losing weight & gaining muscle at same time?

For starters, your protein is way too low. 50g and you weigh you weight 131. You should be aiming for at least 0.7g per pound which is 92g. So you're on about half of what you should be if you're lifting a lot. That said, 2 x 30 mins, some of which is bodyweight stuff and arms, is closer to muscle maintenance than muscle growth.

You have the right approach with a slow loss, and a desire to gain some muscle. But you're going to need more progressive overload and more protein. And even then, as a female in a deficit muscle growth will be hard, but it will absolutely help with your body composition.

eslteacheramy wrote: »

ahoy_m8 wrote: »

Strictly speaking of fat loss, no, you are not in a plateau. It is common for loss to slow as you lose. If you have eaten at a consistent calorie level, and your body weight has decreased (hence your TDEE has decreased), your net deficit has also decreased. Totally normal and healthy.

Speaking of lean gains, I have to agree with @tomcustombuilder , unfortunately. (No shade to Tom.) Adding muscle mass is hard. It takes patience and perseverance. A reasonable goal for lean mass gain is ~1lb/mo in a surplus with pretty ideal conditions and being young with good genetics. ST is TOTALLY worth doing to preserve the mass you have while losing fat. God knows, it's hard to gain lean mass; you you don't want to lose it while cutting!

Your narrative is a little confusing to me. Losing 15lb in 3 months is close to 1.25lb/week, or a deficit of 625cal/day. You suggest that you're eating lower than 1200 cal/day because that's the goal for 1-1.5 lb/mo loss. And you express disappointment with 2lb/mo loss. Have you eaten at 1200cal steadily since the beginning (15 lb in 3 months)?

FWIW, 2lb/mo loss sounds ideal to me if you care about sparing lean mass. Small people lose slower. It sucks, but CO is smaller so less margin for CI.

According to the TDEE calculator, my maintenance calories are 1700. So since I can't go lower than 1200, I've been doing 1200 since Jan. It seems like some of the weight came off faster in the beginning but now has slowed. I only weigh myself 1x a month so I don't track the rate of loss. My current weight maybe could be a pound or two less due to the fact that I don't weigh everyday. Every 2nd day of the month I do weigh at the same time (morning, after pee, before food, naked).

Once you have 3 months of calorie and weight logging experience, ignore what the TDEE calculator says. It just spits out the average calorie needs for someone superficially similar to you on the few data points you put into the calculator. Your actual experience gives you a much better estimate of your calorie needs, and in the context of your own logging habits.

If you've lost 15 pounds in 3 months, you've been averaging about 1.25 pounds of loss per week, which would imply an average calorie deficit over that time of about 625 calories per day. Add up your calories for the 3 months (since you say it varied), divide by the number of days to get your average intake, and add 625. That'd be your estimated average TDEE. (You can look at the loss over just the most recent month and do similar arithmetic. Assume 500 calories a day is about a pound a week of fat change. Use at least a one-month time period, though.)

I have been tracking every day since Jan 2. Sometimes on a weekend I may eat slightly more than 1200- maybe 1300 or 1400, but I also work out those days. I don't purposely eat back the exercise calories. I will usually just eat a hard boiled egg in the morning and then go out to eat with a friend and eat 1200 calories worth. I may burn 100-150 calories from exercise (60 min of walking, 30 cardio, 30 strength).

I think I will adjust my expectations and continue to do strength training not to gain any muscle but to not lose any. Or I have to increase protein. Every article says to do it if you want to lose weight...but then I see that it really only increases metabolism by like idek 20 or 30 calories a day lol. It's gotta be helping me somehow. I was just really hoping after 3 months to have toned my arms up slightly. Does it take 6 months to a year to tone arms/legs/stomach through strength training?

Thanks for your input!

The bolded are the things to do: Strength training (make sure it's progressive, and that you're close to the the last rep or two you could possibly manage when you're on the last set. Use a good program. Get enough volume weekly for each major muscle group. (Others on the thread can give better advice on programs than I can.)

You need protein to keep your existing muscle, as well as to build any at all ever. Protein is the raw material. We need more protein (relatively) when losing weight in order to help maintain our existing muscle. The point isn't that tiny additional amount of calorie burn at rest (because you're right, it's a truly tiny number of calories daily).

However, the stronger/fitter we are, the more easy and fun it is to move, so we tend to do more (without even thinking about it) in our daily life, and burn more calories that way, thus increasing our calorie burn. It's a slow process, but it can be very meaningful. Also, as mentioned, it takes a few more calories to digest protein (vs. carbs or fats), plus most people find it filling. Getting enough is a win for many reasons. FWIW, I'm 5'5", now in the low 130s pounds, and shoot for a minimum of 100g daily (which I usually happily exceed).

"Does it take 6 months to a year to tone arms/legs/stomach through strength training?"

Here's the thing: "Toning" is a poorly-defined term that usually involves a combination of adding muscle mass (via strength training and adequate nutrition) plus having a level of body fat that allows that muscle to show to the degree the specific person finds most attractive.

Yes, it can be slow. It's hard for me to tell, too, where you are in that process. You say you're almost 5'2" and 131 pounds, which is BMI 24. Now, I know that BMI is only a rough approximation, but that would suggest you're just a small bit into the normal weight range, roughly 5 pounds below the technical definition of overweight.

That's not a criticism! The point is that if you do have some muscle mass going, whether from your recent exercise or pre-existing, you may still have enough subcutaneous fat that it doesn't yet show in the way you'd like.

Personal anecdote: I'm an oddball who became very active in her late 40s, including some lifting and a lot of a strength-y-er form of cardio (rowing, boats and machines) . . . but I stayed fat for a long time, a dozen years, while doing that stuff. I looked blobby. Then I lost weight, around 50 pounds. To my amazement, there were some cute li'l ol' lady muscles revealed that had been hiding under the fat layer. It was a nice surprise. So, don't ignore the "right fat level" aspect of "toned". There's more to it than just having muscles, there's also un-hiding them just enough.

If your lifting is new, odds are low that you've gained much muscle mass in 3 months of lifting in a calorie deficit, unfortunately. There can still be appearance improvements, perhaps subtle: Things tighten up, posture improves, there's potentially a little fullness in the muscles from the water retained there for muscle repair. So the training is worth doing, even in the short run. On top of that, strength is useful in daily life, and will help you on the road to healthy aging. (Don't panic: You're not old. I just think of things like that because I am old, 68. )

At your current weight, if it were me with your goals, I'd:
* up the protein (and fine-tune other nutrition if needed),
* make sure the lifting program and lifting consistency are where they need to be, and
* set up for a very slow loss (like half a pound a week) based on your own calorie experience data. (Losing that slowly can take weeks to show up on the scale, as a warning. But it can work, and makes muscle gain a bit more likely, though no guarantees.)

That, and patience, would tend to take you to goal weight with the best chance of a little muscle gain, or at worst absolutely minimum muscle loss.

Hang in there. The results will be worth it, in a variety of ways.

eslteacheramy wrote: »

I asked the previous person this as well, but how do you truly know what weights you should lift? Since Jan I went from 2 to 4 to 6.6 to currently 8 lb dumbbells. 8 is difficult for me- (I've never lifted in my entire 37 years until Jan). For certain exercises, I have to go back down to 6.6 b/c the 8s are too heavy. Should I try 10 lbs to see if I can do them? What if I can only do half of the rep with the 10s- does that mean I should go back down? Or is half at a higher weight better than all at a lower one?

There is a lot of great information here. Following a structured, progressive program is a proven approach:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10332083/which-lifting-program-is-the-best-for-you/p1

It's normal to lift heavier or lighter depending on the exercise. For example, you may find 8lb dumbbells are fine for a db bench press, but too heavy for an overhead press - in which case use a lighter weight for that exercise. Good luck!

Re protein powder, absolutely it's a solid option. I'll buy whey powder from Optimum Nutrition Gold, MyProtein, Muscle Milk, Dymatize Iso, MuscleTech, whatever has a good sale at the time. Check the macros, you want at least 75% calories from protein, you don't want something that's loaded up with extra sugars and carbs. One scoop will probably get you 25g protein for 120-130 calories if you mix it with water, or a little more if you use some milk.