my 10,000 steps per day). I also do some planking to build my core, but aside from that I also move around a lot when I get home. I don't know if any of this is helpful. They say it's all calories in and calories. Not sure what MFP suggest for you but I would look at that first.0
-
Oops sorry for the double post.0
-
What are your stats? 2000 calories seems high to me if you are 5'6" like someone said above, and are looking to weigh 130 lbs. I'm 5'6" after shrinking an inch due to spinal compression in my neck C1-C7, and have been trying out maintenance for about 4 weeks now at 140-143 lbs range. I'm inching up my calories slowly (to 1650 first two weeks, then added another 100 to that), and am currently at 1750 a day, but was losing rather well on 1500 the whole time I was in weight loss mode which started June 2014. 1750 is still technically a deficit for me because I'm exercising several times a week (mostly racquetball, yoga, and some weights), yet my weight seems to have stabilized at this weight, and doesn't seem to want to go much lower than 140 lbs.
You can try this calculator that many of us here use (it has been pretty darn accurate for me):
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com/
Height?
Current weight?
Activity level?0 -
Were you losing on 2000 calories before starting low carb? Unless you are very active that does seem like a high number for weight loss. I'm 5'6 and 52 years old and that is about my maintenance for lightly active. A little more or a little less depending on how much I'm moving.0
-
Dragonwolf wrote: »
There are also several days where you don't even break 1,600 calories. I bet if you look at your calorie intake report and your weekly average, you'll find you're right about at a 2,000 calorie a day average, even if you go over some days.
No, I break 1600 easily. Not sure where you saw that. Even on the days I didn't log, I know I was around 2000 because of the things I ate. My low days were around 1730 because I got home too late to have dinner. I went back almost 2 weeks and there's nothing below that other than the day I forgot to add dinner. Which was the same as most days with dinner.Dragonwolf wrote: »Do you need to reduce your calories to 1,800? Maybe. Your profile shows weight goals as far down as 130lb. Is that reasonable for your height? If so, that means you're on the shorter end (5'6" maybe?), and so, 2,000 might very well be too much for you. Is that 2,000 for sedentary, or does it include activity? If it's sedentary, then it may be too much. If it includes activity, then it may be about where you need to be.
Will you be satisfied on 1,800 calories? I don't see why not. The days you go over seem to be the days you tend to have more dressings and condiments. Are you satisfied on those lower calorie days? Try easing up on the dressings. That should be an easy place to drop some of the calories.
I am 5'1". I also get hungry after a couple hours. So that is why I eat so many meals. I have to bring food to work, so I don't think there is ONE meal I can bring that is 1000 calories. Or whatever.Dragonwolf wrote: »Also, has the scale really not moved? By "not moved" do you mean you weighed 180 3 weeks ago, and you weight 180 today? Or do you mean you weighed 180 3 weeks ago, and you weight 178 today? The latter is movement, and suggests that you're actually pretty close to where you should be, calorie-wise.
It's bounced around the same 2lbs since I started. I go down a little, I go right back up. Repeatedly.0 -
OK for everyone, I am 5'1". I am not active, as I have several back injuries from a car accident. Pain is 24/7. I need to lose some weight to reduce the pressure on my spine, which will reduce the pain so that I can do more. I have a desk job, so I am not laying around in bed. I do walk around and stuff but can't go fast. My carbs are set at 5%. Someone suggested dropping them to 15-25g range - they are already that low. I think I went over that one day 2 weeks ago.0
-
mrsgoodwine wrote: »I am 54 years old and I am 5'2". I have my calories set for 1370. I am active so I eat more than the typical 1200 calories that MFP gives. My carb macros are set at 171 but I usually get about 150. I am also averaging about 50-55 grams of fat per day (I eat cheese, yogurt bars, nuts, bacon, but I am not into the cakes, cookies, chips etc. - I feel like garbage when I eat what we commonly refer to as "junk foods." My macros for protein is 69 and I usually come close to that. I have lost about 11 pounds in 5 weeks. I am basically just walking for exercise (I have a fitbit and strive to get my 10,000 steps per day). I also do some planking to build my core, but aside from that I also move around a lot when I get home. I don't know if any of this is helpful. They say it's all calories in and calories. Not sure what MFP suggest for you but I would look at that first.
We aren't even doing the same WOE.
0 -
Based on the new info (and not knowing your weight), I would guess you probably want 1500 calories for a pound a week loss. But use the calculator that someone posted earlier in the thread.0
-
>I'm just afraid that setting myself at 2000 is why I am not losing...
well...
>you will see I am set at 2000 calories, but find myself going over more than not.
...that could be why too
0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/diary/itsjustdawn?date=2015-05-07 - 1,565
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/diary/itsjustdawn?date=2015-04-30 - 1,624
There are also a few others where you are in the 1,700-1,800 range, as well. I still think you're averaging around 2000, assuming your logging is accurate.
You're getting hungry after two hours, because you're only eating meals that are 300-400 calories. Condense a couple of those meals, and you'll likely find yourself satisfied on an amount that's less than the sum of both, but more than each meal by itself.
And yeah, you're eating way too much. According to the keto calculator, it's kind of a wonder you're not gaining weight. At sedentary and your rough stats, you should be maintaining on about 1,750 calories, and losing on somewhere around 1,400-1,500 calories. Since you're maintaining right now, you might be on the higher end of that estimate. Try somewhere in the 1,500-1,700 range and see what difference that makes and go from there.0 -
I'm 5'1 as well and have my calories set to a little over 1300. I think my diary is open so feel free to take a look at my foods and macros. I don't feel hungry throughout the day because I make sure to eat alot of fat (I think 150g is my goal), which i find keeps me satiated. Yesterday, for example, my daughter had swim lessons, so we don't eat until after 7pm and I had my lunch at 1pm. I had a bulletproof coffee as a "snack" to up my fat intake for the day and give me energy to last until supper. I wasn't starving when it was time to eat so I didn't gorge myself.
It looks like the ranch dressing you're eating is pretty much using up your carb limit right there. I would aim for under 25g of carbs a day. I think with some small tweaks, you can reach your goals. I do eat a moderate amount of veg, but one of the podcasts i listen to (The Fat Burning Man) had an expert on that said that veggies should only be a vehicle to get butter into you! lol
My suggestion is to eat less carbs and waaaay more fat than you're getting. The fat will keep you satiated and give you energy. Also look at the ingredients of what you're eating....those slim jims and processed meats probably have alot of added sugar in them too. Your body will burn that sugar first before it uses your body fat for fuel.
Edit: I just realized I was looking at your macros wrong because they're opposite of mine! lol sorry!0 -
Sorry to say, but at 5'1", you are most definitely eating too much to lose weight. I think it's great that you are maintaining on this amount of calories, though, because this means you will be able to eat more than many of us that are much taller than you and still lose weight. And that is the goal...eat as much as you can and still lose at a decent pace. This is great news for you!0
-
I'll have to agree with other responders: you're eating too much to lose. I'm 5' 9", 256 pounds, and I need to cut my caloric intake to 1800 to lose. My activity level was the same as yours until a week ago when I was given clearance to start working out again.
As for the salad stuff, this was mine every day until recently:
1 C raw spinach
1 C baby greens
1 oz carrot
1 oz cucumber
1 oz snow peas
1 oz purple cabbage
1 oz radish
1 oz celery
1.5 oz grape tomatoes
3.5 oz boneless, skinless grilled chicken breast
35 mL Original Ranch dressing
1 Tbs walnut or olive oil
1/2 oz roasted sunflower seeds
That came out to: 627 kCal, 16g Carb, 49g Fat, 25g Protein. I use the oil to make the dressing coat everything more evenly. Let me tell you, this is a HUGE salad. I ate at 11:30 for lunch, and didn't eat again until 7 pm.0 -
What's your water intake like? Could you be feeling hungry when in reality you're thirsty? Sometimes this happens to me. Try drink a glass of water before eating and in between meals. It will fill your stomach volume wise and help you decide if you're truly hungry.0
-
What's your water intake like? Could you be feeling hungry when in reality you're thirsty? Sometimes this happens to me. Try drink a glass of water before eating and in between meals. It will fill your stomach volume wise and help you decide if you're truly hungry.
I drink 90-100oz per day0 -
The reason I even posted this is because there are arguments in this group for and against tracking calories.0
-
itsjustdawn wrote: »The reason I even posted this is because there are arguments in this group for and against tracking calories.
Technically, there's a difference between tracking calories and counting calories. You can track without counting, and you can count without tracking (though that's arguably harder). Not tracking or counting is not suitable for everyone all the time. Even if it's suitable for you most of the time, if you're finding yourself running into problems, then tracking -- and possibly counting -- for a short period of time may be beneficial, to aid in troubleshooting and finding what gets you back on track.
You're experiencing problems, so it's a good idea to take notes for a while. Once you get back on the right track, you can re-evaluate whether you need to continue counting or tracking and go from there.
If you notice, though, most of us have attempted to address your hunger and haven't said that you need to count calories, necessarily.
1. You're getting hungry every two hours, because you're not eating enough at each meal. Eat until you're full at each meal and aim to eat only 3 meals. Your meals should eventually fall somewhere between the 300-400 that you're eating per meal now and the 600-800 that your two-meal total is currently.
2. Reduce your condiment intake. You shouldn't need a quarter cup of dressing on a 3-cup salad. Try different dressings to see if they work better, or reconsider why you feel the need to put that much dressing on a salad in the first place.
3. Track (don't artificially alter your caloric intake) for a couple of weeks with the above changes, so that you can see how they change your calorie intake, weight, etc.
4. Remember that weight loss isn't a race. Look at trends over a month or two, so that you get a view of your body's patterns over a full hormonal cycle, and so that you give your body enough time to adjust to your new way of eating.0 -
I'm very similar to Mrsgoodwine. I'm also 54 years old and 5'1". (SW 5/1/15 -170; CW162; GW 130) My calories set for 1300. For the past two weeks I reduced my carbs to 45, but I usually end up a bit higher, but that is the target. I literally have beefed up my protein and fats. Limited to 3 meals and 1 snack any time of the day. I also recently purchased a digital scale for portion sizes. I always thought that was overrated, since I knew what a fist size was. Well, It's not! It's made a difference in pre-preparing meals for the day/week.
I used to be a breakfast skipper, opting for just coffee, thinking I would save my calories for later. It wasn't working for me. Now I start with 4-5oz of eggs & cheese bake with a little bit of sausage, & vegs. (mushrooms, tomato) What a huge difference this has made. I am no longer "hangry" and I feel satisfied and full of energy. It is incredible to me the amount of weight loss after being on a plateau for so long and the amount of "found" energy I have. Added 65oz of H20 as a minimum. Real water, not including teas and coffee as a 'liquid'. LOL.
I was resistant to adding calories, but adding protein and fat calories as opposed to carb calories makes a difference for me in terms of energy and feeling full and not crashing midmorning.
I too, am basically just walking for exercise -10,000 steps per day. If I miss my walk I stick in an exercise DVD for 30 mins. Started planking, I can't do pushups, but the planking and stretching make me feel great without being sore the next day. Try a week, log everything, including your mood energy levels, satiety. Weigh, measure, assess progress, adjust if necessary, repeat.
0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »itsjustdawn wrote: »The reason I even posted this is because there are arguments in this group for and against tracking calories.
Technically, there's a difference between tracking calories and counting calories. You can track without counting, and you can count without tracking (though that's arguably harder). Not tracking or counting is not suitable for everyone all the time. Even if it's suitable for you most of the time, if you're finding yourself running into problems, then tracking -- and possibly counting -- for a short period of time may be beneficial, to aid in troubleshooting and finding what gets you back on track.
You're experiencing problems, so it's a good idea to take notes for a while. Once you get back on the right track, you can re-evaluate whether you need to continue counting or tracking and go from there.
If you notice, though, most of us have attempted to address your hunger and haven't said that you need to count calories, necessarily.
1. You're getting hungry every two hours, because you're not eating enough at each meal. Eat until you're full at each meal and aim to eat only 3 meals. Your meals should eventually fall somewhere between the 300-400 that you're eating per meal now and the 600-800 that your two-meal total is currently.
2. Reduce your condiment intake. You shouldn't need a quarter cup of dressing on a 3-cup salad. Try different dressings to see if they work better, or reconsider why you feel the need to put that much dressing on a salad in the first place.
3. Track (don't artificially alter your caloric intake) for a couple of weeks with the above changes, so that you can see how they change your calorie intake, weight, etc.
4. Remember that weight loss isn't a race. Look at trends over a month or two, so that you get a view of your body's patterns over a full hormonal cycle, and so that you give your body enough time to adjust to your new way of eating.
Thank you. I guess I am thinking I need high fat foods, which equates to more calories in my head. I was already thinking I need to change the dressing to something else - I just don't care as much for salads without it. My biggest struggle is having food at work. I am trying to pack foods that will keep me full for 10 hours. I feel like there is a lot of fat in my meals, at least based on what my diary says. I do want to try making my own dressings. I am not really a fan of cooking, but I do make my work meals ahead of time. If I could get away with only 2 meals or whatever at work, that would be freaking fantastic. I did drop to one cup of coffee, and I love my HWC, so I'd like to keep that as well.0 -
slimzandra wrote: »I'm very similar to Mrsgoodwine. I'm also 54 years old and 5'1". (SW 5/1/15 -170; CW162; GW 130) My calories set for 1300. For the past two weeks I reduced my carbs to 45, but I usually end up a bit higher, but that is the target. I literally have beefed up my protein and fats. Limited to 3 meals and 1 snack any time of the day. I also recently purchased a digital scale for portion sizes. I always thought that was overrated, since I knew what a fist size was. Well, It's not! It's made a difference in pre-preparing meals for the day/week.
I used to be a breakfast skipper, opting for just coffee, thinking I would save my calories for later. It wasn't working for me. Now I start with 4-5oz of eggs & cheese bake with a little bit of sausage, & vegs. (mushrooms, tomato) What a huge difference this has made. I am no longer "hangry" and I feel satisfied and full of energy. It is incredible to me the amount of weight loss after being on a plateau for so long and the amount of "found" energy I have. Added 65oz of H20 as a minimum. Real water, not including teas and coffee as a 'liquid'. LOL.
I was resistant to adding calories, but adding protein and fat calories as opposed to carb calories makes a difference for me in terms of energy and feeling full and not crashing midmorning.
I too, am basically just walking for exercise -10,000 steps per day. If I miss my walk I stick in an exercise DVD for 30 mins. Started planking, I can't do pushups, but the planking and stretching make me feel great without being sore the next day. Try a week, log everything, including your mood energy levels, satiety. Weigh, measure, assess progress, adjust if necessary, repeat.
Thank you
I love my omelet at breakfast. I am usually pretty hungry in the morning so skipping breakfast is usually a no for me.0 -
itsjustdawn wrote: »OK, so I have been doing this for almost 3 weeks and the scale is barely moving. If you check my diary, you will see I am set at 2000 calories, but find myself going over more than not. Even though not every day in my diary is filled in, I have stuck to less than 30g carbs, except for 1 day, which was logged. I actually just realized I haven't eaten out since I started LCHF. I was eating out at least once a week prior to starting. Go me I guess.
So the point of my post - if I drop down 200 calories to 1800, I am afraid I won't feel as satisfied in between meals. I am horrible at explaining myself, sorry. I am actually only eating like 5 times a day, but it's the butter, oil, HWC that are jacking up the cals. I'm just afraid that setting myself at 2000 is why I am not losing...
I have tried to cut back on the processed meat (this will be blasphemy, but I cut out the bacon), and also cut a little back on the cheese. Maybe there is an oil-based tasty dressing I can make to replace the Ranch with? I am totally down with hitting up Pinterest for ideas. Just don't make me cut out my Feta *tear*
Also, telling me to ignore the scale is not going to help. The number is what motivates me. Inches will take a lot longer to lose, which will only discourage me even more. I am sure I am not alone in that.
Thanks for the suggestions!
itsjustdawn with your CICO mindset LCHF may just be wrong for your mindset.
Keep in mind I accidentally wound up LCHF just trying to manage my pain that I have had in a major way for 40 years due to Ankylosing Spondylitis and to try and prevent cancer risks.
I left carbs (eating <50 grams daily) 1 Oct 2014 but it was 60 days before the scales started moving down but I was losing inches without realizing it because I thought losing fat was about one's weight decreasing. After I learned how I had accidently stumbled into Very Low Carb Very High Fat eating lifestyle and did some reading on sites like MFP I learned weight loss and fat loss was not directly tied together.
If you are looking for a crash diet to make the scales move down weekly LCHF may disappoint you. If you are looking to cut your risk of stroke, diabetes, cancer, heart attack, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, etc, etc I would encourage you to do a ton of reading on LCHF over the rest of 2015.
Now LCHF can lead to weight loss that is so fast from time to time that it may scare you. In my case I expect after abusing carbs for 40+ years my organs were fat and damaged and needed to recover some before they were able to start burning my body fat.
If one has gained 150 pounds over the past 20 years of example they should not expect to loss it over the next 20 weeks or even the next 20 months perhaps.
Give this eating lifestyle 6 months just to help your body systems recover then work on getting your scales to start giving lower readings. The need to see the scales read lower is a mental thing not directly related to food intake perhaps?
0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
Give this eating lifestyle 6 months just to help your body systems recover then work on getting your scales to start giving lower readings. The need to see the scales read lower is a mental thing not directly related to food intake perhaps?
You are 100% correct - it IS a mental thing. And it sucks. I have barely any stomach issues when I cut carbs so I love that. I am NOT looking for a crash diet. I guess by reading others' posts, I thought I would see something initially, hell, even water weight!
0 -
Try not to compare your weight loss to that of others. We all lose at different rates. It can be depressing if you do.0
-
itjust dawn I think you are actually doing quite well. I was hit and miss the first two months then when off carbs cold turkey to prove I could cut my pain levels before my Dr. appointing that was coming up in thirty days. I too wanted the scales to show weight loss but it did not for about 6 weeks then I dropped 10 pounds the last 2 weeks of Nov last year.
Requiring no Rx meds for pain management keeps me faithful to LCHF. 0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »itjust dawn I think you are actually doing quite well. I was hit and miss the first two months then when off carbs cold turkey to prove I could cut my pain levels before my Dr. appointing that was coming up in thirty days. I too wanted the scales to show weight loss but it did not for about 6 weeks then I dropped 10 pounds the last 2 weeks of Nov last year.
Requiring no Rx meds for pain management keeps me faithful to LCHF.
Thank you 0 -
@GaleHawkins! The lack of need for pain control is keeping me compliant with LCHF also!!0
-
Just saw the doctor and she backs my going off the insulin and onto LCHF! Wanted me to stay on it strictly for 2 months then test me again! BG was 120 this morning. Win!!!0
This discussion has been closed.