Why are the scales not shifting despite loads of cardio exercise???

[PussinJimmyChoos]

Been doing a 30 min Tae Bo DVD 4/5 times a week, plus press ups and weights....although I've lost inches, clothes feel better etc. The scales are not budging!!

When can I expect to see something? I am not dieting but I have drastically reduced my junk intake and don't smoke or drink

Not to mention (I'm sure it has been) that the benefits of excersise are more far-reaching than weight loss. If you are losing inches why do the scales matter? I am truly happy never to step on a set of scales again whilst I am living the life I am.

someone asked what i had for breakfast

i think i might have said earlier but

i have organic oats with jordans super granola and a large amount of thawed frozen rapsberries or summer fruits or forest fruits which they sell in supermarket forzen cabinets..i have a big helping with lots of organic milk

i believe the stuff about organic milk being much better than ordianry milk

when i first wake up i have the rest of my night time glass of water and then another glas of water and then after i eat a mug of herbal tea

basically i imo just eat a healthy diet and i avoid foods which are not imo going to be actually doing me good

however i was totally strict and inflexible when i was actively losing wieght

now i do accept eg a piece of birthday cake

but i do keep a close check on how things are going and if i have been out drinking beer and generally eating the same as my bf for a weekend then i am back to the stricter regime for a couple of weeks as i have no desire to put weight on again

i still dont agree with the exercise or strenuous activity doesnt help you lose weight

if you spend 4 hours gardening then you will have used up a lot more energy than 4 hours sat on mn

so if in both cases you eat the same light lunch then that will add to your losing weight camopaign...it just will

and if you do exercise then it does raise your metbalolism during the hours that follow too

of course if you compensate by eating twice as much then you wont lose weight

also exercise means that you can once at a target weight eat well and get all the benefits are processing good healthy food and the nutrienbts it provides and keep your digestive system in good nick without gaining weight

quite often people dont realise they are doing hardly any exercise a stroll round the block or to the school gates twice a day for 20 minutes each time is not going to make any difference tho its beter than getting someone else to do it or going in the car

and eating an ice cream and stuff all adds up against you

even having three slices bread or 3 potatoes instead of one is 200% more food

so if you think about it you can quite easily be thinking you are eating the right amount to lose weight but if one person eats a quarter of a pizza and the next eats a whole one they are eating 4 times as much food

it doesnt take long for that to add up over a week

I lost a stone two years ago through calory counting.

To lose 2 lb a week you need to eat about 1200 calories a day max. People say that's not enough but it really is. Plus by looking at the calory content of what you eat makes you see food in a different light. For instance 100 grams of chocolate contains 500 calories. That's equivalent to a whole meal. And it wouldn't fill you up. Also once you cut down the amount you eat there comes a time when you really can't eat much more than that because your body is used to it, in the same way as stuffing your face more and more will increase the amount you can eat.

iirc the research says that you don't lose weight any quicker by exercising, however if you exercise you do tone, and you will have some control over where you lose the weight.

But it really is a simple concept, if you burn more than you consume you will lose weight.

But you have to do it gradually. these faddy diets like atkins/lighter life/cambridge/any other diet that makes you lose weight quickly really don't work in the long term because they don't give you any awareness of yhat you're eating or change your attitude to food.

zippi, i never knew you had lost all that weight, you have inspired me. I fell of the wagon about 5 weeks ago. I had been determined to lose weight b4 i go on hols. I just didn't lose owt for 3 weeks, then i did lose 5lbs over the next 3. Then, oh i dunno.

I am determined to get back on it. Unfortunately hold is 2 weeks time (as is eh's wedding!) but i can make a difference before then.

i always think you look great (fawn fawn)

thank you piratecat and you other encouraging people i am not sure i posted much about it when i was actually doing it..it surprises me that i would have to put on half my body weight to be back where i was..i have just recently got rid of my fat clothes and i was amazed at how big they were some were size 20 and i am now a 12 and a ten on the bottom half

but i have occasionally gone on threads like this in evangelical mode since

usually when people say why is nothing happening or can i lose weight without joping a clkub or starving

it was nov 2006 i started and i supposedly finished on dec 1st 2007

june 2007 dp dumped me after 8 years

oct 2007 i met my bf

i havent told him either that i used to be fat

so i know about the weight, can you tell me how to get a younger man ? or any man !!

apart from losing weight lol!!

well im not sure i have got him i am having angst about how impoirtant i am in his life at the mo

no idea i just dated him

as i only saw one other guy i am not sure how the finding people thing works at all

hmm, hope you work it out, i gues this thread isn't really the place to go into detail!!

sorry but I really don't agree with the 1200 calories a day thing wannabe. I'm 5'11, 14lbs overweight atm, pretty active and then I do 1000 calorie workouts at the gym three times a week - I'd prob go into starvation mode if I ate that little! It depends on all those factors, when I joined wlr online with two stone to lose it told me I should be eating about 1800 and I've been steadily losing 2lbs a week on that. Obviously with the more weight I lose the calorific allowance does decrease.

zippi, going to order that book, will let you know how I get on. Good luck sorting out the angst but you really are an inspiration.

no chops but for my height (5 2 ) 1200 is enough. But that is without exercise - if you exercise on top of that you can eat additional calories.

obviously you are taller so it goes without saying that you would need to eat more calories.

i htink that is often my prob with weight loss, my body goes into starvation mode. I can't seem to get over the fact that I don't need to eat like a sparrow to lose weight, and hence my body firmly stands fast, as if to say 'don't worry she'll feed us in a minute'

When i briefly read good eating plans it always seems that there is much more you can eat. Years back you would get berated at ww, (as I so recall) for buying ryvitas with sesame seeds on rather than plain ones!!!!!!!!!

OK, let's take a look at MsDemeanor's studies:

Fox News study: Study lasted 2 years and involved 170 women. They were told to consume 1200-1500 calories/day. They lost about about 7% of their body weight.

Comments: (1) Nobody can be sure what these women ate for 2 years (2) No mention of heart beat levels, without which you can't do effective cardio workout

CNBC study: "In women, even substantial increases in exercise were not enough to produce weight loss if they did not decrease fat consumption. (...) this and other studies show that both increasing exercise and decreasing calorie consumption clearly seems the best weight-loss choice for everyone."

Comments: Did anyone care to take a look at what these women were eating? Quite probably, they were eating more to compensate, a la "I deserve this chocolate cake because I now exercise so much". That last sentence is what I have been saying all along - eat less and exercise to lose weight.

'FactsAboutFitness.Com': Claims studies show very little benefit from exercise to weight loss. Also claims study shows no change in metabolic rate following exercise.

Comments: I have a particular problem with this lady, who is selling her own exercise training program. God knows what it is, because it is 'for members only' The Heritage study she mentions has looked at metabolic rates 24 and 72 hours after exercising, which is the wrong hypothesis to test. What I have said is that sustained cardio exercise raises metabolic rate for several hours after the exercise.

i agree with your assessment cote

i have proved to my own satisfaction that eating less or eating helathily and exercising does produce results

i dont really need to convince anyone else as i dont have any books to sell but i do feel the urge to tell people its possible because i am so pleased i did it

Oi, the only reason I quoted first study was because it showed that (many hours of very vigorous) exercise (over years) did have some minor effect on weight loss! It was me putting YOUR point of view
The study reported on fox says the women were doing very vigorous workouts (as opposed to the gentle or moderate ones, were all put on a diet and stuck with the programme.

Now this is more what I'm talking about - 300 hundred children studied over five years - exercise no impact on obesity without diet
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2033494/Exercise-'does-not-make-obese-children-slim'.html

The point is unless you diet you won't really lose weight. If you are ONLY exercising to lose weight you will almost certainly be disappointed and probably stop because it's an unrealistic expectation. I personally think it's better to think of exercise as fantastic for your health, fitness and firmness, and not really expect it to shift weight, then you won't be so disappointed and will carry on and add years to your life.
And I'd feel like a hamster on a wheel, whatever speed I was going. Running is a very hamsterish experience!

well that dt article is another example of waste of time research the school of the bleeding obvious

MsDemeanor - As I said before, you will not lose weight by running. That is too high a heart rate. You will lose weight by walking at a moderate pace, keeping your heart rate at about 120-130 bpm, at least for 45 minutes, 4 times a week.

sorry for butting in, I meant to leave this thread well alone but can't help it. To say that you won't lose weight through running is just not true.

I think the point is that whatever you do has to be sustainable for around 30 mins in a session. So, if that's running, great but if it's brisk walking, equally great. You need to get slighly puffed (able to talk but not in long sentences), slightly red in the face and probably working up a sweat.

this is my job, I should know - have plenty of happy clients who've lost the weight....back into hiding now!

sorry for butting in, I meant to leave this thread well alone but can't help it. To say that you won't lose weight through running is just not true.

I think the point is that whatever you do has to be sustainable for around 30 mins in a session. So, if that's running, great but if it's brisk walking, equally great. You need to get slighly puffed (able to talk but not in long sentences), slightly red in the face and probably working up a sweat.

this is my job, I should know - have plenty of happy clients who've lost the weight....back into hiding now!

You will lose weight by running if and only if (1) you can keep it up for at least 45 minutes per session, and (2) your heart rate remains at a moderate pace where you can talk.

Meaning, unless you are very fit to start with, you will NOT lose weight by running.

How many people do you know who turn to exercise to lose weight who can run for more than half an hour and are not out of breath in the process?

so if unfit people made themselves run for 45 mins, all out of breath and puce, what would their body have used for fuel to run?