Why aren't I losing any weight?
Replies
-
lynnstrick01 wrote: »ok, i really am not trying to be argumentative, and you do make some valid points, but I do know from research, from weight loss discussions with medical professionals and from personal experience that the scales do not always tell the whole story, if they did weight loss programs would not all have you doing measurements in addition to weigh ins. That is all I am saying
And what do you think the rest of us on here do? We've researched, and we all have personal experience -- some of us have lost a great deal of weight and kept it off. The point is, with regards to the OP's situation, given that she has only been losing weight for a week You. Are. Wrong. And don't even get me started on your starvation mode point, which is also wrong. Now stop.0 -
lynnstrick01 wrote: »lynnstrick01 wrote: »A couple of things could be happening to you, first and foremost, drastically cutting calories and increasing exercise all at once puts your body into a sort of "shock" it thinks that you are starving.. so it reduces metabolism. and secondly, remember muscle weighs more than fat, If you are feeling a little sore from all this exercise you are likely building muscle, try body measurements, waist, chest, hips, arms and thighs, the scales don't always tell the whole story.
this is not true
what Evgeni said is true, but this post you can ignore because none of it is true
Excuse me,, but this information came directly from an internal medicine Dr. when I visited him with my mother regarding her weight loss for diabetes, please check your facts before you call someone a liar
I'm really sorry - and I know it bites because you've been told it by somebody you should be able to trust
but it truly is incorrect
all of it
Body's do not go into shock by lowering calories, metabolism is affected but not to the point you will go into starvation mode which does exist but is a precursor to death
- please look into adaptive thermogenesis, which is a thing but not to the extent that if calories in are lower than calories out you would stop losing scale weight and Minnesota Starvation Experiment amongst other studies
Muscle does indeed weigh more than fat by volume .. but the pain is DOMS and a result of inflammation and muscle repair .. you are not building muscle in a week .. oh I wish .. a woman doing everything right can possibly build 10 - 15lbs in the first year of following a proper progressive resistance programme with a proper attention to calorie and protein intake. It doesn't just happen cos someone is moving a little more, it takes concerted effort over time .. and adequate building blocks .. even in defecit somebody overweight would not build enough muscle as a noob lifter to counteract the fat loss and so the scale will not be impacted
the issue for OP is length of time allowed
0 -
lynnstrick01 wrote: »A couple of things could be happening to you, first and foremost, drastically cutting calories and increasing exercise all at once puts your body into a sort of "shock" it thinks that you are starving.. so it reduces metabolism. and secondly, remember muscle weighs more than fat, If you are feeling a little sore from all this exercise you are likely building muscle, try body measurements, waist, chest, hips, arms and thighs, the scales don't always tell the whole story.
This is all inaccurate0 -
It is called Metabolic adaptation, It is a real thing, your body "adjusts" or "adapts" to the number of calories it is taking in and the number it is using over a period of time.0
-
lynnstrick01 wrote: »It is called Metabolic adaptation, It is a real thing, your body "adjusts" or "adapts" to the number of calories it is taking in and the number it is using over a period of time.
Not in a week. Nor is muscle built in a week.0 -
lynnstrick01 wrote: »OK, I did use the phrase incorrectly, true enough 1 lb is 1lb regardless if it is muscle or fat.. but by VOLUME.. Muscle is more dense than fat, and therefore weighs more than fat. if you filled a box with fat and the same sized box with muscle, the weight of the muscle (by volume) would be more, just as rocks by volume are heavier than feathers. therefore the scales can show you are maintaining or even gaining weight while you are still actually losing fat, which is the ultimate goal. you cannot get a complete picture just looking at the scales, Picture in your mind a 5 foot 3 inch woman ( overweight right), now google a picture of Aleesha Young, female body builder, yep 5 foot 3 inches, 190 lbs and 0 body fat. If I looked like that who cares what the scales say
and how many pounds of muscle exactly did your dr. tell you women can put on in ONE WEEK eating at a deficit??0 -
i would think youre not losing because youre not eating enough. 1100 cals a day and expending ~900 cals for exercise is backfiring on you. eat more! weird right, but its true. when i took in your amount of cals at 1100 i wasnt losing either. i increased it to 1400 and the weight started melting off. so if i were you, jump your intake to at least 1400 and youll definitely see a change in the scale. enjoy it, have an extra snack high in protein.0
-
PosterPens wrote: »i would think youre not losing because youre not eating enough. 1100 cals a day and expending ~900 cals for exercise is backfiring on you. eat more! weird right, but its true. when i took in your amount of cals at 1100 i wasnt losing either. i increased it to 1400 and the weight started melting off. so if i were you, jump your intake to at least 1400 and youll definitely see a change in the scale. enjoy it, have an extra snack high in protein.
Sigh. No.0 -
lynnstrick01 wrote: »It is called Metabolic adaptation, It is a real thing, your body "adjusts" or "adapts" to the number of calories it is taking in and the number it is using over a period of time.
adaptive thermogenesis is what you want to look up ..in general doing everything right, you will continue to lose weight but maybe at a slightly slower level than when initially starting
this has been monumentally misinterpreted in the modern media and health industry as starvation mode
nobody is disputing that adaptive thermogenesis exists
0 -
lynnstrick01 wrote: »lynnstrick01 wrote: »A couple of things could be happening to you, first and foremost, drastically cutting calories and increasing exercise all at once puts your body into a sort of "shock" it thinks that you are starving.. so it reduces metabolism. and secondly, remember muscle weighs more than fat, If you are feeling a little sore from all this exercise you are likely building muscle, try body measurements, waist, chest, hips, arms and thighs, the scales don't always tell the whole story.
this is not true
what Evgeni said is true, but this post you can ignore because none of it is true
Excuse me,, but this information came directly from an internal medicine Dr. when I visited him with my mother regarding her weight loss for diabetes, please check your facts before you call someone a liar
I'm really sorry - and I know it bites because you've been told it by somebody you should be able to trust
but it truly is incorrect
all of it
Body's do not go into shock by lowering calories, metabolism is affected but not to the point you will go into starvation mode which does exist but is a precursor to death
- please look into adaptive thermogenesis, which is a thing but not to the extent that if calories in are lower than calories out you would stop losing scale weight and Minnesota Starvation Experiment amongst other studies
Muscle does indeed weigh more than fat by volume .. but the pain is DOMS and a result of inflammation and muscle repair .. you are not building muscle in a week .. oh I wish .. a woman doing everything right can possibly build 10 - 15lbs in the first year of following a proper progressive resistance programme with a proper attention to calorie and protein intake. It doesn't just happen cos someone is moving a little more, it takes concerted effort over time .. and adequate building blocks .. even in defecit somebody overweight would not build enough muscle as a noob lifter to counteract the fat loss and so the scale will not be impacted
the issue for OP is length of time allowed
Let's go into detail because I don't want to give the impression that the information the doctor gave you for your mother is incorrect.
So, does metabolism go into a kind of "shock" when there are significant changes in exercise and nutrition? The short answer is - "yes, it does." But does this lead to a sudden drop in metabolism that affects weight loss for a person in a weeks versus other possible factors that affect scale weight? The short answer to that is "Nope."
Details: When we significantly cut calories (lets say you stop eating for a few days) metabolic response actually results in an increase in metabolism at about 24-72hr depending on amount of energy decrease, personal status, etc. (research really varies on this). Afterwards and on a longer scale a metabolic slow down does occur (but really noticeable at very large cuts) but not in a way that affects the smaller cuts we see in dieting in a manner that is significant after a week. Long term starvation responses may reach 15% or higher on base metabolism (I've covered that research in a long thread here: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss) but that isn't the OP.
For someone with diabetes, probably sedentary, older and in long term diet needs this is a totally different discussion. The OP is only dieting for a week.
So, what are the details of the factors to look at first. Well, scale variance is generally due to water retention. And water retention has many factors: time of month, change in dietary salt, water absorbed (the less you take, the more you bloat...), carbohydrate to protein diet variance, recovery/healing from tissue damage, inflammation (both normal recovery, infection or dietary response), increase in glycogen sheathing for exercise capacity. And poop. Any of these factors can result in scale variance for a few pounds for a few weeks. It works itself off if you just stay calm and keep at it.
As to muscle building, that metabolic "shock", do you know what it does? It stops muscle building processes in the body COLD. If an individual is entering decreased metabolism due to significant cuts in nutritional energy the body does not build more muscle - it can't. It conserves energy. And in a short period of 1 week, doing more cardio, on a calorie cut - no, our OP is not building a significant amount of muscle that would affect her metabolism. And if she was, her metabolism would go UP.
So, the point is, while your doctor didn't lie to you about the info provided to your mother's long-term management of her disease, it doesn't apply in the way you think to the OP.
If any of the above is unclear or if you want to go into the details of this, post away.0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »lynnstrick01 wrote: »lynnstrick01 wrote: »A couple of things could be happening to you, first and foremost, drastically cutting calories and increasing exercise all at once puts your body into a sort of "shock" it thinks that you are starving.. so it reduces metabolism. and secondly, remember muscle weighs more than fat, If you are feeling a little sore from all this exercise you are likely building muscle, try body measurements, waist, chest, hips, arms and thighs, the scales don't always tell the whole story.
this is not true
what Evgeni said is true, but this post you can ignore because none of it is true
Excuse me,, but this information came directly from an internal medicine Dr. when I visited him with my mother regarding her weight loss for diabetes, please check your facts before you call someone a liar
I'm really sorry - and I know it bites because you've been told it by somebody you should be able to trust
but it truly is incorrect
all of it
Body's do not go into shock by lowering calories, metabolism is affected but not to the point you will go into starvation mode which does exist but is a precursor to death
- please look into adaptive thermogenesis, which is a thing but not to the extent that if calories in are lower than calories out you would stop losing scale weight and Minnesota Starvation Experiment amongst other studies
Muscle does indeed weigh more than fat by volume .. but the pain is DOMS and a result of inflammation and muscle repair .. you are not building muscle in a week .. oh I wish .. a woman doing everything right can possibly build 10 - 15lbs in the first year of following a proper progressive resistance programme with a proper attention to calorie and protein intake. It doesn't just happen cos someone is moving a little more, it takes concerted effort over time .. and adequate building blocks .. even in defecit somebody overweight would not build enough muscle as a noob lifter to counteract the fat loss and so the scale will not be impacted
the issue for OP is length of time allowed
Let's go into detail because I don't want to give the impression that the information the doctor gave you for your mother is incorrect.
So, does metabolism go into a kind of "shock" when there are significant changes in exercise and nutrition? The short answer is - "yes, it does." But does this lead to a sudden drop in metabolism that affects weight loss for a person in a weeks versus other possible factors that affect scale weight? The short answer to that is "Nope."
Details: When we significantly cut calories (lets say you stop eating for a few days) metabolic response actually results in an increase in metabolism at about 24-72 depending on amount of energy decrease, personal status, etc. (research really varies). Afterwards and on a longer scale a metabolic slow down does occur (but really noticeable at very large cuts) but not in a way that affects the smaller cuts we see in dieting in a manner that is significant after a week. Long term starvation responses may reach 15% or higher on base metabolism (I've covered that research in a long thread here: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss) but that isn't the OP.
For someone with diabetes, probably sedentary, older and in long term diet needs this is a totally different discussion. The OP is only dieting for a week.
So, what are the details of the factors to look at first. Well, scale variance is generally due to water retention. And water retention has many factors: toms, change in salt, water absorbed (the less you take, the more you bloat...), carbohydrate to protein diet variance, recovery/healing from tissue damage, inflammation (both normal recovery, infection or dietary response), increase in glycogen sheathing for exercise capacity. And poop. Any of these factors can result in scale variance for a few pounds for a few weeks. It works itself off if you just stay calm and keep at it.
As to muscle building, that metabolic "shock", do you know what it does? It stops muscle building processes in the body COLD. If an individual is entering decreased metabolism due to significant cuts in nutritional energy the body does not build more muscle - it can't. It conserves energy. And in a short period of 1 week, doing more cardio, on a calorie cut - no, our OP is not building a significant amount of muscle that would affect her metabolism. And if she was, her metabolism would go UP.
So, the point is, while your doctor didn't lie to you about the info provided to your mother's long-term management of her disease, it doesn't apply in the way you think to the OP.
If any of the above is unclear or if you want to go into the details of this, post away.
#cerebralcrush
0 -
Drs don't necessarily know anything at all about nutrition. My gastroenterologist has given me really bad food advice in regards to my disease (I have Crohn's) and doesn't understand about trigger foods. I am not trying to lose weight but I would go with what my dietician said way before anything my GI said0
-
rabbit: :flowerforyou:0
-
singingflutelady wrote: »Drs don't necessarily know anything at all about nutrition. My gastroenterologist has given me really bad food advice in regards to my disease (I have Crohn's) and doesn't understand about trigger foods. I am not trying to lose weight but I would go with what my dietician said way before anything my GI said
These general statements, often repeated on the boards, are a disservice to an entire profession - certainly some doctors know squat about nutrition - but in this discussion, the person talking about her interaction with her mother's internist is neither detailed enough nor really relevant to question the veracity.
As to Crohn's - Why not both, I'd be likelier to listen a team (gastro/dietician) rather than either speciality alone. Both have specific roles to play. It doesn't mean that the internist knows nothing about metabolic function.0 -
Sorry this is off topic
Oh I know that but just because it comes from a doctor's mouth doesn't mean it's necessarily true. My GI told me to eat spinach and red meat when I wasn't absorbing iron which is fine for a non Crohn's person but both of those have very negative effects on me and lots of Crohnies. He also called me anorexic when I was in a major flare and suffering from malabsorption even though I was on tpn and eating by mouth so I was not starving myself just it was um not staying in me. Plus other things. He just believes you can eat whatever you want with IBD and actually got mad at me for even seeing a dietician. Do yes, I have reason not to listen when he talks about food 0 -
singingflutelady wrote: »Sorry this is off topic Oh I know that but just because it comes from a doctor's mouth doesn't mean it's necessarily true. My GI told me to eat spinach and red meat when I wasn't absorbing iron which is fine for a non Crohn's person but both of those have very negative effects on me and lots of Crohnies. He also called me anorexic when I was in a major flare and suffering from malabsorption even though I was on tpn and eating by mouth so I was not starving myself just it was um not staying in me. Plus other things. He just believes you can eat whatever you want with IBD and actually got mad at me for even seeing a dietician. Do yes, I have reason not to listen when he talks about food
Ouch, doesn't sound like a good relationship. Or even a good doc, if the bolded is true for a Crohn's patient.0 -
Exactly. But no option to change GI so I just don't discuss food with him at all except if he brings it up.0
-
Would it make you feel better to know that easy 'weight' that drops in the first few days isn't really more than water? Stay the course. Commit to 8-10 weeks & do YOUR part; let your body do its part without nagging. If you can convince yourself to let your emotions not be part of the equation, weigh everyday & let a program like happy scale create trend a line for you. That's really eye opening & empowering! Best wishes to you. xoL0
-
Where's that helpful diagram for when this question popped up?0
-
-
janejellyroll wrote: »
Oh, not on my phone!0 -
I have weeks where I know my caloric intake was lower than what I burned, but I didn't lose or only lost 0.1 or 0.2 pounds. Then I've had weeks where I've lost a few pounds with the same or similar calories in/calories out. I find that as long as I stay consistent, the weight comes off - sometimes more in one week than another. I've seen people say that weight loss isn't "linear" and that seems very true to me. Just give it some time and stay consistent, and the weight will start coming off.0
-
OP, as others have stated, log accurately (weigh everything) and give it time. It takes me a full five weeks before I even start to lose weight even when I'm doing everything right. I don't know why, it just does. It catches up over the next few weeks. Some people start to lose right away, some people don't. I know it's tough to work so hard and see so little results but stick with it. If you're being honest with yourself and know you're doing everything right the results will come.0
-
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Plus other things. He just believes you can eat whatever you want with IBD and actually got mad at me for even seeing a dietician. Do yes, I have reason not to listen when he talks about food
Ouch, doesn't sound like a good relationship. Or even a good doc, if the bolded is true for a Crohn's patient.
It depends very much on the IBD patient. My daughter with IBD can eat anything she wants.
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Plus other things. He just believes you can eat whatever you want with IBD and actually got mad at me for even seeing a dietician. Do yes, I have reason not to listen when he talks about food
Ouch, doesn't sound like a good relationship. Or even a good doc, if the bolded is true for a Crohn's patient.
It depends very much on the IBD patient. My daughter with IBD can eat anything she wants.
Yes, it does. But as a general belief it clearly not true for a variety of food driven IBD issues. The issue isn't that for some patients it is ok, it is that a doctor might believe (if true) that this is the case for all patients.0 -
Hmm pretty sure the fact that my one use of butter per day may be out by 1 tsp is not going to completely ruin all of my efforts...it's only going to equate to an excess of about 34 calories! As I said before, everything else is measured using the barcode scanner, I'm not guessing quantities of anything else whatsoever.0
-
abijones75 wrote: »Hmm pretty sure the fact that my one use of butter per day may be out by 1 tsp is not going to completely ruin all of my efforts...it's only going to equate to an excess of about 34 calories! As I said before, everything else is measured using the barcode scanner, I'm not guessing quantities of anything else whatsoever.
Quick question for you, do you check the information that the barcode scanner picks up as being accurate? Most of the time I use that thing it picks up some random user entry that bears no resemblance to whats actually on the packet. Believe me the entry and the actual nutritional information can vary by a huge amount.
Getting the best out of this site does take a lot of work sometimes but once you accept that you have to check and double check everything then it does work well0 -
abijones75 wrote: »Hmm pretty sure the fact that my one use of butter per day may be out by 1 tsp is not going to completely ruin all of my efforts...it's only going to equate to an excess of about 34 calories! As I said before, everything else is measured using the barcode scanner, I'm not guessing quantities of anything else whatsoever.
I wish my barcode scanner did this. Mine just pulls up the nutrition information per serving. I still have to measure out the serving.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »abijones75 wrote: »Hmm pretty sure the fact that my one use of butter per day may be out by 1 tsp is not going to completely ruin all of my efforts...it's only going to equate to an excess of about 34 calories! As I said before, everything else is measured using the barcode scanner, I'm not guessing quantities of anything else whatsoever.
I wish my barcode scanner did this. Mine just pulls up the nutrition information per serving. I still have to measure out the serving.
LOL
Oh my you are weighing out and adjusting the grams of whatever you scan aren't you op?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
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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