Weight loss medication

I don’t know how large you are but that’s a lot of calories. I eat 1270 per day and don’t eat back exercise calories. I’m 68 and lose 1 lb per week. I need 1270 to feel satisfied so 1lb per week it is.

claireychn074 wrote: »

Jmatievich wrote: »

I don’t know how large you are but that’s a lot of calories. I eat 1270 per day and don’t eat back exercise calories. I’m 68 and lose 1 lb per week. I need 1270 to feel satisfied so 1lb per week it is.

It’s not a lot of calories - we’re all different. I lose on anything under 2000, but that also doesn’t mean everyone else will.

OP can you open your diary? It might be that you’re eating slightly more than you think (logging errors are really common, as MFP isn’t always accurate, and some measurements can vary ie 1 tablespoon peanut butter is 15g, whereas “my” tablespoon of peanut butter was closer to 30g!)

Endorsed.

I'm female, 68, and lose weight (admittedly very slowly) on 1850 calories plus all carefully-estimated exercise calories, so 2100-2500 most days. (I'm 5'5", losing super slowly in maintenance to creep off some holiday pounds painlessly. I weighed 129.8 pounds this morning.) That's probably a high calorie extreme for our demographic.

There are other women who post here in the age range of OP and me who do need to eat a flat 1200 calories to lose weight at a slow but reasonable rate. That's more like the low calorie extreme for our demographic.

A doctor, MFP, a TDEE calculator, even a fitness tracker - they just give us a starting estimate that's the average for similar people. That's all they can do. Individuals vary. Therefore, we stick with the starting estimate for 4-6 weeks (whole menstrual cycles if that applies - usually doesn't in our demographic!) At that point, we have enough personal data to adjust our intake based on our average weekly real-world results. Conveniently, that approach also compensates somewhat for patterns of imprecise calorie estimation.

OP, I started out at close to your age (I was 59) and current weight (I was 183), did not use drugs or surgery. Weight loss is possible, but not necessarily easy every second.

I see that you've opened your diary. This is good. You look like you're getting in some good nutrition - kudos!

I do see a mix of weights, volume measures, "1 piece" kind of thing. If you're not already, one thing you can do is to weigh everything it's possible for you to weigh on your food scale, preferably in grams (more granular/precise). I'm not a person who believes that everyone must weigh every bite in order to succeed, but if someone is not losing as expected, weighing everything for a few weeks can be a great help to pin down what's actually going on. I know I had some forehead slap moments of realization when I started weighing foods. If you don't like weighing, you can stop once your other measuring/estimating methods get more calibrated base on weighing for a while.

If you need tips on how to weigh foods so it's efficient, i.e., takes less time/effort than cups/spoons measuring, take a look at the starting post in this thread (I promise that's what it's about, ignore the dumb title):

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10498882/weighing-food-takes-too-long-and-is-obsessive#latest

Another thing you can do is take a look at your daily life (non-exercise) activity, and think whether there are ways you can increase that. That can make small, but meaningful contributions. Many MFP-ers share their ideas here:

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10610953/neat-improvement-strategies-to-improve-weight-loss/p1

Often, as we age, our lives get gradually and subtly less physically busy. Things like the above can counteract that. The other thing that can happen is gradual, subtle muscle mass loss. You're already strength training and getting adequate protein to work on that, which is great. Other women our age could follow your good example in that! It has a slow return on investment (in calorie burn terms), but the increasing strength, which happens more quickly, has great benefits in daily life, IME.

I'm wishing you success. With patience and persistence, I'm confident you can get there!

Mounjaro and Ozempic can only be prescribed for a Type2 Diabetes diagnosis. Wegovy requires an obesity diagnosis that, at least for my insurance, meant a BMI over 40. All seem to be effective for weight loss. All are expensive at around $1200/month (without insurance.)

Also, it seems that a majority of patients who stop the drug regain a significant portion of the weight lost. The average according to one study was 60% regained in 2 years. Obviously, there was a range of results with the average being 60%. There has been no follow up that I know of on those that kept it off and what they may have done differently than those that regained.

That said, I have been on Wegovy for 4 weeks now and have had good results with minimal side effects.

To PAV888: I have been trying to increase the dosage per protocol for the drug, and under my physician’s supervision. At the moment, I can’t even find a lower dose, so I may discover what happens when suddenly I am off the drug entirely. Not looking forward to that and hope it does not happen.

To others: yes, this drug (Mounjaro) is usually not covered, regardless of whether one has diabetes. This is a real problem, because obesity is at its highest prevalence among people with lower incomes, who can least afford the $1100/mo price tag, even after cutting back on other expenses. I am hoping that as longer term data shows that reducing obesity reduces other costs for the co-morbidities that come with obesity, the public and private insurers will see it is in their economic self interest to cover the Rx price.

sojcherb wrote: »

@cwolfman13 Thank you for the feedback and your analysis definitely shed light on the difficulty that I'm having with weight loss. I am 5'6" and have been tracking and weighing carefully for about 6 weeks and have lost nothing. I even cut my calories down from 1800 to 1750 and now to 1700. I AM at a deficit and am not losing.

Unfortunately, it's our actual fat loss rate that tells us whether we're in a calorie deficit or not. If not losing weight over a multi-week period, and if no reasons for long-term water retention increases masking fat loss, then we're not in a deficit.

MFP, the so-called calorie calculators, and even fitness trackers only give us estimates based on average calorie needs for people similar to us on a few data points (the ones we enter into the app/device). But each of us is a unique individual. Most people will be close to those averages, a few may be noticeably off (high or low), and a really rare few will be surprisingly far off. That's the nature of statistical estimates. The individual may not have any idea why they're non-average, but the weight loss rate trend tells a true story, given a long enough period of monitoring results.

I'm one of the weirdos. MFP and my good brand/model fitness are off by 25-30% daily for me, compared with almost 8 years of calorie logging experience. It's rare, but it happens.

This is not to discount common issues - which may or may not apply in your case - like logging accuracy, unlogged or underlogged cheat days, overestimating activity level or exercise calories, and that sort of thing.

Bottom line, though: Not losing weight over a long time period, not in a deficit, no matter what a calculator, fitness tracker, or doctor says.

If you feel you should be losing weight, talk to your doctor about possible underlying causes, and ask for a referral to a registered dietitian to help you figure it out.

I am just completing a weight loss study of Mounjaro plus an added hormone. I don't know whether I got the placebo of the hormone or not, but the Mounjaro made me lose 19 lbs in 3 months. Unfortunately my insurance (Tricare) will not allow me to continue the Mounjaro, and I don't qualify for the savings card. But the drug study gave me a chance to try it. So I lost 19 lbs and gained $19,000 in compensation. I had 1 bad effect the first dose, nausea, did not throw up, but felt crappy, it passed in a few hours and no side effects since. Now it's back to tracking, weighing everything that goes in my mouth and working out.

I didn't like it. They put me on ozempic because of diabetes, I'd been weaning off insulin and other meds. Later they switched to mounjaro because ozempic became too popular and hard to get. Gave me lots of bloating, discomfort, nausea, constipation... Ozempic was bad, mounjaro was worse. I'm losing weight anyway and my diabetes is well under control now without them so I just told the dr. I'm not taking that stuff anymore.

tomcustombuilder wrote: »

I didn’t read any of the comments, however, I will tell you that none of those drugs will work long-term. The only thing that will work long-term is a diet that allows you to eat a certain way for basically the rest of your life. Anything else is strictly temporary and the weight will come right back on. Everyone thinks once the weights off the job is done, but that is when the job actually starts.

The thought / hope behind some of the more recent drug developments IS that the drugs will be taken "forever". Sort of like blood-thinners, cholesterol drugs, type 2 diabetes medication, thyroid medication, blood pressure medication, prostate medication, or even various long term mood altering medications. Not short term like antibiotics.

Whether this generation of drugs is there in terms of safety and lack of side effects, that I don't know, and given my personal inclinations I would prefer to let others find out for me!

As an add on, if I were today where I was 9.5 years ago I don't know that I wouldn't have signed up for the injectables.. it would have been a much closer call in spite of the level of unknowns I still think they represent.

Have you tried reducing your calories by 1-200 per day? My job leads to a dissapointingly low maintenance level. What MFP tells us we need is just an estimate. I cannot eat more than 1600 and stay the same size.

What makes you insist that you are certainly in a deficit?