1200 calories and not losing

2»

Replies

  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    paperpudding wrote: »
    serrano1000 wrote: »
    Here is some "food" for thought on how the body burns calories and the original definiton of a calorie... https://www.1843magazine.com/features/death-of-the-calorie

    Boy, that was a tedious read. :*

    And all it is really saying, in super long hand, is Weight Watchers is best - along with anecdotal (fictional? ) data about a person with PTSD and gems like calories in an apple and a lollipop might be the same but the apple is better for us - really?? You dont say!! - is anyone really unaware than an apple is more nutritious than a lollipop - that is ground breaking news???? :s

    Since everything that needs to be said about how weight loss works has already been said, writers and gurus in the diet industry try to break out of the tired, jaded pack with the format, "You always thought X was true, but X is actually wrong."

    The article's point seems to be that mid-20th century health professionals, concerned about obesity, targeted the densest source of calories: fat, which led to diets higher in carbs and sugar. Therefore, focusing on calories must be bad because it causes you to eat too much sugar. The sugar epidemic is the fault of calorie counters.

    If only they could figure out how to make pretzels with all the cool knots that come out of trying to deny the obvious. I'd buy one.

  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    serrano1000 wrote: »
    Here is some "food" for thought on how the body burns calories and the original definiton of a calorie... https://www.1843magazine.com/features/death-of-the-calorie

    Like saying no one can gain wealth because the value of currency is in fluctuation.

    Nonsense.
  • yuko0407
    yuko0407 Posts: 67 Member
    mburgess458 wrote: »
    van780 wrote: »
    Ok so I think I'm on day 45 straight of logging. I am 5'3 female
    Sw 157
    Cw 153 ish
    Gw 145 (for now)
    At a rate of 1.5 lbs a week, and mfp has suggested 1200 cal ......

    I don't think anyone has specifically said this yet - You shouldn't be expecting 1.5 lbs a week of weight loss. MFP won't recommend anything below 1,200 calories a day for a woman. You could enter wanting to lose 2 lbs a week and it will say 1,200. Try playing around with it by entering maintain (0 lbs a week) and you'll see what MFP thinks your maintenance calories are... then compare your 1,200 to that and you'll see what your theoretical weight loss per week really is. That is more what you should be expecting over the long-term if you are accurately logging. Obviously there will be large variation but right now your expectation of 1.5 lbs a week is higher than what MFP is even trying to give you.

    This ^^
    I'm 5'3 also, 52 yo, sedentary. I've lost 10 kg (about 20 lb) eating 1250 cal/day, at a pretty constant pace of 0.3-0.4 kg/week (less than 1lb/week). My (estimated) TDEE is about 1500 cal/day. Losing 1.5 lbs/week would give me a deficit of 750 cal/day (you need a deficit of roughly 250 cal/day to lose 0.5 lb/week), leaving only 1500-750 = 750 cal/day to survive. Of course, this isn't sustainable. For us, short people, the weight loss is really slow... But if we are patient, the weight will drop!
  • denjan333
    denjan333 Posts: 158 Member
    With only 8 lbs to lose, you will not lose @ 1.5 lbs per week. That is way too aggressive. With less than 10 lbs to lose, you need to set your goals to .5 lbs per week. Lower your expectations on weight loss. If you had a hundred pounds to lose, you can easily lose 2 lbs a week. It is just going to be slower the closer you are to an ideal weight, because you can't cut that many calories and still remain healthy.
  • kenyonhaff
    kenyonhaff Posts: 1,377 Member
    van780 wrote: »
    Thank you for everyone's responses! I really thought I was doing a good job at counting and measuring but I will have to dive deeper into it to make sure that its accurate. I did not expect fast weight loss by any means - especially since I've yo yo ed a lot of my life. I am happy to be going down at all , I'm just getting anxious about gaining because it's so slow to lose I guess. Thank you for the advice and kind words. I'm gonna keep on logging and I will definitely do the weighing now that I know that it can be such a difference .
    I really hate counting and measuring, but nothing else was working for me and this feels less stressful than diets that eliminate certain food groups etc. I wanted to do something that would allow me to live like a normal person and have a treat if I want it :)

    Hey, totally there with you -- it's a pain to do. But it gets easier the more you do it. It makes you more mindful of what you eat. (I can't tell you how many times I passed on snacks because the effort to measure it wasn't worth it in part because I'd have to log it.) And just logging it helps, too.

    Eliminating whole food groups are generally a red flag that a diet isn't healthy--often too restrictive or based on the "nutritional fad of the year". When there's a facebook ad trying to scare you into not eating bananas, that's usually a sign to head the other way. Sure, some people choose to eat vegetarian for health reasons, or go low-carb or whatever, and that's fine. Know the difference!
  • Noreenmarie1234
    Noreenmarie1234 Posts: 7,492 Member
    cheryldumais wrote: »
    Just my two cents worth on weighing vs measuring. I love Boom Chick a pop popcorn so I eat it almost every day for a snack. The bag says 50 grams or 7.5 cups = 250 calories. So I measured it but that actually weighs more like 80 grams. There's a difference right there of 150 calories. Since my deficit is only 250 calories just one serving measured vs weighed can almost wipe out my deficit for the day. Add to that my chewable Calcium and some Evening Primrose supplements and no loss for me. When you are so close to your goal you really have to be meticulous. Hang in there, it's worth the battle.

    Wow, that is actually quite a big difference!
  • Luke_rabbit
    Luke_rabbit Posts: 1,031 Member
    cheryldumais wrote: »
    Just my two cents worth on weighing vs measuring. I love Boom Chick a pop popcorn so I eat it almost every day for a snack. The bag says 50 grams or 7.5 cups = 250 calories. So I measured it but that actually weighs more like 80 grams. There's a difference right there of 150 calories. Since my deficit is only 250 calories just one serving measured vs weighed can almost wipe out my deficit for the day. Add to that my chewable Calcium and some Evening Primrose supplements and no loss for me. When you are so close to your goal you really have to be meticulous. Hang in there, it's worth the battle.

    I hope you contacted the company. FDA allows a 20% difference, but that would be no more than 60 g. Wasn't there just a class action lawsuit about this same issue with Lenny & Larry? Certainly this company would like to avoid the same thing.

Categories