Why am I losing weight?
Options
Replies
-
Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
Well then the laughers need to be educated.
https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/3500-calorie-rule.html/
Eating extra calories will never cause you to burn more than those extra calories though!!!! I'm eating around an extra 300 calories even with the extra burn from digestion that is still wiping out my deficit
Nobody is saying it does. I'm saying you're burning and extra 30 or so calories just by eating 300 more calories than you were 7 weeks ago. Your NEAT very likely has gone up at least a bit without you realizing it. So perhaps your total calorie burn has increased by 125. Between that and the fact that delayed weight loss is as much a reality as delayed weight loss (i.e., weight loss is not linear, short stalls are normal), you're down a few pounds.
I'm sorry but you are trying to tell me that over a third of my extra calories are going to be burnt just through digestion?........I've already said my activity levels have gone down not up..........1 -
michelle172415 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »Depends on how you're calculating the 3 pounds, is it one weigh in of 3 pounds loss in 3 weeks or a number of weigh ins over the same period.
If it's a number of weigh ins over the 6 weeks maybe you're not actually at maintenance, it's all averages and it would be easy to underestimate exercise and activity/overestimate food enough to be out by 250 cals per day which is all it would take.
If it's a one off weigh in then yes it's also in the realms of a normal water weight fluctuation.
Just monitor and adjust as necessary
It's based on daily weigh ins using Libra
If you're using Libra, look at the rate in the bottom box and it will tell you an approximate calorie deficit using your real world results. Just add in an extra snack to that amount to your day.
I'm aiming for weight loss so no need to add any extra snacks
Huh? You seem to be complaining about losing weight in your OP and talk about eating at maintenance but now you are saying that you are trying to lose weight? Color me confused.
Not complaining at all......... Looking for some form of explanation.......... The obvious one is that MFP have grossly underestimated my maintenance level.2 -
Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
Well then the laughers need to be educated.
https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/3500-calorie-rule.html/
Eating extra calories will never cause you to burn more than those extra calories though!!!! I'm eating around an extra 300 calories even with the extra burn from digestion that is still wiping out my deficit
Nobody is saying it does. I'm saying you're burning and extra 30 or so calories just by eating 300 more calories than you were 7 weeks ago. Your NEAT very likely has gone up at least a bit without you realizing it. So perhaps your total calorie burn has increased by 125. Between that and the fact that delayed weight loss is as much a reality as delayed weight loss (i.e., weight loss is not linear, short stalls are normal), you're down a few pounds.
I'm sorry but you are trying to tell me that over a third of my extra calories are going to be burnt just through digestion?........I've already said my activity levels have gone down not up..........
LOL. You are clearly being deliberately obtuse so I'm done here. Best of luck in your journey!16 -
michelle172415 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »Depends on how you're calculating the 3 pounds, is it one weigh in of 3 pounds loss in 3 weeks or a number of weigh ins over the same period.
If it's a number of weigh ins over the 6 weeks maybe you're not actually at maintenance, it's all averages and it would be easy to underestimate exercise and activity/overestimate food enough to be out by 250 cals per day which is all it would take.
If it's a one off weigh in then yes it's also in the realms of a normal water weight fluctuation.
Just monitor and adjust as necessary
It's based on daily weigh ins using Libra
If you're using Libra, look at the rate in the bottom box and it will tell you an approximate calorie deficit using your real world results. Just add in an extra snack to that amount to your day.
I'm aiming for weight loss so no need to add any extra snacks
Huh? You seem to be complaining about losing weight in your OP and talk about eating at maintenance but now you are saying that you are trying to lose weight? Color me confused.
Not complaining at all......... Looking for some form of explanation.......... The obvious one is that MFP have grossly underestimated my maintenance level.
Or you have grossly underestimated your activity level. It's uncommon, but would be just as reasonable an interpretation.
Most people who taper into maintenance find that they continue losing for 2-6 weeks while they find their actual maintenance calorie balance point.3 -
stanmann571 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
I'd suggest that's entirely not true. As long as it is put into appropriate context
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10672650/eat-more-to-lose-more
Not going to trawl through that but pretty sure noone there suggested eating more would mean you burn more, and I know we do but only by a matter of a 20/30 calories on the figures I am talking about.
Several hundred calories or more a dayJust to be clear/complete... it sounds like there are 2 slightly different themes to the responses here.- Eat more... magic happens... scale starts moving again
- Eat more... feel better, move more, adhere better, deficit better... scale starts moving
The first one is a thing, but not for most people. There's a good thread going about refeeds - look it up if you think this scenario applies to you. The hugely oversimplified cliff notes is that if you maintaining a big enough deficit for long enough, your body/hormones adapt and what was a deficit no longer is. Eating more can help "reset" things.
The second scenario is the case for far more people. They maintain a deficit, lose some weight, then plateau. That plateau could happen for a number of reasons... because they get lazy with their logging/tracking, they get lazy with their workouts, they are moving less in general (NEAT), simply don't have the drive they did when they started out, etc etc. In this case, eating more can help with some of those "symptoms"... and the trickle down effect of eating more is a more consistent deficit which means weight loss... but that only happens IF those symptoms are aleviated. If you eat more but continue to be lazy, unmotivated, sloppy with your logging, etc etc, you won't see any improvement in weight loss.
The vast majority of people should assume they fall into #2. Because they probably do.
Really no need to trawl through, you could have just flipped to the last page and read a couple comments.
That comment does not suggest that you burn more though......... It says you have the energy to move more which then burns more....... As I have said already I have had less activity on the period I have been eating in maintenence so that is actually a factor that makes the maths even further out.4 -
Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
Have you reduced planned exercise but increased NEAT?
At the last place I lived, my NEAT went up Spring - Fall as I was always running out to the garden, which was down a flight and a half of stairs and out back. While I do log prolonged time spent gardening, I don't log all that running back and forth. At my new place, there are no stairs and the garden is closer and smaller, so I'm not seeing that NEAT benefit.1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
Have you reduced planned exercise but increased NEAT?
At the last place I lived, my NEAT went up Spring - Fall as I was always running out to the garden, which was down a flight and a half of stairs and out back. While I do log prolonged time spent gardening, I don't log all that running back and forth. At my new place, there are no stairs and the garden is closer and smaller, so I'm not seeing that NEAT benefit.
No my activity levels have gone down causing a decrease in NEAT as well as the amount of exercise decreasing which is irrelevant to net calories anyway as I eat back calories burned.4 -
michelle172415 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »Depends on how you're calculating the 3 pounds, is it one weigh in of 3 pounds loss in 3 weeks or a number of weigh ins over the same period.
If it's a number of weigh ins over the 6 weeks maybe you're not actually at maintenance, it's all averages and it would be easy to underestimate exercise and activity/overestimate food enough to be out by 250 cals per day which is all it would take.
If it's a one off weigh in then yes it's also in the realms of a normal water weight fluctuation.
Just monitor and adjust as necessary
It's based on daily weigh ins using Libra
If you're using Libra, look at the rate in the bottom box and it will tell you an approximate calorie deficit using your real world results. Just add in an extra snack to that amount to your day.
I'm aiming for weight loss so no need to add any extra snacks
Huh? You seem to be complaining about losing weight in your OP and talk about eating at maintenance but now you are saying that you are trying to lose weight? Color me confused.
This is a very nice way to put what I was thinking.8 -
Anyone have any thoughts other than natural fluctuations?
That's the most likely explanation in my opinion.
The timescale is too short and the loss not large enough to draw any meaningful conclusions.
If it carries on for another 13 weeks or so then report to the nearest weight loss company and prepare to get mad sponsorship!
3 -
I think the best explanation is simple. We are trying to calculate exact numbers for individuals based on simplified estimates for large populations, whose variances are constantly changing because of a multitude of constantly changing variables.
The OP may have a higher metabolism than the general population, but is basing calculations on "calculators" based on estimates. It really doesn't matter. Over time, you adjust to what the results are....1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
I'd suggest that's entirely not true. As long as it is put into appropriate context
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10672650/eat-more-to-lose-more
Not going to trawl through that but pretty sure noone there suggested eating more would mean you burn more, and I know we do but only by a matter of a 20/30 calories on the figures I am talking about.
I'm pretty sure I said something very much like that, on the very thread linked. So did several others. It was to counter people on the thread who said things that amounted to "eating more will never result in faster weight loss". I'd even argue that substantially more than 20-30 calories swing is possible.
Some people still disagreed with me, but I didn't feel laughed off the forums. I do have very thick skin, though.
Stan's right: Context.
BTW: For some reason(s) - no idea what they are - my actual maintenance is several hundred calories more than what MFP estimates for accurately-input profile entries. I'm lucky. Some people vary just as far in the unlucky direction. Neither of these is common, but they are possible. Most people are close to the mean calorie needs for their demographics, but bell curves have tails. Doesn't invalidate the energy balance equation (CICO), though. The standard deviation of this particular bell curve isn't the reason behind the "sometimes eating more results in faster weight loss" argument, either.1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
I'd suggest that's entirely not true. As long as it is put into appropriate context
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10672650/eat-more-to-lose-more
Not going to trawl through that but pretty sure noone there suggested eating more would mean you burn more, and I know we do but only by a matter of a 20/30 calories on the figures I am talking about.
I'm pretty sure I said something very much like that, on the very thread linked. So did several others. It was to counter people on the thread who said things that amounted to "eating more will never result in faster weight loss". I'd even argue that substantially more than 20-30 calories swing is possible.
Some people still disagreed with me, but I didn't feel laughed off the forums. I do have very thick skin, though.
Stan's right: Context.
BTW: For some reason(s) - no idea what they are - my actual maintenance is several hundred calories more than what MFP estimates for accurately-input profile entries. I'm lucky. Some people vary just as far in the unlucky direction. Neither of these is common, but they are possible. Most people are close to the mean calorie needs for their demographics, but bell curves have tails. Doesn't invalidate the energy balance equation (CICO), though. The standard deviation of this particular bell curve isn't the reason behind the "sometimes eating more results in faster weight loss" argument, either.
I really liked your knee analogy on the other thread, it made a great deal of sense. I suspect that just like weight loss, deficits are also spikey due to the knees you described.1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
I'd suggest that's entirely not true. As long as it is put into appropriate context
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10672650/eat-more-to-lose-more
Not going to trawl through that but pretty sure noone there suggested eating more would mean you burn more, and I know we do but only by a matter of a 20/30 calories on the figures I am talking about.
I did actually...2 -
You've lost 3 Lbs in 6 weeks...this would suggest that you're in a very small calorie deficit and not maintenance...like 1/2 Lb per week. Pretty simple...5
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »You've lost 3 Lbs in 6 weeks...this would suggest that you're in a very small calorie deficit and not maintenance...like 1/2 Lb per week. Pretty simple...
No, the OP is in maintenance, because OP said they're in maintenance. They just happen to be losing weight. Aren't you following?!6 -
Because MFP gives approximate maintenance calories, not exact. So eating at MFP maintenance for a long period of time - a few pounds up or down is just that your individual BRM is slightly higher or lower than the MFP approximation.1
-
OP, you also said you were more sedentary now than before (if I am remembering correctly). What type of activity we're you doing previously? I've seen a few members post that their weight adjusts down a few (couple) pounds when they take breaks from exercise.3
-
kshama2001 wrote: »Sounds like you are eating below maintenance.
You're not going to exactly back into your maintenance calories by taking your weight loss calories and adding back the caloric equivalent of your average weight of loss. That's only going to give you an estimate. Once you start eating more, your body burns more calories due to needing to digest that food and you are going to move more without even thinking about it. It's pretty normal for those things to add 100-200 or so calories to your TDEE.
Actually due to certain circumstances I have actually been a lot more sedentary during that period than normal.
If anyone suggested that eating more would mean that you burn more in a post about not losing weight they would be laughed off this forum
Have you reduced planned exercise but increased NEAT?
At the last place I lived, my NEAT went up Spring - Fall as I was always running out to the garden, which was down a flight and a half of stairs and out back. While I do log prolonged time spent gardening, I don't log all that running back and forth. At my new place, there are no stairs and the garden is closer and smaller, so I'm not seeing that NEAT benefit.
No my activity levels have gone down causing a decrease in NEAT as well as the amount of exercise decreasing which is irrelevant to net calories anyway as I eat back calories burned.
That might be your answer. If you’re eating back 100% of exercise calories and you’re exercising less, you’re losing that inaccuracy. You were probably just overestimating your exercise calories.
1 -
No my activity levels have gone down causing a decrease in NEAT as well as the amount of exercise decreasing which is irrelevant to net calories anyway as I eat back calories burned.
That might be your answer. If you’re eating back 100% of exercise calories and you’re exercising less, you’re losing that inaccuracy. You were probably just overestimating your exercise calories.
[/quote]
I dialled down to MFP very active from substantially above MFP very active and went from not losing any weight to actively losing.
So either the eat back for the "last few" calories was above 100% (i.e. their value was over-estimated), or the reduction in exercise activity resulted in a reduction in water retention, or both!0 -
No my activity levels have gone down causing a decrease in NEAT as well as the amount of exercise decreasing which is irrelevant to net calories anyway as I eat back calories burned.
That might be your answer. If you’re eating back 100% of exercise calories and you’re exercising less, you’re losing that inaccuracy. You were probably just overestimating your exercise calories.
I dialled down to MFP very active from substantially above MFP very active and went from not losing any weight to actively losing.
So either the eat back for the "last few" calories was above 100% (i.e. their value was over-estimated), or the reduction in exercise activity resulted in a reduction in water retention, or both![/quote]
Not sure how not exercising is relevant to the question. I was losing at what MFP has me in deficit and I'm still losing with what MFP has me in above maintenance. If as you say I am overestimating exercise calories it makes the current situation even more inaccurate than I have suggested.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions