Having a lot of trouble losing weight

[lzimman@gmail.com]

Hi everyone,

I've been having a lot of difficulty losing weight. A few years ago I
went from 230 to 160 (and still had at least 10-20lbs to use, as I'm
short, 5'6") but gained a lot of weight about a year and a half ago
when a) my girlfriend and I started dating (so going out to eat more,
and me riding my bike less for transportation) b) I started eating
dairy (I had been vegan for 3 years prior) and c) my migraine headaches
started coming every day instead of just once a week or so, making it
very difficult to exercise.

So I've been back in the 190s for a while. I've now been working on
losing weight for about 2.5 or 3 months. At first I was eating around
1800cal/day, no exercise, but that should still produce a weight loss
in someone my weight, but it didn't. So I dropped to 1500. Still no
weight loss. Started working out at the gym, doing 30-45 minutes of
cardio most days and weight training several days a week. Still no
weight loss. In fact, I've gained a few pounds. I realize it's possible
that I've gained some muscle mass, but I've only been doing the WT for
2-3 weeks so that alone really doesn't seem to account for it.

What do you guys think I should do? Eat less? I find it really
difficult to eat less than 1500 calories a day and I doubt I could keep
it up. Exercise more? Both? Keep doing what I'm doing and hope it will
work eventually? I'm at a loss here.. I actually know quite a bit about
exercise physiology, so I don't need a 101 on calories in vs. calories
out. Which is why I'm all the more frustrated at 3 months of eating at
a caloric deficit and not losing a single pound. (BTW I'm also quite
sure of my calories; almost everything I eat comes with nutritional
info and I've been keeping a daily food diary.)

[Polar Light]

"Ignoramus2977" > wrote in message
...
> My first thought is that, as always, if you are not losing in the long
> run, you are not really having a [sufficient] calorie deficit.
>
> Be wary that some food labels are pure bull****. You may be
> undercounting calories because of that. Example:
>
> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/NutritionLabel/
>
> Since you already framed your question somewhat narrowly, my own
> narrow answer is to eat a little bit less and exercise a bit more
> (e.g. walk). There is no way around it, unless you want to make big
> changes in your diet etc.
>
> That said, somehow dairy also makes me gain weight, at least it
> appears to be the case based on my recent observations.
>
After reading studies posted here earlier in the year regarding calcium as
an aid to fat loss, particularly from dairy sources, I decided to give it a
try. Over the past 4 weeks I've been having a lot of yogurt, low- or non-fat
cheese and skimmed milk. I have actually been eating around 200 cals / day
more than before and the weight has just dropped off. I also feel better,
although I think this is the result of eating more rather than the dairy or
calcium. If that was all, I could say it's all in the mind, however, I don't
think I can influence the scale with my power of suggestion.

I may be wrong but I think you are a 'high fat' eater. If that's the case,
it may be the fat in your dairy causing the weight gain.

[lzimman@gmail.com]

I'm not sure I follow how that example shows that some food labels are
pure bull****. How do I know how many calories are really in that
spread?

Even if that was the issue, I'm eating the same foods as I was before,
just less of them and have cut out any junk food that might have been
in my diet before I started trying to lose weight. So if I was
maintaining my weight before, and now I'm definitely eating less (I
know this without counting anything) then it seems that I should be
losing weight. Especially considering I'm now exercising, which I
wasn't before. :/

Unfortunately I don't think it's the dairy (that would be a pretty easy
solution for me as I could easily avoid it) because I barely eat any. I
use pretty much all my old vegan dairy-replacers, like soy milk,
margarine, etc. but unlike before occasionally eat food that has dairy
as an ingredient or (even less often) have some cheese.

[Chris Braun]

On 28 Apr 2005 00:02:48 GMT, Ignoramus2977
> wrote:

>On 27 Apr 2005 16:40:45 -0700, > wrote:
>> I'm not sure I follow how that example shows that some food labels are
>> pure bull****. How do I know how many calories are really in that
>> spread?
>
>The label says that there are 10 calories per 85 grams of that
>vegetable spread. That's pretty impossible.

I'm not so sure. I don't know anything about that product, but
veggies don't have a lot of calories. The broccoli slaw I had for
dinner tonight has 25 calories in a 3 oz. serving (about 85g). If the
spread is made by mixing ground veggies with water (and no doubt
chemicals :-) ), this might not be far off.

Didn't the label show a couple of grams of protein and no carbs,
though? (I looked at it earlier but haven't gone back to check.) If
so, that seems odd for vegetables. What's in this stuff?

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

[lzimman@gmail.com]

I do, in fact, have a complete record of everything I've eaten for the
past month. My average was approximately 1650. I'm a compulsive list
maker so it's pretty easy for me to keep track of everything. This
should add up to at least a 500 calorie deficit (especially with
exercise, which the gym machinery claims gives me an extra 1400 calorie
deficit each week, not that I trust that machine.) And I certainly
don't have a 3000 calorie binge each week. My "binges", i.e. days that
I did not eat as well as I would have liked, were days that I ate about
2250 calories, which should be at least within the maintenance range
for a young male my weight. They have also been few and far between (3
in the past month.)

I agree that perceptions mislead us, but it is quite clear to myself
and my girlfriend with whom I live that I'm eating considerably less
than I did. For example, here is a typical menu for me:
breakfast: 1 cup of cereal (measured) with 1/2 cup soy milk - 170
calories
snack: luna bar - 180 calories
lunch: a vegetarian sausage - 390 calories
snack: an orange - ~50 calories
dinner: frozen vegan lasagne (amy's) with steamed broccoli, no fat -
~400 (the lasagne is 310)
total: ~1200 calories.

That's lifted right out of my food diary and the other entries aren't
much different. I doubt cheerios is listing vastly misleading calories
on their boxes, or that the broccoli secretly has 500 calories in it
(actually even if it did that would only put me at ~1600 calories.)

I understand that most people who say "I'm not eating much but not
losing weight, I don't get it" are probably actually eating more than
they think, and I would probably post the same thing (I was a regular
poster here years ago when I lost weight the first time.) However,
having been a successful dieter and knowing a good deal about nutrition
leads me to believe that I am not undercounting my calories, or at
least not by much. My main point of surprise at this whole situation is
that I SHOULD be able to eat 2000 calories a day and lose weight, given
everything else (my age, sex, general level of fitness, etc.)

[Chris Braun]

On 27 Apr 2005 18:46:39 -0700, wrote:

>I do, in fact, have a complete record of everything I've eaten for the
>past month. My average was approximately 1650. I'm a compulsive list
>maker so it's pretty easy for me to keep track of everything. This
>should add up to at least a 500 calorie deficit (especially with
>exercise, which the gym machinery claims gives me an extra 1400 calorie
>deficit each week, not that I trust that machine.) And I certainly
>don't have a 3000 calorie binge each week. My "binges", i.e. days that
>I did not eat as well as I would have liked, were days that I ate about
>2250 calories, which should be at least within the maintenance range
>for a young male my weight. They have also been few and far between (3
>in the past month.)
>
>I agree that perceptions mislead us, but it is quite clear to myself
>and my girlfriend with whom I live that I'm eating considerably less
>than I did. For example, here is a typical menu for me:
>breakfast: 1 cup of cereal (measured) with 1/2 cup soy milk - 170
>calories
>snack: luna bar - 180 calories
>lunch: a vegetarian sausage - 390 calories
>snack: an orange - ~50 calories
>dinner: frozen vegan lasagne (amy's) with steamed broccoli, no fat -
>~400 (the lasagne is 310)
>total: ~1200 calories.
>
>That's lifted right out of my food diary and the other entries aren't
>much different. I doubt cheerios is listing vastly misleading calories
>on their boxes, or that the broccoli secretly has 500 calories in it
>(actually even if it did that would only put me at ~1600 calories.)
>
>I understand that most people who say "I'm not eating much but not
>losing weight, I don't get it" are probably actually eating more than
>they think, and I would probably post the same thing (I was a regular
>poster here years ago when I lost weight the first time.) However,
>having been a successful dieter and knowing a good deal about nutrition
>leads me to believe that I am not undercounting my calories, or at
>least not by much. My main point of surprise at this whole situation is
>that I SHOULD be able to eat 2000 calories a day and lose weight, given
>everything else (my age, sex, general level of fitness, etc.)

I'm also a calorie counter, and I feel pretty confident that my
numbers are close most of the time (except when I eat at restaurants,
and then I know they're a lot less accurate). This approach has
worked fine for me. I doubt your estimates are inaccurate enough to
make a difference.

Like you, I find your numbers surprising. I maintain a weight of
about 133 lbs. on around 1600 calories per day, and I'm a menopausal
57 year old woman. If I recall correctly what you said about
exercise, I think I'm probably a fair bit more active than you
presently are, but still...

Have you had your thyroid function checked? You might also consider a
resting metabolic rate test. I think some doctors do these, and more
gyms are starting to. You'll probably have to pay something for it,
but it might be worthwhile. It sounds as though your metabolism has
slowed down for some reason.

Anyway, good luck figuring this out :-).



Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

[lzimman@gmail.com]

Chris wrote:
> Have you had your thyroid function checked? You might also consider
a
> resting metabolic rate test. I think some doctors do these, and more

> gyms are starting to. You'll probably have to pay something for it,
> but it might be worthwhile. It sounds as though your metabolism has
> slowed down for some reason

(sorry quoting is wonky, google groups is really not the best thing to
be using for usenet it seems)

I hadn't considered this, but it might be a good idea. thanks for the
suggestion. I doubted that I have thyroid problems because I lost
weight without any unreasonable effort before but the metabolic rate
test sounds like a good idea. I hadn't heard of that before. Thanks!

[Polar Light]

Chris,

From my 'Sent Items' archive, this is a reply to Ig's thread about this food
label posted earlier this year:

"> The brand appears to be Bulgarian.
> http://www.bbsproduce.com/ajvar.html

If you enlarge the label on this photo you'll see the nutrition info is NOT
the same as on the label posted by Igor.
Trying to figure out what it says, I'd say it gives info per 15g tablespoon
as 15 calories, something like 4g carbs, 1g fiber, 1g sugar, 50mg sodium,
~1g fat, 0g protein & 50mg sodium. In short, an entirely different label
(and probably much closer to reality).


"Chris Braun" > wrote in message
...
> On 28 Apr 2005 00:02:48 GMT, Ignoramus2977
> > wrote:
>
>>On 27 Apr 2005 16:40:45 -0700, >
>>wrote:
>>> I'm not sure I follow how that example shows that some food labels are
>>> pure bull****. How do I know how many calories are really in that
>>> spread?
>>
>>The label says that there are 10 calories per 85 grams of that
>>vegetable spread. That's pretty impossible.
>
> I'm not so sure. I don't know anything about that product, but
> veggies don't have a lot of calories. The broccoli slaw I had for
> dinner tonight has 25 calories in a 3 oz. serving (about 85g). If the
> spread is made by mixing ground veggies with water (and no doubt
> chemicals :-) ), this might not be far off.

> Didn't the label show a couple of grams of protein and no carbs,
> though? (I looked at it earlier but haven't gone back to check.) If
> so, that seems odd for vegetables. What's in this stuff?
>
> Chris
> 262/130s/130s
> started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

[Polar Light]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> I'm not sure I follow how that example shows that some food labels are
> pure bull****. How do I know how many calories are really in that
> spread?

There was a thread about this earlier this year, from my archives, this was
one of my replies:

"> The brand appears to be Bulgarian.
> http://www.bbsproduce.com/ajvar.html

If you enlarge the label on this photo you'll see the nutrition info is NOT
the same as on the label posted by Igor.
Trying to figure out what it says, I'd say it gives info per 15g tablespoon
as 15 calories, something like 4g carbs, 1g fiber, 1g sugar, 50mg sodium,
~1g fat, 0g protein & 50mg sodium. In short, an entirely different label
(and probably much closer to reality).

The label Ig keeps on his site as an example is indeed full of bull****,
however, this is an Eastern European import from a country outside the
European Union and is likely to be the exception rather than the rule. Food
labels on products from within the European Union, North America and even
Latin America tend to be a lot more accurate. So, unless you're eating a lot
of ethnic foods imported from 'exotic' lands, this is not likely to be the
issue.

[Rachael Reynolds]

"Polar Light" > wrote in message
...
> Chris,
>
> From my 'Sent Items' archive, this is a reply to Ig's thread about this
> food label posted earlier this year:
>
> "> The brand appears to be Bulgarian.
>> http://www.bbsproduce.com/ajvar.html
>
> If you enlarge the label on this photo you'll see the nutrition info is
> NOT
> the same as on the label posted by Igor.
> Trying to figure out what it says, I'd say it gives info per 15g
> tablespoon
> as 15 calories, something like 4g carbs, 1g fiber, 1g sugar, 50mg sodium,
> ~1g fat, 0g protein & 50mg sodium. In short, an entirely different label
> (and probably much closer to reality).
>
>
It does seem to be the amount per serving (85g) rather than per 100g which
would be more usual, but otherwise the numbers seem to be the same as Ig
gave?
Rachael
176/117/111

[Polar Light]

"Ignoramus20994" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 11:46:02 +0000 (UTC), Rachael Reynolds
> > wrote:
>>
>> "Polar Light" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Chris,
>>>
>>> From my 'Sent Items' archive, this is a reply to Ig's thread about this
>>> food label posted earlier this year:
>>>
>>> "> The brand appears to be Bulgarian.
>>>> http://www.bbsproduce.com/ajvar.html
>>>
>>> If you enlarge the label on this photo you'll see the nutrition info is
>>> NOT
>>> the same as on the label posted by Igor.
>>> Trying to figure out what it says, I'd say it gives info per 15g
>>> tablespoon
>>> as 15 calories, something like 4g carbs, 1g fiber, 1g sugar, 50mg
>>> sodium,
>>> ~1g fat, 0g protein & 50mg sodium. In short, an entirely different label
>>> (and probably much closer to reality).
>>>
>>>
>> It does seem to be the amount per serving (85g) rather than per 100g
>> which
>> would be more usual, but otherwise the numbers seem to be the same as Ig
>> gave?
>
> I would say that everything is different about my label and Polar's
> data. My label claims a zero carb count, for example, whereas Polar
> Light's has 4 grams of carbs per serving. Also, PL's product has fat
> in it (as, most likely, does my ajvar), but hers lists fat and mine does
> not.
>
> you can see for yourself...
>
> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/NutritionLabel/

The link to the alternative label was posted by s/one in the NG. The way
it's shown on the site you can't really read what it says. I'm a Photoshop
user so I took the image into it, enlarged it, sharpened it a little &
managed to figure out what it says (the figures above). My guess is that
s/one re-labels the jars for exporting to the US knowing there's many people
who count carbs (hence the zero count) or watch fat & calories. If I
remember correctly, your label's calories seem to come all from protein,
rather strange for what is essentially a vegetable paste.

[lzimman@gmail.com]

> You certainly need to maintain a calorie deficit to lose weight,
> however I don't understand where you derived 1500 calories
> as your intake. If you consumed 1500 calories and expended
> 2000 then you would have a 500 cal/day deficit. But if you
> consumed 2000 calories and expended 2500 then you would
> still have a 500 cal/day deficit.

I didn't derive 1500 as my intake, but rather experimented with it when
I didn't lose weight after a couple of weeks at 2000 or 1800. Using the
8-10x body weight as caloric input method does give me a range of
approximately 1500-1800 calories/day.

> My concern is that your body may have become used to a
> certain level of intake. Dropping your intake without increasing
> your exercise could've prompted a "starvation response" where
> your metabolism slowed down to conserve energy stores.
> There is also a concern regarding malnutrition with reduced
> food intake.

>From what I've read, I'm not concerned about malnutrition at 1500
calories/day, (especially because I eat pretty wholesome foods, and
take vitamins.) The thing about starvation mode is that usually one
still loses weight when one is starving, it's just that it's an
undesirable ratio of fat to muscle. I don't feel like I've lost much
muscle (when I do WT I seem to be as strong as I was, if not stronger,
when I dabbled with it a few years ago) and my pants tell me I haven't
lost any fat, either.

I actually recently tried eating a bit more, in the range of
1800-2000/day, which actually resulted in me dropping a few pounds
right off the bat but then jumping back up to even higher than I was
before and staying there.

I think I'm going to continue eating in the 1500-1800 cal range with
exercise (as I've only been at that for about 3-4 weeks) and if I don't
see change maybe I'll go in and see my doctor.

[lzimman@gmail.com]

> Chris's idea on checking out your thyroid is extremely
> sensible. Especially if you sometimes feel lazy and cold, it is worth

> exploring.

I often feel lazy, but I think that's just a personality flaw. :) (And
actually I'm always overheated.. hmmm.) Thanks. I'm going to try upping
my exercise. It's the end of the semester and I'm a grad student.. plus
the laziness.. but I know as soon as it's summer I'm going to have a
lot more time to work out so I'll have no excuse.

[Chris Braun]

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 08:40:13 +0200, "Polar Light"
> wrote:

>Chris,
>
>From my 'Sent Items' archive, this is a reply to Ig's thread about this food
>label posted earlier this year:
>
>"> The brand appears to be Bulgarian.
>> http://www.bbsproduce.com/ajvar.html
>
>If you enlarge the label on this photo you'll see the nutrition info is NOT
>the same as on the label posted by Igor.
>Trying to figure out what it says, I'd say it gives info per 15g tablespoon
>as 15 calories, something like 4g carbs, 1g fiber, 1g sugar, 50mg sodium,
>~1g fat, 0g protein & 50mg sodium. In short, an entirely different label
>(and probably much closer to reality).

This sounds far more plausible!

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004