Looking for slow losers
 

Hi,

I don't think I qualify as a true turtle since I think my slow weight loss is due to my antidepressant medication - don't think it is related to insulin - but I ask whoever regularly posts here to reconsider (!) the definition: I do lose, but much slower and I think my morale is equally in need of a kick when I just don't think there is any hope for me. I had given myself the goal of 145 lb to start with, as I thought it was a reasonable weight to start OWL. I have also given myself about 6 months to get there - although I don't know if it is reasonable anymore.

I am still on induction and have cut down on cheese and am ingesting very little salt. I am going to try and cut down all the possible offenders in Karen's list and see if I lose at least 100 g!!!

My concern is to increase my calorie intake as, without the cheese, I am not sure which foods to turn to for fat and cals without getting nauseous.

I figured I needed to eat about 2000 - 2200 cals a day at my weight.

Any suggestions or thoughts?

Hi Agnes:
Have you thought about measuring your success, or lack of, by a measure other than the scale? I no longer own a scale. There are just too many variables. There is #1 Muscle....much heavier than fat.
#2 Water retention due to hormonal reasons or excess sodium
#3 Your bones, organs and muscles.

I measure my progress by either the tape measure or a fat calibrator which measures fat you have on your body. Fat percentage is more important than weight in measuring fitness. I am a "big girl" ie. large bones and alot of muscle mass....if I measured my progress by the scale I'd given up a long time ago.

This is a great suggestion. I have seen it in other posts but never thought to apply it to me :doah:. I am a bit afraid of finding that my measures have increased but it is better than seeing the ridiculous ups of the scale.

I will write my measurements instead of my weight on the profile, I think.

Thanks a lot.

Agnes,

I think over 2000 calories is possibly too much for a 160 lb woman with slow metabolism unless you are exercising an awful lot. That sounds like it is maintaining your weight. You need to figure what your resting metabolism (that's how much energy you expend in a day) is and take away 500 cal's per day from that...it takes a 3500 deficit to lose a lb of fat. If you exercise, then you can eat a bit more, accordingly. Very big people can eat more as they burn more energy just walknig around...but at 160 lbs, this is not so. My guess would be that your resting metabolism is 1600-1800, so to lose, you'd need to eat around 12-1300 calories, and even then it will still take a week to lose one pound (on average, remember). The metabolic advantage is there with LC, but at lower weights, it does not represent a great deal as it does with very overweight folk. There still has to be a caloric deficit. It is important though to not eat less than the 1200 (if that's the figure for you)

Val

Whoops...just realized you are less than 160 lbs, so what I said is even more the case.

And its true about the scales...better to figure out what the optimal calories should be for weight loss at your activity level, height etc., eat that amount, and check the clothes in a month.
Try this:http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.html

Val

Val

Hi Valewis, thank you for your useful info. I went to url you pasted and these are my totals: Now I am not sure what it means (I feel like a big oaf :doah:), but here they are:

BMR (Calories) 1437
Activity (Calories)1677
Total Calories 3114

I hope you can figure out what it means. It looks huge to me.

Can you tell us more about your activity level.. this seems a bit high unless you work out hugely or are employed at fairly manual labor. Did you look at the definitions of activity below the calculator? It says there that most people overestimate their activity. Most of us spend our days in very light and light activity with bursts of moderate and maybe 4-8 hours a week of heavy if you are doing cardio and weight lifting. Walking around the house picking things up and making beds, etc would be 'light' Sitting at the computer, driving, cooking, watching TV is 'very light'...so if you spend 8 hours sleeping, and most of the day doing housework and driving and cooking, that is light and the evening sitting down to dinner and watching TV etc., then this is light. Then factor in the average per day of your weekly heavy activity if you exercise vigorously.

But if what you have given is accurate, then you should be losing weight. I suspect you may have over estimated activity. Chasing after a child all day would be 'light activity' even if it seems like hard work!!

Val

Okay, so taking your suggestions into account, here are my numbers:

1437 BMR
868 Activities
2305 Total Calories

I hope it is accurate.

So reduce your calorie intake to 1800 calories...that should make a difference. But don't weigh yourself except weekly, and don't expect more than .5k/week loss on average...give it few weeks. Then perhaps in 6 months if you still need to lose more, drop it to 1600 to get the rest off. Then at goal, try to keep to the level of calories that maintains you weight the, which might be around 2000.

Val

Dear Valewis,

this was very informative. I have been reading up on the subject further as I found myself terribly ignorant. It boggles the mind how much I need to learn but it is also a pleasure...

Thank you so much for taking the time to look at my numbers and giving your diagnostic!!!