Netting really low

Options
elekelk
elekelk Posts: 107
in Health and Weight Loss
I posted this in a group but no one has answered yet so I'll try here:

I started eating more and it really works for me, the first week I lost 1,2kg! But I didn't lose anything this week. I worked out a lot more this week and my thought is that I might be I'm netting to low (like 700-800 on work out days). Could that be the problem or is it something else, like building muscle?

Replies

  • McButtski
    McButtski Posts: 203 Member
    Options
    What sort of working out are you doing?
    What's your daily calorie consumption disregarding exercise?
  • KathyJSR
    KathyJSR Posts: 24 Member
    Options
    The answer to both questions - yes. Could be muscles. Could also be you're not eating enough (eat back at least the majority of your exercise calories). Could also be a natural plateau - we all have them, & then in a week or two, a couple of pounds are suddenly gone - I recently stayed at the same weight for almost a month - but waist measurement decreased. Don't giveup! Try eating back more exercise calories & definitely take measurements for a second way of tracking progress.
  • elekelk
    elekelk Posts: 107
    Options
    1540 is my daily and I always eat that. And I do every other day cardio 60min and the others 30min cardio 35 min strength 5-6 days a week. And after that I stretch and walk home.
  • KNarrainen
    KNarrainen Posts: 135 Member
    Options
    I think it may be related, when you workout you are using up your energy reserves, which is why your calorie goal for the day goes up.

    You need to fuel your body to allow it be able to do these workouts, If you can try and get much closer to your calorie goal. that can be tough when you've done a big workout, but give it a go,and find foods that work for you to help get closer.

    Peanut Butter on ryvita works great for me.
  • elelat
    elelat Posts: 117
    Options
    I dont know about net calories. Because I usually (and with shame, but still open diary to friends) net around 1000, but eat like 1600.

    But when I start a new exercise -like you working out more this week- numbers in the scale slow down or even stop for 1-2 weeks (started weight lifting, started x-bike).

    But i catch up with the weight reduction a couple weeks after (losing even 3 lbs per week, till I hit my 1.5 average again: thats out of only 4 months of numerical analysis of my weight loss) Im no physiologist so I dont know the reason, its just what it is for me.
  • girlie100
    girlie100 Posts: 646 Member
    Options
    If you are already at a healthy weight for your height but are trying to loose the last 10-15lb then you should only be looking at a calorie deficit of around 500 a day, so you need to track your exercise as well as food and you may find that you need to eat quite a bit more than you are, especially on the 60min cardio days. Do you use a HRM or something to track your exercise?
  • elekelk
    elekelk Posts: 107
    Options
    No I don't because I don't eat back exercise cals so I thought it was not so important to know exactly but now its different.
  • fatforthewin
    fatforthewin Posts: 33
    Options
    I don't eat my exercise calories because it is so difficult to accurately predict how many calories were burned from glycogen and how many were burned from fat, both of which I would rather not replace with food because I am trying to lose weight. (Lower glycogen leads to body fat usage so why would I replace glycogen?) I net pretty low sometimes, especially lately. I am eating more fat and less carbs so my appetite is diminishing. I ate ~700 calories the other day and wasn't hungry but last night I was extremely hungry and made a fatty turkey wrap with cheese which I didn't record. I should have netted ~1200. That would have given me a 950 calorie average for the two days which is pretty close to the 1000 I am aiming for. All that to say, I don't believe you should try to hit a certain number of calories every day whether you have an appetite or not. If you are not hungry, don't eat. If you are extremely hungry, make a good choice but eat something! People fast all the time - if people are fine (i.e., survive and thrive) despite eating nothing, why should you trouble yourself that you are eating little (700-800 calories)? You are still eating more than someone who fasts for a day or two and fasting can be very beneficial. Don't overthink weight loss - that is your body's job. As far as the weight loss is concerned, if you are still working out while eating a low amount of calories your weight could be affected by sodium and water weight. I can eat 700 calories and lose weight just fine but if I try to exercise on top of that I stop losing as quickly. I think it is the negative, cumulative affect of two attempts at an energy deficit and puts the body under too much stress. In my opinion, weight loss is faster without a lot of exercise. That has been my experience anyway.
  • KNarrainen
    KNarrainen Posts: 135 Member
    Options
    The simplest way to look at it I think is, the basic calories in vs calories out.

    This does mean accountinng for calories out as well, hence the preference to eat the exercise calories back.

    I don't worry about the Glycogin or anything else other than the calories I know I can count ( if you can't account for them accurately then don't worry about them in my opinion), and I try to eat healthily and relatively cleanly as possible.

    This approach does mean it would be helpful to have a HRM for exercise.

    Just my tuppence worth, take all the opinions and draw your own conclusion.
  • elekelk
    elekelk Posts: 107
    Options
    Haha I didn't get any wiser but I think I'm going to focus more on how I'm feeling than how much I SHOULD eat and maybe eat back some of it some days and not to obsess about how much calories I'm eating.
  • SuperSexyDork
    SuperSexyDork Posts: 1,669 Member
    Options
    I don't eat my exercise calories because it is so difficult to accurately predict how many calories were burned from glycogen and how many were burned from fat, both of which I would rather not replace with food because I am trying to lose weight. (Lower glycogen leads to body fat usage so why would I replace glycogen?) I net pretty low sometimes, especially lately. I am eating more fat and less carbs so my appetite is diminishing. I ate ~700 calories the other day and wasn't hungry but last night I was extremely hungry and made a fatty turkey wrap with cheese which I didn't record. I should have netted ~1200. That would have given me a 950 calorie average for the two days which is pretty close to the 1000 I am aiming for. All that to say, I don't believe you should try to hit a certain number of calories every day whether you have an appetite or not. If you are not hungry, don't eat. If you are extremely hungry, make a good choice but eat something! People fast all the time - if people are fine (i.e., survive and thrive) despite eating nothing, why should you trouble yourself that you are eating little (700-800 calories)? You are still eating more than someone who fasts for a day or two and fasting can be very beneficial. Don't overthink weight loss - that is your body's job. As far as the weight loss is concerned, if you are still working out while eating a low amount of calories your weight could be affected by sodium and water weight. I can eat 700 calories and lose weight just fine but if I try to exercise on top of that I stop losing as quickly. I think it is the negative, cumulative affect of two attempts at an energy deficit and puts the body under too much stress. In my opinion, weight loss is faster without a lot of exercise. That has been my experience anyway.

    You really, really need to avoid taking this advice.

    Try looking into the group Eat more to weigh less, located here, http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/3817-eat-more-to-weigh-less

    Whatever you do, please do not considered a very low calorie diet (such as one below 1200 calories)! It is okay to have days where you eat too little because sometimes it just happens but you don't not do it consistently or make it a habit!

    If I were you, I'd try to net at least 1200 calories and aim to net your goal of 1540. I would also consider upping your calories to your BMI...

    By the way, if you lose weight without exercise, you're just going to end up with loose skin/flab. Do you want to be toned? I think yes!
  • DarcieC2389
    DarcieC2389 Posts: 146
    Options
    You should always strive for at least 1200 calories net, but try not to get discouraged if you don't lose on some weeks. Try to eat more, especially if you are exercisising a lot.
  • elekelk
    elekelk Posts: 107
    Options
    I tried to focus on calories eaten but maybe I should try looking more at the net calores, thank you :)
  • fatforthewin
    fatforthewin Posts: 33
    Options
    I'm not trying to be contentious but I still caution against setting a number and trying to reach it every day. My reason is that metabolism is controlled by endocrine hormones, not energy. Energy does not control metabolism. Hormones dictate metabolism which dictates energy need/usage. That is why I say to be careful that you do not agonize over not reaching that magic number. Cases of lower-than-expected basal metabolism are seen repeatedly and recorded in peer-reviewed scientific and medical journals. It is often a combination of some unknown factors relating to the endocrine system (i.e., "we know that thyroid hormones are lower than they should be but we don't know why or what the cause was"). If you are still curious or suspicious, see if you can find a biochemistry text on Google books. Your body should give you "directions" based on hunger and feeling of wellness (are you dizzy? thirsty? nauseated? etc.). It is a very, very good approach to learn about how the endocrine system affects metabolism if you are serious about keeping lost weight off.

Categories