Calorie defecit not losing weight
Replies
-
Friendly reminder-
Make sure you are staying on track and helping the OP.
If you want to debate a specific comment by another poster please take it over to debate.
Thanks,
4legs
MFP moderator9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Muscleflex79 wrote: »I don't think that the jam or the mayo can add up to 500 cals per day, you have to eat a lot more of them... Maybe you have some hormonal issues? Your BMR might be lower due to medical anomaly
in what world would a "medical anomaly" be more likely than janejellyroll's advice above??
It's a very common issue, well at least in my country I see people everywhere with similar problems, they usually don't know it until they struggle with diets. It was just a guess, you never know...
It's actually not a very common issue. If you find it hard to see how routine logging errors could keep someone from success in their weight loss, I don't know if as many people around you have medical anomalies as you think. How do you know that they too aren't just routinely underestimating their intake (which is a very, very common issue among humans)?
Yeah well they go to an endocrinologist or a gastroenterologist... I never said that mismeasuring would be less common... I'm a biologist, I see how there are so many people who don't know anything about their medical condition until they see a doctor. I don't know why you should fight for your truth this way. You might be right, might not. What you say is the easiest solution, but that may not be the reality.
I'm sorry you live in a country where everywhere there are people with medical problems that are lowering their BMR. This isn't the case in other countries, so it probably doesn't make sense to recommend this to people outside of your specific region.
I'm not "fighting" for my truth, I'm trying to help the OP. I don't think it makes sense for someone who hasn't yet tried accurate logging to go to the doctor to eliminate a medical issue for which there is no evidence. Even if you are right and her BMR has been lowered by the condition that is endemic in your country (or maybe another condition), she'll still need -- at some point -- to be able to accurately log in order to lose weight.
If you're a biologist, maybe you've encountered the idea that when troubleshooting, it's better to focus first on the most likely solution to a problem. That's the approach I am advocating for here. That it is also the easiest is a bonus.26 -
collectingblues wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »The advice from janejellyroll is helpful. See with things like the vodka cran night I was on a pubcrawl with my class and It literally consisted of me sharing that vodka cran with a friend as we ran to the next bar, that kind of night isnt common it was more of a one time thing. The vodka cran was mostly ice, 1.5 ounces of vodka and then some cranberry juice so when i only had the rest after my friend couldn't finish it I figured 104 calories should be a fair over estimation of my share to air on the safe side.
with things like easter pie and apple crisp made at a friends house I can't exactly get an ingredient list where I didn't make it so my weird decimal numbers are how I attempt to estimate the things I have no way to measure. Is there a better way to approach items like this that don't have restaurant calories available or anything? after over a year of tracking i figured my best guess at those Items would be within reason based on similar ones I've had before
We're all going to sometimes finish someone's drink or eat something out that we have to estimate. But it looks like you're doing that fairly frequently (at least over the past couple of weeks). When you're estimating a lot, you may see the results in your weight loss.
You don't have to stop doing these things *forever*, but while you're trying to figure things out it may be worth committing to a brief period where you get your logging under control, dedicate yourself to weighing everything, and avoid/minimize generic/database entries created by other people.
And, to add to this, if you're going to eat out, and you can't get the recipe, use something like the Aramark or Sodexo entries for the particular item. Those two companies are the largest catering/food service providers in the United States, and even if it's not 100 percent accurate, the odds are really good that it's going to be the closest thing to the real thing that you can get. And it is far better than some generic entry from some other user when you have absolutely no idea of what went in it, or how it was prepared.
Also, If you're eating out, Go ahead and be comfortable overestimating. If you're getting a pub burger, and the restaurant doesn't have a menu or calories online, Find a big pub burger like Fudd's or Red Robin, vs picking a McDonald's hamburger.9 -
As a general rule, if you're estimating a lot and not losing weight, you're estimating too low.
11 -
The time frame is not long enough to make any sort of accurate assessment, but I agree with the other veteran posters that you need to tighten up on logging. Simply put if you aren't losing you have yet to establish a caloric deficit.
You need to be patient with this though. 2 weeks is not long enough and why experts give 6 weeks before declaring a "plateau" (which is nonsense, but provides something else to cast aspersions onto).
Also you need to be realistic about the rate of loss as this will decay as you trend towards your "optimal" weight. Your body naturally wants to keep its energy reserves (fat) and will slow down fat burning as your deficit continues. Expect a .5-1 lb/week loss for those last 10-20 lbs.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Weight lifting does burn calories, but it doesn't burn as much as you think.
Based on my observed TDEE (i.e. at what calorie intake level I maintain weight) estimations of calorie burn for weight lifting overshoots by 2-3x depending on method (I've tried the old UA39 hear rate monitor, apple watch, Polar H7 heart rate monitor, UA record's estimation database). I'd get credit for 500-700 calories per hour lifting where my TDEE only goes up ~200 cals.2 -
well on the average day my active calories is about 550, but that includes about 400 cal at the gym and I have to walk a fair ways into school so I think a hundred other calories above my BMR is pretty reasonable for the watch to calculate
How are you calculating that? Are you using a high-quality and properly calibrated heart rate monitor? If not, you're almost guaranteed to be overestimating your burns.5 -
Yeah, start with tightening things up in regards to your logging. It's not unusual to be able to get away with inaccuracies early on...but you don't get away with them forever.
I'd say your diary is the most glaring issue followed by calorie expenditure estimates.3 -
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »well on the average day my active calories is about 550, but that includes about 400 cal at the gym and I have to walk a fair ways into school so I think a hundred other calories above my BMR is pretty reasonable for the watch to calculate
How are you calculating that? Are you using a high-quality and properly calibrated heart rate monitor? If not, you're almost guaranteed to be overestimating your burns.
HRM is going to overestimate for most things as well, especially light weight training and calisthenics intervals.7 -
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »well on the average day my active calories is about 550, but that includes about 400 cal at the gym and I have to walk a fair ways into school so I think a hundred other calories above my BMR is pretty reasonable for the watch to calculate
How are you calculating that? Are you using a high-quality and properly calibrated heart rate monitor? If not, you're almost guaranteed to be overestimating your burns.
Even the best HRMs when you adjust V02Max and Max HR, are still only good estimatores in certain circumstances/parameters, namely steady state cardio. Once you add interval or anaerobic exercises to the equation, they are not even close to accurate, may as well make up a number that seems right in those cases.3 -
heres my workout from thursday on the apple watch info screen. The other includes my weights, some walking, jumping jacks, boxer bounces and machine use. I know it isnt perfect but I am finding it more accurate seeming than my fitbit used to which matches with the research saying its about as good as you can get in a wearable but I'll put this here just for anyones interest.
In terms of eating I will crack down on things I can't measure and stick to things I can to see if that helps. The thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that most days even if my over estimations of burn and underestimates of eating was off by even 500 calories I should still lose like half a pound a week at least, It just seems like there should be room in these calculations for a fair amount of error that should still cause loss.
4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »I see some things that may be no better than guesses like "Dessert - Lemon Meringue Pie, 0.1125 th of a pie." I agree with @stanmann571 that you want to be weighing your condiments, especially calorie-dense things like mayo. You have a fair amount of generic entries (like "Generic - Stuffing, 0.2 cup") and these are often no better than guesses. Things like "Homemade - Healthy Apple Crisp, 1 slice" were created by other people -- you have no idea what ingredients they used, how big their "slice" was, etc. Things like "Apple crisp - Apple crisp, 0.26666680000000004 slice" -- how are you possibly measuring that (even if the database entry matches the apple crisp you're eating)?
Don't know that this is the case with the OP, but just want to point out that entries like that are sometimes the result of weighing your portion but only having a "serving size" entry available. My homemade entries often say 1.2 servings, or something like that, but it's based on the designated gram weight per serving.
These are homemade/generic entries created by other users, not by OP.
I get what you're saying you're doing and that's a perfectly accurate way to log.
I know- I was only addressing the "how are you possibly measuring that" comment
0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »I see some things that may be no better than guesses like "Dessert - Lemon Meringue Pie, 0.1125 th of a pie." I agree with @stanmann571 that you want to be weighing your condiments, especially calorie-dense things like mayo. You have a fair amount of generic entries (like "Generic - Stuffing, 0.2 cup") and these are often no better than guesses. Things like "Homemade - Healthy Apple Crisp, 1 slice" were created by other people -- you have no idea what ingredients they used, how big their "slice" was, etc. Things like "Apple crisp - Apple crisp, 0.26666680000000004 slice" -- how are you possibly measuring that (even if the database entry matches the apple crisp you're eating)?
Don't know that this is the case with the OP, but just want to point out that entries like that are sometimes the result of weighing your portion but only having a "serving size" entry available. My homemade entries often say 1.2 servings, or something like that, but it's based on the designated gram weight per serving.
These are homemade/generic entries created by other users, not by OP.
I get what you're saying you're doing and that's a perfectly accurate way to log.
I know- I was only addressing the "how are you possibly measuring that" comment
You're right -- going by weight and using a serving size-based entry could result in something like that.0 -
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »well on the average day my active calories is about 550, but that includes about 400 cal at the gym and I have to walk a fair ways into school so I think a hundred other calories above my BMR is pretty reasonable for the watch to calculate
How are you calculating that? Are you using a high-quality and properly calibrated heart rate monitor? If not, you're almost guaranteed to be overestimating your burns.
Even the best HRMs when you adjust V02Max and Max HR, are still only good estimatores in certain circumstances/parameters, namely steady state cardio. Once you add interval or anaerobic exercises to the equation, they are not even close to accurate, may as well make up a number that seems right in those cases.
To close the circle back to the OP, for light weight training and calisthenics, just accept those calories as bonus. Take the distance you've run. Put it through the runner's world calculator and use that number.
If you're walking any meaningful distance (over 1 mile aggregate), do the same.
Use those numbers for 4 weeks and see how you progress.
https://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn
Strength training is good and nice, but not generally a significant contributor to calorie burn.3 -
heres my workout from thursday on the apple watch info screen. The other includes my weights, some walking, jumping jacks, boxer bounces and machine use. I know it isnt perfect but I am finding it more accurate seeming than my fitbit used to which matches with the research saying its about as good as you can get in a wearable but I'll put this here just for anyones interest.
In terms of eating I will crack down on things I can't measure and stick to things I can to see if that helps. The thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that most days even if my over estimations of burn and underestimates of eating was off by even 500 calories I should still lose like half a pound a week at least, It just seems like there should be room in these calculations for a fair amount of error that should still cause loss.
On average you have lost that much though. weekly weight can be skewed due to hydration, TOM, undigested food in your system, among other things. So even if over two weeks you expected to lose 3 lbs, but scale only shows 1, you may be retaining 2 lbs of water, or your logging was off, both would be quite common.0 -
For the elliptical, that's probably pretty close to right.heres my workout from thursday on the apple watch info screen. The other includes my weights, some walking, jumping jacks, boxer bounces and machine use. I know it isnt perfect but I am finding it more accurate seeming than my fitbit used to which matches with the research saying its about as good as you can get in a wearable but I'll put this here just for anyones interest.
In terms of eating I will crack down on things I can't measure and stick to things I can to see if that helps. The thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that most days even if my over estimations of burn and underestimates of eating was off by even 500 calories I should still lose like half a pound a week at least, It just seems like there should be room in these calculations for a fair amount of error that should still cause loss.
For the calisthenics. It's high by at least double and probably closer to triple.
6 -
stanmann571 wrote: »
For the elliptical, that's probably pretty close to right.heres my workout from thursday on the apple watch info screen. The other includes my weights, some walking, jumping jacks, boxer bounces and machine use. I know it isnt perfect but I am finding it more accurate seeming than my fitbit used to which matches with the research saying its about as good as you can get in a wearable but I'll put this here just for anyones interest.
In terms of eating I will crack down on things I can't measure and stick to things I can to see if that helps. The thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that most days even if my over estimations of burn and underestimates of eating was off by even 500 calories I should still lose like half a pound a week at least, It just seems like there should be room in these calculations for a fair amount of error that should still cause loss.
For the calisthenics. It's high by at least double and probably closer to triple.
Yup. The elliptical seems right. The rest... not so much.
1 -
I am 325 lbs and according to MFP exercise, I'd have to walk my dog at a 3mph pace for 50 minutes to cross the 400 calorie threshold. I have truthfully stopped logging the majority of my exercise because I feel that it is grossly overestimated. MFP is lower than most estimators it seems, but it is still too high. I could almost guarantee you that you are not burning anywhere near 400 calories during your exercising. Ever since I stopped logging my exercise, it has really helped me start heading in the right direction (again) on the scale, in clothing size, and where my relationship is with weight loss from a mental standpoint.
The way I see it, not logging exercise means you aren't obsessing about having to exercise to lose weight or burn extra calories for food that you've eaten or plan to eat. Get used to eating what you should eat and if you work out a lot in one day, then eat a little extra. If you don't get a workout in, then you'll still be fine.
That's just my advice...logging all of my exercise, even underestimating the caloric burn, was still giving me too high of a number for caloric burn compared to what the number really is. The inflated numbers led to overeating, which prevented weight loss. Weight loss really is 90% about what, and how much, you put in your mouth. When I was putting in 3hrs of working out in a day, if I ate all of those calories back, I didn't lose weight. Now if I eat my initial calorie goal and even (on the rare occasion) not exercise at all, I still go down in size. It works like it's supposed to, and is incredibly less stressful...how bout that!
8 -
heres my workout from thursday on the apple watch info screen. The other includes my weights, some walking, jumping jacks, boxer bounces and machine use. I know it isnt perfect but I am finding it more accurate seeming than my fitbit used to which matches with the research saying its about as good as you can get in a wearable but I'll put this here just for anyones interest.
In terms of eating I will crack down on things I can't measure and stick to things I can to see if that helps. The thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that most days even if my over estimations of burn and underestimates of eating was off by even 500 calories I should still lose like half a pound a week at least, It just seems like there should be room in these calculations for a fair amount of error that should still cause loss.
You need to incorporate a longer pull through time in this. There will be a minimum 5-7 day delay in any measurable loss/gain following a change in behavior. Any immediate change in weight is water weight as you are ~55-65% water to begin with. On a personal note I typically lose 5 lbs water weight on a run.1 -
I am 325 lbs and according to MFP exercise, I'd have to walk my dog at a 3mph pace for 50 minutes to cross the 400 calorie threshold. I have truthfully stopped logging the majority of my exercise because I feel that it is grossly overestimated. MFP is lower than most estimators it seems, but it is still too high. I could almost guarantee you that you are not burning anywhere near 400 calories during your exercising. Ever since I stopped logging my exercise, it has really helped me start heading in the right direction (again) on the scale, in clothing size, and where my relationship is with weight loss from a mental standpoint.
The way I see it, not logging exercise means you aren't obsessing about having to exercise to lose weight or burn extra calories for food that you've eaten or plan to eat. Get used to eating what you should eat and if you work out a lot in one day, then eat a little extra. If you don't get a workout in, then you'll still be fine.
That's just my advice...logging all of my exercise, even underestimating the caloric burn, was still giving me too high of a number for caloric burn compared to what the number really is. The inflated numbers led to overeating, which prevented weight loss. Weight loss really is 90% about what you eat. When I was putting in 3hrs of working out in a day, if I ate all of those calories back, I didn't lose weight. Now if I eat my initial calorie goal and even (on the rare occasion) not exercise at all, I still go down in size. It works like it's supposed to, how bout that!
While good advice for someone your size or mine, it's less good for someone much smaller like the OP who may need 200 of those exercise calories in order to eat breakfast.9 -
stanmann571 wrote: »While good advice for someone your size or mine, it's less good for someone much smaller like the OP who may need 200 of those exercise calories in order to eat breakfast.
I think that may the problem many people have on this website. Everyone is "Playing" with so few calories to work with they are constantly getting super close one way or the other leading to not losing or even gaining. If people focused on eating a larger deficit/more workout calories they wouldn't be ruined by stupid things like olive oil consumption or that the elliptical was off by 20%. My two cents anyways.
13 -
darrenbeckworth wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »While good advice for someone your size or mine, it's less good for someone much smaller like the OP who may need 200 of those exercise calories in order to eat breakfast.
I think that may the problem many people have on this website. Everyone is "Playing" with so few calories to work with they are constantly getting super close one way or the other leading to not losing or even gaining. If people focused on eating a larger deficit/more workout calories they wouldn't be ruined by stupid things like olive oil consumption or that the elliptical was off by 20%. My two cents anyways.
Easy to do if you're a larger person, harder to envision how this works for smaller people and/or those closer to their goal weight. A deficit large enough to absorb unlogged calorie-dense foods or major calorie burn estimation errors is more challenging when you're closer to goal weight.10 -
heres my workout from thursday on the apple watch info screen. The other includes my weights, some walking, jumping jacks, boxer bounces and machine use. I know it isnt perfect but I am finding it more accurate seeming than my fitbit used to which matches with the research saying its about as good as you can get in a wearable but I'll put this here just for anyones interest.
In terms of eating I will crack down on things I can't measure and stick to things I can to see if that helps. The thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that most days even if my over estimations of burn and underestimates of eating was off by even 500 calories I should still lose like half a pound a week at least, It just seems like there should be room in these calculations for a fair amount of error that should still cause loss.
From the Apple website: "Active calories for Other workouts are estimated at a rate equivalent to a brisk walk or based on data recorded by the heart rate sensor, whichever is higher". So the weight lifting calculations are probably off by quite a bit since it takes whichever would be higher and I don't know about you but a "brisk walk" would likely burn more calories for me.6 -
ok so I will continue going to the gym and put less emphasis on my active calories. I'm having a hard time because as others have said I'm so short that my BMR is really only 1500-1600 calories so in order to get a deficit in there and not starve I need some extra calories gone in exercise. I'll try to tighten in on my food tracking even more and continue to see if I get anywhere. Just frustrating that I've put in so much effort this year and gotten nowhere, some months tracking through weight watchers and myfitnesspal only to maintain. Thanks for all your advice.2
-
Just looking back at your spreadsheet and you've lost 2 pounds in less than a month. I don't remember if you said how tall you were or what your end goal weight was, but 2 pounds in a month is perfectly acceptable, especially if you don't have much to lose.
Totally agree with the (great) advice you've gotten on this thread about tighter logging and not overestimating your exercise calories, but wanted to add that a loss is a loss. Sometimes it comes off slower, especially if you're getting closer to your goal11 -
Over the last month of tighter tracking, and especially over the past 2 weeks, water weight can be a very real factor, so patience may be good advice in addition to further tightening logging. Depending on where you are in your menstrual cycle, that can influence the water weight big time, and it's not always 100% consistent from cycle to cycle for everyone. I'd suggest monitoring for a full cycle plus a bit (maybe 6 weeks) before cutting further.
Are you using a weight trending app (such as Happy Scale for iOS, Libra for Android, Trendweight, . . .)? Those will also take a month or so to give you a useful trend, but can be helpful at the smaller deficits you're likely to be running as you head toward maintenance. (Many people find they need to be much more meticulous near the end. Just for the sake of argument: If we speculate you could be underestimating eating by 100 calories, and overestimating exercise by 100, your deficit could be low enough to take some time to show up through daily water-weight and digestive-contents fluctuation.)
I'd also argue for weighing things like mayo, if only on the grounds that it's easier than spoons. Put the open mayo jar on the scale, zero it, stick the knife in, pull out a glob, and spread it on your sandwich. Read the negative value on the scale: It's what you took out. Done, and no measuring spoon to wash. And, as a bonus, it's more accurate.
Just as a background comment: Keep in mind that any external consumer device - your Apple watch, a HRM, exercise machines, whatever - don't measure calorie burn. They estimate it, based on algorithms and measurements of proxies/correlates like motion, speed, distance, heart rate, etc. Their estimates are only as good as their algorithms and some research into population averages (similar to any other calorie estimates, just somewhat more personalized). You're an individual, not a population, so devices' and calculators' estimates may vary from your personal reality.
Best wishes! 7 -
Food diary issues seem true. I am not totally ready to discount calories out, not due to calisthenics, but due to "a lot of waking".
I am also not ready to concede that the OPs impression that she is not losing is correct.
Looks like weekly weigh ins by an op who is female and exercises and near normal weight. Both can produce water weight variation that exceeds losses especially near normal weight.
5 -
I would recommend that you work out for the health benefits and not the dietary advantage you think you are getting. Unless you are going balls-to-the-walls for an hour plus, I would either skip logging it or just manually enter it with a 1 calorie burn, then focus on your diet.
I exercise for maybe 30-40 minutes at a time and almost never eat back my "recorded" calories burned because, a) I don't burn enough to create that much extra hunger and, b) if I am creating a deficit I'll just hit my goals that much faster.
I think your iWatch is leading you astray...
Weight loss goals are done in the kitchen, health goals are done in the gym (or on the road or in your basement exercising or whatever). I think the majority of your issues will be solved by tightening up your logging.
And if you aren't sure what the correct way to measure or track some food that you didn't make when you are out and about or at a friends house? Don't eat it. That's my way of handling those scenarios. Garbage data in = garbage results.11 -
I would recommend that you work out for the health benefits and not the dietary advantage you think you are getting. Unless you are going balls-to-the-walls for an hour plus, I would either skip logging it or just manually enter it with a 1 calorie burn, then focus on your diet.
I exercise for maybe 30-40 minutes at a time and almost never eat back my "recorded" calories burned because, a) I don't burn enough to create that much extra hunger and, b) if I am creating a deficit I'll just hit my goals that much faster.
I think your iWatch is leading you astray...
Weight loss goals are done in the kitchen, health goals are done in the gym (or on the road or in your basement exercising or whatever). I think the majority of your issues will be solved by tightening up your logging.
And if you aren't sure what the correct way to measure or track some food that you didn't make when you are out and about or at a friends house? Don't eat it. That's my way of handling those scenarios. Garbage data in = garbage results.
While it may work in the short-term, for the not-very-active, or for those with a lot to lose, completely disregarding calories burnt through activity can be a risky strategy. On some level, most people need to account for the calories they're burning through activity if they want to continue to have good energy and keep progressing in their fitness.10 -
I would recommend that you work out for the health benefits and not the dietary advantage you think you are getting. Unless you are going balls-to-the-walls for an hour plus, I would either skip logging it or just manually enter it with a 1 calorie burn, then focus on your diet.
I exercise for maybe 30-40 minutes at a time and almost never eat back my "recorded" calories burned because, a) I don't burn enough to create that much extra hunger and, b) if I am creating a deficit I'll just hit my goals that much faster.
I think your iWatch is leading you astray...
Weight loss goals are done in the kitchen, health goals are done in the gym (or on the road or in your basement exercising or whatever). I think the majority of your issues will be solved by tightening up your logging.
And if you aren't sure what the correct way to measure or track some food that you didn't make when you are out and about or at a friends house? Don't eat it. That's my way of handling those scenarios. Garbage data in = garbage results.
I see a pattern in this thread (and others) of men advising a female OP to ignore exercise calories. When your TDEE is over 2000 cals, maybe it's fine to ignore 200 exercise cals. When you are a short woman who has to eat 1300 cals to lose even a small amount of weight, those 200 calories are magical gifts of sanity from the great beyond. And ignoring them could put you below the 1200 cal net minimum.
OP, I think your issues are all pretty basic, which is good news- Your logging is a little off.
- Your exercise cals are a little over-estimated.
- You are being a little impatient.
With 20 lbs left to go, you should be expecting to lose 0.5-1 lb per week, and water weight fluctuations are going to easily mask that rate of loss from week to week.Hang in there and good luck!35
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
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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