Not loosing weight despite serious calories reduction

[ScubaAlex]

When I started out, I needed to loose about 12-13 lbs. I know that doesn't sound like much but that is what makes it all the more difficult. 

Of course the first 3 lbs came right off in barely a week or so, the rest has been a true struggle.

This past week, I have been exercising daily if not even twice a day, eating around 1000 calories (so a defiicit of 750-1000 calories per day!), no alcohol, drink an average of 100 fl oz of water per day, and I got the scale this morning to only see 1.2lbs gone.  WTF!  The week before, when I had my period and with an average of 800 calorie deficit per day, I didn't loose anything!!   This is totally depressing. 

I don't see how I can eat even less and still be functional.  Thoughts?

(I'm now 139lbs, 5'6, 45 y/o and aiming for 132lbs). 

[Dominique]

@mommy9397: note that this topic was started by @ScubaAlex almost five years ago, that he last posted in January 2015 and last visited the community in June 2016. You may therefore want to tag him in order to get his attention, as I just did.

Losing 8 pounds in one week is what typically happens at the very beginning of a weight loss journey, if/when cutting almost all carbs. A large part of that amount is water, not tissue. I understand it can feel great when you see the number on the scale, but you should understand it’s a one-off effect. Whatever you lose on subsequent weeks is much more likely to be actual tissue (hopefully primarily adipose tissue i.e. fat), and losing 2.4 and 2 lbs per week should be viewed as a great achievement rather than as disappointing. I agree with your doc about keeping the deficit for no longer than 12 weeks at a time. Think what would happen if you were able to lose at an average of 2 lbs per week for 12 weeks: you would have lost almost 10% of your starting weight. Not disappointing at all in my books.

Yes, metabolic adaptation (the fancy term for "starvation mode") is a real thing, and the best way to keep it under control is to lose at a reasonable pace, and not for too long at a time.

[CHIANTE123]

What you are eating is absolutely the problem. Under 900 calories a day? Your body is storing fat, and no matter what you do at 900 calories its not going to burn the fat. You need to feed your body regularly with good non processed real food so it will burn. Think of it like this.... You body thinks there is no more food coming, so it protects you by holding on to what it has.... if it knows there is more food coming its like a wheel thatwill continue to spin. Feed it good food in small portion to keep the wheel spinning, every 3 hours. It will burn the stored fat and you will lose weight. 

[Heybales]

---

@CHIANTE123 wrote:

What you are eating is absolutely the problem. Under 900 calories a day? Your body is storing fat, and no matter what you do at 900 calories its not going to burn the fat. You need to feed your body regularly with good non processed real food so it will burn. Think of it like this.... You body thinks there is no more food coming, so it protects you by holding on to what it has.... if it knows there is more food coming its like a wheel thatwill continue to spin. Feed it good food in small portion to keep the wheel spinning, every 3 hours. It will burn the stored fat and you will lose weight. 

---

Sadly those are all myths as far as weight loss, and fat loss.

If only starving people would have their system hold on to what it has and not continue to waste away.

And while 3 hours may personally help someone to feel satisfied with amount they are eating, for others constantly keeping the insulin elevated after eating and potential low blood sugar would cause just other issues and not be satiating to them - no science behind that claim.

Not sure where to find the science behind needing to feed the body with good non-processed real food so it can burn fat. Considering the fat loss on people doing twinkie diets, fast food only diets, ect - that claim doesn't pan out in testing.

What your body will do though is adapt if you eat too little for it and stresses it's already dealing with.

And with stress-induced increased cortisol it can increase water weight - easily hiding fat loss on the scale, by upwards of 20 lbs slowly being added.

Those adaptations are also about slowing down the calorie burn, so you aren't burning as much as before.

But you eat 900 foolishly and you'll still lose fat - the body can only slow down so much - it's not like it can stop doing some processes. But it can lose hair and nails and stop replacing skin, ect. And be cold constantly and make you not want to fidget or move much and sleep longer.

And the likely lack of nutrition on 900 daily will cause other problems sooner and later too.

But sadly you keep eating low enough you can overcome those adaptations and loose fat. And likely never be able to eat "normal" levels again without gaining it all and more back again.

But real concerns don't have to be masked in myths of "the body will hold onto all the fat" and "you'll gain fat" or "eat every 3 hrs to keep the metabolism alive" ect, ect.

There are real reasons for not eating that low that are not often repeated myths.

[cutie]

Thanks

Sent from my iPhone

[Dominique]

---

@CHIANTE123 wrote:

Feed it good food in small portion to keep the wheel spinning, every 3 hours. It will burn the stored fat and you will lose weight. 

---

Interestingly enough, proponents of intermittent fasting (which is the opposite of what you advocate) are making the same argument: that their way of eating will best promote burning of stored fat, though they usually claim it’s because of avoiding "insulin spikes".

The thing is, nutrient timing (e.g. how frequently or infrequently you’re eating during the day) only plays a marginal role in weight changes: both ways of eating (smaller meals every few hours or just 1-2 larger meals during the day) will lead to weight loss if they result in a caloric deficit (and to weight gain if they result in a caloric surplus). So choosing the frequency of your meals should mostly be a question of personal preferences (whatever best floats your boat).

[Allicat7420]

Here is the deal...

Eating less than 1200 a day SUCKS. I am a recovering anorexic and I used to eat 300-500 a day. I lost my hair, developed osteoporosis, lost my menstrual cycle, became bradycardic, and developed irregular heart arrhythmias. I am 21 years old and I almost died. Eating less than 1200 calories may help you lose weight fast, but long term it will kill you. Take it from someone who almost lost their life. 

[nickyshephard40]

Hello, I've read your post and it got my attention. I feel you dear, weight loss is indeed a difficult journey. But with perseverance, I believe that you can do it. You can eat low carb foods and take supplements which can help you on your diet.

[Ccl33]

Thanks, I try to do low carb. Love the bread at Whole Food store that has cranberry and walnuts…..so good. The bread is a treat and I never make a sandwich, but it sometimes feels good for breakfast with an egg or in the afternoon with coffee.
thank you
Cathy

[Dominique]

---

@nickyshephard40 wrote:
... and take supplements which can help you on your diet.

---

In the hierarchy of things that matter, supplements only play a very minor role, whether it’s for weight loss or health. Or what specific supplements do you have in mind?

[andrew1111]

Old topic, but I just wanted to mention something.

When I tried losing weight I did so very efficiently losing a couple of pounds every week at around 1250 calories with no exercise.  That got derailed though and I started eating more.  When I decided to lose it again I started going for a brisk walk every day and eating vegetables and for some reason I wasn't losing at all.  I cut out the vegetables then immediately started losing again.  I'm convinced based on this that vegetables were the culprit.  I never ate vegetables my whole life, and by the way no I am rarely ill, and maybe this was the reason?

[Dominique]

So according to your anecdotal findings, the key to successful weight loss is exercising as little as possible and staying away from veggies, while the secret of good health is to avoid veggies at any cost?! That certainly flies in the face of a lot of scientific evidence...

[Heybales]

---

@andrew1111 wrote:

Old topic, but I just wanted to mention something.

When I tried losing weight I did so very efficiently losing a couple of pounds every week at around 1250 calories with no exercise.  That got derailed though and I started eating more.  When I decided to lose it again I started going for a brisk walk every day and eating vegetables and for some reason I wasn't losing at all.  I cut out the vegetables then immediately started losing again.  I'm convinced based on this that vegetables were the culprit.  I never ate vegetables my whole life, and by the way no I am rarely ill, and maybe this was the reason?

---

Perfect example that causation =/= correlation.

Are you aware of the many reasons why a body gains water weight when you start a new exercise routine?

Easily could be that effect finally stopped about the time you stopped eating vegetables.

Are you aware of the many reasons a body can fluctuate water weight?

You easily could have weighed at an unusual low weight such your normal weigh-ins appeared high.

Are you aware that stress induced cortisol can cause slowly retained water up to 20 lbs?

Your life could easily have changed about that time that caused more stress - besides eating vegetables.

Unless you've run studies before and are knowledgeable enough about all the interactions so as to create a properly crafted set of changes - your experience could have been chalked up to so many other reasons for the effect you saw.

Additionally - if you didn't have more that 50 lb to lose in total - your attempting to go back to losing 2 lbs weekly could have easily freaked body out and it adapted.

Because if your deficit prior eating 1250 led to 2 lbs with no exercise, then if you started eating 1250 again with exercise would have meant a bigger deficit - talk about an easy stress on the body.

[Runswithwolves]

I would say stay with it, you will lose, yes you should probably eat more but it's harder when you get older. Maybe try a 21 day fast on bone broth and tea. I read Dr. Fung's book on fasting and it's supposed to have great health benefits. 

[WishingEveryday]

I have a similar question, but in my case, if I eat more than 800 calories daily, I’ll gain weight. But my metabolism is quite fast, and I exercise daily, so I really have no idea what’s going on.

[Heybales]

---

@WishingEveryday wrote:

I have a similar question, but in my case, if I eat more than 800 calories daily, I’ll gain weight. But my metabolism is quite fast, and I exercise daily, so I really have no idea what’s going on.

---

Curious how you would know your metabolism is quite fast?

What are your stats - age, gender, weight, height, daily activity level outside exercise (kids, pets, household, garden, deskjob, ect), what is the daily exercise (time and what)?

So are you suggesting your maintenance calories is 800, and you are gaining fat weight when you eat more than that?

How much do you figure you are eating when eating "more", like 900 total, or 2000? "More" can have an enormous range to it.

How many days eating more?

How fast is the weight gain?

Because here's the fact regarding fat - it's not fast gained or lost.

Fat takes 3500 calories to gain or lose a pound.

Let's pretend your maintenance calories with everything you do was really 800 (highly unlikely).

Let's say you gained 1 lb in the next 2 days and believed it was fat weight.

1 lb x 3500 / 2 days = 1750 extra calories daily.

You would have had to eaten 2550 calories for those 2 days for that to happen.

So now your numbers, how fast did you gain how much weight?

Could it possibly have been fat weight?

Considering water weight fluctuates in a healthy person 1-2 lbs daily very easily, you can see what it is likely happening.

Oh - I doubt greatly you are actually eating 800 calories anyway.

Do you log every bite that goes into your mouth by weight?

Because calories is per gram, weight. Not by spoon or cup or about 3 per package.

[MichelleEllis]

Nonsense! Not everyone loses the weight at the same rate... it is simply as that. Everyone loses weight at differently with different metabolism... it’s doesn’t they won’t lose weight unless the eat more... that is nonesense... Burn what you eat with a enough calorie deficit that is true weightloss. Yes you need to eat to fuel energy, but not to lose weight. How else do you explain ketosis... or gastric sleeve surgery... basically you are eating less and still lose weight. Ask any doctor and the will put you on a low cal and healthy protein diet and a restricted calorie intake. Just do your best to follow it and stick with it...Weight will come off in it own time.

[Lisag56]

The above advise is hood of you are 25 but they really don’t understand. When you are over the age of 40, your calories are processed differently and WATER takes a HUGE role. When your hormones are going haywire, you can lose 1 lb of fat and it’s IMMEDIATELY replaced by FLUID! Fat and fluid become interchangeable. The only way is fasting. I’m don’t listed to people telling you to eat “healthy” fats and all the stuff that works when you’re younger. Get your hire ones and thyroid checked and start intermittent fasting for at least 3 days a week. Drop all carbs. You are not crazy, they are because they think there is a one size fits all approach for weight loss. 

[Lisag56]

Sounds good but you’re wrong the body needs only 1000 calories to run even if sedentary. Those calories are burning but you’re storing water. Fluid retention is one of the biggest tricksters that mimic weight gain. Try more dandelion root and magnesium. Have blood checked for thyroid function and build more muscle. That’s it. Most people over the age of 40 are losing weight but that weight loss is immediately being replaced by fluid. If you eat whole grains and all that stuff, you’ll be healthy but fat. You WON’T lose what you want so please stop giving people that advice because it’s inaccurate. Fluid retention is the reason it seems like they’re not losing weight 

[RunsWScissors]

I’m not sure if you’re responding to me or someone else as it’s been years - maybe 10 since I posted anything on this board. Half my messages go to spam, I have no way to log in and see the thread, etc. But -

Your opinion is your opinion. Please don’t tell people to stop giving advice unless you have time tested, peer reviewed published medical or nutrition data with a large number of participants. If you’d like information on grains reducing weight, LDL levels, stoke and cardiovascular events in general, there is so much you’d be reading for the next few weeks. Otherwise, your opinion is no more credible than anyone else’s.

While I have no idea what the rest of the thread is I am curious as to the supplements you mentioned. Thanks for that.

Please don’t write me back. I can’t see the original thread and I have no desire to converse further on opinions. Let alone ones discussing a post from a decade ago. Im sending it to spam where it mostly goes anyway.
Be well.

[Heybales]

---

@Lisag56 wrote:

Sounds good but you’re wrong the body needs only 1000 calories to run even if sedentary. Those calories are burning but you’re storing water. Fluid retention is one of the biggest tricksters that mimic weight gain. Try more dandelion root and magnesium. Have blood checked for thyroid function and build more muscle. That’s it. Most people over the age of 40 are losing weight but that weight loss is immediately being replaced by fluid. If you eat whole grains and all that stuff, you’ll be healthy but fat. You WON’T lose what you want so please stop giving people that advice because it’s inaccurate. Fluid retention is the reason it seems like they’re not losing weight 

---

That's frankly some wild unsafe advice. Besides not knowing what post you are replying to.

Without even knowing any stats or activity levels you are claiming we don't really need to eat more than 1000 calories?

And everyone over 40 doesn't really lose weight, just lose fat and gain water.

I think there are millions of examples you need to look at including studies that clearly show you are missing a lot in your blog reading. Or tweeter or tik-tok or wherever you are getting your misinformation.

Agree that fluid retention is reason for what appears to be plateaus, just different mechanism without risky advice included.