100 lb. Club - am I on track?




View Full Version : am I on track?


ubergirl
08-09-2009, 02:09 PM
Well, for starters I'm on vacation. Weighing on two different scales, neither of which is my home scale.

1. Clothes: MUCH looser. In June, I had outgrown my size 24 jeans and now I almost feel like I could go down a size.

2. Fitness: Walking 4 miles daily and I can really feel the difference in my energy level.

3. The Mirror: I can see a difference. It's slight, but my stomach is smaller.

4. Weight: Not so good. Almost three weeks ago I saw on my home scale 279.5 on the scale and so I moved my ticker down, but it might have been premature as I seemed to be hovering around 280-81. Now, I'm seeing anything between 273 (once) and 280. Maybe a scale issue? But when I looked back over my weight chart, I've been stuck around 280 for three weeks!

5. Calories: Since I started, I've been shooting for 1200, but ranging between 1200 and 1500. I haven't had any major slip ups yet.

I've been at this since mid-June.


lottie63
08-09-2009, 02:15 PM
I have a calorie deficit chart (that is more conservative than some calculators you'll find online) that might be able to help you find how many calories you can eat a day while burning however many as well, to show you how much you can lose in a week (not an exact science, but better than guessing) If you'd like the chart, PM me your email and I will email it to you.

Also, if you weigh 280, then 1200 cals is NOT enough. It takes more cals to run a bigger body, and you will stall by not eating enough. Even 1500 for someone your size isn't really enough, and could be leading to your stall.

I have repeated this a dozen times:

A friend of mine, I warned her, do NOT go so low, she ate 1200 cals for 4 months and lost about 40 lbs quickly.

Then, she stalled. big time. She couldn't get out of her stall because she couldn't safely lower her cals. (ALWAYS leave yourself 'wiggle room' to go down in cals safely to pull yourself out of a stall)

so, she got fed up with the amount she was eating (so little) and not losing (at all) and binged, and binged, and binged, for 3 months, and never weighed, when she finally weighed again she had gained 25 lbs!

This always seems to happen.

I weigh 264 and I eat 1700 or so cals a day and I lose about 1-2 lbs a week, sometimes more, sometimes less.

I also exericse anywhere from 15-45 mins 5-6 days a week (cardio, strength training and yoga)

Don't be afraid to eat. :)

ubergirl
08-09-2009, 02:21 PM
Hmm, Lottie 63. I keep seeing people say this about calories, but I'm not sure.

I'm 48 years old and I think I have a relatively slow metabolism. When I was younger, I would have lost 5 or 6 pounds per week on 1200 calories, but now, I'm not hungry in the 12 to 15 range.

Anyone know how much age/metabolism have to do with it?


lottie63
08-09-2009, 02:26 PM
Well...this is what the nutritionist told me, 1200 as low as you should go for women and 1500 for men.

and if you're larger, usually much more.

and I don't mean this to sound rude AT ALL...but you didn't get to be 277 lb by not being hungry eating 12-1500 calories. I can eat 12-1500 and be fine, with little yet manageable hunger, that does not mean that my body is optimally burning calories at that range is all I'm saying.

but yes age does have something to do with it as it's on the calorie deficit chart you need to put your age and activity level into the chart to find out how much you can eat and still lose.

Also, I'm not saying you can't lose weight at 1200 calories, you can, and you can lose a lot, but chances are you will stall and won't be able to get out of the stall until you increase your cals, you will probably gain a few at first as your body gets used to you eating again but then it will start to come off at a healthy rate.

Also, it's not particularly heatlhy to lose 5-6 lbs a week for any extended period of time. And if YOU HAD Been losing that much, for so long....you wouldn't be here, right?

It doesn't really work.

lottie63
08-09-2009, 02:27 PM
but.....congrats on the looser clothes! I jsut bought some size 18/20's myself down from a 24/26 this time last year... I know it feels great! :D

Bonnie+J
08-09-2009, 02:32 PM
maybe this could help

http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/

if you go to this site and put in the information, it calculates the amount of calories you need, at your current weight just to keep yourself alive every day. if you get this number and reduce it by 500, thats how many calories you should eat to lose 1-2lbs a week, the recommended loss.

i agree with lottie, 1200 sounds far too low. your body will be clinging to any fat it can get because it anticipates a famine. even increasing it to 1500 with some wiggle room should give you a good loss.

hope this helps! you sound like you are in a good frame of mind about it, keep up the good work!

Onederchic
08-09-2009, 03:06 PM
Well, with the site above, the number I get is 1616.05. Now if I take 500 from that I get 1116.05 :o. I have tried the low low calorie before and I ain't going that route anymore :nono:

lottie63
08-09-2009, 03:14 PM
Well, with the site above, the number I get is 1616.05. Now if I take 500 from that I get 1116.05 :o. I have tried the low low calorie before and I ain't going that route anymore :nono:

You dont subtract 500 from that number, you can subtract 500-1000 from the number you get form taking THAT number on that calculator, and then clicking on the 'daily calorie needs' link, multiplying that number times your bmr and whatever that number is (mine is 2718, so I can subtract 1000 calories from that and eat 1700 cals a day) to lose 2 lbs per week)

Onederchic
08-09-2009, 03:24 PM
That sounds awfully confusing :o

lottie63
08-09-2009, 03:30 PM
It is. I wish they had the calculator do it for you. it's like this:

find your bmr here: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/

mine is 1977, then go here: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/harris-benedict-equation/

and multiply your bmr (1977) by the number associated with your activity level, even though I exercise enough to put me in the moderate activity level category, I know that I am MOSTLY sedentary, cept for exercise that I go out of my way to do so I say i am "lightly active" and mutliply 1977 by 1.375, that gives me 2718. I take that and subtract 1000 calories to lose 2 lbs per week and it gives me 1718.

I know it's confusing but I hope that helps!

Onederchic
08-09-2009, 03:33 PM
Thanks lottie :hug:

thistoo
08-09-2009, 03:51 PM
Hmm, Lottie 63. I keep seeing people say this about calories, but I'm not sure.

I'm 48 years old and I think I have a relatively slow metabolism. When I was younger, I would have lost 5 or 6 pounds per week on 1200 calories, but now, I'm not hungry in the 12 to 15 range.

Anyone know how much age/metabolism have to do with it?

I'm 37, have a slow metabolism and carb sensitivity, and have a hard time losing weight. I've always been terrified of upping my calories when I stall, because it usually makes my weight go up. But recently I upped my exercise and was sticking with 1200-1300 calories, and I got well and truly stuck.

I finally made the decision to try upping my calories to 1400-1500, and what do you know, my weight started going down again. Considering I am a lot shorter than you and weigh less, I'd say you should give it a try.

ubergirl
08-10-2009, 12:04 AM
I tried the BMI/BMR thing, but it kind of confused me.

I think I may be average closer to 1400 per day since my calorie counts are estimates and I don't always know exactly how much I've eaten.

Also, I think maybe I'm not as stalled as I thought. It's been driving me crazy being away from home and weighing on all different scales.

The good news is that I was down to 276.5 today, so I'm still doing slightly better than two pounds a week.

I appreciate everyone's advice. I have a tendency to get frustrated and think I'm not losing even when logic tells me that I am.

Bonnie+J
08-10-2009, 05:33 AM
i'm sorry for posting wrong info! i had it wrong myself tho, i had read about bmr in an article and thought it would be a help to post it!

ubergirl, have you thought about joining weight watchers? theres no estimates there, and alot of things you dont have to count because they're free. i had a really hard time getting the calories right and never really lost weight because i was either over estimating or under, but weight watchers takes all the guessing out. some people find it really easy to work out calories, but i'm awful at it. weight watchers is definitely working for me cos theres no gray area for me.

chickiegirl
08-10-2009, 10:17 AM
I think you need to track on one scale. I'm fussy and don't think I could handle big swings. Wait until you get home and weigh in then and then just use that number.

But no matter what the scale says, you've had some great NSVs, so you're obviously making progress -- congrats!!