Calorie in Calorie out
MrsKila
Posts: 320 Member
I have been reading multiple posts. And most of them seem to indicate that nothing else could possibly scientifically assist in weight loss except for the fact of "Calorie in/Calorie out". For those who feel that this is the "only" way weight is loss please explain to me if you are weighing your food, logging everything you put in your mouth, not eating back all of your exercise calories, and have researched and know what your macros should be, how can you not lose weight for 3 months? Oh, and have been to the doctors and not diagnosed with anything. Also, if the answer is plateau, then please explain how this is possible if the only factor that counts is Calorie in/Calorie out. Thank you for your help with this.
0
Replies
-
I think instead of your regular MD you would do better by seeing a nutritionist or a dietitian. They can measure your metabolism with a device that collects your exhalations (I don't know the science behind it, but it works) and then calculate from there exactly what your basal metabolic rate is and what your true caloric needs are. Then they help you build a good food plan based on that number. What MFP estimates to be your metabolism may not actually be accurate for you.3
-
Estimates.
Calories in: All you can do is get as close as possible with your calorie intake estimate. It will never be exact. You might have incorrect data, calories that you forgot to log, cheat days, etc. You might think you are consuming an average of 1200 calories but actually be consuming 1500 or even more.
Calories out: You can't know exactly how many calories you are burning. You might think you are burning 500 calories but only be burning 200.
Maintenance point: Online calculators for things like BMR and TDEE are estimates based on averages. Once you record your personal data as accurately as possible, you may find that you have higher or lower numbers than expected from those online calculators.
If you have been at a plateau for months, you are consuming an equal amount of calories to what your body is using. Your body can't pull energy out of the air. The energy to run your body systems comes from what you eat and your body if you are eating at a deficit.11 -
Have you started any new meds? Sometimes these can cause water retention.
I also would go get checked out by a dr.0 -
I have been reading multiple posts. And most of them seem to indicate that nothing else could possibly scientifically assist in weight loss except for the fact of "Calorie in/Calorie out". For those who feel that this is the "only" way weight is loss please explain to me if you are weighing your food, logging everything you put in your mouth, not eating back all of your exercise calories, and have researched and know what your macros should be, how can you not lose weight for 3 months? Oh, and have been to the doctors and not diagnosed with anything. Also, if the answer is plateau, then please explain how this is possible if the only factor that counts is Calorie in/Calorie out. Thank you for your help with this.
There's really only three possibilities:
1. You're wrong about your calories in. Maybe by neglecting something, maybe by other errors.
2. You're wrong about your calories out. All TDEE calculators are only accurate at the population level; an individual may be higher or lower than predicted. Exercise burns may be inflated by even more than you think.
3. You actually are losing weight, but your weight data is too inaccurate (or has too few data points) to see it. A slow rate of loss can easily be masked by water fluctuations if you have only a few data points over those three months, but if you're weighing daily at the same time in the same conditions and your trend line is flat, that isn't the issue.
Energy balance is a physical necessity. Every calorie your body expends, be it to move around or just to keep itself alive, must come from somewhere - physics won't let you get energy from nowhere.11 -
rankinsect wrote: »3. You actually are losing weight, but your weight data is too inaccurate (or has too few data points) to see it. A slow rate of loss can easily be masked by water fluctuations if you have only a few data points over those three months, but if you're weighing daily at the same time in the same conditions and your trend line is flat, that isn't the issue.
Are you using www.weightgrapher.com (or similar: for example happy scale for iphone, libra for android, or my own preference www.trendweight.com) to track your weight trend over time?
Unless you have daily weight ins under the same conditions and preferably on a scale that is positioned on solid ground (not carpet or something yielding) it will be hard to track very small changes.
1 -
To add 4. You are making enough small logging errors to impact on any or all losses. There are a lot of incorrect entries in the database as it is largely user created. Make sure to cross reference entries with package information/USDA information and never use generic entries for things like spaghetti sauce, lasagne etc, create your own recipes with the recipe builder.2
-
I have been reading multiple posts. And most of them seem to indicate that nothing else could possibly scientifically assist in weight loss except for the fact of "Calorie in/Calorie out". For those who feel that this is the "only" way weight is loss please explain to me if you are weighing your food, logging everything you put in your mouth, not eating back all of your exercise calories, and have researched and know what your macros should be, how can you not lose weight for 3 months? Oh, and have been to the doctors and not diagnosed with anything. Also, if the answer is plateau, then please explain how this is possible if the only factor that counts is Calorie in/Calorie out. Thank you for your help with this.
you are eating more than you think (choosing incorrect entries, not logging everything as it is easy to forget)
and/or
Over estimating calorie burns
CICO is science. If you haven't lost any weight...at all period...but in 3 months your weight has to have moved either up or down.2 -
Yes, I log everything that goes in my mouth and I use a food scale make sure my portion sizes are accurate. I eat back no more than 50% of my exercise calories but usually don't eat them back at all. The weight is coming off.0
-
I have been reading multiple posts. And most of them seem to indicate that nothing else could possibly scientifically assist in weight loss except for the fact of "Calorie in/Calorie out". For those who feel that this is the "only" way weight is loss please explain to me if you are weighing your food, logging everything you put in your mouth, not eating back all of your exercise calories, and have researched and know what your macros should be, how can you not lose weight for 3 months? Oh, and have been to the doctors and not diagnosed with anything. Also, if the answer is plateau, then please explain how this is possible if the only factor that counts is Calorie in/Calorie out. Thank you for your help with this.
Something that you may consider is switching from the MFP model of calculating calories to a TDEE model (TDEE would incorporate exerice and you would eat the same thing daily). In the end, there is a feedback loop where you have to adjust calories based on actual results.
If you want to open your food log, we can take a look.
Also, do you have any medical conditions, such as PCOS, diabetes, etc..? Because they can effect the results.1 -
I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?3 -
battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.2 -
The first thing I would do is open my diary and ask others to take a look at it to see if any inaccuracies are causing me to be eating more than I think I am. A second set of eyes will catch things that we might not see as being inaccurate.2
-
battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?0 -
battyfitch wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?
accurate logging is logging solids by grams...if you are going to speak to logging accurately and choosing correct entries then the accurate logging is done by grams for butter.
Mentioning tbsp in regards to a solid muddies the waters.4 -
MFP really needs an eye roll emoji.12
-
battyfitch wrote: »MFP really needs an eye roll emoji.
I agree...2 -
battyfitch wrote: »MFP really needs an eye roll emoji.
I concur.3 -
9_9 this will have to do for now.3
-
you are eating more than you think (choosing incorrect entries, not logging everything as it is easy to forget)
and/or
Over estimating calorie burns
CICO is science. If you haven't lost any weight...at all period...but in 3 months your weight has to have moved either up or down.
This. Unless you're one of the X-men and your superpower is defying physics, your numbers are off.
Nothing we do is exact. If it's not working, you tweak it until it works (eat less, stop eating back exercise cals, weigh more carefully, etc.)
Are you counting all your liquid calories?
0 -
I have been reading multiple posts. And most of them seem to indicate that nothing else could possibly scientifically assist in weight loss except for the fact of "Calorie in/Calorie out". For those who feel that this is the "only" way weight is loss please explain to me if you are weighing your food, logging everything you put in your mouth, not eating back all of your exercise calories, and have researched and know what your macros should be, how can you not lose weight for 3 months? Oh, and have been to the doctors and not diagnosed with anything. Also, if the answer is plateau, then please explain how this is possible if the only factor that counts is Calorie in/Calorie out. Thank you for your help with this.
you are eating more than you think (choosing incorrect entries, not logging everything as it is easy to forget)
and/or
Over estimating calorie burns
CICO is science. If you haven't lost any weight...at all period...but in 3 months your weight has to have moved either up or down.
This 1000%0 -
battyfitch wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?
You shouldn't log butter anyway. Gary Taubes said you can eat all the butter you want and not gain weight.
again 9_9...seriously it has significant calories in it...1 -
battyfitch wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?
You shouldn't log butter anyway. Gary Taubes said you can eat all the butter you want and not gain weight.
This is ridiculous, not sure who Gary Taubes is but that is bad advice that will drastically affect your weight.2 -
battyfitch wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?
You shouldn't log butter anyway. Gary Taubes said you can eat all the butter you want and not gain weight.
again 9_9...seriously it has significant calories in it...CasperNaegle wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?
You shouldn't log butter anyway. Gary Taubes said you can eat all the butter you want and not gain weight.
This is ridiculous, not sure who Gary Taubes is but that is bad advice that will drastically affect your weight.
Pretty sure he/she was being sarcastic.8 -
I have been reading multiple posts. And most of them seem to indicate that nothing else could possibly scientifically assist in weight loss except for the fact of "Calorie in/Calorie out". For those who feel that this is the "only" way weight is loss please explain to me if you are weighing your food, logging everything you put in your mouth, not eating back all of your exercise calories, and have researched and know what your macros should be, how can you not lose weight for 3 months? Oh, and have been to the doctors and not diagnosed with anything. Also, if the answer is plateau, then please explain how this is possible if the only factor that counts is Calorie in/Calorie out. Thank you for your help with this.
Yes. It's the only scientifically supportable manner, due to physics. The mechanics behind it are flexible (keto/weight watchers/whatever), it still boils down to CICO.
I logged everything that goes in my mouth, aside from water. I eat back some of my exercise cals, sometimes.
As far as you not losing weight, then one of two options:
* You are overestimating your TDEE
* You are underestimating your intake
* Combination of the above 2.1 -
All the parts of the CICO equation are just estimates. You can't really know the true value of either calories in OR calories out.
Calories in:
It's been shown that gut bacteria mean that different people actually extract different amounts of energy from the same foods. Preparing some foods in different ways actually changes the amount of energy we can extract from them. And all calorie counts are based on one specific way of measuring the energy in the foods. On top of that, if you're eating packaged foods and relying on corporate calorie calculations, those calculations aren't required to be 100% accurate AND packaged food portions are often bigger than the amount on the box.
Calories out:
Metabolisms vary, and different people burn different numbers of calories doing the same basic activities.
So: You've got to figure out through trial and error what those CI and CO values actually are for you.3 -
battyfitch wrote: »MFP really needs an eye roll emoji.
@.@ this is my eyeroll0 -
One thing that no one has mentioned… If you went from losing to not losing – reaching a plateau – it could because the same amount of activity burns less calories.
Taking a basic thing like walking: When I was 187 pounds, I was effectively carrying that weight with me while I walked. Now that I’m 150 pounds, walking the same way burns less calories, because I’ve dropped the 37 pound weight that I was carrying everywhere I went. That means, in order to continue burning calories at the same rate as before, I have to increase something with regards to my exercise: amount or speed or start carrying a backpack with a 37 pound load.3 -
battyfitch wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?
You shouldn't log butter anyway. Gary Taubes said you can eat all the butter you want and not gain weight.
again 9_9...seriously it has significant calories in it...CasperNaegle wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »battyfitch wrote: »I'd double and triple check the food entries you're using are accurate. I think a lot of people use the lowest one they can find - like, I'll see people logging 2 tbsp butter at 37 calories or whatever when in reality 2 tablespoons of butter would be over 200 calories. Do that a few times a week, plus a few other inaccurate entries and it can add up to enough to stall losses, especially if you're aiming to 0.5-1lbs a week.
Other than that, I dunno. Scientific marvel? Alien?
actually butter should be logged by Grams.
2tbsp of butter or appx 30grams.
Ok?
You shouldn't log butter anyway. Gary Taubes said you can eat all the butter you want and not gain weight.
This is ridiculous, not sure who Gary Taubes is but that is bad advice that will drastically affect your weight.
Pretty sure he/she was being sarcastic.
no not sure he was..I google Gary whats his face and he has books on dieting
http://www.dietdoctor.com/diet-advice-that-ignores-hunger
http://garytaubes.com/2010/12/calories-fat-or-carbohydrates/0 -
So: You've got to figure out through trial and error what those CI and CO values actually are for you.
Bingo. This is really your only relevant answer. If you aren't losing weight, than you need to make adjustments to what you are doing: lower your calorie goal and calories in, re-evaluate how you are logging food, stop logging in exercise calories and eating them back... something. The definition of insanity is doing the same things over and over again expecting different results. Weight loss (and even maintenance) is an exercise in trial and error. You try things until you find things that work. If what you are doing isn't working, why not make changes?
First thing I'd recommend is to stop logging exercise calorie burns and eating them back. People ALWAYS over-estimate the number of calories they burn exercising. Unless you are an Olympic athlete, you are burning on the lowest end of that scale. I promise. I always under log my exercise (today I went for over and hour but only logged in 50 minutes) and I will NOT be eating my exercise calories back. I'll stay within my food goal, because I already have my meals for the day planned out, including snacks.
Start from scratch, re-evaluate, and try to mix up your plan with new ways to measure, log, track, and estimate your calories in AND out. You'll get there, it just takes work and trial and error. We've all been there.
Good luck!
1 -
I put "a little 1% milk" in my coffee. Turns out its about 3 oz. 3/8 of a cup. 40 calories. Its the same for 2 TBSP of half and half, which has the same effect. So, 3 cups per day, 120 calories there, 30 days....that's either a pound gained or a pound not lost. IF you're not tracking it.
Track and enter EVERYTHING!
4
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
- 232.6K 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