Myfitnesspal

Message Boards General Health, Fitness and Diet
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Eating 1,500 cal a day with exercise and still not loosing weight...

2

Replies

  • LietchiLietchi Member Posts: 2,756 Member Member Posts: 2,756 Member
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    leggup wrote: »
    I have been focusing on 6 days 1,300-1,500 and one cheat day to have a frozen pizza and crisps. it's really the only way to keep myself motivated to stay on course throughout the week.

    It is 100% possible to wipe out a calorie deficit with 1 cheat day. I'm actually quite good at doing just that myself, heh. Going through your diary time- are you using a food scale? Some of the items are a little suspect.
    • Yorkshire Tea - Tea, 500 ml Yorkshire Tea,50ml semi-skim milk 1/2 tsp(2g) unrefined sugar: is this a pre-packaged item? Otherwise, this should be tea and sugar separately with the sugar weighed.
    • Aldi - Xplosade, 500 ml: 146 calories: What an odd calorie count on a drink. Are you sure this is right?
    • Lidl - Vanilla & Yogurt Protein Bar, 45 g 194 calories: What an odd calorie count- are you sure this is right?

    In the past 3 weeks from yesterday (21 days):
    • Days with 1400-1700 Calories logged: 7
    • Days 1700+ Calories: 6
    • Blank Days/less than 900 cals logged: 8

    So--- in 3 weeks of data, you only logged 1/3 of your meals as between 1400-1700: that's 33%. Now- on days where you ate 1,700 calories, it says that you burned and earned a few hundred calories. It may benefit you to eat back a smaller % of your workout calories, particularly if you're getting any calories from lifting workouts. I typically eat back 90-100% of my workout calories if I am losing weight. If i'm not losing weight, I drop down the amount I'm eating back to 80% or even 50%.

    Here's your real problem, though- Blank days. In 3 weeks there were 7 completely blank days and 1 that was 800 cals, probably not all you ate. You said "one cheat day" but 8 days in 21 is more than twice a week. Without complete data it's hard to say. I suggest logging even your "cheat day" and then calculating your calories net for the week. If I know that I want to eat more on a Saturday, have wine, etc, I will eat -200 for Thurs-Sat (or workout +200) and indulge guilt-free.

    Thank for this :)

    The Yorkshire tea, I'll start adding individually but I don't have sugar it's just milk and the tea bag.

    In terms of the suspect calories. All the calories are what comes up when scanning on MFP and all cross checked with the packaging and they match...

    I'll start tracking cheat days too.

    Really appreciate your help ☺️

    Really the simplest explanation is that you are wiping out your deficit on your cheat days :(

    Nooooo! hahah, I thought it would be the case :(

    In real terms, do I have to stop my cheat day? No more monstermunch for me lol

    Start by logging your cheat days. Based on the numbers, you can see whether you need to stop or scale down the cheat day. Alternatively, you could just eat more during the week and you might not feel the need for a cheat day.
  • janejellyrolljanejellyroll Member Posts: 25,873 Member Member Posts: 25,873 Member
    davew0000 wrote: »
    It always surprises me that beer is never mentioned in threads like these. Surely not everyone is teetotal.

    Beer really messes up my deficits. Especially with beer snacks too.

    I think the reason beer isn't mentioned is that there is no indication that OP is drinking it (unless I missed it).
  • leggupleggup Member Posts: 3,000 Member Member Posts: 3,000 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    Yes, hitting the gym twice a week, one 5k run and two rugby training sessions. I would stick to 1,500 cals no matter the cals burned.

    I was loosing on average 1/2 kg a week.

    0.5 kg x 7716 cal fat/kg / 7 days = 551 cal apparent deficit daily.

    If truly eating 1500, you would have been only burning 2050 on average.

    Perhaps you are very sedentary outside that activity.
    Perhaps that activity isn't burning nearly as much as I'd think.

    But I'd sure think you are burning more than that on average.
    Which means you were actually eating more than that on average.

    Your food logging is probably not that accurate.

    Once you get accurate, I'd suggest 250 deficit too, or .25 kg weekly, this close to the end.

    Out of curiosity, what amount of cals would you suggest? And if I workout, I don't add these cals on to the day?

    A 250 cal deficit would mean eating 250 less than you burn in the day.

    Are you burning calories in the workout?

    Yes, I have 1,500 cal plan and then typically lose 500 and still stick to the 1,500. Shall I be adding more to my cals

    Hm? This is not what your diary says. Your diary says that when you workout you typically eat back your workout calories. That's why it's also important to figure out if your workout calories are accurate :) Cardio tends to be most accurate: walking a mile is about 100 calories burned. (variance due to height, weight, age, hills, speed, etc).

    When you look at your diary summary for a day at the bottom (desktop) you can see total vs net calories. If you are net 1500ish but total 1700 it will say below it "you earned 200+ calories with exercise" or something like that. Fitness trackers often overcalc workouts.
  • yirarayirara Member Posts: 6,698 Member Member Posts: 6,698 Member
    leggup wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    Yes, hitting the gym twice a week, one 5k run and two rugby training sessions. I would stick to 1,500 cals no matter the cals burned.

    I was loosing on average 1/2 kg a week.

    0.5 kg x 7716 cal fat/kg / 7 days = 551 cal apparent deficit daily.

    If truly eating 1500, you would have been only burning 2050 on average.

    Perhaps you are very sedentary outside that activity.
    Perhaps that activity isn't burning nearly as much as I'd think.

    But I'd sure think you are burning more than that on average.
    Which means you were actually eating more than that on average.

    Your food logging is probably not that accurate.

    Once you get accurate, I'd suggest 250 deficit too, or .25 kg weekly, this close to the end.

    Out of curiosity, what amount of cals would you suggest? And if I workout, I don't add these cals on to the day?

    A 250 cal deficit would mean eating 250 less than you burn in the day.

    Are you burning calories in the workout?

    Yes, I have 1,500 cal plan and then typically lose 500 and still stick to the 1,500. Shall I be adding more to my cals

    Hm? This is not what your diary says. Your diary says that when you workout you typically eat back your workout calories. That's why it's also important to figure out if your workout calories are accurate :) Cardio tends to be most accurate: walking a mile is about 100 calories burned. (variance due to height, weight, age, hills, speed, etc).

    When you look at your diary summary for a day at the bottom (desktop) you can see total vs net calories. If you are net 1500ish but total 1700 it will say below it "you earned 200+ calories with exercise" or something like that. Fitness trackers often overcalc workouts.

    This. But I would like to question the 100 net calories per mile walked. One would need to be quite a lot overweight to achieve that. Speed has very little influence on calories burned when walking, unless you compare normal walking and Olympic speed walking. Thus better be conservative here.
  • wunderkindkingwunderkindking Member Posts: 1,192 Member Member Posts: 1,192 Member
    yirara wrote: »
    leggup wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    Yes, hitting the gym twice a week, one 5k run and two rugby training sessions. I would stick to 1,500 cals no matter the cals burned.

    I was loosing on average 1/2 kg a week.

    0.5 kg x 7716 cal fat/kg / 7 days = 551 cal apparent deficit daily.

    If truly eating 1500, you would have been only burning 2050 on average.

    Perhaps you are very sedentary outside that activity.
    Perhaps that activity isn't burning nearly as much as I'd think.

    But I'd sure think you are burning more than that on average.
    Which means you were actually eating more than that on average.

    Your food logging is probably not that accurate.

    Once you get accurate, I'd suggest 250 deficit too, or .25 kg weekly, this close to the end.

    Out of curiosity, what amount of cals would you suggest? And if I workout, I don't add these cals on to the day?

    A 250 cal deficit would mean eating 250 less than you burn in the day.

    Are you burning calories in the workout?

    Yes, I have 1,500 cal plan and then typically lose 500 and still stick to the 1,500. Shall I be adding more to my cals

    Hm? This is not what your diary says. Your diary says that when you workout you typically eat back your workout calories. That's why it's also important to figure out if your workout calories are accurate :) Cardio tends to be most accurate: walking a mile is about 100 calories burned. (variance due to height, weight, age, hills, speed, etc).

    When you look at your diary summary for a day at the bottom (desktop) you can see total vs net calories. If you are net 1500ish but total 1700 it will say below it "you earned 200+ calories with exercise" or something like that. Fitness trackers often overcalc workouts.

    This. But I would like to question the 100 net calories per mile walked. One would need to be quite a lot overweight to achieve that. Speed has very little influence on calories burned when walking, unless you compare normal walking and Olympic speed walking. Thus better be conservative here.

    I checked the study that number came from (It was done at UCLA Davis FYI). 100 calories per mile is for a 180 pound person. About 65 for 120lb person. So, yes. Though not necessarily quite overweight but also definitely heavier than most *women*.
    edited April 15
  • heybalesheybales Member Posts: 19,202 Member Member Posts: 19,202 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    Yes, hitting the gym twice a week, one 5k run and two rugby training sessions. I would stick to 1,500 cals no matter the cals burned.

    I was loosing on average 1/2 kg a week.

    0.5 kg x 7716 cal fat/kg / 7 days = 551 cal apparent deficit daily.

    If truly eating 1500, you would have been only burning 2050 on average.

    Perhaps you are very sedentary outside that activity.
    Perhaps that activity isn't burning nearly as much as I'd think.

    But I'd sure think you are burning more than that on average.
    Which means you were actually eating more than that on average.

    Your food logging is probably not that accurate.

    Once you get accurate, I'd suggest 250 deficit too, or .25 kg weekly, this close to the end.

    Out of curiosity, what amount of cals would you suggest? And if I workout, I don't add these cals on to the day?

    A 250 cal deficit would mean eating 250 less than you burn in the day.

    Are you burning calories in the workout?

    Yes, I have 1,500 cal plan and then typically lose 500 and still stick to the 1,500. Shall I be adding more to my cals

    Some things really do have to be understood to figure out, because guess what changes?
    Life, the future, your numbers.
    Understand and you can make those changes when needed.
    Fail to understand and you'll won't when you should.

    I think you understand what a 250 cal deficit means.
    My question about your workouts burning calories was to make you think.

    So what do you think a 250 cal deficit means?
  • dragon_girl26dragon_girl26 Member Posts: 2,176 Member Member Posts: 2,176 Member
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    leggup wrote: »
    I have been focusing on 6 days 1,300-1,500 and one cheat day to have a frozen pizza and crisps. it's really the only way to keep myself motivated to stay on course throughout the week.

    It is 100% possible to wipe out a calorie deficit with 1 cheat day. I'm actually quite good at doing just that myself, heh. Going through your diary time- are you using a food scale? Some of the items are a little suspect.
    • Yorkshire Tea - Tea, 500 ml Yorkshire Tea,50ml semi-skim milk 1/2 tsp(2g) unrefined sugar: is this a pre-packaged item? Otherwise, this should be tea and sugar separately with the sugar weighed.
    • Aldi - Xplosade, 500 ml: 146 calories: What an odd calorie count on a drink. Are you sure this is right?
    • Lidl - Vanilla & Yogurt Protein Bar, 45 g 194 calories: What an odd calorie count- are you sure this is right?

    In the past 3 weeks from yesterday (21 days):
    • Days with 1400-1700 Calories logged: 7
    • Days 1700+ Calories: 6
    • Blank Days/less than 900 cals logged: 8

    So--- in 3 weeks of data, you only logged 1/3 of your meals as between 1400-1700: that's 33%. Now- on days where you ate 1,700 calories, it says that you burned and earned a few hundred calories. It may benefit you to eat back a smaller % of your workout calories, particularly if you're getting any calories from lifting workouts. I typically eat back 90-100% of my workout calories if I am losing weight. If i'm not losing weight, I drop down the amount I'm eating back to 80% or even 50%.

    Here's your real problem, though- Blank days. In 3 weeks there were 7 completely blank days and 1 that was 800 cals, probably not all you ate. You said "one cheat day" but 8 days in 21 is more than twice a week. Without complete data it's hard to say. I suggest logging even your "cheat day" and then calculating your calories net for the week. If I know that I want to eat more on a Saturday, have wine, etc, I will eat -200 for Thurs-Sat (or workout +200) and indulge guilt-free.

    Thank for this :)

    The Yorkshire tea, I'll start adding individually but I don't have sugar it's just milk and the tea bag.

    In terms of the suspect calories. All the calories are what comes up when scanning on MFP and all cross checked with the packaging and they match...

    I'll start tracking cheat days too.

    Really appreciate your help ☺️

    Really the simplest explanation is that you are wiping out your deficit on your cheat days :(

    Nooooo! hahah, I thought it would be the case :(

    In real terms, do I have to stop my cheat day? No more monstermunch for me lol

    It would be advisable to stop, yes, if it's wiping out your deficit, but first log it to see where you stand. You could be just overeating in general through logging errors and the cheat day is adding to it.
    One thing you could try in place of a "cheat" day is just to eat a day or two at your current maintenance calories if you're wanting a deficit break each week. If you're truly eating 1300-1500 as a younger adult male, that is a ridiculously low and restrictive calorie goal and possibly why you're drawn to having the binge day. Once you get your logging figured out, it would be worth revisiting that goal.
    edited April 15
  • PsychgrrlPsychgrrl Member Posts: 3,151 Member Member Posts: 3,151 Member

    I'll start tracking cheat days too.

    That will likely be disillusioning. Sorry in advance! :)
  • PsychgrrlPsychgrrl Member Posts: 3,151 Member Member Posts: 3,151 Member
    davew0000 wrote: »
    It always surprises me that beer is never mentioned in threads like these. Surely not everyone is teetotal.

    Beer really messes up my deficits. Especially with beer snacks too.

    Or beer AS a snack! ;)
  • leggupleggup Member Posts: 3,000 Member Member Posts: 3,000 Member
    yirara wrote: »
    leggup wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    Yes, hitting the gym twice a week, one 5k run and two rugby training sessions. I would stick to 1,500 cals no matter the cals burned.

    I was loosing on average 1/2 kg a week.

    0.5 kg x 7716 cal fat/kg / 7 days = 551 cal apparent deficit daily.

    If truly eating 1500, you would have been only burning 2050 on average.

    Perhaps you are very sedentary outside that activity.
    Perhaps that activity isn't burning nearly as much as I'd think.

    But I'd sure think you are burning more than that on average.
    Which means you were actually eating more than that on average.

    Your food logging is probably not that accurate.

    Once you get accurate, I'd suggest 250 deficit too, or .25 kg weekly, this close to the end.

    Out of curiosity, what amount of cals would you suggest? And if I workout, I don't add these cals on to the day?

    A 250 cal deficit would mean eating 250 less than you burn in the day.

    Are you burning calories in the workout?

    Yes, I have 1,500 cal plan and then typically lose 500 and still stick to the 1,500. Shall I be adding more to my cals

    Hm? This is not what your diary says. Your diary says that when you workout you typically eat back your workout calories. That's why it's also important to figure out if your workout calories are accurate :) Cardio tends to be most accurate: walking a mile is about 100 calories burned. (variance due to height, weight, age, hills, speed, etc).

    When you look at your diary summary for a day at the bottom (desktop) you can see total vs net calories. If you are net 1500ish but total 1700 it will say below it "you earned 200+ calories with exercise" or something like that. Fitness trackers often overcalc workouts.

    This. But I would like to question the 100 net calories per mile walked. One would need to be quite a lot overweight to achieve that. Speed has very little influence on calories burned when walking, unless you compare normal walking and Olympic speed walking. Thus better be conservative here.

    I checked the study that number came from (It was done at UCLA Davis FYI). 100 calories per mile is for a 180 pound person. About 65 for 120lb person. So, yes. Though not necessarily quite overweight but also definitely heavier than most *women*.

    I was not referencing a study. I am a 6'0 woman using my numbers and making assumptions based on the OP's numbers. OP said they are 81 KG, which is about 180 lbs, ironically. I am not sure what your last sentence means.
  • l4a_pl4a_p Member Posts: 241 Member Member Posts: 241 Member
    I'm a bit in the same situation, a lot of my own "research" (aka perusing forums, articles etc) seem to suggest your body's BMR is able to adapt to whatever you are doing. Even with exercise. And thus you plateau. (Short version). So I'd suggest to maybe look into macro cycling and having high(er)/low(er) kcal days. Like someone else said: when you reach a healthy weight, it's getting very difficult so I often find the simple CiCo doesn't cut it anymore. Goodluck
  • southkonahisouthkonahi Member Posts: 137 Member Member Posts: 137 Member

    Nooooo! hahah, I thought it would be the case :(

    In real terms, do I have to stop my cheat day? No more monstermunch for me lol

    Hi. Would it work to just have a "cheat food", not an entire "cheat day"?
  • wunderkindkingwunderkindking Member Posts: 1,192 Member Member Posts: 1,192 Member
    leggup wrote: »
    yirara wrote: »
    leggup wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    Yes, hitting the gym twice a week, one 5k run and two rugby training sessions. I would stick to 1,500 cals no matter the cals burned.

    I was loosing on average 1/2 kg a week.

    0.5 kg x 7716 cal fat/kg / 7 days = 551 cal apparent deficit daily.

    If truly eating 1500, you would have been only burning 2050 on average.

    Perhaps you are very sedentary outside that activity.
    Perhaps that activity isn't burning nearly as much as I'd think.

    But I'd sure think you are burning more than that on average.
    Which means you were actually eating more than that on average.

    Your food logging is probably not that accurate.

    Once you get accurate, I'd suggest 250 deficit too, or .25 kg weekly, this close to the end.

    Out of curiosity, what amount of cals would you suggest? And if I workout, I don't add these cals on to the day?

    A 250 cal deficit would mean eating 250 less than you burn in the day.

    Are you burning calories in the workout?

    Yes, I have 1,500 cal plan and then typically lose 500 and still stick to the 1,500. Shall I be adding more to my cals

    Hm? This is not what your diary says. Your diary says that when you workout you typically eat back your workout calories. That's why it's also important to figure out if your workout calories are accurate :) Cardio tends to be most accurate: walking a mile is about 100 calories burned. (variance due to height, weight, age, hills, speed, etc).

    When you look at your diary summary for a day at the bottom (desktop) you can see total vs net calories. If you are net 1500ish but total 1700 it will say below it "you earned 200+ calories with exercise" or something like that. Fitness trackers often overcalc workouts.

    This. But I would like to question the 100 net calories per mile walked. One would need to be quite a lot overweight to achieve that. Speed has very little influence on calories burned when walking, unless you compare normal walking and Olympic speed walking. Thus better be conservative here.

    I checked the study that number came from (It was done at UCLA Davis FYI). 100 calories per mile is for a 180 pound person. About 65 for 120lb person. So, yes. Though not necessarily quite overweight but also definitely heavier than most *women*.

    I was not referencing a study. I am a 6'0 woman using my numbers and making assumptions based on the OP's numbers. OP said they are 81 KG, which is about 180 lbs, ironically. I am not sure what your last sentence means.

    Okay, but those numbers came from a study and science is good.

    The last sentence was referencing a post that said to burn a hundred calories in a mile you'd have to be quite a bit overweight/question the accuracy of it. I was saying that is not the case. Especially since we're talking about a guy, here.
    edited April 16
Sign In or Register to comment.