Gaining puffy fat on Insanity

If you're fainting, then you're either training too hard for your fitness level, or your nutrition is wrong. I'd start with the nutrition.
Counting calories IS the best thing you can do. Estimating isn't the same as having actual numbers. And they do count.

Spot on. Everything has been said. There is nothing more we can tell you. Best of luck with your goals.

I eat the same thing everyday. No one believes me when I tell them that because theres really no variety in my diet. The only person who can really believe it is my husband and thats cause he lives with me. I have said it time and time again, I eat the same exact thing everyday. I do it because I like it, I do it because I dont have to think about what to eat. I do it because I dont have to think about it. Believe it or not, yesterday is a typical weekday for me.

Quantity is vastly more important than quality for weight loss. Note that studies have proven that many people vastly underestimate how much they eat and overestimate how much they expend from exercise. And I'm not calling you a liar, you may very well have some other issues that need to be dealt with. But my point is that we cannot reasonably determine this without you doing what I described in my previous post. What is the harm in actually measuring/counting the calories for a few weeks? You even admit you eat the same thing everyday, so it shouldn't be that hard.

Jeez. You again? You tried that "eat 10,000 calories" garbage on me in another post a few days ago. It was stupid then and it's stupid now.

Nice try though.

So do you have anything else to say other than it's "stupid"? I didn't "try" anything, I gave an example to prove a point. The fact is that it is about calories vs calories out, and you are not a thermodynamic miracle. I guess facts are inconvenient though for some people.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/is-a-calorie-a-calorie.html

It is stupid because 10,000 calories is a hyperbole. I don't think anyone on this site would ever advocate for eating that many calories. But, there are some people who need a smaller deficit in order to actually lose weight. I fully understand the idea that people need to eat fewer calories than they burn in order to lose weight. But, through experimentation with different amounts of calories, I have found that I need a small deficit in order for my body to burn fat. If a large deficit worked for me I'd be dropping weight crazy fast right now. But it doesn't, and I'm not.

Jeez. You again? You tried that "eat 10,000 calories" garbage on me in another post a few days ago. It was stupid then and it's stupid now.

Nice try though.

So do you have anything else to say other than it's "stupid"? I didn't "try" anything, I gave an example to prove a point. The fact is that it is about calories vs calories out, and you are not a thermodynamic miracle. I guess facts are inconvenient though for some people.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/is-a-calorie-a-calorie.html

It is stupid because 10,000 calories is a hyperbole. I don't think anyone on this site would ever advocate for eating that many calories. But, there are some people who need a smaller deficit in order to actually lose weight. I fully understand the idea that people need to eat fewer calories than they burn in order to lose weight. But, through experimentation with different amounts of calories, I have found that I need a small deficit in order for my body to burn fat. If a large deficit worked for me I'd be dropping weight crazy fast right now. But it doesn't, and I'm not.

Yes, 10k is a hyperbole, so what? Is 5k more practical for you? Either way, my point still stands.
Eating zero calories would be a "large deficit", and I can guarantee you that you will lose weight (and eventually die from starvation). Do you disagree? If you agree, then how can you say a large deficit does not work for you?

Of course there are people who may want to stick to smaller deficits - I am well aware of the problems associated with large deficits in certain conditions(metabolic slowdown, plateaus, and whatnot). I was not making any recommendations in my post for you to increase your deficit. just contending your absolute statements such as "the only thing that gets my body burning fat is exercise" and "So while your body may need a calorie deficit, others don't.". These statements are just plain wrong in the context of weight loss.

And I quote "A breastfeeding woman burns between 200 and 500 calories per day more than non-breastfeeding women"

Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/309083-how-many-calories-do-you-burn-a-day-breastfeeding/#ixzz1vpW13Oq0

1200 a day? Are you breastfeeding triplets?

I had a strong feeling before, but now I can comfortably say you are trolling. I hope the OP can get some useful information and make the needed changes, as to me, I am done feeding the troll.

I'm a troll? Really?

I pump 60 ounces of milk a day. 60 ounces multiplied by 20 calories an ounce equals 1200 calories. I'm not an idiot. Check out my diary, I log my breastfeeding.

Obviously, you missed the part where I said I'm burning about 1200 calories a day producing breast milk.

You should not be on a severe diet while breastfeeding. When prolactin levels are high, your body isn't going to respond very well to caloric restriction. Has your body preferentially pulled fat off the hips/thighs? This may happen while breastfeeding due to a hormonal shift

I'm not restricting calories right now. My daily calorie goal is 3000 calories. For various reasons, I do have trouble meeting that goal, but I do my best. And no, my body has not burned any fat from anywhere.

If you are OVERstressing your body (working out daily, not eating enough, not sleeping enough, etc.) without any rest/recovery periods, it can actually backfire. Your hormones get out of whack, you release cortisol, your body stores fat (it's a lot more complicated than that, but that's the gist.)

Take a diet break. Take an extreme exercise break. Reset your body, then start again.

Oh, and pee on a stick, just in case.

^My thoughts exactly! Good luck OP. And now I'm a bit nervous, I just started Insanity :P

If you have Thyroid problems there are a couple of things that may cause the inflammation. Sorry if you already know this stuff! Soy and any gluten are your enemies. If soy is in your cereal or protein drinks it will not let your Thyroid meds work properly. Secondly don't consume any dairy/calcium within an hour of your meds. If you are eating more fiber let your Dr. know you may need an increase in your meds. Also, since you are working out so hard and taking a thyroid med you are probably stressing your adrenals to the max Thyroid Meds can stress the adrenals and with heavy workouts you may have really taxed them. Take a few days and take some yoga classes a great work out and you will sweat out that puffiness with Hot yoga or a Power Yoga class. Watch the glutens/soy and see if the inflammation goes away. Lastly, I would recommend taking using MCT oil and using coconut oil it really helps with Thyroid problems. Check out both and see if you can replace your other oils with them and get in some extra potassium through cocnut water (great electrolytes), apple cider vinegar.

Jeez. You again? You tried that "eat 10,000 calories" garbage on me in another post a few days ago. It was stupid then and it's stupid now.

Nice try though.

So do you have anything else to say other than it's "stupid"? I didn't "try" anything, I gave an example to prove a point. The fact is that it is about calories vs calories out, and you are not a thermodynamic miracle. I guess facts are inconvenient though for some people.

It is stupid because 10,000 calories is a hyperbole. I don't think anyone on this site would ever advocate for eating that many calories. But, there are some people who need a smaller deficit in order to actually lose weight. I fully understand the idea that people need to eat fewer calories than they burn in order to lose weight. But, through experimentation with different amounts of calories, I have found that I need a small deficit in order for my body to burn fat. If a large deficit worked for me I'd be dropping weight crazy fast right now. But it doesn't, and I'm not.

Yes, 10k is a hyperbole, so what? Is 5k more practical for you? Either way, my point still stands.
Eating zero calories would be a "large deficit", and I can guarantee you that you will lose weight (and eventually die from starvation). Do you disagree? If you agree, then how can you say a large deficit does not work for you?

Of course there are people who may want to stick to smaller deficits - I am well aware of the problems associated with large deficits in certain conditions(metabolic slowdown, plateaus, and whatnot). I was not making any recommendations in my post for you to increase your deficit. just contending your absolute statements such as "the only thing that gets my body burning fat is exercise" and "So while your body may need a calorie deficit, others don't.". These statements are just plain wrong in the context of weight loss.

I spent 6 months eating 400-700 net calories a day. I didn't lose a single pound. THAT is how I know a large deficit doesn't work for me. When I started here I ate the recommended 1500 net calories a day to lose 1 pound per week. After a couple of months I decided to increase my deficit to try to lose faster. I ate 1200 net calories for a month. Again, I didn't lose anything. THAT is how I know I need a small deficit. I have taken the time to figure out what my body needs. And, that experimentation has shown me that the exercise is more important than a calorie deficit or my weight loss.

This is not surprising. You should have not had such a massive deficit, many problems will occur such as metabolic slowdown, hormonal crashes, etc etc. This is particularly bad news when combined with lots of activity. All the more reason to incorporate refeeds/full diet breaks. However, what you described does not discount the importance of calories nor does it discount energy balance. What you did does not apply to everyone and there are certainly ways to eat at a "large" deficit and still lose weight under certain conditions and as long as certain requirements are met. Which is not to say one should eat 300 calories a day because more doesn't always equal better - it depends on the context. And that is why I was taking issue with the absolute statements you were making. You cannot always extrapolate your situation to everyone else's, particularly when what you describe above is about the worst thing you can do.


This is all assuming of course that you were counting calories accurately. Also, it can be problematic to calculate "net calories", as many people tend to overestimate their expenditure from exercise (don't take those calories burned calculators as gospel). All the more reason to not count exercise expenditure in the first place and keep it simple.

Obviously, you missed the part where I said I'm burning about 1200 calories a day producing breast milk.

You should not be on a severe diet while breastfeeding. When prolactin levels are high, your body isn't going to respond very well to caloric restriction. Has your body preferentially pulled fat off the hips/thighs? This may happen while breastfeeding due to a hormonal shift

I'm not restricting calories right now. My daily calorie goal is 3000 calories. For various reasons, I do have trouble meeting that goal, but I do my best. And no, my body has not burned any fat from anywhere.

Oh, yeah I mean if you are not in a deficit of course it will not happen.