So frustrated. Any wisdom?

sara1077
sara1077 Posts: 89 Member
I’m 50 and trying to lose weight. Been tracking religiously for about 3 months and only lost 4lbs. Currently 200lbs.

I have a desk job but walk about 9-10K steps on average per day and I am new to it, but added strength training 3x per week about a month ago.

MFP has me at 1200 calories a day, but I can’t eat that little. I tend to avg about 1650-1700 calories per day and with exercise, I net about 1500.

Sites put my BMR at about 1350-1525

I get wildly different TDEE suggestions too from like 1850-2200

Im so frustrated! I actually was eating more and weighed about 7lbs less last year.

Replies

  • sara1077
    sara1077 Posts: 89 Member
    Do I need to just commit to the MFP 1200 net? Seems so low for someone who is 200lbs and fairly active.
  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 2,248 Member
    If loss is slow or non exostent after a few months and you're fairly active then the culprit is too many weekly calories. Most people under count their overall weekly calories due to several factors and most will argue that they're being accurate however the proof is in the result or lack of results as they tell the actual story.
  • csplatt
    csplatt Posts: 1,206 Member
    I’m 42 and my maintenance, unfortunately, comes out right around 1650. If you’re at all in the same boat, perhaps you’re closer to maintenance than you think every week.
  • FionaCarlinCallaghan
    FionaCarlinCallaghan Posts: 1 Member
    Hello. My stats are similar to yours age, job and 10k steps. I find 1400 cals per day is max I can eat to lose.
  • ridiculous59
    ridiculous59 Posts: 2,911 Member
    edited July 3
    Hello. My stats are similar to yours age, job and 10k steps. I find 1400 cals per day is max I can eat to lose.

    ^This^

    I lost 90 pounds when I was in my 50's. I went from 232 pounds to 142. Desk job. Walking. Deep Water Running classes a couple of times a week. Some strength training. My calories were 1200-1400 per day. To put it in perspective, my MAINTENANCE calories are only 1500 per day.

    It's way too easy to over-estimate our "calorie burn" and under-estimate our calorie intake. I tend to take the attitude that I exercise for my health, and I cut calories to lose weight. If I were a 20-something dedicated runner I'd think differently. Or even if I was a serious masters athlete. But alas, I'm neither. I just don't exercise with that kind of intensity. And for those reasons, I have my activity level set at "not very active" and I never eat back all my earned exercise calories.
  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 2,248 Member
    Hello. My stats are similar to yours age, job and 10k steps. I find 1400 cals per day is max I can eat to lose.

    ^This^

    I lost 90 pounds when I was in my 50's. I went from 232 pounds to 142. Desk job. Walking. Deep Water Running classes a couple of times a week. Some strength training. My calories were 1200-1400 per day. To put it in perspective, my MAINTENANCE calories are only 1500 per day.

    It's way too easy to over-estimate our "calories burn" and under-estimate our calorie intake. I tend to take the attitude that I exercise for my health, and I cut calories to lose weight. If I were a 20-something dedicated runner I'd think differently. Or even if I was a serious masters athlete. But alas, I'm neither. I just don't exercise with that kind of intensity. And for those reasons, I have my activity level set at "not very active" and I never eat back all my earned exercise calories.
    Yes

    People seem to be way off in their calculations and don’t realize how low their maintenance calories actually are sometimes. There is too much emphasis put on relying on calorie calculators, eating back calories, etc.

    The best approach is after a month or 2 of using those things is to review the actual data that is right in front of you and adjust accordingly.

    People also get caught up in anecdotal calories amounts by others when those other people will almost always have a different NEAT burn amount and may not be accurate in their weekly calorie counting abilities.
  • pashin8nz2000
    pashin8nz2000 Posts: 23 Member
    I'm on 1200 calories and have lost 10lb in 3 weeks. I'm not very active and weigh 216 lbs.
  • HappyDonkey75
    HappyDonkey75 Posts: 334 Member
    similar to you, 200 lbs , 48 years old, desk job, 10,000 steps atleast a day and about 35 minutes of workout 3-4 times a day. I am at 1500 calories . Losing slowly but it comes down to tracking, drinking a gallon of water a day , increasing my exercise intensity so I do two HIT workouts a week (low impact since I have a knee issue) , strength training (lifting heavier weights) eating larger amounts of lean protein (minimal fatty meats) and sticking to it day in and day out. Menopause does not make things easier. Its hard work.Keep at it and try to log accurately.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,986 Member
    I'm on 1200 calories and have lost 10lb in 3 weeks. I'm not very active and weigh 216 lbs.

    If this high rate of loss continues I would eat a bit more. Ok, you have a lot to lose, but going too quickly also means you'll lose a lot of muscles as your body can only burn so much fat in a day. Assuming you're a woman. If you're a man you're on a very slippery slope here.
  • FibroHiker
    FibroHiker Posts: 398 Member
    You won't know your true TDEE unless you wear an activity tracker around the clock, including during your sleep. That will give you an accurate weekly and daily average of your calorie burn. Then you can set some accurate goals for your calorie deficit.

    As others said, it's important to weigh and measure your foods to be sure your calorie intake is accurate too.

    It's hard to lose weight at this age but not impossible. I'm 49 and it took me 6 months to lose 15 pounds, but I still lost that weight and keep going.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,458 Member
    I agree with Lietchi about activity trackers.

    They are broad estimates, sometimes off by several hundred calories. I've heard this over and over, and mine was off by quite a lot - they're nice little gadgets and they have their usefulness. The best way to figure out how many calories you need is to track it yourself. You don't even want to hear about my Excel workbook. It's a beautiful thing.

  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    There are mistakes that people commonly make that cause them to not lose weight that we might be able to spot if you change your Diary Sharing settings to Public.

    In the app, go to Settings > Diary Setting > Diary Sharing > and check Public.

    Desktop: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/diary_settings
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    sara1077 wrote: »
    Do I need to just commit to the MFP 1200 net? Seems so low for someone who is 200lbs and fairly active.

    How tall are you?

    Short answer: No.

    Long answer: https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/1200-calorie-diet/
  • KareninCanada
    KareninCanada Posts: 962 Member
    1200 is too low unless you are tiny and inactive. But perimenopause and menopause do affect the metabolism a lot. Personally I am finding that about 1500 calories and ignoring exercise calories is my happy place, along with really paying attention to fiber and sugar intake. But I am not currently doing any weight training - when I was, I tried to also prioritize protein a little more.

    I would play with the numbers a bit - try adding 100 calories a day, try taking away 100, try boosting fiber to 25-30g per day, cutting added sugar to under 20g per day, and make sure you are accurately measuring/weighing your food for a week or two so you have a good understanding of what portions look like.
  • Seffell
    Seffell Posts: 2,244 Member
    csplatt wrote: »
    I’m 42 and my maintenance, unfortunately, comes out right around 1650. If you’re at all in the same boat, perhaps you’re closer to maintenance than you think every week.

    43 here and 1600 maintenance. Without any movement that is. 10k steps add about 400kcal for me so 2000kcal with 10k steps.
  • Anna800
    Anna800 Posts: 639 Member
    edited July 4
    Can you make your food diary public?
  • musicfan68
    musicfan68 Posts: 1,143 Member
    1200 is too low unless you are tiny and inactive. But perimenopause and menopause do affect the metabolism a lot. Personally I am finding that about 1500 calories and ignoring exercise calories is my happy place, along with really paying attention to fiber and sugar intake. But I am not currently doing any weight training - when I was, I tried to also prioritize protein a little more.

    I would play with the numbers a bit - try adding 100 calories a day, try taking away 100, try boosting fiber to 25-30g per day, cutting added sugar to under 20g per day, and make sure you are accurately measuring/weighing your food for a week or two so you have a good understanding of what portions look like.

    Menopause/perimenopause does not affect metabolism! There are studies proving this is a myth. Your metabolism does not go down umtil at least 60 yes old and then it is only maybe a 5% decrease. It has everything to do with people just eat too many calories.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,622 Member
    musicfan68 wrote: »
    1200 is too low unless you are tiny and inactive. But perimenopause and menopause do affect the metabolism a lot. Personally I am finding that about 1500 calories and ignoring exercise calories is my happy place, along with really paying attention to fiber and sugar intake. But I am not currently doing any weight training - when I was, I tried to also prioritize protein a little more.

    I would play with the numbers a bit - try adding 100 calories a day, try taking away 100, try boosting fiber to 25-30g per day, cutting added sugar to under 20g per day, and make sure you are accurately measuring/weighing your food for a week or two so you have a good understanding of what portions look like.

    Menopause/perimenopause does not affect metabolism! There are studies proving this is a myth. Your metabolism does not go down umtil at least 60 yes old and then it is only maybe a 5% decrease. It has everything to do with people just eat too many calories.

    I agree with this, generally.

    But some things menopause may do include reducing sleep quality/quantity (via hot flashes and such), accelerating loss of muscle mass, increasing chances of fatigue, and that sort of thing.

    Issues on the sleep/fatigue side can spark appetite, which has two potential side effects: Eating subtly more (because food is energy and fatigue makes the body seek energy, loosely); and moving subtly less. If a person eats 100 calories over maintenance on average daily, or moves that much less, or a combination, we'd expect them to gain 10 pounds a year.

    It's easy for portion creep to happen unnoticed, if not calorie counting (or not doing so meticulously). 100 calories is equivalent to a little extra full-fat ranch dressing on the salad, just as one example, but a person can also up their calorie average that much by eating some cheesy deep-fried appetizer or milkshake with add-ins once a week.

    On the activity side, research has shown that a fidgety person can burn up to a couple of hundred more calories daily than an otherwise similar non-fidgety one, and I don't think most of us would notice if we were bouncing our knee less, changing positions at our desk less, and that sort of thing.

    Muscle loss also has an impact on calorie needs. We tend to lose muscle loss with aging, unless we work pretty diligently and consistently to challenge our current strength, plus get overall good nutrition, especially adequate protein. Research suggests that most people don't do that kind of exercise, and that a large minority (if not a majority) don't get optimal protein as we age.

    On top of that, there's evidence that at 50+ and beyond, we metabolize protein less effectively, so it becomes more important to spread it through the day for better absorption. A common eating pattern, though, is a carb-heavy breakfast, and focusing most of the day's protein on a nice piece of meat at dinner.

    Muscle burns only a tiny bit more calories than fat (only about 6 calories per pound difference per day), so the metabolic impact is very small. But I suspect that gradually becoming less strong and fit contributes to habits of moving less, so burning materially fewer calories daily through movement, over time. These subtle habit changes are hard to notice!

    I'm not saying all those things are true of any or all of people commenting with concerns on this thread, but they're common things, and worth some thought.

    They're also things we can control nearly 100%: We can manage calorie intake, increase movement (exercise and/or daily life movement), get good nutrition (including protein), and do exercise that increases strength and muscle. Those won't necessarily yield instant results, but they add up to big differences over time (remembering that 100 calories per day = 10 pounds a year thing).

    Just some thoughts.

    Links for fellow geek/nerds:

    Research suggesting metabolism is stable until around 60, then decline is slow: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8370708/
    Research about protein and aging:
    https://www.jamda.com/article/S1525-8610(13)00326-5/fulltext
    Advice from fellow MFP-ers about strength training programs:
    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10332083/which-lifting-program-is-the-best-for-you/p1
    (Despite the title, it covers strength programs beyond lifting weights.)
    Ideas from fellow MFP-ers about increasing daily life (non-exercise) movement:
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10610953/neat-improvement-strategies-to-improve-weight-loss/p1