Can someone explain "Is My Scale Broken"
roselee2014
Posts: 17 Member
I weigh 168.4 & 5' 4" I want to lose 30 lbs. I have followed MFP calorie schedule 1700 always under about 300. I burn on average 500 calories a day with a workout in the evening 6 days a week. I don't eat my calories back. I started this workout 5 weeks ago. I have lost 3 inches on my waist & I can see my stomach & butt is shrinking etc. I feel better & stronger but the scale has not budged at all. It's really starting to make me wonder is my scale possessed 
looking for answers please!! Thank you
looking for answers please!! Thank you 0
Replies
-
This happened to me last year. Everyone commented on how much thinner I was looking, but the scale wouldn't budge. However, at the same time I was losing fat, I was gaining muscle. You might also be retaining water in your muscles from the new workout. Be patient and you'll see the numbers fall!3
-
It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!3
-
So MFP gives you 1700, you undereat by 300 which gives you 1400, and you burn another 500, giving you a net of 900 per day,. and you're not losing weight? How long have you been doing this, a week, a month, or a year? Something doesn't add up here5
-
You're going to retain some water when you first start working out. If you're eating too little you are just going to cause yourself more stress and that can end up causing more water retention.5
-
trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.4 -
Does your scale literally read 168.4 each time you've stepped on it over the last 5 weeks? Since weight fluctuates I'd find this odd, so it would not hurt to replace the batteries. Or replace the scale if you truly think something is wrong with it.
But if you mean you started at 168.4 and now 5 weeks later, you're not seeing 'much' change (such as weight has moved up or down a pound here, there but you expected to be down several) then you may just need patience.9 -
moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Yep. I run 5 miles and burn about 300 calories. Why do you think?4 -
So many questions:
- Have you replaced the scale's batteries lately? Tested it with something of known weight such as dumbbells or a multi-gallon water jug?
- Are you weighing your food or eyeballing/estimating/using package info/believing restaurant info frequently?
- What is that 500 calorie workout, and how do you estimate the calories? (My spin bike said 700-something for a hour class today, which makes me LOL uproariously to even consider - heart rate monitor said 371 . . . for an intense hour that left me dragged out in the short run, despite being a long-term active person and athlete. 500 is certainly possible, even though you're not extremely overweight, but 500 is quite a large number).
- No so-called cheat days or breaks in logging or over-goal days in that 5 weeks?
- Logging all oils used in cooking, tastes and bites while cooking, condiments, beverages, etc?
In 5 weeks, I'm sorry to say that you won't have gained enough muscle to offset a significant fat loss. Under optimal conditions - which include a calorie surplus, not a deficit - a woman would be doing very well to gain a quarter pound of muscle on average per week while doing an aggressive, progressive, well-designed weight-lifting program with muscle gain as its explicit goal. You absolutely can get stronger and "tighter" in 5 weeks, however (and exercise is worth doing to retain as much existing muscle as possible while losing weight).
Some people do hang onto water weight with new exercise, and women's time of month can also trigger water weight gain (at any time from ovulation through menses), so you may simply have had water weight masking fat loss for a small number of weeks . . . if so, you should see a scale drop soon, possibly substantial.
It's also possible that you have a (statistically) unusually small calorie requirement, but it's far more likely that there's some issue with logging and calculation, so anything you can do to tighten up food logging will help you to figure out whether that's a factor.
I'm truly not trying to be discouraging - you can do this, and patience is a big part of it!4 -
moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Not that it is accurate (I hope it is because I use Runtastic) but "a work out" is not very specific1 -
Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Yep. I run 5 miles and burn about 300 calories. Why do you think?
I think it's because you are considerably smaller than I am. That and the fitness trackers we're using are most likely not 100% accurate. Why do you think?1 -
moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.0 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
Getting faster, but I think it's mostly because of the hills, there's an elevation gain of around 600 feet. I hope it's that and not that Runtastic is way off on calculating calories burned.2 -
moonstroller wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Yep. I run 5 miles and burn about 300 calories. Why do you think?
I think it's because you are considerably smaller than I am. That and the fitness trackers we're using are most likely not 100% accurate. Why do you think?
That was my thought too! Yay!2 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
or up some BIG hills. Never heard of such a burn for only 5 miles. My 5 miles always around 300.2 -
moonstroller wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
Getting faster, but I think it's mostly because of the hills, there's an elevation gain of around 600 feet. I hope it's that and not that Runtastic is way off on calculating calories burned.
You can double check using this: http://www.runnersworld.com/tools/calories-burned-calculator
or invest in an heart rate monitor...1 -
Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Yep. I run 5 miles and burn about 300 calories. Why do you think?
I think it's because you are considerably smaller than I am. That and the fitness trackers we're using are most likely not 100% accurate. Why do you think?
That was my thought too! Yay!
I'm interested to see what it reads when I'm in much better shape and go a lot faster. I've noticed Runtastic tends to err on the side of time, so when I go slower and longer it shows a higher caloric burn than when I go faster and quicker. Personally I think I should be burning more calories pushing myself to run faster. I'm sure it's related to whatever logarithm Runtastic uses given the particulars I've entered for height, weight, sex, and age. I know it's not perfect, but it should be ball park, or at least close enough for my purposes.0 -
You may be losing weight and gaining muscle. It can be a good thing. Don't focus on the scale and keep eating healthy foods. You got this!0
-
moonstroller wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Yep. I run 5 miles and burn about 300 calories. Why do you think?
I think it's because you are considerably smaller than I am. That and the fitness trackers we're using are most likely not 100% accurate. Why do you think?
That was my thought too! Yay!
I'm interested to see what it reads when I'm in much better shape and go a lot faster. I've noticed Runtastic tends to err on the side of time, so when I go slower and longer it shows a higher caloric burn than when I go faster and quicker. Personally I think I should be burning more calories pushing myself to run faster. I'm sure it's related to whatever logarithm Runtastic uses given the particulars I've entered for height, weight, sex, and age. I know it's not perfect, but it should be ball park, or at least close enough for my purposes.
If you're losing weight, don't worry about it.1 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
Or heavy.1 -
mitchell_maya1705 wrote: »You may be losing weight and gaining muscle. It can be a good thing. Don't focus on the scale and keep eating healthy foods. You got this!
No4 -
Totally normal to retain water starting a new workout! But I agree with a previous poster, you should be some fluctuation in ounces on your scale. I wouldn't trust it too much if it is staying at the exact same number.2
-
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »Never heard of such a burn for only 5 miles. My 5 miles always around 300.
I wonder if you're cheating yourself out of some calories. Do you run really slow and/or are you around the 100 lb mark? I think that's what it'd take to burn only 300 calories for 5 miles.
I think you'd just have to be closer to 200 lbs at an average pace and/or run quite fast to get up above 700 calories so it isn't unusual.0 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
or up some BIG hills. Never heard of such a burn for only 5 miles. My 5 miles always around 300.
My fast-ish walks (15 min miles) I average a burn of 100 cals per mile. In an hour long boot camp class I have burned close to 900 calories. I use a heart rate monitor for all of my activities. I think we can't compare our burns to anothers since there are so many things that could make a difference from one individual to another. I do find it fascinating hearing what everyones burns are however for the same activities (see this at OTF classes)0 -
TavistockToad wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
Or heavy.
5'9" tall and 165 pounds.0 -
CricketClover wrote: »Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
or up some BIG hills. Never heard of such a burn for only 5 miles. My 5 miles always around 300.
My fast-ish walks (15 min miles) I average a burn of 100 cals per mile. In an hour long boot camp class I have burned close to 900 calories. I use a heart rate monitor for all of my activities. I think we can't compare our burns to anothers since there are so many things that could make a difference from one individual to another. I do find it fascinating hearing what everyones burns are however for the same activities (see this at OTF classes)
Fascinating. On my most recent 4mph walk, I burned about 80 calories per mile according to my HRM (5'5", 130lbs, age 61) - some mild hills, but lots of near-flat, about 4.42 miles for 355 calories (distance from Garmin).
But I'm not sure any of our comparative calories help OP, though. (I already threw in my best attempt at helpful, a few posts back.)1 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
or up some BIG hills. Never heard of such a burn for only 5 miles. My 5 miles always around 300.
Are you also @ 5'9" tall and 165 pounds like moonstroller?1 -
trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
What's a workout mean to you? 30-60-90-120+ minutes?3 -
CricketClover wrote: »Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »It's unlikely you burn 500 calories in a workout!
Why not? According to Runtastic I burn anywhere from 750 to 850 calories running 5 miles.
Whoah - that's a lot. You must be pretty fast.
or up some BIG hills. Never heard of such a burn for only 5 miles. My 5 miles always around 300.
My fast-ish walks (15 min miles) I average a burn of 100 cals per mile. In an hour long boot camp class I have burned close to 900 calories. I use a heart rate monitor for all of my activities. I think we can't compare our burns to anothers since there are so many things that could make a difference from one individual to another. I do find it fascinating hearing what everyones burns are however for the same activities (see this at OTF classes)
Fascinating. On my most recent 4mph walk, I burned about 80 calories per mile according to my HRM (5'5", 130lbs, age 61) - some mild hills, but lots of near-flat, about 4.42 miles for 355 calories (distance from Garmin).
But I'm not sure any of our comparative calories help OP, though. (I already threw in my best attempt at helpful, a few posts back.)
I am 5'6", 150 lbs, age 34, there are also a couple of wicked hills on my walk but only a 200 ft elevation gain (I also use a garmin hr/tracking device). I do trust my garmin device for things like walking, hiking, running etc but not so much for group indoor fitness and weight training (obviously) but still use it anyway for those things.0 -
There are a ton of variables to calculating burn. One person's 300-500 could be another's 800. It depends on how intense and what your heart is doing over time, and obviously what the overall work load is. After all, calories are a measure of energy - and it stands to reason that for the same intensity (not speed), it would take more energy for a larger mass than a smaller one to do the same thing. 500 calories in a workout for me, even a relatively short one, is not out of the question at all. For the OP, I would think it would have to be pretty intense and for a pretty good amount of time (or a super-intense HIIT), but not unreasonable.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions