Calorie in vs. calorie out

[kmeden09]

I have been diligent in logging my food in the food log everyday.  I reach my goal for the day and I stop eating.  Although I still sometimes feel hungry, I'm very committed to not going over the goal that I've achieved each day.  At this point, my dashboard indicates that I'm over in my calorie in vs. calorie out.  But I realize that I will continue to burn calories in the evening. By the next morning, when I review my dashboard, my caloric intake is now in the under zone.  So I've met my goal and yet somehow I'm still under.  How do I resolve this?  Any suggestions?  I know that when I'm not getting enough calories, I lose absolutely no weight, which is so frustrating when I feel I'm following everything to a tee.  Help!

[Maxit]

That dashboard tile about "the zone" is just fyi.  Know what your daily target is and meet that.  If your goal is to be, for example, 250 calories under your burn, then that is what you want to meet.  Remember that your body burns calories to keep you alive, and activity adds to the total burn.  So that tile will show you fine, say, at 7 PM after you have finished your evening meal .... then for the next 5 hours you continue to burn fuel.  Then, at midnight the clock starts again, and so you find that in the morning you are "under" again as your body has been keeping itself alive without any food intake.  Your weekly report will show your calorie deficit for each 24 hour period.  That is what I look at.

Be sure your daily calorie goal is reasonable for your weight, activity level, and age.  If you are feeling actual hunger, then you may need to eat something 🙂

[Heybales]

Stop looking at that tile for the guage, which is only stats up to that moment in time, not later as you've observed.

Silly tile.

Look at the tile for calories eaten, and calories burned. Do the math for your 500 or whatever calorie deficit you are doing.

After 1 day of what you saw, don't you now know exactly how much more you are given credit for burning after you go to bed?

So you can eat that much more.

[TCG · Accepted solution]

The reason you may think you are not losing weight is that for every pound of fat your lose you gain that pound in muscle which is leaner. Measure your body and see how many inches you have lost. I have to be under 1500 calories each day but the days I workout and burn more calories I have to allow for those calories burned. I try not to go over the 1500 calories even if I workout but the extra calories burned allow me to adjust my evening meal. I've lost two pant sizes, I had to purchase smaller shoes and I see a noticable difference in my body but I've only lost 3 pounds this month.

[kmeden09]

Thank you so much for your response.  I am feeling so much better about my results.  I have noticed significant differences in the way my clothing is fitting - they are beginning to hang on me, but unfortunately as a woman, I am a slave to the number on the scale.  I will try and change my focus to inches versus pounds and hopefully that mind shift will continue keep me motivated.  Thanks for taking the time to respond.  This response has been very helpful and encouraging.  Thanks again.

[Heybales]

---

@TCG wrote:

The reason you may think you are not losing weight is that for every pound of fat your lose you gain that pound in muscle which is leaner. 

---

The whole body building, power lifting, and weight lifting community would love to know who this can possibly be done.

I'm sorry, while it's a feel good phrase thrown out there - "you are probably gaining muscle while losing fat" - it's also not based in reality, for anyone, in any circumstance, not to the extreme you are claiming.

First, you can lose fat without gaining one ounce of muscle. Not sure where you heard this idea that if you lose fat you gain muscle, like automatically. Body builders have years of research and training to cut fat while trying to retain muscle mass, because it's a fine line for them for show prep.

In fact, unless you do strength training, you are expected to lose about 20% muscle mass along with fat mass as your weight.

Second, total myth that you can build muscle up as fast as you can lose fat, and in this case with no comments at all about there even being strength training involved, it ain't going to happen.

About the best study involving men, so better hormones, doing a progressive strength training program, eating at maintenance so no weight lost, lost fat and gained LBM at the rate of 3.5 lbs in 16 weeks.

http://jap.physiology.org/content/76/1/133.short

And that's not even muscle mass, but LBM, which is everything but fat, so muscle, glycogen, water.

A woman eating in surplus, so gaining fat and muscle, doing progressive weight lifting, can hope for 1 lb gain in LBM in 6 weeks. Again, not even pure muscle, some water too. And of course the fat gain that comes along with eating in surplus.

And the cut the fat later, and faster, then they gained that 1 lb. Probably 2-3 weeks to drop the 3-4 lbs of fat gained along with that muscle.

You can gain strength without gaining any muscle mass at all, tapping out existing muscle and training the Central Nervous System for better use of muscle, better form, ect.

And there is all kinds of water weight gain that comes from exercise as part of body's response to improve.

And in a diet, truly eating less than maintenance, you might gain 1-2 lb in 3 months if truly new at weight lifting and you tap out existing muscle fast, and you have enough fat to spare.

So while it sounds good, it's not based in reality. If you think it is, would love to see some research proving me wrong.

[TCG]

I've been working with a personal trainer for 8 months, at first I lost some weight then I stopped losing for a few months. We measured my body and made the necessary adjustments, we workout different parts of the body every day I see him. One day we do all arms the next we go to legs and mid section, I have also had my diet adjusted reducing my carb intake. I have gone a month without losing any weight but my legs lost 1 1/2 inches and my waist lost 1 inch. I have also gone down one whole shoe size, people don't realize that feet have fat on the outside and your shoe size goes down when you start losing weight. A person may lose fat and not gain muscle if they live a sedetary lifestyle but if the person puts in the effort even if it's just walking they will start to build muscle. I'm a 59 year old female and the first major weight loss I noticed was not retaining water, that makes a big difference when females weigh themselves. Women tend to have more fat in their bodies than men so there is a big difference in how we build muscle and lose weight. Men and women need to workout differently because of the different areas that we store fat. When I started my health journey I started by seeing a dietician and a trainer, I did not go at it on my own. I have learned alot from both, so I am suggesting that people do research that fits their needs and body type and they will see results, it may take time but progress will be seen

[Jessesmom]

Ok I am sorry I am new at this and feeling very stupid 😉 I chose the 750 plan (which means there is one level harder than the plan I chose) my desired calorie burn was 2200 for the first week which I met no problem and optimal intake was 1450 right? Now my goal calorie burn has jumped to 2500 still met but I was still only taking in 13-1400 calories? Does my intake stay the same or does it need to adjust to the higher amount? Am I doing harm to myself if I take in less calories? Should I adjust my plan to the hardest option? Sorry for all the questions I just don't want to frustrate myself to the point of quitting!!! Thanks for any help

[Heybales]

---

@Jessesmom wrote:
Ok I am sorry I am new at this and feeling very stupid 😉 I chose the 750 plan (which means there is one level harder than the plan I chose) my desired calorie burn was 2200 for the first week which I met no problem and optimal intake was 1450 right? Now my goal calorie burn has jumped to 2500 still met but I was still only taking in 13-1400 calories? Does my intake stay the same or does it need to adjust to the higher amount? Am I doing harm to myself if I take in less calories? Should I adjust my plan to the hardest option? Sorry for all the questions I just don't want to frustrate myself to the point of quitting!!! Thanks for any help

---

You eat correctly for the amount you burn.

You burn more, you eat more.

In the long run if consistent with badly undereating, yes, you can become calorie deficient.

How long does it take for a vitamin or mineral deficiency to show up?

usually a long while, and usually some bad enough symptoms to even check it out and discover what's up.

Same with calories, bad negative effects it could take awhile to recover from.

1000 cal deficit for over 60 to lose.

So the 750 cal deficit is reasonable if you have 30 - 60 lbs to lose.

500 for 10 - 30 lbs

250 for last 10 lbs.

That calorie burn goal is merely to give you something to aim for, which will leave you enough to eat.

Some find they can adhere to their diet very easy if they can eat 2000 daily, they get treats, stuff they like, nutritious stuff, ect.

And if they want to lose 1 lb weekly, then the burn goal is set to 2500.

If eating 1300-1400 leaves you feeling restricted, and you splurge too often - then what good is it?

Or if you must totally eliminate food items that you know full well you'll eat again when off diet, then what good was it in the long run?

Both are usually recipes for disaster and starting a series of yo-yo diets.

[Jessesmom]

Thank you so much for breaking it down so I understand!!! So my ultimate goal is to lose between 70 to 75 lbs, and I am comfortable actually over full eating 1400calories (without depriving myself)!! So to make sure I am understanding you correctly I should/could effectively switch to the 1000 cal deficit eating my 13-1400 calories just make sure I burn at least 2400 calories? Then lower my deficit as I have less to lose?

[Jessesmom]

TOTAL CALS BURNED 14,102
DAILY AVERAGE. 2,015 cals
BEST DAY. 2,287 cals
CALORIES IN VS OUT. -2048 WEEKLY TOTAL.
14105 cals burned
6807 cals eaten
-5250 plan deficit
WEIGHT CHANGE. 0.0 lb
This is what confuses me?? If I ate that much less than my burn why is my weight change 0??

[Heybales]

---

@Jessesmom wrote:
Thank you so much for breaking it down so I understand!!! So my ultimate goal is to lose between 70 to 75 lbs, and I am comfortable actually over full eating 1400calories (without depriving myself)!! So to make sure I am understanding you correctly I should/could effectively switch to the 1000 cal deficit eating my 13-1400 calories just make sure I burn at least 2400 calories? Then lower my deficit as I have less to lose?

---

You got it.

In fact if your food logging is per weight and you feel very accurate, and you do indeed lose 2 lbs weekly following the problem, when you start seeing the loss becoming less and less, like 1.8, then 1.7, 1.6 - 

Get the calories up to maintenance fast - your body is already slowing down when that starts to happen.

Couple weeks at maintenance, then drop to next smaller loss amount.

And it's not a bad idea to reset the hormones eating at maintenance for a week, like every 6-8 weeks anyway.

That can many times prevent the above effect from happening.

Which when that happens, it means you are no longer burning what Fitbit thinks you are burning, and was accurate about before. The body has started to adapt and slow down.

Probably 3 weeks like that is sign it started.

[Heybales]

---

@Jessesmom wrote:
TOTAL CALS BURNED 14,102
DAILY AVERAGE. 2,015 cals
BEST DAY. 2,287 cals
CALORIES IN VS OUT. -2048 WEEKLY TOTAL.
14105 cals burned
6807 cals eaten
-5250 plan deficit
WEIGHT CHANGE. 0.0 lb
This is what confuses me?? If I ate that much less than my burn why is my weight change 0??

---

Because you started an exercise program and first response of body is to add more water.

Because you have stressed the body out too much eating less than 1000 daily on average and elevated cortisol is causing water retention despite losing fat and muscle weight.

Because your food logging is terrible, and you are manually logging a bunch of exercise that is way over estimated on burn, the combo is wiping out your deficit.

Because this isn't the first week in a diet and it's been awhile, and body has already slowed down the 20-25% max it might.

And/or a combo of several of those, because they do go together. When you undereat so much is does slow the body down, cortisol is elevated because of the stress retaining water, muscle is lost, accuracy with food logging many times is bad because of binges eating so little.

You'll have to narrow down which of those, or combo, is most likely.

You could keep trying to eat less than 900 daily, and then see where you'll end up, with whatever level of activity you do.

If you are under the impression that a bigger deficit is better - why not just stop eating and get it done with quicker?

I suggest it would be terrible for that kiddo on your neck though.

[shanna0209]

I'm so confused on this calorie thing. 1000 calorie deficit, example on my day- 1243 calories in, worked out today and have 2684 calories out and I still have 508 calories left for the day. I thought I was supposed to stick with 1000 calories a day. Can someone please help me?

[Heybales]

---

@shanna0209 wrote:

I'm so confused on this calorie thing. 1000 calorie deficit, example on my day- 1243 calories in, worked out today and have 2684 calories out and I still have 508 calories left for the day. I thought I was supposed to stick with 1000 calories a day. Can someone please help me?

---

To lose fat weight you merely need to eat less daily than you burn daily, on average - by a reasonable amount.

You burn 2684, you eat 1000 less, or a 1000 calorie deficit, and eat 1684.

1000 calorie deficit doesn't mean your eating goal is 1000.

Oh, if 1000 isn't reasonable - say goodbye to losing some muscle mass too. You'll really want that later.

You have over 80 lbs to lose to make 2 lbs weekly, or a 1000 calorie deficit, a reasonable amount to attempt weekly.

Bigger deficit isn't better, faster isn't better. You didn't gain it fast, your body won't want to lose it fast.

[shanna0209]

Thanks a ton for the quick response, that was so helpful thank you so much.  I am doing lots of weight training and cardio right now and yes I have about 60 lbs to lose unfortunately. I thought the 2lbs a week wouldn't be too difficult considering I have so much to lose. I do want to be careful not lose any muscle I'm building in the process. Do you think 1000 is a good number to start? 

[kaelarenee7]

For 2684 calories out with a 1000 calorie deficit, that leaves 1684 calories to be consumed and still be at your set deficit. Based off of what you already ate, 1243, that's about 440 calories left to eat just based on what you burned so far for the day and Fitbit would include more based on how much of the day is left and how much you should burn just for being alive. 508 calories left for the day sounds about right. If you don't eat anymore for the day beyond your 1243 calories already consumed, that's going to give you a deficit of about 1500 calories for the day, which is a rather large deficit and I wouldn't recommend it.

[Heybales]

---

@shanna0209 wrote:

Thanks a ton for the quick response, that was so helpful thank you so much.  I am doing lots of weight training and cardio right now and yes I have about 60 lbs to lose unfortunately. I thought the 2lbs a week wouldn't be too difficult considering I have so much to lose. I do want to be careful not lose any muscle I'm building in the process. Do you think 1000 is a good number to start? 

---

If this is the first start to a diet and you haven't already been doing one, then that might work until 50 lbs to lose without too much ill effect.

But at 50 lbs left, 1.5 lb weekly, or 750 cal deficit, would be more reasonable, if you want to really get much benefit from that lifting.

Also, your daily burn estimate may be badly off depending on your device. If non HR device, then calories for lifting or badly under-estimated for steps taken - and should be manually logged as Weights or circuit training depending on how many reps and rests between sets you do.

If HR device, then calorie burn will be inflated, and still should be manually logged.

And if this is the start to weight lifting, this is the only time you could actually build muscle during this diet, once existing muscle is tapped out for strength.

Still only about 1 lb ever 8 weeks, but something is better than nothing.

[Lexi_P]

I got my charge HR for Christmas and have not lost ( on the scale) a pound.  I am 134 and 5 foot and want to lose 20-30 lbs.  I have my plan set to a -5250 defict.  I eat on average 1000-1200 calories per day and work out 6 days a week. Daily my calorie defict will be between 750 and 900, and this is without feeling hungry or deprived.  However, when I get my weekly progress reports, my defict is in the hundreds ( this week it said I had a -249 defict?  I am really confused...please someone explain and guide me to some weight loss.

[Heybales]

---

@Lexi_P wrote:

I got my charge HR for Christmas and have not lost ( on the scale) a pound.  I am 134 and 5 foot and want to lose 20-30 lbs.  I have my plan set to a -5250 defict.  I eat on average 1000-1200 calories per day and work out 6 days a week. Daily my calorie defict will be between 750 and 900, and this is without feeling hungry or deprived.  However, when I get my weekly progress reports, my defict is in the hundreds ( this week it said I had a -249 defict?  I am really confused...please someone explain and guide me to some weight loss.

---

Just a question since it appears you believe bigger deficit is better.

Why not just stop eating and lose it faster?

Whatever reasons you can think of, there are more and you are still causing them though a tad slower.

With only 20-30 lbs to lose, set your deficit to 500 daily, and meet your eating goals.

Depending on device and exercises being done, you may need to manually correct calorie burn so that math is done with best estimates.

Accurately log your food.

Calories is per gram, not per cup or spoon. Weigh all your food.

Being short you don't burn much, so your margin for error is very small to see results sadly.

You were 249 lower than your goal eating level - which already has a deficit to it to cause weight loss.

So while that's not bad by itself, added to a weight loss plan that sounds too aggresive it is.

And you feeling full has no relationship to your body being fully fed for your level of activity.

You can screw up your own hormones undereating and not feel hungry, so that's not useful anyway.

Besides, vast majority have weight to lose precisely because they did follow their stomach and they shouldn't have. Neither direction, it's not really trustworthy guide unless you know a whole lot about how your body works and how signals can be incorrect, both hunger and not hunger signals.