Macros & calories

If you haven't lost ANY weight for 2-3 months then you are eating at maintenance.

You need to eat less or move more.

kommodevaran wrote: »

mariclaire87 wrote: »

ive been able to lose 55lbs but plateaued right now and it's driving me crazy. I have 20 lbs to go. My macros are at 25carb 30fat 45protein 1300 cals if I don't exercise and I eat back the calories I burn. I've juggled macros a few times open to any suggestions. i workout 3-5 days a week both cardio and strength usually at least 30 mins or more. Help I want these 20 lbs gone

If you are at the same weight for just a week or two, it may be water retention from exercise, sodium, TOM, constipation, etc. If you have been at a stable weight for a few weeks, you're eating at maintenance (plateaus aren't really a thing, thank goodness, one less thing to worry about, right).

As you lose weight, your calorie need drops. To keep losing, you need to decrease your calorie intake. You'll also lose more slowly - this can periodically look like the scale isn't moving. But it is, as long as you have excess fat and really are eating at a deficit.

You need to eat less than you burn to lose weight, but if you eat too little, you'll get hungry. Smart wegihtloss is about finding that sweet spot where you lose weight, but feel fine. This spot is determined by your height, weight, sex and activity level. A good weightloss rate is up to 1% of your bodyweight per week - "up to" means that 1% is more realistic when you have a lot to lose.

No macro split will make you lose faster. But a good macro split can make eating at a deficit easier. Your current setting looks like it's difficult to translate into tasty and balanced meals. You will want tasty and balaced meals because you'll be doing this for a long time, and when you hit maintenance, you'll be doing mostly the same.

My suggestion would be to 1) set your calorie goal properly, 2) set protein and fat goals to 1 - 1.5 grams per kilo of bodyweight at normal BMI, 3) prepare meals you want to eat, and 4) eat, enjoy, exercise moderately, and lose weight at a steady and healthy pace.

Bolded the points I especially like, but pretty much the whole post gets a +1 from me.

I'll aslo add that if you feel stuck, tighten up your logging. Make sure you are weighing/measuring what you eat, that you are logging everything you consume, and that you are doing those things consistently.

How long have you been dieting? Do you use a food scale? Do you log daily?

Also, you probably aren't eating enough protein to cause issues. Its only 146g which is hardly excessive. Having said that, you likely can reduce protein a bit down to 35% and increase fats.

I would recommend picking up a digital. On amazon, most are around $15-$20. It's very easy to be inaccurate, even if you are a trained professional.

Also, it may be worth increasing calories to around maintenance for a few weeks since it's been awhile. Prolonged periods of suppression can decrease metabolic functions. Often diet breaks can help normalize it, give you a sanity break, and enable you to drop calories back down to a reasonable level and lose again.

mariclaire87 wrote: »

I will look into trying to log food more accurately and weigh if I can manage it
Deannafisher: thanks i didn't know that it may be over estimating exercise that could be part of the issue
psulemon: yeah Id be willing to try that method. So then you don't log any exercise? How do I know what to initially set my calories at

The reason I have used the method is because we have no way of measuring the follow unless you get testing and it only addresses the bold: Basal Metabolic Rate, Thermal Effect of Food (calories expended through digestion), Thermal Effect of Activity (exercise calories) and Non Exercise Activity Therogenesis (calories burned in daily activities outside of exercise). As stated, I am very consistent with my exercise (5-6 hours a week).

Initially, I used an only TDEE calculator, cut 20% below my maintenance, tracked calories with a food scale daily, and adjust every 4 to 8 weeks based on average calories. I would aim to get +/- 100 calories of my target to maximize consistency. From there, I was able to back into my average TDEE. The biggest problem people have is not using the feedback mechanism to set calories to appropriate levels. I actually had to increase calories 300 because I was losing faster than I needed/wanted to.

Unless you are exercising really hard multiple days a week I would recommend not eating back your exercise calories. I burn 250-400 calories/ day exercising 6 days/week but do not log them and only use an extra 100 if I feel hungry at the end of the day.

psuLemon wrote: »

mariclaire87 wrote: »

Ok I think that is making sense. So i used an online calculator and put in my info, it says my TDEE is 2152, so minus 20% is 1722. In 4-8 weeks if I'm losing more than 2 lb per week or whatever my target is, I raise the calories by 100 is that what you mean? Just clarifying ...and thanks for the help

With 20 lbs to lose, you should aim for about 1 lb per week. If you are losing 2 lbs, then you are pretty active and should up intake up to around 2200. But you could slowly increase calories by 100 per week until you only see 1 lb per week.

There may be some other benefits in that "add 100 at a time and monitor" approach. For one, it's possibly psychologically reassuring if you're worried about regain - you can't actually gain much at that rate even if you temporarily go over maintenance by accident. Also, 1300 net seems fairly low for 5'5" at your age (I eat more at 5'5" and 61 y/o with a weight in the 120s, though I'm outlier-ish for my age - able to eat on the high side). I'm wondering if you might get some improvement in non-exercise activity (NEAT) along the way by moving up gradually, but that's purely speculative.

OP, definitely get the digital food scale. It'll make things easier and clearer. Many of us get some big surprises when we move from estimating or measuring in cups/spoons, to weighing.

Oh, and FWIW, at 5'5" and in a very slight calorie deficit, I'm shooting for 100g minimum protein daily (0.8g per pound of healthy goal weight, which is a bit higher than suggested above) and at least 45g fat minimum (0.35 per pound, also higher than above) but usually get 60-80g. That's for a goal weight of 120, though, which works for my body type (built like a 14-year-old boy!) but it sounds like you have a different frame than that so might want a bit more daily protein & fat, given your goal weight.

If your goal weight is 150, then the recommendations from someone else above (1-1.5g/kilo for both protein & fat ) would be 68-102g for 150 pounds.

The ratios I'm using for myself, translated to 150 pounds, would be 120g protein minimum, 53g fat minimum.

I'm not trying to push any of those ratio schemes on you, just trying to do the math (correctly, I hope - ya never know! ) so you can better understand what others are doing/saying, by seeing what it would mean applied to your stats.

An absolute must IMO is accurately measuring everything you eat and always double checking that the measurement on MFP is accurate as well. If you look up Honeycrisp apples, one of my favourites, you get options for 2.5" diameter, 100g, 154g, 425g, large, medium etc. Since I weigh all of my food or measure it with a cup or spoon, I know that that the apples I buy are anywhere from 140 to 280 grams. If you don't weigh and just guess, you could be off by 100%. A digital scale is an absolute must for anyone counting calories.