Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn’t sound like you have enough of a calorie deficit.

I’m very tall. I should be eating more even, but I cheat myself about 250 cal in an attempt to lose more.

….and your aren’t in enough of a calorie deficit. Doesn’t matter how many calories you think need based on whatever calculations you are using, and how many calories you think you are burning. They are wrong. The scale tells the truth

And I’m losing weight. I don’t get your point?

Well, you said you're discouraged which suggests you are looking to lose weight more quickly? Everyone in this thread needs to eat something

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn’t sound like you have enough of a calorie deficit.

I’m very tall. I should be eating more even, but I cheat myself about 250 cal in an attempt to lose more.

….and your aren’t in enough of a calorie deficit. Doesn’t matter how many calories you think need based on whatever calculations you are using, and how many calories you think you are burning. They are wrong. The scale tells the truth

And I’m losing weight. I don’t get your point?

So then what is your question? Didn’t you post because you are discouraged you aren’t losing weight at a faster rate? If so, you need less calories. If you don’t want to do that, then keep doing what you are doing

I answered above but the QUESTION is literally in the last paragraph of the post.

Comparing yourself to others is useless unless you're looking to be frustrated. You're also not following what your coach prescribed because of your impatience. You could be correct at first that you will lose quicker, but that isn't the point of tracking macros. It's to reach your goal in the LEAST restrictive way possible. If you start with the most restrictive you don't leave room for downward trending if you need to progress more. And you're also more miserable doing it. Macro counting works. Don't try to outsmart your coach. Or do what you want and don't be surprised when it doesn't work or it does but you're absolutely miserable and feel like it isn't worth it. If you're counting macros properly you shouldn't feel hardly restricted at all. It's a great way to recomp your body and still eat. Not just for trying to lose weight (unless you are obese to begin with).

I am hungry too OP, I get it. also I've been 140lbs for about 4 months now and not going down (5'7 mid 50s female).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn’t sound like you have enough of a calorie deficit.

I’m very tall. I should be eating more even, but I cheat myself about 250 cal in an attempt to lose more.

….and your aren’t in enough of a calorie deficit. Doesn’t matter how many calories you think need based on whatever calculations you are using, and how many calories you think you are burning. They are wrong. The scale tells the truth

And I’m losing weight. I don’t get your point?

So then what is your question? Didn’t you post because you are discouraged you aren’t losing weight at a faster rate? If so, you need less calories. If you don’t want to do that, then keep doing what you are doing

I answered above but the QUESTION is literally in the last paragraph of the post.

NP - good lord, you’re snippy, OP.

Yes, it’s harder for people of “normal” BMI to lose weight than people in the “overweight” or “obese” BMI categories.

Not OP. Why are you being so snippy, Pot?

I answered her question. How is that snippy? I didn’t resort to shouting at people. Calling her snippy is snippy? She was incredibly rude to someone who asked a legitimate question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn’t sound like you have enough of a calorie deficit.

I’m very tall. I should be eating more even, but I cheat myself about 250 cal in an attempt to lose more.

….and your aren’t in enough of a calorie deficit. Doesn’t matter how many calories you think need based on whatever calculations you are using, and how many calories you think you are burning. They are wrong. The scale tells the truth

And I’m losing weight. I don’t get your point?

So then what is your question? Didn’t you post because you are discouraged you aren’t losing weight at a faster rate? If so, you need less calories. If you don’t want to do that, then keep doing what you are doing

I answered above but the QUESTION is literally in the last paragraph of the post.

NP - good lord, you’re snippy, OP.

Yes, it’s harder for people of “normal” BMI to lose weight than people in the “overweight” or “obese” BMI categories.

Not OP. Why are you being so snippy, Pot?

Anonymous wrote:OP, I get it. I'm normal weight but I feel my best at a lower (still normal) weight. Working out doesn't work. I'd actually recommend slowing down, doing less strenuous exercises, and working on lowering your calorie and specifically your carbohydrate intake.

Working out absolutely works. I hate eating poverty calories, so I always up my cardio (elliptical, as I do not like high impact) and walking when I try to lose. And it works perfectly well.

Anonymous wrote:So frustrated!

I’m technically within a “normal” weight, but I have some extra fat I’m carrying and trying to get back down to my pre-pregnancy weight and into those clothes again.

I’ve been working my ass off —literally— since around Christmas. Cardio twice a day (walking dog briskly, even in the cold, plus running at the gym), a calorie deficit (weighing food even) and I’m only down 5lb.

My friend and her husband have been doing less than me and only since January, and at dinner last night they told me they are down SO MUCH weight. (Her, overweight, is down 15lb, and him, normal weight, is down 20lb!)

Is it just harder for someone in a normal weight category to lose? I feel like I can’t eat less without starving myself (1200 now) or working out more.

You know, 5 pounds since christmas is 1/2 pound a week, which is a good, sustainable weight loss. How much do you expect to lose each week? It is more difficult when you are close to your goal weight, because you are already eating close to what you should be for the lower weight.

OP, I get it. I'm normal weight but I feel my best at a lower (still normal) weight. Working out doesn't work. I'd actually recommend slowing down, doing less strenuous exercises, and working on lowering your calorie and specifically your carbohydrate intake.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn’t sound like you have enough of a calorie deficit.

I’m very tall. I should be eating more even, but I cheat myself about 250 cal in an attempt to lose more.

….and your aren’t in enough of a calorie deficit. Doesn’t matter how many calories you think need based on whatever calculations you are using, and how many calories you think you are burning. They are wrong. The scale tells the truth

And I’m losing weight. I don’t get your point?

So then what is your question? Didn’t you post because you are discouraged you aren’t losing weight at a faster rate? If so, you need less calories. If you don’t want to do that, then keep doing what you are doing

I answered above but the QUESTION is literally in the last paragraph of the post.

Hangry I see. No, it isn’t harder for you to lose weight. It is the same. A calorie deficit is needed though. The more you weight, the more calories you can eat to maintain that weight. So to lose, the number after the deficit is a lot higher than yours is. Since you are a heathy weight, your maintenance calories are already going to be a lot less than someone heavier. And to make a deficit, you need to be even lower. Calorie expenditure numbers are never accurate. It just gives you a place to start. You should be adjusting calories based on the scale and what you want the outcome to be..then adjust your calorie intake accordingly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have a way to track calories burned? Try being on a few hundred under that and eat a lot of protein and start lifting weights and cut down on cardio.

I lift weights 5 days a week. I track via my watch. I got my macros from a trainer. They calculated my deficit for 1lb a week at 1450 calories. I’m eating 1200 but have lost about 1lb a week, so I’m only off by 3lb. Maybe I’ve gained muscle? My clothes are looser. I’m just remarking how swiftly my friend shed so many pounds!

Perhaps they are making it up?

If you want to change your body composition, then you need to be lifting real weights. And it isn't going to happen overnight. Whatever your watch is reporting to you is probably wrong about energy expenditure anyways. About the only accurate thing I have ever seen for energy expenditure is a power meter on a bike, and not a peloton. A smart trainer or calibrated power meter or power pedals. Otherwise, its probably inaccurate.

OP is snippy because she is HUNGRY!

I’ve really enjoyed the audiobook, How to Lose Weight for the Last Time. Written by a female doctor for other busy doctors, but relatable for a broader audience. It challenges some of the assumptions in your post. It worked for me to lose and keep off the last 10 lobs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn’t sound like you have enough of a calorie deficit.

I’m very tall. I should be eating more even, but I cheat myself about 250 cal in an attempt to lose more.

….and your aren’t in enough of a calorie deficit. Doesn’t matter how many calories you think need based on whatever calculations you are using, and how many calories you think you are burning. They are wrong. The scale tells the truth

And I’m losing weight. I don’t get your point?

So then what is your question? Didn’t you post because you are discouraged you aren’t losing weight at a faster rate? If so, you need less calories. If you don’t want to do that, then keep doing what you are doing

I answered above but the QUESTION is literally in the last paragraph of the post.

NP - good lord, you’re snippy, OP.

Yes, it’s harder for people of “normal” BMI to lose weight than people in the “overweight” or “obese” BMI categories.

The smaller you are the lower are your maintenance calories which means the lower your deficit calories have to be to lose at the same rate as someone larger. You are saying that you are very tall though so I assume you are not super light, which is why the 1200 calories surprise me. I am 140lbs, very lean, but still can easily lose at 2000.

Yes, it is much harder to lose when you are at a normal weight. I’m well into a normal BMI after starting off at just a bit shy of tripping over into obese. At first the weight was coming off quickly and easily. Now that I am down to the last 5 to go it has been so slow. It’s taken me since Christmas to lose 4 lbs. these last 5 are going to take me forever.