Not losing weight
Options
Replies
-
I started eating Keto in Jan... and while I dropped from 212 to 205 in a few weeks... I stalled and fluctuated up and down for a good few weeks. then it would drop a lb then fluctuate up and then back to that new weight... and on and on it went like that. I was thinking I'd never get below 200. I do notice that on days that if my carbs is more than 10% and I eat more fat and protein to offset the carb intake... even to the point where I think I ate too much I'd lose something the next day. This morn I weighed in at 195.9 omg...Just last week I was stuck at 198/197...I'm so excited... I haven't seen this number in a LONG TIME . I'm glad I didn't give up... we even had a birthday party on Sat... and stuck to my guns...even had a few drinks... but it's been Slow and steady... in the weeks that I stalled... I chose to look at it well atleast I'm not gaining and my clothes were loser.. .today I was able to fit in a pants that I couldn't wear that I got it uber tight about a month and half ago... and today it fits nicely and almost loose. :-) I'm going to make an apt soon to check my blood levels as I was pre-diabetic... hoping this takes me out of that stage. I know others drop fast...but I'm ok with slow and steady as long as it's heading in the right direction. I did one of the KETO calculators and it told me I should eat alteast 1660 cals a day... and I'm trying to keep to 10% carbs, 60% fat and 30% protein... and I shoot for 1400 a day to create a lil more deficit... I wear a fitbit...so the more I move the more cals it gives me to eat. :-) The days I go over on my cals... I try to pick up more movement, walking etc...so that I get more cals to keep me from going over...somedays I just say oh well... and if my overage was spent on fat... I am pleasantly surprised the next day by some loss.2
-
I started eating Keto in Jan... and while I dropped from 212 to 205 in a few weeks... I stalled and fluctuated up and down for a good few weeks. then it would drop a lb then fluctuate up and then back to that new weight... and on and on it went like that. I was thinking I'd never get below 200. I do notice that on days that if my carbs is more than 10% and I eat more fat and protein to offset the carb intake... even to the point where I think I ate too much I'd lose something the next day. This morn I weighed in at 195.9 omg...Just last week I was stuck at 198/197...I'm so excited... I haven't seen this number in a LONG TIME . I'm glad I didn't give up... we even had a birthday party on Sat... and stuck to my guns...even had a few drinks... but it's been Slow and steady... in the weeks that I stalled... I chose to look at it well atleast I'm not gaining and my clothes were loser.. .today I was able to fit in a pants that I couldn't wear that I got it uber tight about a month and half ago... and today it fits nicely and almost loose. :-) I'm going to make an apt soon to check my blood levels as I was pre-diabetic... hoping this takes me out of that stage. I know others drop fast...but I'm ok with slow and steady as long as it's heading in the right direction. I did one of the KETO calculators and it told me I should eat alteast 1660 cals a day... and I'm trying to keep to 10% carbs, 60% fat and 30% protein... and I shoot for 1400 a day to create a lil more deficit... I wear a fitbit...so the more I move the more cals it gives me to eat. :-) The days I go over on my cals... I try to pick up more movement, walking etc...so that I get more cals to keep me from going over...somedays I just say oh well... and if my overage was spent on fat... I am pleasantly surprised the next day by some loss.
I agree about slow and steady having advantages. I went that route and believe that is why maintenance has been so easy.
One suggestion I would make is to go by actual grams instead of percentages. At 1400 calories, 10% carbs would be 35 grams which is likely more than you can eat and maintain ketosis regular. Most can't go above about 20 grams per day. If you are like most, you are not testing your blood or breath for ketones due to the cost. The pee sticks are not always accurate and when they are, they are only accurate in the beginning because as your body becomes more adept at using ketones less will be in your urine. Even those eating the SAD will have frequently have some ketones in their urine before breakfast if they have gone at least 12 hours since last eating.
I know those calculators are popular, but every expert I have heard have all stressed it is the number of grams and not the percentage - Drs Phinney, Westman and Naly as well as Jimmy Moore would be included in that list.
All that said, you do not have to be keto to lose weight or improve your health. I lost the vast majority of my weight doing low carb not keto. I didn't really know about keto until I was about 10 lbs away from my maintenance weight. The change to keto dropped that weight off quite rapidly though. Because of BG control and just because I like the way I feel, I have remained in keto for maintenance these last several months.5 -
helen772010 wrote: »Thank you for your replies.
My macros are
20g carbs
75g protein
115g carbs
Calories are set at 1500
Im 39 and 11st .13lb
I would like to lose 27lb
I feel ok although tired and headachy.
I test ketosis using urine ketosticks
I have decided to try lfhc for health reaons too especially the benefits that are said for cancer survivors.
I think you probably meant 115g fat, yes?!
The symptoms you describe are due to electrolyte imbalance...and what most people call the Keto Flu. When following this WOE, your body NEEDS 3000-5000mg of Salt/Sodium every single day.
2 -
Calories 100% do matter. I would suggest weighing and recording accurately for a while. Every little thing that goes in your mouth. Be totally honest. 100 cals over can make a huge difference. I lose weight on 1500 (I'm 5'10") but not on 1650. Eyeballing quantities doesn't work. Neither do those entries like "1 sausage" or "1 large XX" - if you have them in your diary. If 1500 is too many calories, reduce it to 1400. LCHF is not magic, you still need a calorie deficit. The only reason it's so effective is you find it easier to eat less due to reduced hunger.
Also this http://www.ditchthecarbs.com/top-10-reasons-youre-not-loosing-weight/2 -
I agree with @EbonyDahlia . I have been mostly low carb for a year and still don't have it dialled in. If I skip breakfast and stay below 1300 I will slowly lose weight.1
-
It's funny I went on a rant this morning about the scales not co-operating. I weigh-in everyday just so I can pick up on trends and I can see that I'm due a drop sometime soon. So what I'm saying is, if you look at my trends since January I bounce around all over the place all month, followed by a drop at the end of the month (after my TOM). Patience is the key, just keep going, you will get there.
1 -
EKG of a cracked-out kangaroo...
But it's realistic. THAT'S what a real weight graph looks like. That's normal for lots of folks.
3 -
I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories0
-
I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories
Hmmmm, it suggests eating less fat than protein? I thought this was bad? I'm 5'7" and it says 103g protein, minimum of 77g fat.0 -
I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories
Hmmmm, it suggests eating less fat than protein? I thought this was bad? I'm 5'7" and it says 103g protein, minimum of 77g fat.
How much fat you eat is adjusted up or down based on weight loss, maintenance or weight gain goals. Carbs and protein are pretty much fixed and consumed fat is adjusted to create or close a calorie deficit.
Basically, if you want to burn more body fat, eat less fat.1 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories
Hmmmm, it suggests eating less fat than protein? I thought this was bad? I'm 5'7" and it says 103g protein, minimum of 77g fat.
How much fat you eat is adjusted up or down based on weight loss, maintenance or weight gain goals. Carbs and protein are pretty much fixed and consumed fat is adjusted to create or close a calorie deficit.
Basically, if you want to burn more body fat, eat less fat.
Oh, so at least 77g but more depending on left over calories (after carbs and protein). I just thought I read somewhere that you should eat more fat than protein to avoid your body using protein as an energy source? Or is this in % not grams?0 -
I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories
Hmmmm, it suggests eating less fat than protein? I thought this was bad? I'm 5'7" and it says 103g protein, minimum of 77g fat.
Protein is a funny topic. There is a lot of variability. Unfortunately, with that there is a lot of conflict within the keto community.
IMHO, we need to stop the infighting on this topic and understand that depending on factors such as level of activity, insulin resistance, genetics, etc., the amount of protein one can consume and remain ketogenic will vary.
There is a bare minimum that is needed. Even that amount can be debated. I tend to look at the arguments that have scientific studies to back them up. The lowest amount seems to be about 0.75 g per kg of lean body mass for someone who basically sits on the couch all day with little to no activity.
Phinney and Volek recommend between 1.5-2 grams per kg of ideal body weight.
Those factors mentioned above affect how your body will treat protein above what you need. Those who are extremely IR are more likely to convert that protein into glucose via gluconeogenesis. Those who are healthy metabolically and very active are less likely to do so until much higher levels are consumed.
To truly know what is best for you, you would need to get a blood ketone meter or a breath ketone meter (urine strips are not reliable) to measure your level of ketosis and do your own n=1 experiment to see how different levels of protein affect you. Some use BG readings, but that will not tell the whole story because protein will convert to glucose in the blood much slower than carbs will, so it is more like getting a steady stream of low dose glucose over a longer period of time thus not giving a real spike in those BG readings. However, it could be preventing you from getting into ketosis which is why the ketones have to be measured to know for sure.
Again, IMHO, the OKL chart may very well be a good one to use for those who are metabolically healthy, but if one is IR, I think there is a good chance the protein may be too high depending on your level of IR.
We in the keto community need to stop doing what those in the SAD community do, which is claim that if a certain thing works for me, then it must work for everyone exactly the same way and if it doesn't then that other person must be doing it wrong.4 -
cstehansen wrote: »I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories
Hmmmm, it suggests eating less fat than protein? I thought this was bad? I'm 5'7" and it says 103g protein, minimum of 77g fat.
Protein is a funny topic. There is a lot of variability. Unfortunately, with that there is a lot of conflict within the keto community.
IMHO, we need to stop the infighting on this topic and understand that depending on factors such as level of activity, insulin resistance, genetics, etc., the amount of protein one can consume and remain ketogenic will vary.
There is a bare minimum that is needed. Even that amount can be debated. I tend to look at the arguments that have scientific studies to back them up. The lowest amount seems to be about 0.75 g per kg of lean body mass for someone who basically sits on the couch all day with little to no activity.
Phinney and Volek recommend between 1.5-2 grams per kg of ideal body weight.
Those factors mentioned above affect how your body will treat protein above what you need. Those who are extremely IR are more likely to convert that protein into glucose via gluconeogenesis. Those who are healthy metabolically and very active are less likely to do so until much higher levels are consumed.
To truly know what is best for you, you would need to get a blood ketone meter or a breath ketone meter (urine strips are not reliable) to measure your level of ketosis and do your own n=1 experiment to see how different levels of protein affect you. Some use BG readings, but that will not tell the whole story because protein will convert to glucose in the blood much slower than carbs will, so it is more like getting a steady stream of low dose glucose over a longer period of time thus not giving a real spike in those BG readings. However, it could be preventing you from getting into ketosis which is why the ketones have to be measured to know for sure.
Again, IMHO, the OKL chart may very well be a good one to use for those who are metabolically healthy, but if one is IR, I think there is a good chance the protein may be too high depending on your level of IR.
We in the keto community need to stop doing what those in the SAD community do, which is claim that if a certain thing works for me, then it must work for everyone exactly the same way and if it doesn't then that other person must be doing it wrong.
Okey dokey. I didn't realise this was a cause of debate, I thought the whole gluconeogenesis was a set-in-stone fact kind of thing. Hence the high-fat part. Plus my step-mother-in-law hit the roof when I said I was doing low-carb because she has poly-cystic kidneys and started going on about too much protein is bad for your kidneys etc etc.
Has this been put into a sticky at the top of the page? I don't remember reading about it, otherwise I would have accepted the chart and moved on. I was more concerned than wanted to start something, I'm sorry
1 -
cstehansen wrote: »I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories
Hmmmm, it suggests eating less fat than protein? I thought this was bad? I'm 5'7" and it says 103g protein, minimum of 77g fat.
Protein is a funny topic. There is a lot of variability. Unfortunately, with that there is a lot of conflict within the keto community.
IMHO, we need to stop the infighting on this topic and understand that depending on factors such as level of activity, insulin resistance, genetics, etc., the amount of protein one can consume and remain ketogenic will vary.
There is a bare minimum that is needed. Even that amount can be debated. I tend to look at the arguments that have scientific studies to back them up. The lowest amount seems to be about 0.75 g per kg of lean body mass for someone who basically sits on the couch all day with little to no activity.
Phinney and Volek recommend between 1.5-2 grams per kg of ideal body weight.
Those factors mentioned above affect how your body will treat protein above what you need. Those who are extremely IR are more likely to convert that protein into glucose via gluconeogenesis. Those who are healthy metabolically and very active are less likely to do so until much higher levels are consumed.
To truly know what is best for you, you would need to get a blood ketone meter or a breath ketone meter (urine strips are not reliable) to measure your level of ketosis and do your own n=1 experiment to see how different levels of protein affect you. Some use BG readings, but that will not tell the whole story because protein will convert to glucose in the blood much slower than carbs will, so it is more like getting a steady stream of low dose glucose over a longer period of time thus not giving a real spike in those BG readings. However, it could be preventing you from getting into ketosis which is why the ketones have to be measured to know for sure.
Again, IMHO, the OKL chart may very well be a good one to use for those who are metabolically healthy, but if one is IR, I think there is a good chance the protein may be too high depending on your level of IR.
We in the keto community need to stop doing what those in the SAD community do, which is claim that if a certain thing works for me, then it must work for everyone exactly the same way and if it doesn't then that other person must be doing it wrong.
Okey dokey. I didn't realise this was a cause of debate, I thought the whole gluconeogenesis was a set-in-stone fact kind of thing. Hence the high-fat part. Plus my step-mother-in-law hit the roof when I said I was doing low-carb because she has poly-cystic kidneys and started going on about too much protein is bad for your kidneys etc etc.
Has this been put into a sticky at the top of the page? I don't remember reading about it, otherwise I would have accepted the chart and moved on. I was more concerned than wanted to start something, I'm sorry
No apology necessary. If you look through the older threads, you will just see this topic come up over and over again. You will see it on keto FB pages and elsewhere. I was just trying to avoid having this turn into one of "those" debates.
As for the protein damaging the kidneys, the research shows that if your kidneys are healthy, then excess protein does not damage them. The fact that protein is excreted through kidneys that are damaged has led to some assumptions which have not been able to be proved scientifically. I would put this in the same camp as those who said cholesterol build up in your arteries gives you a heart attack, therefore eating cholesterol will give you a heart attack. The logic, on the surface, sounds good. The problem is the reality does not match up.
Damaged kidneys can show improvement on a keto diet, though. This has been shown scientifically. It would take me a while to find this since my research catalog is quite large and unorganized and I did not keep copies of everything. I also don't recall if they specified the protein amounts in the study.0 -
cstehansen wrote: »cstehansen wrote: »I have done keto quite a bit over the years and the only time I ever managed to consistently lose after the initial water weight loss, was when I actually tracked my macros. I always followed the OKL chart (google it). I think even though I was eating less due to ketosis, I was still eating too much fat and that was pushing me over my calories
Hmmmm, it suggests eating less fat than protein? I thought this was bad? I'm 5'7" and it says 103g protein, minimum of 77g fat.
Protein is a funny topic. There is a lot of variability. Unfortunately, with that there is a lot of conflict within the keto community.
IMHO, we need to stop the infighting on this topic and understand that depending on factors such as level of activity, insulin resistance, genetics, etc., the amount of protein one can consume and remain ketogenic will vary.
There is a bare minimum that is needed. Even that amount can be debated. I tend to look at the arguments that have scientific studies to back them up. The lowest amount seems to be about 0.75 g per kg of lean body mass for someone who basically sits on the couch all day with little to no activity.
Phinney and Volek recommend between 1.5-2 grams per kg of ideal body weight.
Those factors mentioned above affect how your body will treat protein above what you need. Those who are extremely IR are more likely to convert that protein into glucose via gluconeogenesis. Those who are healthy metabolically and very active are less likely to do so until much higher levels are consumed.
To truly know what is best for you, you would need to get a blood ketone meter or a breath ketone meter (urine strips are not reliable) to measure your level of ketosis and do your own n=1 experiment to see how different levels of protein affect you. Some use BG readings, but that will not tell the whole story because protein will convert to glucose in the blood much slower than carbs will, so it is more like getting a steady stream of low dose glucose over a longer period of time thus not giving a real spike in those BG readings. However, it could be preventing you from getting into ketosis which is why the ketones have to be measured to know for sure.
Again, IMHO, the OKL chart may very well be a good one to use for those who are metabolically healthy, but if one is IR, I think there is a good chance the protein may be too high depending on your level of IR.
We in the keto community need to stop doing what those in the SAD community do, which is claim that if a certain thing works for me, then it must work for everyone exactly the same way and if it doesn't then that other person must be doing it wrong.
Okey dokey. I didn't realise this was a cause of debate, I thought the whole gluconeogenesis was a set-in-stone fact kind of thing. Hence the high-fat part. Plus my step-mother-in-law hit the roof when I said I was doing low-carb because she has poly-cystic kidneys and started going on about too much protein is bad for your kidneys etc etc.
Has this been put into a sticky at the top of the page? I don't remember reading about it, otherwise I would have accepted the chart and moved on. I was more concerned than wanted to start something, I'm sorry
No apology necessary. If you look through the older threads, you will just see this topic come up over and over again. You will see it on keto FB pages and elsewhere. I was just trying to avoid having this turn into one of "those" debates.
As for the protein damaging the kidneys, the research shows that if your kidneys are healthy, then excess protein does not damage them. The fact that protein is excreted through kidneys that are damaged has led to some assumptions which have not been able to be proved scientifically. I would put this in the same camp as those who said cholesterol build up in your arteries gives you a heart attack, therefore eating cholesterol will give you a heart attack. The logic, on the surface, sounds good. The problem is the reality does not match up.
Damaged kidneys can show improvement on a keto diet, though. This has been shown scientifically. It would take me a while to find this since my research catalog is quite large and unorganized and I did not keep copies of everything. I also don't recall if they specified the protein amounts in the study.
I understand your frustration with repeated debates, that's why I try to stay out the main forum. It's a shame the groups don't have a search option, it would save the same questions coming up.
Judging from her reaction to the news I don't think any research would persuade her low-carb is a good idea! But I appreciate you explaining all the same. The protein excretion was exactly what she was talking about. I guess it's the same as people blaming too much fat in diets for people being fat.1 -
cstehansen wrote: »
Damaged kidneys can show improvement on a keto diet, though. This has been shown scientifically. It would take me a while to find this since my research catalog is quite large and unorganized and I did not keep copies of everything. I also don't recall if they specified the protein amounts in the study.
FYI, Dr. Bernstein personally reversed kidney disease from mistreated T1D by switching to LC.
1 -
The fat % of your diet comes from the fat you eat and your body fat. So if you're eating less fat the rest is taken from your fat stores, which is what you want to happen.2
-
Thank you for all the advice/replies.
Sunny bunny you look fab. I did go through chemo and rads back in 2012 and i think this has definitely changed my metabolic rate as i had never had an issue with weight before treatment. I was always a steady 143lbs and at 5"9 i was happy at that weight.
Ginamisa well done for sticking it out.
I actually lost 2lb on weigh day, i also noticed that i was going over on my fat g fror the day. I have started drinking water, homalayan salt and lemon before breakfast and have dropped my calories for 1200.1
