Not losing weight despite exercise

seems like you could be eating more than your realizing - are you hungry on this?

At between 450-700 calories net / day you should have lost about 1/2 a pound per day. (Btw totally NOT recommended).

You are probably eating more than you think, and burning less than you think.

What do the slimming world people say?

cottontailsandcupcakes wrote: »

I am going to the gym 3 times a weeks for 45 minutes doing cardio, followed by a 30 minute swim of continuous lengths. Also doing clubbercise once a week and a hula hoop class once a week.

I've always had success with slimming world before.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

All your answers are HERE - and they are brutally honest answers.

As others asked, how long have you not been losing? I have been steadily losing about a pound a week for the last 3 or 4 months - but if you would look at my once or twice weekly weigh-ins there were a lot of times it went up a pound or two, or times when it plateaued, but it all evened out in the end. Shoot, I weigh about 5 lbs more in the evening than I do in the morning. If a month goes by without any scale change I'd be concerned. Less than that, it may well just be a measurement issue and not a reality based issue.

If you're losing inches, there are only one of two things going on:
1) You are losing fat. This would cause slight weight loss, unless offset by muscle gains.
2) You are losing lean muscle mass. This would cause weight loss too, because even if it's replaced by fat the fat won't weigh as much to offset the loss.

I agree with the poster above who said to cut back on the cardio and incorporate some strength training. Replace two of your workouts each week with push-ups, squats while holding weights, lunges while holding weights, sit-ups, and planks. For push-ups, do them to failure. For sit-ups, do as many as you can in 60 seconds. For plank, hold for 60 seconds. For squats and lunges, select a weight where doing 15 reps is challenging by the last few reps. Do 3 or 4 exercises in sequence and then repeat the circuit once or twice more. At the end of each circuit try incorporating something like running lunges, squat jumps, step-ups, or anything else that involves moving your whole body with speed or force and a full range of motion. This will keep your heart rate up while you're doing the other exercises and increase the caloric burn you get from it. I typically burn 350 calories in a 40-minute weight-lifting session by incorporating those type of exercises in between the weights.

Every additional pound of muscle burns an additional 50 calories per day. Conversely, every pound of muscle you lose reduces the amount of calories you can eat without gaining weight by 50 calories per day.

I'm not completely sure how this slimming world thing works but I'm wondering if they have calculated the calories burned from swimming as a big factor for CICO. Swimming is a great way to get fit and burn calories, but it's overestimated in swimming calculators for the average person. There are way too many variables to make it accurate- technique being the biggest one (efficient vs not efficient swimmer), size of pool (25 m easier than 50m or open water because of frequent push offs), and speed.

cottontailsandcupcakes wrote: »

SingingSingleTracker wrote: »

cottontailsandcupcakes wrote: »

We'll if that's the case I'll stick to calorie counting for a while then with the exercise and see how I get on. If it's purely as simple as I'm crap at maths and slimming world is wrong.

Plug in your information here (weight, age, gender, height, activity level - best to leave it at sedentary so you can see the calculations to maintain your current weight, lose or gain 1 or 2 pounds per week.

http://www.calculator.net/calorie-calculator.html

Then accurately measure - or as best as you can honestly muster - everything you put into your mouth. Most tend to underestimate what goes in, and overestimate what gets burned during exercise. That leads to the bad math of CICO and results in one not losing weight, or being stalled, etc.

10 Weeks to the day yesterday by targeting about 1 pound of weight loss per week, and using the calculations from that link above, my report chart has resulted in a 12.4 loss for the 10 weeks...

December2nd-February11

Entered l the details and it's 1405 for 1lb a week weightloss and 905 for 2lb a week. 1905 to maintain.

Will continue with my current exercise plan but change it up a bit and do some strength based as well as the cardio.

That sounds about right, 1405 calories to get a 1 pound weight loss per week. Mine is currently 1670 calories per day to lose 1 pound (that's for my age, gender, and height). And it has been working very well. When playing both sides of the equation for CI/CO - the more exercise you do, then your daily amount of calories you are allowed to eat rises. I do love to eat, so I take advantage of that when I can. However, one must remain diligent and not eat back all of the exercise calories. That way you will stay on track with the weight loss. Mainly because we tend to overestimate what we burn, and underestimate what we eat. So having a cushion of 100 - 500 calories deficit usually makes up for any and all estimation mistakes. If not, well adjust until things are going in the right direction.

All the best!

cottontailsandcupcakes wrote: »

Expatmommy79 wrote: »

They give you some crap about muscle weighing more than fat and that crap. They are forgetting I'm not an athlete so that's a load of b****kitten*. Does ones metabolism change after having children?

You don't have to be an athlete and it's not c**p. Muscles are denser than fat. Have you measured yourself? You might be doing better than you realize.