Calories . . . .

laurenlees86
Posts: 10 Member
Hi All,
I have been on a weight loss journey now since January and have dropped 15g so far
YAY!! I have now been working with an online personal trainer in a bid to gain lean muscle and drop the last bit of belly fat which is proving impossible. I am currently 50kg and am 5ft 2". For months I wasn't really counting calories but was following a high protein low carb eating plan. The PT I am working with started me out on 1250 cals per day (125g protein / no less that 28g of fat per day and the rest carbs. After around 7 weeks of following this programme we're now starting on a reverse diet and have increased my calories to 1350 with the additional calls coming in mainly from carbs. The problem is is that I have now totally plateau'd and have seen no results in many weeks. I am actually worried that I may not be eating enough and wanted your opinion. I do four days of weight training a week and hitt 4 / 5 times a week. . . I am also particularly worried as I have now not had a period for a few months (and no I'm not pregnant). Any advice would be really wonderful.
Thanks,
I have been on a weight loss journey now since January and have dropped 15g so far

Thanks,
0
Replies
-
15g?0
-
@ the stats you have given 1350 is your maintenance - balance will not move and body wise the progress will be slow.1
-
Eish - that's supposed to read 15kg . . .Given my activity levels fitness pall works out that my maint level is 1860?!0
-
correct - because it factors in the activity and eventually you need to deduct your workouts / activity to get to a net calories. i.e. - 1860 calories from food - 400/500 calories workout = 1350 net calories.0
-
The answer to a plateau is never to eat more. You need to be careful and wary of online personal trainers, or even many in person, because they do not need any form of degree or study to qualify to be a personal trainer.
With that being said, do you use a food scale to track your calories? If you are stalling for a few months, you are simply eating more than you think. To lose fat, you need a calorie deficit. So to be adding more calories is not doing much good currently in losing weight.2 -
Ahhh i see Thatnks Abadvat.
Vespiquenn for the last 2 months I have been tracking everything I eat and have been weighing everything religiously.. . . .I haven't been eating anything over 1250 and now 1350 and working my butt off in the gym
0 -
is your trainer considering you still on a cut and not realised you are maintaining?
My suggestion - increase a couple of 100 cals - you will see muscles slowly popping and BF reaming stable if you keep at it.0 -
correct - because it factors in the activity and eventually you need to deduct your workouts / activity to get to a net calories. i.e. - 1860 calories from food - 400/500 calories workout = 1350 net calories.
I do not think you understand what maintenance calories are. Her maintenance is ~1850 at very active based on a calculator I just ran. Exercise would actually be added to maintain her weight. So 1850 plus exercise (est 200 a day) would be 2050. To maintain her current weight, she would need to eat that. To lose .5lbs a week, she would deduct 250 cals a day to be at 1800 a day. So that 1350 number you are giving her is not maintenance.
With that being said OP, opening up your diary for folks to take a look could be greatly benefitial. If you are being honest with yourself, weighing all your food on a scale (not measuring cups), and have not seen weight loss, something is amiss. Aside from medical conditions, you should be seeing downwards movement. How long has it been since the last time you even lost any weight?
0 -
is your trainer considering you still on a cut and not realised you are maintaining?
My suggestion - increase a couple of 100 cals - you will see muscles slowly popping and BF reaming stable if you keep at it.
Also, if she is not losing, adding calories is not going to help. That's not how the science of this works.
2 -
vespiquenn wrote: »correct - because it factors in the activity and eventually you need to deduct your workouts / activity to get to a net calories. i.e. - 1860 calories from food - 400/500 calories workout = 1350 net calories.
I do not think you understand what maintenance calories are. Her maintenance is ~1850 at very active based on a calculator I just ran. Exercise would actually be added to maintain her weight. So 1850 plus exercise (est 200 a day) would be 2050. To maintain her current weight, she would need to eat that. To lose .5lbs a week, she would deduct 250 cals a day to be at 1800 a day. So that 1350 number you are giving her is not maintenance.
With that being said OP, opening up your diary for folks to take a look could be greatly benefitial. If you are being honest with yourself, weighing all your food on a scale (not measuring cups), and have not seen weight loss, something is amiss. Aside from medical conditions, you should be seeing downwards movement. How long has it been since the last time you even lost any weight?
at 50KG a maintenance of 1850 is with activity levels factored in.0 -
vespiquenn wrote: »correct - because it factors in the activity and eventually you need to deduct your workouts / activity to get to a net calories. i.e. - 1860 calories from food - 400/500 calories workout = 1350 net calories.
I do not think you understand what maintenance calories are. Her maintenance is ~1850 at very active based on a calculator I just ran. Exercise would actually be added to maintain her weight. So 1850 plus exercise (est 200 a day) would be 2050. To maintain her current weight, she would need to eat that. To lose .5lbs a week, she would deduct 250 cals a day to be at 1800 a day. So that 1350 number you are giving her is not maintenance.
With that being said OP, opening up your diary for folks to take a look could be greatly benefitial. If you are being honest with yourself, weighing all your food on a scale (not measuring cups), and have not seen weight loss, something is amiss. Aside from medical conditions, you should be seeing downwards movement. How long has it been since the last time you even lost any weight?
at 50KG a maintenance of 1850 is with activity levels factored in.
Remember that activity levels are daily activity, not exercise. Exercise is applied after. Even then, what you stated still makes no sense. I think you confused a few things such as maintenance calories and TDEE, which TDEE is everything plus exercise, which is not what we are discussing at the moment. Maintenance is the calories needed for the individual to maintain their current weight. If they were deducting exercise calories from that, obviously they would lose. So I'm not sure where you are getting a net of 1350 for OP to maintain weight.
Eta: Also, OP, how much are you looking to lose? You are already on the lowish end of the BMI scale.
0 -
Hi all - at 1350 my trainer is considering me on a reverse diet. I haven't seen the scales budge in maybe a month or so but I have been gaining strength each week on my strength training. I am at a point now though where I am literally always hungry
I shall open up my diary for you all now hang on
0 -
If I did the calculation right, you are 110 pounds. How much more are you trying to lose?0
-
never used a site to calculate my calories and macros but using formulas that have been out there for declines 10/12 cals /LBS for a cut
12/14 cals /LBS for maintaining
14/16 / LBS to bulk as a ruff guesstimate
lower ends being mostly applied to women - higher ends to men.
Figures are ballpark to set you up and eventually it is up to you, based on experience to adjust.
1 -
never used a site to calculate my calories and macros but using formulas that have been out there for declines 10/12 cals /LBS for a cut
12/14 cals /LBS for maintaining
14/16 / LBS to bulk as a ruff guesstimate
lower ends being mostly applied to women - higher ends to men.
Figures are ballpark to set you up and eventually it is up to you, based on experience to adjust.
But once again, what you applied to maintenance calories still makes no sense. OP was correct in calculating her maintenance calories. So I'm not sure what your point is? Spreading false or misinformation to a new user does more harm than good, especially when they were correct in the first place.
Also, that formula doesn't take height or activity into consideration. Estimates that vary that greatly have no place in a field that requires as much precision as possible, at least in the beginning, even with experience and time to tweak. It might have worked for you, but it isn't accurate enough to give to new users as a baseline when there are other variables to take into account. Down the road when you do have a grasp on it, as you said, is fine. But it's not accurate enough to start out.1 -
Hi Dnarules - well i still have belly fat . . . . so I don't know . . . . I'm really stuck as to what to do really0
-
laurenlees86 wrote: »Hi Dnarules - well i still have belly fat . . . . so I don't know . . . . I'm really stuck as to what to do really
Did you go into settings to make your diary public? It is not public for me, but I am on the app and it picks and chooses what diaries it wants to see.
But I would normally suggest a recomposition, which you would eat at maintenance and do a progressive lifting program, but I think figuring out the logging first is important.
Also, when you say you haven't lost in a month, does this mean absolutely 0lbs lost, or that you still lost any amount of weight like .2lbs? Typically a month isn't long enough to be quite concerned yet at no loss because of water retention, especially if the intensity is upped.0 -
Hiya - everything should now be public. There's a few days last week I didn't log as I was sick but everything else is to the absolute point. I have't shifted and LB's in a maybe just over a month . . . I haven't been eating back any calories i've burned during work outs . . . So I guess my net cal's have perhaps been too low? My trainer said I shouldn't be eating back any cal's burned . . .0
-
laurenlees86 wrote: »Hiya - everything should now be public. There's a few days last week I didn't log as I was sick but everything else is to the absolute point. I have't shifted and LB's in a maybe just over a month . . . I haven't been eating back any calories i've burned during work outs . . . So I guess my net cal's have perhaps been too low? My trainer said I shouldn't be eating back any cal's burned . . .
Just looking through quickly, I'm seeing things like medium apples and very very precise grams. Things like 120 g of yogurt, 170 g rice, etc. I know I already asked, but when you say that you weigh food, are you using a SCALE and not measuring cups? I find it hard to believe that every single entry is even numbers, except for chocolate, which seems to vary.
But once again, no, your calories are not too low to be losing weight. That's not how it works. If you truly are eating less than you are burning, you would lose (unless a medical condition is involved).0 -
Yes I weigh everything using a scale . . . . oh I'm worried now0
-
I would suggest a FULL thyroid panel. Not just a TSH (which won't tell you crud). Free T3, Free T4, antibodies (TPO), Reverse T3, and TSH. When I get stuck, I find it's usually my thyroid needing adjusting. You don't say how old you are, but it's not uncommon as a woman gets older for the thyroid to not function as well. Mine crashed when I was 40. Most people function optimally at a TSH of 1-1.5 (NOT up to 5.0 as doctors suggest). FT3 and FT4 are best in the upper 1/3 of the lab range. Stop The Thyroid Madness website is a good guide to use for dealing with this issue. Given what you're saying about weight loss, it would be worth the blood test. It's easy, non-invasive, and may give you some answers.1
-
Thanks ronjsteele1 - I'm 300
-
laurenlees86 wrote: »Yes I weigh everything using a scale . . . . oh I'm worried now
You may be eating more than you think - in a really quick glance, your apples, bananas and eggs don't appear to be weighed and all of those can add up when you are working with a small deficit. Try tightening up your logging and see if you don't get better results.0 -
hmmm ok thanks RAinWA0
-
vespiquenn wrote: »laurenlees86 wrote: »Hiya - everything should now be public. There's a few days last week I didn't log as I was sick but everything else is to the absolute point. I have't shifted and LB's in a maybe just over a month . . . I haven't been eating back any calories i've burned during work outs . . . So I guess my net cal's have perhaps been too low? My trainer said I shouldn't be eating back any cal's burned . . .
Just looking through quickly, I'm seeing things like medium apples and very very precise grams. Things like 120 g of yogurt, 170 g rice, etc. I know I already asked, but when you say that you weigh food, are you using a SCALE and not measuring cups? I find it hard to believe that every single entry is even numbers, except for chocolate, which seems to vary.
But once again, no, your calories are not too low to be losing weight. That's not how it works. If you truly are eating less than you are burning, you would lose (unless a medical condition is involved).
I see these precise grams as well. The medium apple is always the same medium @ 80 calories, and the protein powder does not look weighed at all.
OP, because 1300-1350 calories is low on the spectrum and needing to get everything down to exacts, and at an already lean weight of 110 pounds, this is where logging needs to be precise. There could easily be additional 100+ calories.
And you not having a period for several months is a bit alarming to me as well. This can be caused by overtraining, hormonal changes like thyroid, adrenal (there is an imbalance going on that may need to be looked at by your MD or OB/GYN). Any thing you can add about this part?0 -
vespiquenn wrote: »laurenlees86 wrote: »Hiya - everything should now be public. There's a few days last week I didn't log as I was sick but everything else is to the absolute point. I have't shifted and LB's in a maybe just over a month . . . I haven't been eating back any calories i've burned during work outs . . . So I guess my net cal's have perhaps been too low? My trainer said I shouldn't be eating back any cal's burned . . .
Just looking through quickly, I'm seeing things like medium apples and very very precise grams. Things like 120 g of yogurt, 170 g rice, etc. I know I already asked, but when you say that you weigh food, are you using a SCALE and not measuring cups? I find it hard to believe that every single entry is even numbers, except for chocolate, which seems to vary.
But once again, no, your calories are not too low to be losing weight. That's not how it works. If you truly are eating less than you are burning, you would lose (unless a medical condition is involved).
I see these precise grams as well. The medium apple is always the same medium @ 80 calories, and the protein powder does not look weighed at all.
OP, because 1300-1350 calories is low on the spectrum and needing to get everything down to exacts, and at an already lean weight of 110 pounds, this is where logging needs to be precise. There could easily be additional 100+ calories.
And you not having a period for several months is a bit alarming to me as well. This can be caused by overtraining, hormonal changes like thyroid, adrenal (there is an imbalance going on that may need to be looked at by your MD or OB/GYN). Any thing you can add about this part?
I actually missed the lack of period completely.
Yeah OP, it might be worth going and getting checked out at a doctor to make try thing is in check. I suspect that the weighing is not precise, but that lack of period can be something very simple or an underlying condition. Better to get it checked out and have it be an easy fix rather than something going unchecked.
0 -
I can assure you that the protein and everything (bar the apple) is weighed. I am actually obsessively anal about it - much to the annoyance of my boyfriend hehe.0
-
laurenlees86 wrote: »I can assure you that the protein and everything (bar the apple) is weighed. I am actually obsessively anal about it - much to the annoyance of my boyfriend hehe.
If you do weigh it then your log should reflect that. My 'medium' apples average about 120 calories.0 -
vespiquenn wrote: »vespiquenn wrote: »correct - because it factors in the activity and eventually you need to deduct your workouts / activity to get to a net calories. i.e. - 1860 calories from food - 400/500 calories workout = 1350 net calories.
I do not think you understand what maintenance calories are. Her maintenance is ~1850 at very active based on a calculator I just ran. Exercise would actually be added to maintain her weight. So 1850 plus exercise (est 200 a day) would be 2050. To maintain her current weight, she would need to eat that. To lose .5lbs a week, she would deduct 250 cals a day to be at 1800 a day. So that 1350 number you are giving her is not maintenance.
With that being said OP, opening up your diary for folks to take a look could be greatly benefitial. If you are being honest with yourself, weighing all your food on a scale (not measuring cups), and have not seen weight loss, something is amiss. Aside from medical conditions, you should be seeing downwards movement. How long has it been since the last time you even lost any weight?
at 50KG a maintenance of 1850 is with activity levels factored in.
Remember that activity levels are daily activity, not exercise. Exercise is applied after. Even then, what you stated still makes no sense. I think you confused a few things such as maintenance calories and TDEE, which TDEE is everything plus exercise, which is not what we are discussing at the moment. Maintenance is the calories needed for the individual to maintain their current weight. If they were deducting exercise calories from that, obviously they would lose. So I'm not sure where you are getting a net of 1350 for OP to maintain weight.
Eta: Also, OP, how much are you looking to lose? You are already on the lowish end of the BMI scale.
I'm a bit confused. I thought maintenance factors in your TDEE, which is the total energy expenditure. If what we eat equals what we expend, then we maintain. This number shouldn't add or deduct exercise since it's already factored in. Am I missing something?0 -
leejoyce31 wrote: »vespiquenn wrote: »vespiquenn wrote: »correct - because it factors in the activity and eventually you need to deduct your workouts / activity to get to a net calories. i.e. - 1860 calories from food - 400/500 calories workout = 1350 net calories.
I do not think you understand what maintenance calories are. Her maintenance is ~1850 at very active based on a calculator I just ran. Exercise would actually be added to maintain her weight. So 1850 plus exercise (est 200 a day) would be 2050. To maintain her current weight, she would need to eat that. To lose .5lbs a week, she would deduct 250 cals a day to be at 1800 a day. So that 1350 number you are giving her is not maintenance.
With that being said OP, opening up your diary for folks to take a look could be greatly benefitial. If you are being honest with yourself, weighing all your food on a scale (not measuring cups), and have not seen weight loss, something is amiss. Aside from medical conditions, you should be seeing downwards movement. How long has it been since the last time you even lost any weight?
at 50KG a maintenance of 1850 is with activity levels factored in.
Remember that activity levels are daily activity, not exercise. Exercise is applied after. Even then, what you stated still makes no sense. I think you confused a few things such as maintenance calories and TDEE, which TDEE is everything plus exercise, which is not what we are discussing at the moment. Maintenance is the calories needed for the individual to maintain their current weight. If they were deducting exercise calories from that, obviously they would lose. So I'm not sure where you are getting a net of 1350 for OP to maintain weight.
Eta: Also, OP, how much are you looking to lose? You are already on the lowish end of the BMI scale.
I'm a bit confused. I thought maintenance factors in your TDEE, which is the total energy expenditure. If what we eat equals what we expend, then we maintain. This number shouldn't add or deduct exercise since it's already factored in. Am I missing something?
That depends on the individual method. If one follows the MyFitnessPal program the way it's designed, the calorie goal, maintenance or otherwise, assumes no exercise outside of regular daily activity. Additional exercise has to be added on after the fact to adjust. TDEE can also be used to estimate maintenance calories, but it DOES include exercise.
So, maintenance can either be seen as Calories In = MFP maintenance calorie goal + exercise, or Calories In = TDEE. The end numbers, and therefore end results, will be the same.
If someone is using MFP but wants to use the TDEE method, they just enter a custom calorie goal above what MFP generates for them.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.2K Introduce Yourself
- 44.1K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 446 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions