I guess the bottom line though is that it is what it is.
I mean, I am an otherwise healthy person. At 38, I have no medical issues, great energy, healthy skin and hair, I am fit enough to be fairly active- I can do push ups, squats, run a 5K at an easy pace. I almost never get sick- in the past 10 years I have had 2 bad colds and a stomach bug.
I mean, my body functions really well except for hanging on to excess fat.... which is mostly in my butt, thighs, arms and boobs. Eating Primal- when I lost the weight- it came all off from my midsection. I went from an over 39" waist to under 30" with hardly any off anywhere else.
It seems like men get fat in their midsections, and you seldom see men fat elsewhere unless they are just so obese.
I can see why hormones would shape where we store fat.... but is it that wise to mess with them?
To simplify, put two people who weigh 150 lbs on the same caloric intake. One has 20% body fat, one has 30% body fat. Since body fat is inert, the person with the 20% body fat will lose faster. Since men in general have lower body fat, they are more efficient calorie burners even in a resting state. Now, if one of those people is female, the estrogen will help some of that body fat go to her breasts and ass.
Here's a question for those who think calories don't matter: why are all concentration camp victims skinny? Not a single one was starved and malnourished for years and came out saying, "I just couldn't lose!"
Our body is our subconscious mind, and anybody who thinks that their conscious mind is running the show is seriously mistaken. In fact the conscious mind just may be the most narcissistic entity in the universe, it thinks it's running the show. It's not.
~ Nora Gegaudas
"Everything can be taken from a man but one thing... -- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." ~Vicktor Frankl
And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.
1.) The inaccuracies surrounding the caloric content of food. As mentioned previously, calories are not measured properly because how they are broken down in a bomb calorimeter does not reflect how they're broken down in the human body. Even if you're tracking absolutely perfectly, Fitday is not.
2.) The inaccuracies surrounding TDEE calculation. Most people overestimate their activity level. Going for a 2-3 mile walk three times a week is NOT 3 days of exercise. Going for a 2-3 mile walk three times a week, then going to the gym to lift heavy 3 days a week is 3 days of exercise. Also, some calorie calculations take bf% into effect, which very few of us know accurately. Not to mention the equations used - depending on method, approximations can vary by up to 10%. That right there could be your "deficit" that has just disappeared.
3.) The inaccuracies surrounding your own metabolism. Thyroid issues, insulin/leptin resistance, genetic conditions - you may be an outlier that does not fit into the "calorie calculators."
The fact is, if you're not losing "weight," then you are taking in more energy than your body needs. The only way to truly find what works is to be consistent. The most successful people eat the exact same handful of meals over and over again. Go buy 1 dozen eggs and a pint of 1% cottage cheese. Eat that each day for a week. See what happens to your weight. The next week, it your weight doesn't change, do 10 eggs and a pint of cheese. If that doesn't work, do 8 eggs and a pint of cottage cheese. It's the only real way to find your maintenance - eat the same damn thing every day and increase or decrease portions until you get the results you want. And then you have to hope it's sustainable.
I did too much of a severe caloric deficit. That's true. I didn't lose "weight" despite dropping calories. And it made me put on fat, but in different ways.
Point #1: It was water retention. As soon as I ate more food for a couple days, I dropped about 5 lbs. The severe caloric deficit (around 3,000/week) made me hold water and upping the intake made me pee it all out. However, I've since gained about 8 lbs, so I have actually negated all the weight loss and then some since upping my calories significantly. Some of my gain was fat, but most was muscle as my benchpress went up 15 lbs in about 6 weeks and my pants still fit the same.
Point #2: You're mincing my cutting calories/gaining fat experience. This did not happen simultaneously. When I cut calories hard and then stopped, in moments of surplus, my body was greedy and put on more fat than it should. Doing slow cuts and mild refeeds didn't result in large amounts of fat storage when at a surplus as my body never felt starving. The large caloric deficit clearly made my body scared, so in brief periods of caloric surplus, it would partition a lot more excess calories to fat than what was desirable, leading to rapid fat gain. My weight has completely stabilized as I'm eating to satiety, and although you can't see my abdominals as well as I used to be able to, the increased energy, mood and better lifts have been worth it.
Footnotes: CI/CO still worked, and it proved that slow cuts are much healthier than fast cuts. Just as I've always assumed.