Current Events > Net negative caloric intake and not losing weight?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Seems like I've hit a plateau and I'm not sure why. I'm starting the gym this weekend, but it shouldn't be necessary if I'm still net negative. Not really sure why, insight/advice is welcome.

youre either miscalculating or not being honest with yourself.

Go to a doctor and find out what your basal metabolic rate is. You probably don't need as many calories per day as you think you do.

Sounds like you arent at net negative.

MFBKBass5 posted...

youre either miscalculating or not being honest with yourself.

or retaining water/constipated
i gain weight while fasting sometimes

Miscalculations and perhaps a bit of water weight or constipation.

Are you factoring in calories from beverage/liquids? Are you getting ebough fiber and water to have proper bowel movements?

I thought this too

Then I learned that I was putting 400 calories of mayo in my tuna sandwiches

Harpie posted...

I thought this too

Then I learned that I was putting 400 calories of mayo in my tuna sandwiches

homie thats like a third of a cup

ArsGoetia posted...

homie thats like a third of a cup

Did I stutter?
Its more like a quarter cup anyways

Harpie posted...

Did I stutter?
Its more like a quarter cup anyways

i aint judgin
i could eat mayo by itself
but thats a smidge much to not wonder how many calories it is lol

You're overlooking some calories somewhere

or

Your actual calories burned doesn't line up with whatever you got from a TDEE calculator (for various reasons)

or

You're cutting your calories too low and subconsciously moving less, so you're closer to maintenance than a deficit.

or

It's water weight

Plateaus are common. Give it a couple weeks and see if you start to see some losses again.

At that point you may need to evaluate, recalculate if you are seeing weight gain or zero losses.

Harpie posted...

Did I stutter?
Its more like a quarter cup anyways

Don't tell johnny you like mayo

Anyway when I would plateau I just stayed the course, and eventually I started losing again

I've heard someone say that if you go back into a calorie surplus for a week or two it'll kick start your metabolism and when you go back to the deficit you'll lose again. Idk if that's true

How can you truly know how many calories youre burning?

EndOfDiscOne posted...

How can you truly know how many calories youre burning?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate

Proper measurement requires a strict set of criteria to be met. These criteria include being in a physically and psychologically undisturbed state and being in a thermally neutral environment while in the post-absorptive state (i.e., not actively digesting food).

pretzelcoatl posted...

I'm starting the gym this weekend, but it shouldn't be necessary if I'm still net negative.

Then you're not net negative anymore. You can try posting your meal just in case you made a miscalculation somewhere.

You're probably not counting enough calories and/or overestimating how much you burn.

Also, give it more time. When you first start, fat turns to muscle, which weighs more than fat, so you'll gain weight for a while.

If you've lost a lot of weight, that by itself will reduce your base metabolism.

Bugged mechanics

Account for carbs and sugar as well

Simple. You're either undercounting your intake, overcounting your caloric burn, or are currently retaining more than you think in water or poo.

Weight loss isn't consistent and plateaus are common, especially with metabolic changes that come with dieting.

If you're sticking to an honest diet and starting an exercise regime, you will lose weight, though admittedly maybe not as fast as you would like.

Animals evolved to retain fat stores for a very good reason, so they can burn slowly unfortunately in this circumstance.

is that tdee calculator accurate

you are literally not at a negative calorie intake then. you are not accurately counting calories.

the gym should fix the problem.

TheLiarParadox posted...

You're overlooking some calories somewhere

or

Your actual calories burned doesn't line up with whatever you got from a TDEE calculator (for various reasons)

or

You're cutting your calories too low and subconsciously moving less, so you're closer to maintenance than a deficit.

or

It's water weight

or

"Calories in, calories out" is an unscientific and unreliable approach to weight loss and health.

Thanatos_the_Great posted...

or

"Calories in, calories out" is an unscientific and unreliable approach to weight loss and health.

you can measure the calories in, but its hard to measure the calories out, lots of people have slow metabolism and our body gets accustomed to us being fatasses

Thanatos_the_Great posted...

or

"Calories in, calories out" is an unscientific and unreliable approach to weight loss and health.

No, its totally fine.

Thanatos_the_Great posted...

or

"Calories in, calories out" is an unscientific and unreliable approach to weight loss and health.

Nonsense, it's simple math. If you burn more calories then you consume, you will lose weight.

The thing that's not simple is that it's not always easy or consistent to measure caloric intake or especially burn.

Thanatos_the_Great posted...

or

"Calories in, calories out" is an unscientific and unreliable approach to weight loss and health.

What do you recommend?

Calories in is also difficult to measure. You actually need to weigh shit out and stuff. While its a solid ballpark figure, the packaging that your food comes in is very often incorrect.

The best approach is to just gradually step down your intake and increase exercise until you start losing weight

I am pretty sure that your body can go into starvation mode so it holds on to everything.

cjsdowg posted...

I am pretty sure that your body can go into starvation mode so it holds on to everything.

As far as I know this is a myth, or at least an oversimplified interpretation of something the experts said, but most people didn't understand.

A calorie deficit is quite literally the definition of losing weight. You are not at negative calorie intake, anymore than I am a married man despite being a bachelor.

EPR-radar posted...

If you've lost a lot of weight, that by itself will reduce your base metabolism.

Yeah this one was my first thought. Like after I lost a bunch of weight, I recalculated and the amount of calories I could eat in order to lose weight changed quite a bit.

Dark_Arbron posted...

As far as I know this is a myth, or at least an oversimplified interpretation of something the experts said, but most people didn't understand.

I have read different things on subject. For example if you are eating too little the natural body movements that you do over the day slows down. And you resting Cals are not as much. As someone on a weight loss mission. I can tell you, if I eat like normal person pounds come right back on. So I stay around 900 cals. or less.

are you building muscle mass?

Muscle mass is heavier than fat.

Unsuprised_Pika posted...

Miscalculations and perhaps a bit of water weight or constipation.

Are you factoring in calories from beverage/liquids? Are you getting ebough fiber and water to have proper bowel movements?

I only drink black coffee or water, so that's definitely not it. Maybe it's *too* much fiber?

calories in calories out is basic thermodynamics how in the fuck is that not scientific.

what's not scientific is all the bullshit diet fads and tricks people go through.

"reading" stuff means about as much as fuck-all if it's not peer-reviewed, empirical science.

EndOfDiscOne posted...

How can you truly know how many calories youre burning?

I know how much I'm eating, which is not much due to prescription stimulants making it difficult to eat large amounts of food. Not sure how many calories I'm burning, but my job is fairly active lately. I'm usually moving for about 6 hours a day at work.

cjsdowg posted...

I have read different things on subject. For example if you are eating too little the natural body movements that you do over the day slows down. And you resting Cals are not as much. As someone on a weight loss mission. I can tell you, if I eat like normal person pounds come right back on. So I stay around 900 cals. or less.

Dude what? 900 calories a day can't be good for you. That's well below the minimum recommendations

NoxObscuras posted...

Dude what? 900 calories a day can't be good for you. That's well below the minimum recommendations

ive gone over 2 weeks without eating
900 calories is fine especially for a sedentary lifestyle lol
2k calories is the recommended diet for a fast food eater that doesnt walk if he doesnt have to

NoxObscuras posted...

Dude what? 900 calories a day can't be good for you. That's well below the minimum recommendations

I know :( . But after I hit my goal weight I will build back up to normal. Honestly it really has made writing harder.

ArsGoetia posted...

ive gone over 2 weeks without eating

How are you living?

The thing a lot of people get wrong about "Calories in, calories out" is that it's NOT a diet strategy. It's just quite literally the explanation for what's happening according to physical law.

If you're trying to learn how to bounce a basketball it doesn't really help if someone says "It's just gravity and the transference of kinetic and potential energy". That doesn't give you the tools you need to actually get better at bouncing a ball.

Counting calories in might be a diet plan - but it's incomplete, and it doesn't work well for everyone.

Dieting is a skill. You need to learn it. You need to learn a diet plan that allows you to adhere to the physical law.

In any case, it is just calories in vs calories out.

If you are 100% sure everything is being counted correctly, the next obvious answer is just water weight. Water weight fluctuates a lot, and there is no hard line way of really measuring this because your body is majority water.

Someone mentioned muscle mass. I don't know your exercise routines, but if you have never lifted, and started lifting to lose weight, that's really the only time you can get significant muscle mass while also losing fat. Which would mean you would be gaining weight too via muscle mass.

Best advice is if you are doing everything correctly, just don't rely on a scale. Measure your stomach, arms, legs. See how older clothes fit on now vs a while back ect.

cjsdowg posted...

How are you living?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/e1fab14d.jpg

Also change up your exercise routine. Your body adapts to your exercise and you might have to change duration and/or intensity.

"fairly active" is relative.

you should count steps with a fitbit or something and you might see you arent as active as you think, that's my guess.

in any case, the gym is always necessary. the idea that it wouldn't be necessary would mean you get like 80,000 steps (or equivalent) per week which is highly unlikely. you would know if you walked that much--you'd have to walk at least a mile to work and a mile home or something everyday to reasonably avoid having to do other exercises and be healthy. probably more.

a day that feels fairly active can still end up being like 4000 steps or so, below the 10,000 standard goal, and even 10,000 step is not enough to not work out. more like 20,000 to be fit.

steps are just a way to think about calories, things like weight-lifting are the best for losing weight because you burn so many calories doing it. as long as you're moving some iron, the energy is only coming from you, and that makes a huge difference. the force required to do most modern tasks is negligible. you can look up charts to translate time lifting into steps.

step-counting is the other half of calorie counting, a way to measure how active you were.

anyway if you go to the gym you wont have to do all this boring stuff

Check secondary things you consume like drinks. They add up in surprising ways.

pazzy posted...

Check secondary things you consume like drinks. They add up in surprising ways.

Don't drink anything besides black coffee and water. Unsweetened iced tea as well. Definitely not drinking my calories.

Then the only thing I can think is your resting calories burned is less than you think.