RGv2 Member

It seems like you have a little to learn about this tool. When you first start MFP and enter in your data, and how much you want to lose per week MFP spits out a number, assuming that you aren't going to do any exercise. That exercise is going to give you more calories to eat per day. Let's look at the math. Let's say we…

How are you measuring your lean mass? At the restricted numbers you're eating at, there is no way under the sun that you aren't losing LBM as well. You don't know if it's good or bad, I'll be the one to start...if you're netting 500 cals a day (or less) it's bad. Do you have a doctor supervising this? Seriously?

Our local ambassador had this story this morning....... Their friend just had a newborn. With that they were having a hard time pumping 14oz of milk per day...started with "pink drink" now they're miraculously pumping 14oz by noon. That was a good one. I remember one where she claimed it cured arthritis. Really? I see at…

Ya....no, that's not true. If anything, IMHO, those are the individuals more likely setting themselves up for a crash.... The most successful have found out what portion of their exercise calories they need to eat back while still hitting their goal. For some their logging is so off that yes, not eating back exercise cals…

To start, you can't spot reduce. In a deficit, your body will lose fat from wherever it wants to. Cardio (if you like it) + Structured full body lifting program + a moderate deficit should get you to your desired aesthetic goals.

This isn't true. If you're using MFP as designed, you'll struggle to maintain muscle, let along build any if you're eating back your exercise calories (let alone -25%), and if you don't eat any back at all, you'll be sacrificing more than just fat. If you're using MFP as designed, it's not defeating the goal. Let us look…

That's not really a counter point. Sperlock over ate purposely, supersizing every time asked. Where the opposite, Cisna watched his calories (and I think his macros too) and exercised. That basically proves it's the person and their choices, not the food.

Totes agree, and odds on we're thinking of different posters

The thing is..BMI doesn't really take BF% into consideration. At the height of my fitness at age 26, I was 5'7", 173lbs. BMI, obese, BF% 14%. You have to take BMI with a grain of salt. BF% is all I pay attention to now.

If you were doing it before it was "the Fad of the century".....odds are it's not a "fad". Everyone is getting caught up on the term "heavy". In heavy lifting all that means is you're progressively overloading. You can "lift heavy" without even touching a weight.

OK....you got to your goals thought a calorie deficit (to lose 4" from your waist and fat in other places so you can see the muscle) and running. I'm not sure what this has to do with advising people the benefits of adding a progressive overload program to their regimen, especially when the goals their looking for advice…

Define "other exercises". The reason running gets easier is improved endurance.

There's a lot of this, IMHO where I comment mostly and see it is: When an OP has lost a most of their weight to the point they're only a couple pounds from goal, are already at a healthy weight, aren't the biggest fans of their aesthetic appearance and want to know what to do to lose more weight. Most of the time to meet…

Um....that's not how it works. You can lift as heavy as possible, but you're not going to build mass / bulk witout the building blocks (calories). People advise an additional heavy lifting program to maintain muscle mass. It's the most efficient way to do so. Heavy lifting can be done at the gym, in the yard,…

Disagree on overall cardio. OP is at a ht/wt where they would benefit from a recomp. Slight calorie deficit and a good structured progressive overload lifting program (and sure, cardio if they like it). http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10177803/recomposition-maintaining-weight-while-losing-fat/p1

OP, the bolded is a bad idea. Setting your calories at 1200 gross as a max would be setting your intake at over TDEE -50%. That's an equation for burnout. You said it in your post, and everyone else has echoed it....you need to tighten up your logging.

Decent workout, but you can't spot reduce fat. OP can do all the ab exercises you put here, but the body will use fat from whatever part of the body it wants. Also, isolated ab exercises are usually pretty inefficient, especially because in most cases they're not doing what you think they are. OP, please read over this.…

Your BMI is close to center for a normal weight. Enjoy this light reading. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10177803/recomposition-maintaining-weight-while-losing-fat/p1

What is your tape? I never once made weight.

OP, please don't follow this advice. Why would you not want to be "tempted" to use the tool as its designed? Baffling.

Yes, of course. If I didn't, I wouldn't be fueling properly. For those saying "it's redundant" and agreeing.....let's do the math. When you sign up with MFP, you enter in all of your stats. Your stats include your daily activity and how much you want to lose. MFP spits out a number for you to lose the amount of weight you…

Just throwing this out there, as you sound a little confused. Most fitbits know the difference between 5000 workout steps and 5000 steps throughout normal activity as it can read your body's exertion level. My fitbit knows that I ran for 37 min this morning and adjusts to MFP as such.

Weight loss is actually 100% diet. Saying not to eat back exercise calories is a slippery slope, and one I wouldn't advise on a site designed to eat back at lest some of your exercise cals.

Yep, pretty sure I said it's possible just not probable. Especially with the information we had, and are continually getting (no progressive overload for one).

Then your logging is off (which is fine). If your logging was on point and your burn estimate was accurate you'd be losing at close to 2.5lbs (give or take) per week eating 1200 cals gross per day. Double checking your profile, I'd eat back some so you're losing more like 1-1.5 lbs per week as you're getting closer to your…

Then your logging is off (either your intake, your estimated calorie burn, or most likely both). So you're probably eating more than 1200 cals and burning less than 800 (which is a really high burn). How fast are you losing if you don't eat them back?

Possible yes, but OP did not tell us anything about what they were doing in the gym to give them a progressive overload to help maintain the muscle on top of not being sure of how much they were eating. Possible yes, but a long shot IMHO. There were too many variables to jump to the recomp card. OP also didn't say anything…

OP, before we go down that road can you explain what exercise you have been doing? Recomping, as explained above, is extremely difficult to do.......when you're trying to recomp. It's even harder to recomp accidentally.