1 month in and no difference!!
Replies
-
Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
no4 -
joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
to be honest your calorie burns seem rather high for your weight, but if you're only eating 1200-ish cals, you should be losing.
if you're logging accurately then it could be time for a visit to the doctors to check out thyroid etc.
though i still maintain that 4 weeks isnt long enough to see results especially when you add in the bloating from constipation3 -
It's been one week since you last posted, and you don't have much to lose.
Are you weighing daily or weekly? Weekly may mask losses. But even daily may not show a loss for a bit, especially with little to lose.
I think you have unrealistic expectations. No, you should not lower your calories. If you're certain you are being accurate in both weighing your food and choosing correct database entries and you are not eating back exercise calories, you really should be in a deficit. While all numbers are just estimates and you may have to adjust, at 1200 without eating exercise calories, you need to be patient - you should wait 4-6 weeks before making changes. Seriously. THEN make one change if necessary and wait another 4-6 weeks. I know you're not going to like that answer, but expecting weekly changes is unrealistic and you're going to continue driving yourself crazy.2 -
FreyasRebirth wrote: »BMR should be the absolute lowest number of calories you consume. That is what fuels your heart, kidneys, and other parts of you that operate whether or not you ever get out of bed in the morning.
This is not true. As someone who spends most of my day on bedrest the only way to lose weight is to eat below BMR (mine is 1450 and I've lost all my weight eating at about 200cal deficit).
Also there is no health/scientific reason one should not eat below BMR while trying to lose weight. Here is why:
Let's say your BMR is 1500 and you burn 300 in exercise. Then suppose you eat 1500 which makes your deficit that day 300. Well, it is not like your BMR takes the 1500 energy from your food alone and the exercise only from your fat reserves. Obviously it is all mixed and some energy is taken from your food, some from your fats for either intentiomal exercise or other body processes (which your body doesn't distinguish), that is there is no devision in your body where to take the energy from for a particular activity. Therefore to support your organs, like you say, the body can (and does) tap in your fat reserves everyday (for everyone on deficit of any kind, that is you including) and there is nothing dangerous or unhealthy about it.
2 -
Try "Smooth Move" tea, it will help things along naturally...0
-
Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.5 -
gebeziseva wrote: »FreyasRebirth wrote: »BMR should be the absolute lowest number of calories you consume. That is what fuels your heart, kidneys, and other parts of you that operate whether or not you ever get out of bed in the morning.
This is not true. As someone who spends most of my day on bedrest the only way to lose weight is to eat below BMR (mine is 1450 and I've lost all my weight eating at about 200cal deficit).
Also there is no health/scientific reason one should not eat below BMR while trying to lose weight. Here is why:
Let's say your BMR is 1500 and you burn 300 in exercise. Then suppose you eat 1500 which makes your deficit that day 300. Well, it is not like your BMR takes the 1500 energy from your food alone and the exercise only from your fat reserves. Obviously it is all mixed and some energy is taken from your food, some from your fats for either intentiomal exercise or other body processes (which your body doesn't distinguish), that is there is no devision in your body where to take the energy from for a particular activity. Therefore to support your organs, like you say, the body can (and does) tap in your fat reserves everyday (for everyone on deficit of any kind, that is you including) and there is nothing dangerous or unhealthy about it.
the fact that you are on bed rest makes you different from the majority of people who should NOT eat below BMR.1 -
TavistockToad wrote: »gebeziseva wrote: »FreyasRebirth wrote: »BMR should be the absolute lowest number of calories you consume. That is what fuels your heart, kidneys, and other parts of you that operate whether or not you ever get out of bed in the morning.
This is not true. As someone who spends most of my day on bedrest the only way to lose weight is to eat below BMR (mine is 1450 and I've lost all my weight eating at about 200cal deficit).
Also there is no health/scientific reason one should not eat below BMR while trying to lose weight. Here is why:
Let's say your BMR is 1500 and you burn 300 in exercise. Then suppose you eat 1500 which makes your deficit that day 300. Well, it is not like your BMR takes the 1500 energy from your food alone and the exercise only from your fat reserves. Obviously it is all mixed and some energy is taken from your food, some from your fats for either intentiomal exercise or other body processes (which your body doesn't distinguish), that is there is no devision in your body where to take the energy from for a particular activity. Therefore to support your organs, like you say, the body can (and does) tap in your fat reserves everyday (for everyone on deficit of any kind, that is you including) and there is nothing dangerous or unhealthy about it.
the fact that you are on bed rest makes you different from the majority of people who should NOT eat below BMR.
Did you just not read my post? Only the first sentence? Really?1 -
-
TavistockToad wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
no
Personally 7 months and 60 pounds lost is what I base this on. Not all bodies are the same and metabolic history will take a part in this as well.0 -
Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
0 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.2 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
this is absolute garbage advice...ignore this and listen to the others!1 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print. 0 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print.
You can argue against the fact that a calorie deficit is required to lose weight? Do you have sources to back that up?0 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print.
Starvation mode as you describe it is a myth and meal time doesn't matter the amount of calories you eat does.0 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print.
scary that a "healthcare professional" believes in starvation mode and doesn't believe in calorie deficit for weight loss???5 -
Muscleflex79 wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print.
scary that a "healthcare professional" believes in starvation mode and doesn't believe in calorie deficit for weight loss???
Oh I don't believe anyone should put them selves in starvation mode. I am saying the opposite. I am saying that you need to eat enough ...eating too little is dangerous. I personally ate double in the last few months from what I used to and lost weight. You misread the posts. Not a good idea to make the calorie deficit gap too large. I appreciate the concern of miscommunication.
0 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Muscleflex79 wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print.
scary that a "healthcare professional" believes in starvation mode and doesn't believe in calorie deficit for weight loss???
Oh I don't believe anyone should put them selves in starvation mode. I am saying the opposite. I am saying that you need to eat enough ...eating too little is dangerous. I personally ate double in the last few months from what I used to and lost weight. You misread the posts. Not a good idea to make the calorie deficit gap too large. I appreciate the concern of miscommunication.
No the misunderstanding is that starvation mode is a thing. It is a myth. If you eat too little you will continue to lose weight.1 -
gebeziseva wrote: »FreyasRebirth wrote: »BMR should be the absolute lowest number of calories you consume. That is what fuels your heart, kidneys, and other parts of you that operate whether or not you ever get out of bed in the morning.
This is not true. As someone who spends most of my day on bedrest the only way to lose weight is to eat below BMR (mine is 1450 and I've lost all my weight eating at about 200cal deficit).
Also there is no health/scientific reason one should not eat below BMR while trying to lose weight. Here is why:
Let's say your BMR is 1500 and you burn 300 in exercise. Then suppose you eat 1500 which makes your deficit that day 300. Well, it is not like your BMR takes the 1500 energy from your food alone and the exercise only from your fat reserves. Obviously it is all mixed and some energy is taken from your food, some from your fats for either intentiomal exercise or other body processes (which your body doesn't distinguish), that is there is no devision in your body where to take the energy from for a particular activity. Therefore to support your organs, like you say, the body can (and does) tap in your fat reserves everyday (for everyone on deficit of any kind, that is you including) and there is nothing dangerous or unhealthy about it.
Yep. I tried to tell my doctor (who specializes in treating obesity, btw) that I was not going to be able to follow the 1200 calorie diet he put me on because my BMR was higher than that and I would get deathly ill, and he and the nurse had a good laugh. Then as the pounds started dropping off and my health started improving by leaps and bounds, we all had a good laugh.0 -
Okayyy so this has created quite a discussion! I'm going to try to continue with 1200 and my three weekly cardio sessions on top. And if after another 2 weeks I don't see any differences in anything - measurements, weight, visually ... I might just break down in tears!
I'm going to trial cutting out dairy in case this is an issue for me as well; though as someone who only regularly eats natura yoghurt can't imagine it's that... but you never know
0 -
joannalouise92 wrote: »Okayyy so this has created quite a discussion! I'm going to try to continue with 1200 and my three weekly cardio sessions on top. And if after another 2 weeks I don't see any differences in anything - measurements, weight, visually ... I might just break down in tears!
I'm going to trial cutting out dairy in case this is an issue for me as well; though as someone who only regularly eats natura yoghurt can't imagine it's that... but you never know
Is there a reason you're so adverse to adding in some strength/resistance training?1 -
I would say that your logging is on point, it looks great. I would watch how much you eat back from exercise - usually the burn is over estimated either by trackers or MFP (even the wristbands are not completely accurate). Try eating back about 50% of those calories and definitely keep on with at least 1200 (not counting exercise).
Going back to 1/29-2/6 (8 days) and calculating if you were to do 50% eat back, that would have put you over calories 7 times (unless I counted wrong as math + me = no). I don't mean this in a bad way, so I hope you don't take it that way, but just to try and help.
Ultimately, you could drop the exercise and as long as you're still eating at a deficit you'll lose weight. I don't know about you, but I get hangry on 1200 as I am right now, so if MFP suggests a different amount for your deficit, don't ignore it. It gives you that # to have a healthy deficit.1 -
Do you have any kind of health issues such as PCOS? If so, you want to look at *what* you are eating as well as how much, because women with PCOS tend to be insulin resistant.0
-
Also consider cortisol. The more you stress yourself out about this and the more stress you put on your body, the higher your cortisol levels are going to be. Also, low calorie eating increases cortisol, as does intensive exercise. Back down on the stressing, ease up a little on your body, and see if that helps.1
-
DarkSinestra wrote: »Also consider cortisol. The more you stress yourself out about this and the more stress you put on your body, the higher your cortisol levels are going to be. Also, low calorie eating increases cortisol, as does intensive exercise. Back down on the stressing, ease up a little on your body, and see if that helps.
You know I do agree wth this, I think it's unfortunately a vicious circle as it's hard to not be stressed about it as I feel so unable to control my own weight loss.. I'm going to try to maybe ease off on one of my workouts and try to substitute in more walking throughout the week.. that along with cutting out yoghurt and fingers crossed in a couple of weeks I'll feel a little better0 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
....no1 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Muscleflex79 wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print.
scary that a "healthcare professional" believes in starvation mode and doesn't believe in calorie deficit for weight loss???
Oh I don't believe anyone should put them selves in starvation mode. I am saying the opposite. I am saying that you need to eat enough ...eating too little is dangerous. I personally ate double in the last few months from what I used to and lost weight. You misread the posts. Not a good idea to make the calorie deficit gap too large. I appreciate the concern of miscommunication.
Also no LOL2 -
joannalouise92 wrote: »Okay so I'm happy to have a deficit of just 250 per day; but my difficulty is knowing what to take that from.. anyone have any idea what seems reasonable? Given I've been doing what I think is net 1200 per day (before gym workout calories) and not getting anywhere... is 1200 reasonable?
A deficit of 250 is great. Your BMR is 1550 and it's a pretty good estimate. Your TDEE for sedentary is 1.2 x BMR so 1860. I think a safe bet would be to try 1600 and don't eat back the calories it adds from exercise. Try it for two weeks.
If it helps your brain (it helps mine), weigh yourself in the morning every day, and record it. I know lots of people say don't do this because of the amount the body fluctuates over the day, but that is exactly what you want to see. Your body is a machine, reacting to what goes through it. Weighing yourself every day shows you how much your body changes from day to day and it gives you a real picture of what your body machine is doing. Your body could fluctuate 5 lbs from one day to the next. If you only weigh yourself once per week, you could catch a low weight day first, then a high weight day second, so it would look like you'd gained weight, but you wouldn't be able to see the other days to show you that the trend is still down.
You're on the right track, don't get discouraged. Sometimes we just need to figure it all out before things start working.0 -
Lipsmahoney wrote: »Muscleflex79 wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »Maxematics wrote: »Lipsmahoney wrote: »joannalouise92 wrote: »I think then, as clearly I'm underestimating calories even when weighing, I'm going to have to aim for a lower net goal or maybe 1000
I'll stop eating back my calories from walking too
Just can't understand how gym sessions are having no impact especially when you combine it with the low calories (even if it's not as low as apparently it needs to be it's still pretty low)
Don't you think that shows there's some issue ?
I think you are putting your body in starvation mode. The time between meals( no more than 3 hours EVER), when you eat (ie after workout equal carbs and protein grams and nothing 2 hours before cardio), fasted morning cardio before breakfast and so on may be causing problems.
Just...what is this foolishness? If you should never let three hours pass between meals, how do you sleep at night when all those precious meal window times are being abandoned? I don't know where you heard or read this but it's absolute nonsense.
losing 60 lbs in 7 months is what I base this on .... not everyone is the same. Do what works for you
You lost weight because you were eating in a calorie deficit. The frequency and timing of your eating had nothing to do with it outside of the fact that it was something you were able to stick to that created said deficit.
There is no such thing as starvation mode as you represent it in your post.
As a health professional with expertise in the area... we could argue all day. People need to do what works for them and finding that formula is as individual as your finger print.
scary that a "healthcare professional" believes in starvation mode and doesn't believe in calorie deficit for weight loss???
Oh I don't believe anyone should put them selves in starvation mode. I am saying the opposite. I am saying that you need to eat enough ...eating too little is dangerous. I personally ate double in the last few months from what I used to and lost weight. You misread the posts. Not a good idea to make the calorie deficit gap too large. I appreciate the concern of miscommunication.
Nobody was disputing that eating too little is dangerous or that one shouldnt make the calorie deficit too large.
But OP is doing neither of those things, since she is not in fact losing weight.
People also disputed your silly idea about having to eat every 3 hours - eat whenever in the day you like and have as big or small a time gap between meals as you like - the total calories for the day is what matters for weight loss.
and btw, nearly every day I have more than 3 hours between lunch and tea. Nothing in between. Lunch is at work around 1- 1:30 and tea is around 7:00 ish.
Did not stop me from reaching or maintaining my goal weight.3
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