Always a weekly deficit of 3,500 calories equals weight loss in a pound? And primer..

[keckispasse]

I write all data about my cut in Excel. Also lead journal at Fitday.
To calculate my mainteince I put activity «Sedentary» in Fitday and add whatever I have done for the day.
I believe that my calculations were very accurate.

As can be seen in the screenshot, my weight loss was insignificant at the weekly deficit of 3,500 calories.

So, my question is:
1) Either Fitday greatly exaggerates my mainteince and I need to lower calories nearly 1,500 that would lose weight faster
2) Either it is not always weekly deficit of 3,500 calories equals weight loss of 1 pound
Explain, please. Thank you. Sorry for my English.

Here's my data for 6 weeks:

[SOJA]

Read the nutrition stickies to find your actual macros. The fitday calculators and library among other things is grossly inaccurate.

[Mr_Aryze]

Compare with this: http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm

Also note that everyone is different... and many have found their 'magic calorie number' through trial and error.

[SOJA]

That site Aryze linked to gives out the same numbers the nut sticky gives with its equations. I've only had to adjust it a little for my activities in the past few months.

[FluxRepertoire]

I don't see how your weight loss was "insignificant" or different from what you had planned. You lost 6.5 pounds in 7 weeks, pretty spot on. Your real weight is going to fluctuate based on other factors.

[jagooch]

I'm in the same boat. 2 weeks in and I haven't lost any weight. Like others have said, formulas are "best guesses" that should get you close to the actual number. I think most of them are designed for sedentary people, who have a much different body composition than bodybuilders. Personally, my plan is to drop my daily calorie ceiling by 100cal for each week I don't measure or see fat loss.

Its difficult to measure fat loss when you are putting on additional muscle since it weighs more than fat. You may have lost 1 pound of fat but muscle gains masked it from you.

[teequlah]

how was it insignificant? i'm looking at the graph you posted up and your weight loss seems pretty much perfect

[SOJA]

I'm in the same boat. 2 weeks in and I haven't lost any weight. Like others have said, formulas are "best guesses" that should get you close to the actual number. I think most of them are designed for sedentary people, who have a much different body composition than bodybuilders. Personally, my plan is to drop my daily calorie ceiling by 100cal for each week I don't measure or see fat loss.

Its difficult to measure fat loss when you are putting on additional muscle since it weighs more than fat. You may have lost 1 pound of fat but muscle gains masked it from you.

Activity rate. 1.2;1.3;1.4 etc. None of those worked for you?

[Lvisaa2]

So, my question is:
1) Either Fitday greatly exaggerates my mainteince and I need to lower calories nearly 1,500 that would lose weight faster
2) Either it is not always weekly deficit of 3,500 calories equals weight loss of 1 pound
Explain, please. Thank you. Sorry for my English.

Weight loss isn't going to be perfectly linear. Maintenance level is simply an estimate and will fluctuate as activity does - you can burn extra calories just by walking a little more in a day, cleaning around the house, etc. If you are losing weight relatively consistently at a decent rate then no need to change things up.

[FemmeFatale28]

I'm in the same boat. 2 weeks in and I haven't lost any weight. Like others have said, formulas are "best guesses" that should get you close to the actual number. I think most of them are designed for sedentary people, who have a much different body composition than bodybuilders. Personally, my plan is to drop my daily calorie ceiling by 100cal for each week I don't measure or see fat loss.

Its difficult to measure fat loss when you are putting on additional muscle since it weighs more than fat. You may have lost 1 pound of fat but muscle gains masked it from you.

Im suprised people have taken your post and flamed the hell out of you for making "noob" comments.. but you are right weight loss is not always linear and especially in the beginning because lifting will increase your blood volume, and your muscles hold more glycogen. Muscle gains are possible when you are new to lifting weights while losing fat, even though its not going to be of "epic proportions" while eating in deficit. Here is a good website to visit.. it really helps get your mind off the scale http://www.hussmanfitness.org/theScale.html

For the record.. muscle does not weigh more than fat. 1lb is 1lb however muscle is more dense and thereby takes up LESS SPACE than fat. Weighs the same thing. For instance.. if you gain 1lb of muscle but lose 1lb of fat the scale would remain the same. By saying "muscle weighs more than fat" you are saying that given these conditions that you would gain weight on the scale becasue of the muscle weighing more which is not the case

[jagooch]

Im suprised people have taken your post and flamed the hell out of you for making "noob" comments.. but you are right weight loss is not always linear and especially in the beginning because lifting will increase your blood volume, and your muscles hold more glycogen. Muscle gains are possible when you are new to lifting weights while losing fat, even though its not going to be of "epic proportions" while eating in deficit. Here is a good website to visit.. it really helps get your mind off the scale
For the record.. muscle does not weigh more than fat. 1lb is 1lb however muscle is more dense and thereby takes up LESS SPACE than fat. Weighs the same thing. For instance.. if you gain 1lb of muscle but lose 1lb of fat the scale would remain the same. By saying "muscle weighs more than fat" you are saying that given these conditions that you would gain weight on the scale becasue of the muscle weighing more which is not the case

"weighs more than" is a colloquialism for "is more dense than" . That is, having more matter per unit volume.

I brought that up as the OP does not need to add as much muscle (in volume) as they lose in fat(volume) for the scale to either not register a loss in weight or perhaps it even show a weight gain despite lower %fat body composition. Calipers and impedance are much more accurate way to measure "fat loss" than a scale alone.

[staunchkg]

Im suprised people have taken your post and flamed the hell out of you for making "noob" comments.. but you are right weight loss is not always linear and especially in the beginning because lifting will increase your blood volume, and your muscles hold more glycogen. Muscle gains are possible when you are new to lifting weights while losing fat, even though its not going to be of "epic proportions" while eating in deficit. Here is a good website to visit.. it really helps get your mind off the scale http://www.hussmanfitness.org/theScale.html

For the record.. muscle does not weigh more than fat. 1lb is 1lb however muscle is more dense and thereby takes up LESS SPACE than fat. Weighs the same thing. For instance.. if you gain 1lb of muscle but lose 1lb of fat the scale would remain the same. By saying "muscle weighs more than fat" you are saying that given these conditions that you would gain weight on the scale becasue of the muscle weighing more which is not the case

I've had a crush on you for months............

[SOJA]

I never understood the logic behind the saying "muscle weighs more than fat". How can something 1 lb of one weigh more than 1 lb of another?

[5ilver]

Try adding more/different cardio and weight-lifting. Reducing food intake should be a last resort.

[AvsFreak]

I never understood the logic behind the saying "muscle weighs more than fat". How can something 1 lb of one weigh more than 1 lb of another?

It's more along the lines of 1 cubic inch of muscle weighs more than 1 cubic inch of fat as the density is higher. It's not the old , "What is heavier a ton of bricks or a ton of feathers?", question.

[lovingit]

Try adding more/different cardio and weight-lifting. Reducing food intake should be a last resort.

No it shouldn't.