Despite diet & exercise I KEEP GAINING WEIGHT! Please help!
Replies
-
Two questions: (1) what's your water intake like? (2) what's the timing and portion sizes of your meals like? You MAY be putting your body into starvation mode, if you're running too much of a calorie deficit.0
-
Raptor2763 wrote: »Two questions: (1) what's your water intake like? (2) what's the timing and portion sizes of your meals like? You MAY be putting your body into starvation mode, if you're running too much of a calorie deficit.
No. Starving people don't gain weight.9 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »Raptor2763 wrote: »Two questions: (1) what's your water intake like? (2) what's the timing and portion sizes of your meals like? You MAY be putting your body into starvation mode, if you're running too much of a calorie deficit.
No. Starving people don't gain weight.
And More calories do not lead to more weight loss. Ever.8 -
CICO is the simplification of the energy equation but in reality it looks more like this:
0 -
While I didn't gain as dramatically as you have, I have experience with gaining weight while dieting and exercising. At the time, I only had a cup of coffee for breakfast (the same cup of coffee I've always had) and I didn't change how I ate dinner (to the best of my knowledge). I decreased my lunch - eating more healthy things (fruit, veggies, yogurt), rather than chips, cookies and a sandwich - and gained 20 pounds. I went back to my old diet and the weight gain stopped, but I didn't lose either.
More recently, I began exercising quite a bit more and I've been more accurately keeping track of my calories. I've also been eating breakfast (more than coffee) and a reasonable lunch. This time, I've been able to lose 30 pounds, putting me down 10 pounds from what I was when I first tried dieting.
I know there will be people here who will say that I must have been eating more than I realized. I have no answer for them. I didn't keep records about my food intake at that time. All I can say is that I know I was eating less at lunch. I wasn't one of those people who sat down and said, "I'm eating healthy. That means I can have tons of healthy food." I'd have about 1 stalk of celery chopped up and half a cup of grapes or cherries, with my 100 calorie yogurt. Does that really have more calories than a ham and cheese sandwich, 3 oreos and a bag of chips?
Anyway, getting back to the point: I'm not going to tell you to eat more. I will say that you should make sure you eat breakfast in the morning (it'll take away from what you can eat later in the day, but it might help in other ways). I'd also make sure to be careful and accurate with logging what you're eating and your exercise. See if that helps you in anyway.
At the same time... I'd get a second opinion from the doctor - possibly from a different doctor. There may be something medical going on.
1 -
5 pounds a week for 6 months? I'd be knocking down lots of doctors doors.....you'd have to consume SO many extra calories to do that.1
-
Raptor2763 wrote: »Two questions: (1) what's your water intake like? (2) what's the timing and portion sizes of your meals like? You MAY be putting your body into starvation mode, if you're running too much of a calorie deficit.
I really wish we could flag starvation mode posts as abuse... seriously. These weight loss myths are getting beyond ridiculous. No one ever put on 35lbs from being dehydrated. No one ever put on 35lbs of muscle without actively trying to. No one ever got obese from 'starving themselves'. I mean if your body is able to create mass without consuming energy, I suggest you contact the Department of Energy asap, because your miraculous metabolism could very well save us from a potential energy crisis.16 -
rubypinkbutterfly wrote: »Per my food log and fit bit I'm at a deficit of 500-800 calories everyday. I should be losing a ton of weight, not gaining!
You're not in a calorie deficit. You need to weigh and measure everything, increase your exercise, decrease your intake further, or all of the above.
6 -
5 pounds a week for 6 months? I'd be knocking down lots of doctors doors.....you'd have to consume SO many extra calories to do that.
I actually did the math on this, for the OP to have gained 5lb/week for 6 months (130lbs total) and for that to equal 36% of her body weight gained, she would have started at 360lb, and would currently be 490lb. I'm going to guess that the picture in the avi is not a 490lb woman.
If the OP were to have started at 150lb and gained 36% of her weight over 6 months, that would be 9lb/month, which could be done with overeating, but it would be a lot of overeating to get there.
TL;DR - insufficient data5 -
jennifershoo wrote: »You're 46...Perhaps pre-menopause? I'd go see an endocrinologist to have all my hormones checked up.
Peri-menopause alone won't cause this. There are many of us here peri- and post- menopause who lose weight just fine.1 -
ElizabethOakes2 wrote: »Just as an adjunct here- Before my thyroid problem was properly diagnosed, I was gaining weight (about 2 pounds a week) on a strict doctor supervised 1100 calorie a day diet and a highly active lifestyle. It CAN happen. And the standard thyroid test didn't show a problem, it was the full thyroid work-up that finally revealed the thyroid problem.
That being said, the first thing to look at is your logging. Are you weighing/measuring and are you using accurate entries in the database? If your logging is solid, don't eat back ALL of your exercise calories. Aim for half or even a quarter. Many trackers and activity lists overestimate calories burned for some people.
If your logging is tight and you aren't overestimating your calories, get the back to the doctor and demand to be either have more tests or to be referred to you someone who give you a second opinion.
Right! I used to get sooo sick and tired of reading the CICO thing that I stopped reading the forum messages. Sometimes medical problems are hidden. I tried losing 50 lbs for the past 10+ years and ending up gaining 20 more over that same time frame...because I would give up and eat what I wanted, but everytime I put myself on a deficit (and yes all was weighed) I would not be able to lose a single pound...UNTIL recently and what a god send that doctor was, in the past 2 months I have lost 11 lbs. My problem? I had Lyme disease and it will mess with everything from head to toe in your system including your metabolism.
I don't know, for every one of you with a legitimate medical condition, there are at least 5 people that say things like "I never weigh my food because I just know what a proper portion is, I must have a medical condition that causes me not to lose weight" or "I burn 2000 calories a day exercising according to GlitchyFitnessBand and eat them all back, why am I gaining weight?" or "I eat perfect to lose half a pound 5 days of the week and then stop logging on weekends, why am I not losing weight?"
I'd guess that for every one person with a legitimate medical condition there are thousands who are not losing weight because they are miscalculating their Calories In or Calories Out.4 -
Raptor2763 wrote: »Two questions: (1) what's your water intake like? (2) what's the timing and portion sizes of your meals like? You MAY be putting your body into starvation mode, if you're running too much of a calorie deficit.
Dieters don't stop losing weight due to "starvation mode", let alone gain weight:
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/4 -
I think it's a rant. The OP has never returned. Right? Or did I miss it?
ETA: Just double checked, never returned. I'm staying with rant
1 -
For a lot of people that may gain weight when eating less and lose weight when eating more, it's more about providing your body with enough energy to support your level of activity. Eat less, you'll end up doing less. Eat more, you'll typically end up able to do more. The weight loss experience may have resulted from having more energy to use and just being able to be more active throughout the day. You can't put more calories in your body than you burn and lose weight, it just doesn't happen unless your sick and your body is using the calories for other things abover standard repair and support. OP, if you're positive you've been eating exaclty the way you were while losing weight (same exact foods and portion sizes) and gaining 5 lbs a week, you may have a medical problem or are taking medications that may cause weight gain or something unrelated to your food intake. That's a lot of weight to gain over a short period of time without actually increasing your food intake. I've randomly gained up to 8 lbs in one week but that was due to eating a high sodium diet. I dropped that and more in a week of intense exercise and drinking tons of water.1
-
Wynterbourne wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »CiaraCatch wrote: »Mavrick_RN wrote: »Just a reminder: muscle is NOT heavier than fat. That is a fact.
Yes, it is. When we say one substance is heavier than another, the assumption is that we're talking about equal volumes, otherwise it's meaningless. In the same way that lead is heavier than cheese, muscle is heavier than fat.
Huh?
Muscle is more dense and takes up less space than fat, but a pound is a pound no matter how you weigh it.
When ever any substance is said to weigh more than something else it is always a given that we are talking about the same cubic volume. You never see anyone arguing, "No, Lead is not heavier than feathers. A pound of lead is the same as a pound of feathers." Of course a pound is a pound, but we are talking about the same volume! You compare the same volume. YES, muscle (the same volume by default) is indeed heavier than fat. I will never understand why it is only these two items that anyone ever refuses to compare at the same cubic volume. Everything else they do.
But....here is an OP saying she's gained 35 pounds, and another poster comes in and says:Also if you are exercising it could be muscle weight which is heavier than fat...
But my comments about weight and volume was in response to this:Mavrick_RN wrote: »Just a reminder: muscle is NOT heavier than fat. That is a fact.
I wasn't addressing the '35 pounds' comment specifically, however, If you took measurements of yourself, say one year apart, and you had the exact same measurements, but weighed say 5 pounds more, than yes, that would probably be due to muscle gain. That is not what my statement was addressing though. All I was arguing was that the statement that 'it is an absolute fact that muscle isn't heavier than fat', without regards to volume, is erroneous. It's a misconception that has gone on for far too long because people continue to ignore the basis for comparison. Which is identical volumes.
I understand, but the response of the poster you quoted said appeared to be in response to the poster who said the weight gain could be muscle.
Ahhh.... a bit of the 'quote inception' going on. lol. As you were.Wynterbourne wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »CiaraCatch wrote: »Mavrick_RN wrote: »Just a reminder: muscle is NOT heavier than fat. That is a fact.
Yes, it is. When we say one substance is heavier than another, the assumption is that we're talking about equal volumes, otherwise it's meaningless. In the same way that lead is heavier than cheese, muscle is heavier than fat.
Huh?
Muscle is more dense and takes up less space than fat, but a pound is a pound no matter how you weigh it.
When ever any substance is said to weigh more than something else it is always a given that we are talking about the same cubic volume. You never see anyone arguing, "No, Lead is not heavier than feathers. A pound of lead is the same as a pound of feathers." Of course a pound is a pound, but we are talking about the same volume! You compare the same volume. YES, muscle (the same volume by default) is indeed heavier than fat. I will never understand why it is only these two items that anyone ever refuses to compare at the same cubic volume. Everything else they do.
But....here is an OP saying she's gained 35 pounds, and another poster comes in and says:Also if you are exercising it could be muscle weight which is heavier than fat...
But my comments about weight and volume was in response to this:Mavrick_RN wrote: »Just a reminder: muscle is NOT heavier than fat. That is a fact.
I wasn't addressing the '35 pounds' comment specifically, however, If you took measurements of yourself, say one year apart, and you had the exact same measurements, but weighed say 5 pounds more, than yes, that would probably be due to muscle gain. That is not what my statement was addressing though. All I was arguing was that the statement that 'it is an absolute fact that muscle isn't heavier than fat', without regards to volume, is erroneous. It's a misconception that has gone on for far too long because people continue to ignore the basis for comparison. Which is identical volumes.
I understand, but the response of the poster you quoted said appeared to be in response to the poster who said the weight gain could be muscle.
Ahhh.... a bit of the 'quote inception' going on. lol. As you were.
1 -
Wynterbourne wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »CiaraCatch wrote: »Mavrick_RN wrote: »Just a reminder: muscle is NOT heavier than fat. That is a fact.
Yes, it is. When we say one substance is heavier than another, the assumption is that we're talking about equal volumes, otherwise it's meaningless. In the same way that lead is heavier than cheese, muscle is heavier than fat.
Huh?
Muscle is more dense and takes up less space than fat, but a pound is a pound no matter how you weigh it.
When ever any substance is said to weigh more than something else it is always a given that we are talking about the same cubic volume. You never see anyone arguing, "No, Lead is not heavier than feathers. A pound of lead is the same as a pound of feathers." Of course a pound is a pound, but we are talking about the same volume! You compare the same volume. YES, muscle (the same volume by default) is indeed heavier than fat. I will never understand why it is only these two items that anyone ever refuses to compare at the same cubic volume. Everything else they do.
But....here is an OP saying she's gained 35 pounds, and another poster comes in and says:Also if you are exercising it could be muscle weight which is heavier than fat...
But my comments about weight and volume was in response to this:Mavrick_RN wrote: »Just a reminder: muscle is NOT heavier than fat. That is a fact.
I wasn't addressing the '35 pounds' comment specifically, however, If you took measurements of yourself, say one year apart, and you had the exact same measurements, but weighed say 5 pounds more, than yes, that would probably be due to muscle gain. That is not what my statement was addressing though. All I was arguing was that the statement that 'it is an absolute fact that muscle isn't heavier than fat', without regards to volume, is erroneous. It's a misconception that has gone on for far too long because people continue to ignore the basis for comparison. Which is identical volumes.
I understand, but the response of the poster you quoted said appeared to be in response to the poster who said the weight gain could be muscle.
Ahhh.... a bit of the 'quote inception' going on. lol. As you were.
I'm not sure what you mean by this remark. As you were.
1 -
I heard that regular thyroid tests do not test the functionality of your parathyroid which, if not functioning properly, can cause weight gain. I'm having mine checked Tuesday. I'm in the same boat. Also I have a huge cyst on an ovary which is screwing with my horomones also causing unintentional weight gain. Love being a woman...0
-
This content has been removed.
-
While I didn't gain as dramatically as you have, I have experience with gaining weight while dieting and exercising. At the time, I only had a cup of coffee for breakfast (the same cup of coffee I've always had) and I didn't change how I ate dinner (to the best of my knowledge). I decreased my lunch - eating more healthy things (fruit, veggies, yogurt), rather than chips, cookies and a sandwich - and gained 20 pounds. I went back to my old diet and the weight gain stopped, but I didn't lose either.
More recently, I began exercising quite a bit more and I've been more accurately keeping track of my calories. I've also been eating breakfast (more than coffee) and a reasonable lunch. This time, I've been able to lose 30 pounds, putting me down 10 pounds from what I was when I first tried dieting.
I know there will be people here who will say that I must have been eating more than I realized. I have no answer for them. I didn't keep records about my food intake at that time. All I can say is that I know I was eating less at lunch. I wasn't one of those people who sat down and said, "I'm eating healthy. That means I can have tons of healthy food." I'd have about 1 stalk of celery chopped up and half a cup of grapes or cherries, with my 100 calorie yogurt. Does that really have more calories than a ham and cheese sandwich, 3 oreos and a bag of chips?
Anyway, getting back to the point: I'm not going to tell you to eat more. I will say that you should make sure you eat breakfast in the morning (it'll take away from what you can eat later in the day, but it might help in other ways). I'd also make sure to be careful and accurate with logging what you're eating and your exercise. See if that helps you in anyway.
At the same time... I'd get a second opinion from the doctor - possibly from a different doctor. There may be something medical going on.
It would be unbelievably easy for you to make up 300-400 calories without even knowing it at dinnertime, if you're not closely measuring your portions. An extra splash of olive oil can easily add 50 calories alone, or half a tablespoon of butter, or an extra ounce of dry pasta is 100 calories, or an extra half cup of steamed corn with no toppings is nearly 100 calories....the list goes on and on. It's not about saying "I ate less at lunch so I can eat more at dinner", it's about how easy it is to add extra calories when you're not approximating and if you're hungrier, you'll naturally get a bigger portion unless you're actively working against it. A little extra food there, a negligible amount of extra topping there, an extra serving of healthy vegetables, half a scoop of ice cream, a can of Coke....it's so easy to make up the caloric difference and then some when you're not paying attention.3 -
CiaraCatch wrote: »Both are true. By your reckoning we can never, ever say that any one substance is heavier than another, which limits us somewhat.
Weight is indeed weight, and is independent of the size of an object. The physics definition is: W = m X g, where m = mass (an object's resistance to acceleration) and g = the force of gravity. That's why a 100kg person on Earth would only weigh 16.5kg on the Moon, and 38kg on Mars. Density is defined as mass per unit volume, or informally weight per unit volume.
That's the formal definition which anyone can look up in a high school physics textbook. Not that clarifying things matters, because by next week there will be two or three threads on here arguing the same thing over again. The interwebs have no memory.
3 -
The day she went to the cardiologist, my friend was admitted to the hospital for a triple bypass. The reason she's been gaining weight was retaining water due to a serious heart condition.
If it were me, I'd definitely get it looked into further. Suddenly putting on 5lb/week sounds like either a medical problem, or the result of some change in medications.
I went into the hospital while on vacation three and a half years ago to have my gall bladder removed. I was in the hospital for five days because I'm on blood thinners, and they had to get my clotting factor up before they could operate. I had two IVs in at all times during the five day stay.
When I checked out of the hospital, I couldn't put on my pants and the staff had to get some "big boy" pants from the lost and found. I had put on over 20 lbs in four days -- all of it water retention. After I got back home, I asked my doctor about it and he said there was no way to speed up the loss of water, because this kind of water weight was held in the spaces between my cells so diuretics wouldn't affect it. It took a week or so for the weight to come off -- the fastest I've ever lost weight or gained weight, and it was all water.2 -
Pu-leeeeeeze. If you are talking about WEIGHT, it does not automatically mean you are talking about volume. These are two different properties. A pound of feathers, a pound of fat, and a pound of muscle are going to weigh ONE POUND.diannethegeek wrote: »CiaraCatch wrote: »Mavrick_RN wrote: »Just a reminder: muscle is NOT heavier than fat. That is a fact.
Yes, it is. When we say one substance is heavier than another, the assumption is that we're talking about equal volumes, otherwise it's meaningless. In the same way that lead is heavier than cheese, muscle is heavier than fat.
No, muscle is more DENSE than fat. 1 pound of muscle still equals 1 pound of fat, but the pound of muscle will take up less space.
No, muscle is more DENSE than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle still equals 1 cubic inch of fat, but the cubic inch of muscle will weigh more.
You are most definitely going to need different sized containers for each, but they will weigh precisely one pound.0 -
This may be an unpopular response but relying solely on calorie deficit does not work for everyone. The thyroid regulates many things in the body that people aren't even aware of, metabolism is just one of the things that it can affect. My first suggestion is to have your thyroid levels checked and not just the TSH that a normal doctor would check as that number can be in normal range and you could still be suffering from a thyroid disorder. I have been where you are and after three years and multiple doctors I was diagnosed with Autoimmune Hashimoto's Thyroiditis. I am finally getting better and have my levels optimized enough that I am starting to lose some weight but not nearly what I should at the calorie deficits that I have. If you have any questions feel free to message me.0
-
This may be an unpopular response but relying solely on calorie deficit does not work for everyone. The thyroid regulates many things in the body that people aren't even aware of, metabolism is just one of the things that it can affect. My first suggestion is to have your thyroid levels checked and not just the TSH that a normal doctor would check as that number can be in normal range and you could still be suffering from a thyroid disorder. I have been where you are and after three years and multiple doctors I was diagnosed with Autoimmune Hashimoto's Thyroiditis. I am finally getting better and have my levels optimized enough that I am starting to lose some weight but not nearly what I should at the calorie deficits that I have. If you have any questions feel free to message me.
The OP said that their thyroid is fine, according to an endocrinologist.
The BMR and TDEE calculators are estimates of calories burned based on population averages. Not losing weight at a rate that you are expecting is an indication that you did not have the calorie deficit that you had hoped for. It does not mean that having a calorie deficit does not work for you; it just means that you have found that for you personally, these average numbers are higher than the number of calories your body truly burns. Good on you for your determination through your medical complications, I wish you all the best with your weight loss journey.
I do agree though that the OP should consult a doctor if they are gaining 5lb per week. Such a consistent gain would indicate that they are eating considerably more than just little inaccuracies from logging their food incorrectly as it would average out to eating about 2,500 calories above their maintenance level every single day. Even if their maintenance level is a bit lower than average, this still means they are consuming a lot of extra calories. So it seems worthwhile to check if anything is going on medically.
0 -
This may be an unpopular response but relying solely on calorie deficit does not work for everyone. The thyroid regulates many things in the body that people aren't even aware of, metabolism is just one of the things that it can affect. My first suggestion is to have your thyroid levels checked and not just the TSH that a normal doctor would check as that number can be in normal range and you could still be suffering from a thyroid disorder. I have been where you are and after three years and multiple doctors I was diagnosed with Autoimmune Hashimoto's Thyroiditis. I am finally getting better and have my levels optimized enough that I am starting to lose some weight but not nearly what I should at the calorie deficits that I have. If you have any questions feel free to message me.
The OP said that their thyroid is fine, according to an endocrinologist.
The BMR and TDEE calculators are estimates of calories burned based on population averages. Not losing weight at a rate that you are expecting is an indication that you did not have the calorie deficit that you had hoped for. It does not mean that having a calorie deficit does not work for you; it just means that you have found that for you personally, these average numbers are higher than the number of calories your body truly burns. Good on you for your determination through your medical complications, I wish you all the best with your weight loss journey.
I do agree though that the OP should consult a doctor if they are gaining 5lb per week. Such a consistent gain would indicate that they are eating considerably more than just little inaccuracies from logging their food incorrectly as it would average out to eating about 2,500 calories above their maintenance level every single day. Even if their maintenance level is a bit lower than average, this still means they are consuming a lot of extra calories. So it seems worthwhile to check if anything is going on medically.
Based on the numbers in the OP, I doubt that it has been 5lb/week consistently for 6 months:nutmegoreo wrote: »5 pounds a week for 6 months? I'd be knocking down lots of doctors doors.....you'd have to consume SO many extra calories to do that.
I actually did the math on this, for the OP to have gained 5lb/week for 6 months (130lbs total) and for that to equal 36% of her body weight gained, she would have started at 360lb, and would currently be 490lb. I'm going to guess that the picture in the avi is not a 490lb woman.
If the OP were to have started at 150lb and gained 36% of her weight over 6 months, that would be 9lb/month, which could be done with overeating, but it would be a lot of overeating to get there.
TL;DR - insufficient data
1 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »This may be an unpopular response but relying solely on calorie deficit does not work for everyone. The thyroid regulates many things in the body that people aren't even aware of, metabolism is just one of the things that it can affect. My first suggestion is to have your thyroid levels checked and not just the TSH that a normal doctor would check as that number can be in normal range and you could still be suffering from a thyroid disorder. I have been where you are and after three years and multiple doctors I was diagnosed with Autoimmune Hashimoto's Thyroiditis. I am finally getting better and have my levels optimized enough that I am starting to lose some weight but not nearly what I should at the calorie deficits that I have. If you have any questions feel free to message me.
The OP said that their thyroid is fine, according to an endocrinologist.
The BMR and TDEE calculators are estimates of calories burned based on population averages. Not losing weight at a rate that you are expecting is an indication that you did not have the calorie deficit that you had hoped for. It does not mean that having a calorie deficit does not work for you; it just means that you have found that for you personally, these average numbers are higher than the number of calories your body truly burns. Good on you for your determination through your medical complications, I wish you all the best with your weight loss journey.
I do agree though that the OP should consult a doctor if they are gaining 5lb per week. Such a consistent gain would indicate that they are eating considerably more than just little inaccuracies from logging their food incorrectly as it would average out to eating about 2,500 calories above their maintenance level every single day. Even if their maintenance level is a bit lower than average, this still means they are consuming a lot of extra calories. So it seems worthwhile to check if anything is going on medically.
Based on the numbers in the OP, I doubt that it has been 5lb/week consistently for 6 months:nutmegoreo wrote: »5 pounds a week for 6 months? I'd be knocking down lots of doctors doors.....you'd have to consume SO many extra calories to do that.
I actually did the math on this, for the OP to have gained 5lb/week for 6 months (130lbs total) and for that to equal 36% of her body weight gained, she would have started at 360lb, and would currently be 490lb. I'm going to guess that the picture in the avi is not a 490lb woman.
If the OP were to have started at 150lb and gained 36% of her weight over 6 months, that would be 9lb/month, which could be done with overeating, but it would be a lot of overeating to get there.
TL;DR - insufficient data
I agree, inconceivable. She has not returned to set the story straight. I think it was hyperbole!!2
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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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