Calories & Weight Loss - not working
Options
Replies
-
I didn't see this linked yet:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10697068/how-i-stopped-kidding-myself/p1
6 -
-
24 -
I remember years ago when I first heard that weighing my food was a "thing." I thought there was no way that my cups and eyeballing could be off by much. So I decided to spend some days testing it. I would eyeball or measure my food and afterwards I would weigh it. Man was I so wrong!
I used to eyeball meat using the old deck of cards standard. I thought if it was about the size of a deck of cards then it would be 3oz. Then I weighed my meats - all came back to be between 6-8 oz (I only use grams now). That was hundreds of calories difference in just one day in just one food. After a few days of double checking I was sold. I've used a scale every since.
OP I would just add that you have been given lots of terrific advice by some people who really know what they are talking about, that is if you ignore those comments with lots of woo's. Maybe give some of the advice a try and see what happens. Good luck.16 -
4 -
vollkornbloedchen wrote: »
I think someone needs to make one asking if it's been less than 6 weeks and if you have started any new exercise this one doesn't seem to cover all the possibilities although it's a good place to start0 -
vollkornbloedchen wrote: »
I think someone needs to make one asking if it's been less than 6 weeks and if you have started any new exercise this one doesn't seem to cover all the possibilities although it's a good place to start
Isn't new exercise covered pretty well in the first "has it been less than 3 weeks?" box? idk. I hardly every use the flowchart since it's impossible for people using a screen reader to glean info from it, but I don't think there'd be any harm in making your own to use if you don't like this one by lemonlionheart.2 -
-
Yes, weighing everything is a thing, for reasons given above.
It may seem silly but it isn't nearly as silly as "being on a diet" without ever losing weight. You know what isn't silly? Actually eating the correct number of calories to hit your goals, and losing weight. I'm down 125 lbs and maintaining at a normal weight for over a year now. I don't weigh everything now, since I have mostly learned what a correct portion looks like. But I did need to weigh to get to this point, and when I notice my weight creeping up, the first thing I do is check my portion sizes with a scale.
Your choice, eat fewer calories and lose weight, or keep doing what you're doing now and continue to have the results you're seeing now. You and your wife are not magical unicorns who can stay fat by eating air. You are just not measuring your intake.16 -
tinkerbellang83 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »A prime example of why eyeballing doesn't work....
I want to add some reinforcement to this. 2 tbsp is not a whole lot, easy to get it wrong. 2 tbsp x 7 days a week = a whopping 1330 calories. There are so many other calorie dense foods out there - it's not hard to get it way wrong when guessing
Not to mention the fact that a tbsp generally means a level tablespoon, not what most people dig out with a tablespoon lol
I only had one glass of wine!
Oh, yeah, before Weight Watchers opened my eyes to wine points/calories my glass when gardening outdoors was one of the big red ones - and I could put away two on a good night.
4 -
That’s odd that starvation mode isn’t a thing. Yet I’ve heard it from a number of trainers and nutritionists. Your body gets to a point were it’s difficult to lose weight.
All my calories are tracked via the MFP app, and all my activity it tracked with my Apple Watch. There definitely is a deficit of at least 500 calories daily. I was taking in 1800 calories, and working out daily burning another 500. Bring my caloric intake to 1300. But yet, no results. Which is extreme low if I’m basing it on my base metabolic rate. I should have been basing it on my caloric needs, which is 2800. But I feel if I’m not losing weight by cutting out 1700 calories, then how am I going to lose it by creating a deficit off the 2800? Even if my portion sizes were off, the miscalculated calories wouldn’t add up to 1700 pushing me back up to where I would gain weight or maintain it.
Today I tried to intake 2800 calories, and couldn’t come close. Was only able to eat 2100 worth of calories.
My wife is having the same issue. So it doesn’t seem to be a fluke.
You have overexplained a lot about your maths here. What you haven't done is answer the questions about how you are measuring and logging your food, and what exercise it is that you think is giving you such a high burn.
If your wife is having the same issue, that's a strong indication that there are flaws in whatever logging method you're both using.
I’m logging my food via the MFP app, scanning barcodes. I don’t weigh my food (is that even a thing?) I measure with a cup or eyeball a serving. The numbers might be off slightly but as with any method it’s just an estimate. I ate healthy.
My daily active calories that I burn according to my Apple Watch is over 600 calories, sometimes I get up to 1000 calories burned. My total calories burned for the day averages about 2600. So if I’m only eating 1800 worth, then I should be dropping weight easily just based on calorie intake.
I’m doing CrossFit style cardio boot camp about 1 hour day, when I play soccer I’m burning 500-600 calories and when I play hockey I’m burning 700 calories. Some days I’m working out twice a day.
At this point I feel like you are trolling us so i'm just going to read all the fun memes in this thread and go on my merry way to weight loss, (as I weigh all my food). K Thx BYEEE10 -
And, since I haven't seen anyone else say it:
Scanning the barcode isn't necessarily accurate.
You're still pulling up an entry from the crowd-sourced food database, so you're still at the mercy of whatever MFP user entered it in the first place. If they were lazy, didn't care, or transposed digits, it's inaccurate. You need to check entries when you start using them, until your recent foods get populated with valid database selections.
People think the barcodes are magic because they're technological. Nope. Same as if you typed something in the search box.
So, you have what are almost certainly inaccurate quantities (because you're eyeballing) of what are potentially inaccurate food entries.
And wonder why you're not losing as expected?
P.S. Fitness trackers and heart rate monitors can be very inaccurate for exercises with a resistance/strength component (like, say, Crossfit), or for interval activities (like, say, soccer or hockey).
This is an oldie, but still a goodie:
https://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472
On this thread, you have a bunch of people who've lost a bunch of weight telling you what they've learned from actually accomplishing it. On that basis alone, I'd suggest you might want to consider reject "starvation mode" as the reason, and consider "more accurate logging" as a more productive tactic.19 -
And, since I haven't seen anyone else say it:
Scanning the barcode isn't necessarily accurate.
So much this! I've scanned barcodes and come up with huge errors in calories and/or really strange measurements (liquid measures for pasta, for instance). I always check each entry the first time I use it - if it comes up in my frequent food list I know I've already validated it, but anything I have to search for in the database gets the once-over.
BTW, I've been at maintenance for a year and still weigh and log. It takes a few minutes and gives me confidence for when I have to guesstimate for meals I don't prepare myself.5 -
And, since I haven't seen anyone else say it:
Scanning the barcode isn't necessarily accurate.
So much this! I've scanned barcodes and come up with huge errors in calories and/or really strange measurements (liquid measures for pasta, for instance). I always check each entry the first time I use it - if it comes up in my frequent food list I know I've already validated it, but anything I have to search for in the database gets the once-over.
BTW, I've been at maintenance for a year and still weigh and log. It takes a few minutes and gives me confidence for when I have to guesstimate for meals I don't prepare myself.
I've scanned barcodes and had it come up with a completely different food! I treat it with just as much skepticism as every other MFP database entry.4 -
kshama2001 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »A prime example of why eyeballing doesn't work....
I want to add some reinforcement to this. 2 tbsp is not a whole lot, easy to get it wrong. 2 tbsp x 7 days a week = a whopping 1330 calories. There are so many other calorie dense foods out there - it's not hard to get it way wrong when guessing
Not to mention the fact that a tbsp generally means a level tablespoon, not what most people dig out with a tablespoon lol
I only had one glass of wine!
Oh, yeah, before Weight Watchers opened my eyes to wine points/calories my glass when gardening outdoors was one of the big red ones - and I could put away two on a good night.
Nice! Keeping it classy
5 -
kshama2001 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »A prime example of why eyeballing doesn't work....
I want to add some reinforcement to this. 2 tbsp is not a whole lot, easy to get it wrong. 2 tbsp x 7 days a week = a whopping 1330 calories. There are so many other calorie dense foods out there - it's not hard to get it way wrong when guessing
Not to mention the fact that a tbsp generally means a level tablespoon, not what most people dig out with a tablespoon lol
I only had one glass of wine!
Oh, yeah, before Weight Watchers opened my eyes to wine points/calories my glass when gardening outdoors was one of the big red ones - and I could put away two on a good night.
Nice! Keeping it classy
I have these cups, and they are the epitome of classy.3 -
DomesticKat wrote: »
I have these cups, and they are the epitome of classy.
one of my friends named her yellow Lab "Solo" because of the red cups
6 -
kshama2001 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »A prime example of why eyeballing doesn't work....
I want to add some reinforcement to this. 2 tbsp is not a whole lot, easy to get it wrong. 2 tbsp x 7 days a week = a whopping 1330 calories. There are so many other calorie dense foods out there - it's not hard to get it way wrong when guessing
Not to mention the fact that a tbsp generally means a level tablespoon, not what most people dig out with a tablespoon lol
I only had one glass of wine!
Oh, yeah, before Weight Watchers opened my eyes to wine points/calories my glass when gardening outdoors was one of the big red ones - and I could put away two on a good night.
Nice! Keeping it classy
I drink diet ginger ale out of wine glasses sometimes...4
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
- 391 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
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions