RobD520 Member

OP is not eating enough calories for 5 11 and sedentary. I am pretty sure the question of overcounting calorie burns is not the most important consideration here.

If you are tracking ALL your activity, you should set it to sedentary. 4000 calories a day is a very large burn for most people. What is your job??

Setting to "active" and then tracking all activity is double-counting some activity.

One other point I don't think anyone raised is that, at a 25.6 BMI, you don't have as much to lose as some and so weight loss is likely to be slower.

About 10 times, I have had to lose somewhere between 8-20 pounds in late winter-early spring to compete in some kind of running, walking or cycling long distance activities. For proteins, when I don't make the marinades into a sauce, I don't count it. I have always lost according to expectations and hit the starting line…

I meant a digital food scale. It is very difficult to count calories without weighing.

Your weight is in the low end of you healthy BMI range at 126 (20.3). This makes weight loss much harder than if you were over weight. Over two weeks, normal water weight fluctuations can easily mask weight loss-even for someone significantly overweight. Although you have not given your calorie goal, I wonder if 200-500…

Sometimes it is missed when a poster quotes weight in kg.s. OP is 5'4'' 120 with a BMI of 20.6. Being well below the 24.9 top end if the healthy weight range, weight loss will be very slow.

The OP offers bad advice. 850-900 calories and not eating exercise calories back is a very unhealthy plan.

For me it tends to be around 40-60 in favor of evercise. Everyone has to find their own combination to make their equation work. I get impatient with generalizations like "weight loss is in the kitchen; exercise is for health." For many people, the CI component is more important; but everyone is different.

My digital scale goes to the hundredth of an ounce, but only the individual gram. Therefore, in my case, ounces is more precise since one gram is .035274 ounces. Not that I think it matters much. Either way of measuring is likely to be effective if done accurately.

Weight fluctuations are a product of a number of variables, only one of which is fat loss. Two others are water and food passing through your system, As a result, even with the most precise measurements of CICO, you will rarely get the precise predicted result in any given week. Yours was unusually close.

I understand your frustration; but I assume you don't intend to live on "Herbalife" forever. So even if you lose all the weight you desire on the program, you are likely to gain it back when you try to get back to normal eating. The advantage to learning how to accurately calorie count is that you learn skills you can…

One other important thing to note is the OP is already within a healthy BMI range. This makes weightloss much tougher, and precision in measuring much more important.

I agree with this. Kale is another example. All dark leafy greens are full of vitamins; there is no reason to give some kind of special super-food status to kale. The funny thing is that I have been cooking with kale since the nineties-after seeing Emeril Legasse make portugese kale-sausage soup on the Food Network. People…

I just use a smaller serving of butter.

Hummus is a very popular food in the middle east and has been for quite some time. I would be really fascinated to understand what is pretentious about it. I do agree that it is not low calorie or low fat.

When we say that one thing substance weighs more than another, we are really meaning some thinks are more dense. Yet another weigh of saying this is that some substances weigh more than others AT the same volume. Yet another weigh is to say that some substance take up more volume at the same weight. When people are saying…

This. There is very little tolerance here for anyone that suggests anything bad about sugar. When I eat meals that are too sugar intensive, I get hungry earlier and don't tend to feel good. That's pretty much all the data I need. If it is somehow "all in my head" or some sort of placebo effect, I really don't care. I know…

Can you a bit more specific on your assessment of the DSM criteria?

I will vouch for the fact that there is a glitch in MFP where it will sometimes give a male 1200 net calories. OP 1500 net calories is the healthy minimum for a male who is not under medical supervision.

As a male 5 6 and 165 I used to burn around 360-400 calories in a very intense 45 minute spinning workout, according to my heart rate monitor. 500 calories in 45 minutes on an elliptical is likely a large overestimate.

The lowest MFP allows is 1200 irrespective of what you say your weight loss goal is. You could test this by entering a 2 pound per week goal and note it gives you 1200. It sounds like, based upon your entries, you would have had to go down to 1210-250= 960 calories for your original goal. However, this is too few calories…

I am keep it it healthy by preparing Filet Mignon, lemon-white wine Shrimp, baked potato, spaghetti squash, and a mixed green salad with a balsamic vinaigrette.

I don't see any stats. Maybe the OP is already thin, which makes weightloss much harder...,

When BMI is in the normal range, weight loss is very tough and fluctuations in water weight can easily obscure any progress you are making. Gaining muscle is very hard to do-and nearly impossible in a deficit. That is unlikely to be the answer.

For the reasons that were quoted to you in the post you took issue with, it is very VERY common. That being said, water retention is transient, and exercising is healthy.

People who are significantly overweight sometimes lose weight rapidly the first couple weeks. Much of this weight is water. In the long term, losing weight at this rate is not healthy.