Keto Question about Weight Loss
1ragmar
Posts: 9 Member
Ok I've been monitoring my calories for the last 10 days with the Keto diet. Keeping it under 1500calories
Also my macros are always in check 70/20/5
Drink atleast 3000ml of water day
Question is I've only lost 1.7lbs in 10 days.
Why is my weight loss so slow
Advice?
Also my macros are always in check 70/20/5
Drink atleast 3000ml of water day
Question is I've only lost 1.7lbs in 10 days.
Why is my weight loss so slow
Advice?
0
Replies
-
moved to other thread0
-
-
First, I feel like you must know that unless you're planning on being keto for a super long time (years) then you might want to drop it. I had an appointment with a nutrionist not too long ago and unless you do the diet long term, you only lose water weight. Keto diets cause your body to release water from your muscles, making it look like you lost weight. (Your small weight loss just means there's not a lot of water in your muscles rn.)
Please don't give me any crap for this. This is just what my nutritionist told me.2 -
First, I feel like you must know that unless you're planning on being keto for a super long time (years) then you might want to drop it. I had an appointment with a nutrionist not too long ago and unless you do the diet long term, you only lose water weight. Keto diets cause your body to release water from your muscles, making it look like you lost weight. (Your small weight loss just means there's not a lot of water in your muscles rn.)
Please don't give me any crap for this. This is just what my nutritionist told me.
Ketogenic diets cause more water weight loss up front due to the massive reduction in carbohydrates however you can certainly lose fat on a ketogenic diet even if it's not done for years at a time.
You lose a lot of water initially just like you do with any diet basically. You just lose more water on a ketogenic diet and so the initial weight loss is a bit faster.
5 -
I have the eating healthy and focusing on quality of clean food rather than quantity, but I have no desire to exercise at all. I live a rather idle life because I work fro home. I wish I had a workout partner.0
-
Ok I've been monitoring my calories for the last 10 days with the Keto diet. Keeping it under 1500calories
Also my macros are always in check 70/20/5
Drink atleast 3000ml of water day
Question is I've only lost 1.7lbs in 10 days.
Why is my weight loss so slow
Advice?
1.7lbs is substantial weight loss in 10 days regardless of diet. While a firm believer in CICO, weight loss is not a smooth and linear process, most of the battle is consistency. If you keep your macros and calories in check and preferably move more, you will lose weight! Also, you will likely lose more initially if you have a significant amount to lose. For me, as I get closer to goal weight, loss is slower. Stick to your plan and results will come, good luck!1 -
First, I feel like you must know that unless you're planning on being keto for a super long time (years) then you might want to drop it. I had an appointment with a nutrionist not too long ago and unless you do the diet long term, you only lose water weight. Keto diets cause your body to release water from your muscles, making it look like you lost weight. (Your small weight loss just means there's not a lot of water in your muscles rn.)
Please don't give me any crap for this. This is just what my nutritionist told me.
Your Nutritionist is wrong. You will lose weight doing keto, low carb, High carb and every other combination in between. The common denominator with ALL diets is they all work as long as you are in a calorie deficit.7 -
For certain people eating carbrohydrates wreaks havoc on their system, others can have carbs all day and lose a ton of weight..I have a fatty liver so my body doesn't do well with Carbs. My body rejects food. I have to basically live off of veges, fruit, and meat to lose anything.0
-
Are you tracking your carbs? Many keto plans suggest no more than 20 net carbs. Eating fruit could put you well over that in a hurry.1
-
Christine_72 wrote: »
Your Nutritionist is wrong. You will lose weight doing keto, low carb, High carb and every other combination in between. The common denominator with ALL diets is they all work as long as you are in a calorie deficit.
Let's test this theory. I'm 6 ft tall, I'm male I weight 152.2 pounds of this morning. I'm a network administrator who doesn't go to the gym or work out at all. So how many calories do I burn in a single day? To have a deficit I should use more than I consume, so how many do I burn & how many should I consume?
0 -
alienws1998 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »
Your Nutritionist is wrong. You will lose weight doing keto, low carb, High carb and every other combination in between. The common denominator with ALL diets is they all work as long as you are in a calorie deficit.
Let's test this theory. I'm 6 ft tall, I'm male I weight 152.2 pounds of this morning. I'm a network administrator who doesn't go to the gym or work out at all. So how many calories do I burn in a single day? To have a deficit I should use more than I consume, so how many do I burn & how many should I consume?
You would estimate your expenditure and track intake and adjust based on changes in bodyweight. Eventually you would narrow down what your energy needs are.
There's no way she can answer that question based on the information you wrote.1 -
Anecdotal evidence seem to suggest that men are more successful on a ketogenic diet then women. It also seem to take women longer to get into ketosis. Keto diet is not for everyone. Phinney and Volek are probably the pre-eminent authorities on nutritional ketosis. I'd get both their books on "The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Performance." Dr. Jason Fung also has a practice that focuses on nutritional ketosis and can speaks on his experience treating both men and women. They all have numerous talks on youtube.com (Low Carb Down Under and elseware). Dig in. This is cutting edge science and there is not "one size fits all."1
-
There's no way she can answer that question based on the information you wrote.[/quote]
That is exactly my point. Its very difficult to determine calorie consumption. Too many factors go into that equation, everything from resting heart rate to the temperature, to the size of your bladder, the location of your bathroom, etc etc. So the concept of "just have a calorie deficit" while in theory isn't bad, its just impractical for most people. Carb levels are much easier to calculate, also many people (including myself) on the lchf diets abstain from most corn syrup, refined sugars, and processed grains. If I remember correctly wasn't corn syrup designed to make livestock fat? Wasn't that the point? Why would you assume that by consuming it you wouldn't also get fat?
0 -
First, I feel like you must know that unless you're planning on being keto for a super long time (years) then you might want to drop it. I had an appointment with a nutrionist not too long ago and unless you do the diet long term, you only lose water weight. Keto diets cause your body to release water from your muscles, making it look like you lost weight. (Your small weight loss just means there's not a lot of water in your muscles rn.)
Please don't give me any crap for this. This is just what my nutritionist told me.
I agree that doing keto is really only a good idea if you plan on sticking with some sort of LCHF diet, but not always keto. The reaon for this is because I believe it is best to start as you mean to go on. If you plan on eating a higher carb diet agai, it is probably best to learn how to lowe and moderate that way. Then, if you discover things need to chamge in a lower carb dircetion, it is then that you switch to LCHF permanently or at least for quite some time.
One does not ONLy lose water weight on a ketogenic diet. They will probably lose an extra pound or two of water but the rest is fat. I did not lose 40 lbs of water in 2015.
3 -
alienws1998 wrote: »There's no way she can answer that question based on the information you wrote. That is exactly my point. Its very difficult to determine calorie consumption. Too many factors go into that equation, everything from resting heart rate to the temperature, to the size of your bladder, the location of your bathroom, etc etc. So the concept of "just have a calorie deficit" while in theory isn't bad, its just impractical for most people.
I disagree. There are a whole lot of people on this website who are successfully losing weight while monitoring calories.
YES, calories are absolutely estimations however it's not necessary to hit the bullseye. You just need to eat less than you burn over time and as long as people are monitoring results and adjusting intake accordingly it leads them to a reasonable intake range.
Additionally, a calorie deficit is a requirement for ketogenic diets as well. They are not exempt from this, it's just that in many cases people who do low carb diets don't track calories because they are relying on the satiating effects of the diet to keep them in a deficit.Carb levels are much easier to calculate, also many people (including myself) on the lchf diets abstain from most corn syrup, refined sugars, and processed grains. If I remember correctly wasn't corn syrup designed to make livestock fat? Wasn't that the point? Why would you assume that by consuming it you wouldn't also get fat?
Because fat accumulation is caused by a chronic energy surplus, not an individual food source or ingredient.7 -
So we can't accurately predict how many calories burnt but know we must be under it? That's absurb. As I pointed out, its incredibly difficult to measure calories used so how would a person consume less than they burn when you don't know how much you burn? Also with calorie deficit you can consume too few and trigger your bodies storage systems actually causing weight gain even with a calorie deficit. And yes there are certain foods that can cause greater weight gain than others regardless of the caloric levels due to the nature of the food itself. Corn syrup is one of those products, it was designed to put on weight on live stock. We discovered later that it makes a cheap sweetener and it began to be used for that purpose, but that doesn't change its original purpose or how its designed.0
-
alienws1998 wrote: »So we can't accurately predict how many calories burnt but know we must be under it? That's absurb. As I pointed out, its incredibly difficult to measure calories used so how would a person consume less than they burn when you don't know how much you burn? Also with calorie deficit you can consume too few and trigger your bodies storage systems actually causing weight gain even with a calorie deficit. And yes there are certain foods that can cause greater weight gain than others regardless of the caloric levels due to the nature of the food itself. Corn syrup is one of those products, it was designed to put on weight on live stock. We discovered later that it makes a cheap sweetener and it began to be used for that purpose, but that doesn't change its original purpose or how its designed.
It's not possible to store fat in an energy deficit.
Reductions in energy expenditure caused by dieting aren't high enough to put someone into an energy surplus.
There is an adaptive response to dieting where energy expenditure does reduce slightly but it does not cause fat gain. It's not possible in an energy deficit.
And regarding the in accuracy of calorie tracking which can of course be an issue, as long as people are making an effort to track accurately they can certainly get close enough to achieve a desired outcome. As I said previously yes it is an estimate but you don't need to hit the bull's-eye you just need to get remotely close.7 -
"Your body is equipped with its own starvation defense mechanism, which has evolved over millions of years to protect you during times when food was scarce -- a problem most people don't have today. When you take in too few calories to support activity and normal physiological functioning, your body adapts by reducing the amount of energy it uses to accomplish tasks. Your body may also turn to lean muscle mass for energy in order to conserve its valuable fat stores, just in case it doesn't receive more food anytime soon."
http://www.livestrong.com/article/264810-weight-loss-starvation-mode/
Argue with them0 -
alienws1998 wrote: »"Your body is equipped with its own starvation defense mechanism, which has evolved over millions of years to protect you during times when food was scarce -- a problem most people don't have today. When you take in too few calories to support activity and normal physiological functioning, your body adapts by reducing the amount of energy it uses to accomplish tasks. Your body may also turn to lean muscle mass for energy in order to conserve its valuable fat stores, just in case it doesn't receive more food anytime soon."
http://www.livestrong.com/article/264810-weight-loss-starvation-mode/
Argue with them
That article further proves my point. It says right in the beginning that if you eat fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight.
Nothing in the article says that you can gain weight eating fewer calories than you burn.
i disagree with some of this article but not all of it.2 -
"Your body may also turn to lean muscle mass for energy in order to conserve its valuable fat Stores"
Reread the article, that's the second time I've quoted that0 -
Just to be clear here your direct claim was that you can gain weight in a caloric deficit.
This is false, and your link doesn't support your claim.3 -
alienws1998 wrote: »"Your body may also turn to lean muscle mass for energy in order to conserve its valuable fat Stores"
Reread the article, that's the second time I've quoted that
This is partially correct although it's not in order to preserve fat stores.
There's a limit to how much fat can be oxidized based on how much fat someone has.
And so if you create too large of an energy deficit or you're insufficient with dietary protein then yes you will lose skeletal muscle.
But your original claim is that you can gain weight in a deficit due to starvation mode which is false.
3 -
alienws1998 wrote: »So we can't accurately predict how many calories burnt but know we must be under it? That's absurb.
It would be absurd. However, that's why no one said it.As I pointed out, its incredibly difficult to measure calories used so how would a person consume less than they burn when you don't know how much you burn?
You don't need to know how much you burn exactly to be under what you burn. A few ways:
Write down/log what you regularly eat. If you've been maintaining, this is likely maintenance. Reduce calories from that and maybe add some activity. Track results.
Use a calculator and be honest about activity. If you have a high fat percentage, try the calculator based on fat percentage and try a few estimates to see the difference. Pick a number 500-1000 below the number you get depending on how much you have to lose (or 10-20% less if you are closer to goal). Track results.
Use MFP. Add back in some amount for exercise (I'd reduce the amounts for exercise MFP gives to start), track results.
These are more consistent and reliable ways to make sure you are in a calorie deficit than just eating a certain percentage of carbs. I certainly could be in a calorie surplus and gain eating low carb if I didn't otherwise pay attention to what I ate.Also with calorie deficit you can consume too few and trigger your bodies storage systems actually causing weight gain even with a calorie deficit.
No, this doesn't happen. Not good to eat too few, but you will see that you are either because you know what you are eating or because you lose too quickly vs. your reasonable goal.0 -
alienws1998 wrote: »"Your body may also turn to lean muscle mass for energy in order to conserve its valuable fat Stores"
In a ketogenic diet, and during starvation, lean muscle mass is fastest in the first few days while getting into ketosis. As I understand it, the body seems to be used to burning glucose and it will use protein (muscles if there is not enough dietary protein) to create glucose. Eventually the body starts using fat for its primary fuel and protein is conserved. The body has switched to using stored energy, aka fat, as its main fuel source. After a few weeks of ketosis, the body will be fat adapted and need a few days to switch back to glucose burning if the diet is switched back to a higher carb diet.
This is true of starvation too. The body does not go to muscle protein for fuel before fat. Protein is the last to go. If this wasn't true, people would lose muscle and not be able to move their overweight bodies when searching for food. 0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »First, I feel like you must know that unless you're planning on being keto for a super long time (years) then you might want to drop it. I had an appointment with a nutrionist not too long ago and unless you do the diet long term, you only lose water weight. Keto diets cause your body to release water from your muscles, making it look like you lost weight. (Your small weight loss just means there's not a lot of water in your muscles rn.)
Please don't give me any crap for this. This is just what my nutritionist told me.
Your Nutritionist is wrong. You will lose weight doing keto, low carb, High carb and every other combination in between. The common denominator with ALL diets is they all work as long as you are in a calorie deficit.
Anyway, this is correct.
OP, 10 days is nothing and 1.7 lb is a quite good rate of loss for 10 days. It's true that people sometimes drop more at first, especially with low carb, due to water weight loss, but if that didn't happen to you it's no reason to be bothered. Sounds like you are doing just fine.0 -
If you can't count calories with exact accuracy, why do you have to calculate energy expenditure with exact accuracy?
As SideSteel said, hitting the bullseye isn't necessary. Close enough is good enough, especially if you rely on feedback from the scale to make adjustments.
The way to tell how many calories you burn in a day is to start with an estimate using an online TDEE calculator, track your intake, track your weight, and then use your data over time to see if the loss was as expected. If you lost more than what the estimates would have been, you have a higher TDEE. If you lost less, you have a lower TDEE.
Or, you can get an activity tracker and do something similar and make adjustments to the settings on the tracker until it aligns with scale performance.
You're arguing against people who have used calorie counting and quantifying their energy expenditure without pinpoint precision to lose weight. It's a futile effort on your part.5 -
alienws1998 wrote: »Okay GottaBurnThemAll so you are accepting my challenge then?
No. Because scales weights fluctuate for many reasons that don't mean fat gain and your weight could be up from activity or water weight. It would have nothing to do with "starvation mode".4 -
alienws1998 wrote: »I'm sick of this argument, bottom line not one of you have managed to tell me precisely how many calories I burn in a day. I've had the question up for a while now and still not one single answer. But you all seem convinced that my results don't seem to matter and that its strictly calorie deficit so fine. Here's the bet, I will not consume any more calories for the rest of the day leaving my intake at less than 200 calories for the day. That's a definite deficit right? If I weigh more tomorrow than I do today (which I will I was a combat medic and have a pretty good grasp on human biology) then you have to swear that you'll never use the community forums again, ever. Agreed?
You won't burn the exact same number of calories every single day anyway. Maybe tomorrow you will fidget a lot more than you did today. Or you get tired from chasing your tail, so you nap longer today. It's an inexact science.
Counting carbs is going to be pointless if you are consuming too many calories. Additionally, what you eat today isn't going to have a direct impact on the scale tomorrow. The body is just not that efficient that my work today gives results tomorrow. There are way too many confounding variables. The point is that despite all of the little factors which influence the results, persistence with caloric deficit (a reasonable caloric deficit, or we end up talking about increasing health risks from malnourishment) will lead to weight loss. I'm not sure what exactly it is that you are arguing about. If you want an approximation of how many calories you burn in a day, take your own data (calories consumed in addition to weight lost) and you can get a pretty good estimate, but that's all one can really do.4 -
alienws1998 wrote: » That is exactly my point. Its very difficult to determine calorie consumption. Too many factors go into that equation, everything from resting heart rate to the temperature, to the size of your bladder, the location of your bathroom, etc etc. So the concept of "just have a calorie deficit" while in theory isn't bad, its just impractical for most people. Carb levels are much easier to calculate, also many people (including myself) on the lchf diets abstain from most corn syrup, refined sugars, and processed grains. If I remember correctly wasn't corn syrup designed to make livestock fat? Wasn't that the point? Why would you assume that by consuming it you wouldn't also get fat?
Eating one food will not make you fat, eating an excess of calories (to which that one food may contribute), will cause weight gain over time. Foods with refined sugar or corn syrup may also have a lot of fat and be calorie dense while not being very satiating, contributing to a calorie excess which causes weight gain.
I think everyone's different. I do moderate everything and lost over 115 pounds and have kept it off for about 2.5 years now. So have quite a few people on here. Other folks have lost with low carb, Keto or something similar.
The important thing is to find a WOE that works for the person in the long term and causes a calorie deficit. Some people have great success with LCHF, some don't. Some people have great success with an opposite diet, some don't.
Regardless of the way of eating, no one loses weight without a calorie deficit. Just like eating one food or ingredient on its own will not cause weight gain. There's always a combination of factors, including our behaviors around food that create a caloric deficit or excess, leading to weight-loss or weight gain. No food or diet defies the laws of thermodynamics.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions