Calorie in Calorie out vs low cal super accumulation of fat
Options
SpinCyn
Posts: 94 Member
I was reading up on fat loss vs muscle loss since I am working out 5 days a week (1h crossfit amd 1h hot yoga), not losing weight and body not visually changing much. I will eat around 1200 cals a day when Im good and maybe 2000 on a rough day. Basically I am always trying to eat very little without succeeding for the typical reasons, however with the training I cant seem to wrap my mind around how its all failing. Any pointers so I can start up again, the right way?
Here is the article I feel is describing my situation...
https://bengreenfieldfitness.com/2013/12/diet-myth-news-flash-eating-less-cause-fat-loss/
Here is the article I feel is describing my situation...
https://bengreenfieldfitness.com/2013/12/diet-myth-news-flash-eating-less-cause-fat-loss/
0
Replies
-
How many calories are you eating a day (specific, not an estimate), are you using a food scale, set to grams, to measure out all your food, are you tracking all your food here on MFP? Are you following the calorie deficit that MFP set for you when you entered your stats? How are you figuring out calorie burns from exercise?
What are your stats-height, age and current weight?
And finally-if you make your food diary public we can take a look at it and get a better idea of what's going on.
eta: exercise is nice, but it's not what matters for weight loss. You need to eat at the appropriate calorie deficit for your weight loss goal, and in order to do that you need to make sure you're accurately tracking intake.6 -
If you are not measuring carefully and consistently what you are eating that is where your problem lies.
https://youtu.be/vjKPIcI51lU 6 -
Trying to eat very little always ends up eating too much, and exercise doesn't burn that many calories. Stay consistent and log intake accurately and you will get results.11
-
kommodevaran wrote: »Trying to eat very little always ends up eating too much, and exercise doesn't burn that many calories. Stay consistent and log intake accurately and you will get results.
all of this - essentially it sounds like you're eating at maintenance3 -
My doctor recently told me that weight lose is 90% diet. Too often we eat extra after exercise feeling we have earned it. But, we haven't exercised enough to earn it. This summer, I rode my bike more than any summer in the past 10 years, and gained 10 pounds. That was his reasoning. I must agree. Since going back to measuring food, I have lost 8 of the 10 pounds.7
-
Weight loss (barring medical conditions) comes down to calories in vs calories out. No ifs, no buts. If you aren't losing, you're eating too much, and by the sounds of it you aren't being consistent.
ETA - yoga doesn't burn many calories compared to other exercise. Hot yoga burns... pretty much almost the same amount as regular yoga. Yoga's good for relaxing and getting flexible, not so good for weight loss, unless it's intense.5 -
-
crzycatlady1 wrote: »How many calories are you eating a day (specific, not an estimate), are you using a food scale, set to grams, to measure out all your food, are you tracking all your food here on MFP? Are you following the calorie deficit that MFP set for you when you entered your stats? How are you figuring out calorie burns from exercise?
What are your stats-height, age and current weight?
And finally-if you make your food diary public we can take a look at it and get a better idea of what's going on.
eta: exercise is nice, but it's not what matters for weight loss. You need to eat at the appropriate calorie deficit for your weight loss goal, and in order to do that you need to make sure you're accurately tracking intake.
You are making me realize I need to start over with mfp because I USED to know and calculate all this and lost some weight (not in a sustainable fashion) and then started 'winging it' since now 'i know approximately' what is needed. This might be 50% of the problem now so Im going to get back onto that, thanks!
As for the calories set for me by mfp it was much too high for what I thought (2000 I believe), being 5"2 and 180lbs at 26. I try not to enter my workouts into the equation (so as to not eat more to compensate the burnt calories).
So would you say that it comes down to strict calorie in calorie out and me needing to be a a certain deficite? And should this be a deficit that will be life-long considering in this study it shows That dieting for a while may lead to the issue of more fat in the long run...? Thank you!2 -
rileysowner wrote: »If you are not measuring carefully and consistently what you are eating that is where your problem lies.https://youtu.be/vjKPIcI51lU
Amazing!! Thank you for this! I a,ways use my measuring cup but I do not utilize a scale, will get on this. Thanks!
4 -
My doctor recently told me that weight lose is 90% diet. Too often we eat extra after exercise feeling we have earned it. But, we haven't exercised enough to earn it. This summer, I rode my bike more than any summer in the past 10 years, and gained 10 pounds. That was his reasoning. I must agree. Since going back to measuring food, I have lost 8 of the 10 pounds.
Your doctor is wrong. Weight loss is 100% calorie deficit (or amputation).5 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »How many calories are you eating a day (specific, not an estimate), are you using a food scale, set to grams, to measure out all your food, are you tracking all your food here on MFP? Are you following the calorie deficit that MFP set for you when you entered your stats? How are you figuring out calorie burns from exercise?
What are your stats-height, age and current weight?
And finally-if you make your food diary public we can take a look at it and get a better idea of what's going on.
eta: exercise is nice, but it's not what matters for weight loss. You need to eat at the appropriate calorie deficit for your weight loss goal, and in order to do that you need to make sure you're accurately tracking intake.
You are making me realize I need to start over with mfp because I USED to know and calculate all this and lost some weight (not in a sustainable fashion) and then started 'winging it' since now 'i know approximately' what is needed. This might be 50% of the problem now so Im going to get back onto that, thanks!
As for the calories set for me by mfp it was much too high for what I thought (2000 I believe), being 5"2 and 180lbs at 26. I try not to enter my workouts into the equation (so as to not eat more to compensate the burnt calories).
So would you say that it comes down to strict calorie in calorie out and me needing to be a a certain deficite? And should this be a deficit that will be life-long considering in this study it shows That dieting for a while may lead to the issue of more fat in the long run...? Thank you!
If the conclusion of the article you posted were true, no one would ever die of starvation. By they do, in large numbers, all over the world.
Everyone's individual, but on average, there are ways to minimize so-called "metabolic damage" while losing weight. Exercising, including some resistance exercise (like your weight training) helps, and losing weight slowly (or at least avoiding losing it *fast*) helps most people accomplish this. As a bonus, losing weight slowly means easier compliance with reduced calories along the way, and provides better habit formation for long-term healthy eating.
Try reading this, and the research it links to:
Reduced metabolism/TDEE beyond expected from weight loss
May be kind of think-y reading, but it's worth your time.
2 -
My doctor recently told me that weight lose is 90% diet. Too often we eat extra after exercise feeling we have earned it. But, we haven't exercised enough to earn it. This summer, I rode my bike more than any summer in the past 10 years, and gained 10 pounds. That was his reasoning. I must agree. Since going back to measuring food, I have lost 8 of the 10 pounds.
Agreed. I work out after work and typically eat dinner at around 8:30 or 9, after I get home. I eat more during the day, usually 4-5 mini-meals, and for dinner often just have some Greek yogurt and fruit or a protein shake. For me, reframing what a meal is or needs to be, and eating the bulk of my calories during the day (weekdays) typically works well.1 -
MarziPanda95 wrote: »Weight loss (barring medical conditions) comes down to calories in vs calories out. No ifs, no buts. If you aren't losing, you're eating too much, and by the sounds of it you aren't being consistent.
ETA - yoga doesn't burn many calories compared to other exercise. Hot yoga burns... pretty much almost the same amount as regular yoga. Yoga's good for relaxing and getting flexible, not so good for weight loss, unless it's intense.
I may be an exception, but I lost quite a few inches since starting yoga (3-4 90 minute Ahstanga classes per week).
I started at the end of March. Around that time, I bought a couple dresses online at clearance from one of my regular brands in my regular size and couldn't get them zipped past my waist. No return. I put them in the closet and shrugged it off.
A few months later, I tried them on and they zipped right up. With room. The one major change was the yoga. I still lift heavy once per week (full body) and do a couple HIIT training sessions.
I have more definition in my arms and shoulders and abs. The classes are intense, not hot yoga, just a tough workout. We held headstands for five minutes on Tuesday. My core still aches. Sneezing has me holding on to my stomach. And God help me if I cough.
I started them because of my back. It was tough and actually more expensive for the physical therapy schedule between the gas and the copay. Not to mention the time off work. Found tons of other benefits. I'm in maintenance and use the Sparkpeople calorie burn--about 340 for 75-80 minutes. I do shave off a little time for the warm up and the cool down. Weight is stable, but I'm slimmer and stronger.
I think it depends on the class and the instructor. And what you put in.1 -
trigden1991 wrote: »My doctor recently told me that weight lose is 90% diet. Too often we eat extra after exercise feeling we have earned it. But, we haven't exercised enough to earn it. This summer, I rode my bike more than any summer in the past 10 years, and gained 10 pounds. That was his reasoning. I must agree. Since going back to measuring food, I have lost 8 of the 10 pounds.
Your doctor is wrong. Weight loss is 100% calorie deficit (or amputation).
But the point usually being made is that it is really, really hard to generate a deficit just through exercise, because it doesn't burn as much as people think, and because the appetite increases to compensate for it. The statement is an oversimplification but it isn't wrong - if you start trying to lose weight just by moving more, without logging your food, you're very unlikely to succeed - whereas if you start by reducing how much you eat you are much more likely to see results. The best option from a general health point of view is to do both, of course.
5 -
0
-
I was reading up on fat loss vs muscle loss since I am working out 5 days a week (1h crossfit amd 1h hot yoga), not losing weight and body not visually changing much. I will eat around 1200 cals a day when Im good and maybe 2000 on a rough day. Basically I am always trying to eat very little without succeeding for the typical reasons, however with the training I cant seem to wrap my mind around how its all failing. Any pointers so I can start up again, the right way?
Here is the article I feel is describing my situation...
https://bengreenfieldfitness.com/2013/12/diet-myth-news-flash-eating-less-cause-fat-loss/
I read the link you posted , sure makes things confusing and scary that you loose 75 percent muscle when dieting . some questions do come up like rate of loss , what calorie deficit , ect ? my biggest complaint is he states these things but never offers his own answer , just states CI verses CO does not work . its been working for me and i know if i weigh less i wont need as much muscle anyway ..
Good luck hope you find your answers , i know it must be hard ..
1 -
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »My doctor recently told me that weight lose is 90% diet. Too often we eat extra after exercise feeling we have earned it. But, we haven't exercised enough to earn it. This summer, I rode my bike more than any summer in the past 10 years, and gained 10 pounds. That was his reasoning. I must agree. Since going back to measuring food, I have lost 8 of the 10 pounds.
Your doctor is wrong. Weight loss is 100% calorie deficit (or amputation).
But the point usually being made is that it is really, really hard to generate a deficit just through exercise, because it doesn't burn as much as people think, and because the appetite increases to compensate for it. The statement is an oversimplification but it isn't wrong - if you start trying to lose weight just by moving more, without logging your food, you're very unlikely to succeed - whereas if you start by reducing how much you eat you are much more likely to see results. The best option from a general health point of view is to do both, of course.
The statement that weight loss is 90% DIET is wrong. Your point above is true though as exercise/calorie restriction create a calorie deficit which reduce weight.0 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »How many calories are you eating a day (specific, not an estimate), are you using a food scale, set to grams, to measure out all your food, are you tracking all your food here on MFP? Are you following the calorie deficit that MFP set for you when you entered your stats? How are you figuring out calorie burns from exercise?
What are your stats-height, age and current weight?
And finally-if you make your food diary public we can take a look at it and get a better idea of what's going on.
eta: exercise is nice, but it's not what matters for weight loss. You need to eat at the appropriate calorie deficit for your weight loss goal, and in order to do that you need to make sure you're accurately tracking intake.
As for the calories set for me by mfp it was much too high for what I thought (2000 I believe), being 5"2 and 180lbs at 26. I try not to enter my workouts into the equation (so as to not eat more to compensate the burnt calories).
So would you say that it comes down to strict calorie in calorie out and me needing to be a a certain deficite? And should this be a deficit that will be life-long considering in this study it shows That dieting for a while may lead to the issue of more fat in the long run...? Thank you!
This study (or this article) is a scam and woo (scamwoo) - yes, starvation/binge cycles forces the body to burn muscles and store fat, but dieting, healthy dieting, a reasonable, sustained calorie deficit, does not have that effect. Your body is in a constant flux of taking in, expending and storing energy - when you sleep, your body "eats" up calories ingested through the day, or if they are not sufficient, as when you are dieting, it "eats" from your fat stores too.
Yes, you need to be in a certain deficit to lose weight - large enough to see results, but not so large that you experience adverse effects. These effects are so adverse that you'll know that you're doing it wrong - you'll get hungry, hangry, lethargic, cold, and if you push through (because we can do unpleasant things for a while), you'll get weak, lose hair, your period, all sorts of nasty things can happen. Until you can't take it anymore, and eat all the things. Back to square one, or square zero (best case scenario).
No, you won't stay in a calorie deficit for the rest of your life. A calorie deficit means that you are burning more than you eat. At your goal weight you'll want to keep that weight stable. A body that has less muscle than "normal" (after chronic starvation) would need fewer calorie to run than a healthy body of the same size, but that doesn't mean that it's in a calorie deficit. And a person can always build muscle, with hard work, good rest, sufficient nutrition, and patience.3 -
I would disregard that article.5
-
crzycatlady1 wrote: »How many calories are you eating a day (specific, not an estimate), are you using a food scale, set to grams, to measure out all your food, are you tracking all your food here on MFP? Are you following the calorie deficit that MFP set for you when you entered your stats? How are you figuring out calorie burns from exercise?
What are your stats-height, age and current weight?
And finally-if you make your food diary public we can take a look at it and get a better idea of what's going on.
eta: exercise is nice, but it's not what matters for weight loss. You need to eat at the appropriate calorie deficit for your weight loss goal, and in order to do that you need to make sure you're accurately tracking intake.
You are making me realize I need to start over with mfp because I USED to know and calculate all this and lost some weight (not in a sustainable fashion) and then started 'winging it' since now 'i know approximately' what is needed. This might be 50% of the problem now so Im going to get back onto that, thanks!
As for the calories set for me by mfp it was much too high for what I thought (2000 I believe), being 5"2 and 180lbs at 26. I try not to enter my workouts into the equation (so as to not eat more to compensate the burnt calories).
So would you say that it comes down to strict calorie in calorie out and me needing to be a a certain deficite? And should this be a deficit that will be life-long considering in this study it shows That dieting for a while may lead to the issue of more fat in the long run...? Thank you!
That's the whole of it, right there
In order to lose weight you need to eat at a calorie deficit. To find the correct deficit for your weight loss goal, enter your stats into MFP and I'd suggest chosing a 1lb per week goal. Then start tracking your intake, making sure your using a food scale, set to grams, to measure out food portions. Do this consistently for a few weeks and you'll start to see the progress you're hoping for.
As for long term dieting, here's a little anecdote-my mom is in her 60s and has been yo yo dieting since she was 11 years old (the first time her dad called her a fatty). She has over 50 years of yo yo dieting behind her-fad diets, diet pills, unsafe dieting methods like water fasts etc etc. She now also has medical issues that she's dealing with. I sat down with her last year and laid out how weight loss actually works-calories in, calories out. I ran her stats through a couple calculators and gave her the calorie deficit she needed to lose around 1lb a week (her bmi was in the obese category at the time). She started following the deficit, along with some slow walking a few times a week. Fast forward-she's lost weight and is maintaining it.
Calories, calories, calories 2
https://youtu.be/JVjWPclrWVY
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions