Eat more to break your plateau!

Mr_Knight

RunRutheeRun wrote: »

I read about it lately, but it made sense to me that the body would indeed get used to the same old same old so hence doing more or doing something different helped.

It doesn't make any sense at all. It takes X amount of energy to move a mass of Y pounds Z miles - that doesn't go down because you've done it a bunch of times before. As for lifting, the more you "get used to" it, the *more* you will burn for the same perceived effort, not less.

The notion that getting fitter means burning less for the same exercise is exactly backwards - fitness means being able to burn MORE calories in the same amount of time.

To the OP - you're either at maintenance, or losing slowly enough now that you're inside the error margins of your scale. In either case, you've already been very successful, so you already know what to do. :drinker:

Marianna93637

So those of you who say that a person must be eating at maintenance if they stopped losing weight - I strongly disagree with you.
-
This is why: I upped my calories for the last 2 days. Some of my friends said that it worked for them. My point is that I am 175 lb, until now I have been finishing every day right under 1300 calories. I deduct exercise, and I eat back most of it, so a lot of times I eat 1600 calories but exercise 400 etc. I know you're probably saying that the exercise calories are not accurate, logging is not accurate, etc (I use a food scale and I'm very careful).
So today I ate 1963 calories, deduct 251 exercise calories, I end up with 1712. Even if you don't deduct it, I'm at 1963, and MFP said when I completed the entry, that if i ate like this every day I would be at 171 lbs in 5 weeks. That means that at 1900 calories I would still be losing 1 lb / week.
So my maintenance calories must be higher than that. Even if not, there is NO way that i think I'm ending up with 1300 every day, but in reality it's over 1900. There is NO way I miscalculate 600 calories every single day. Therefore the problem is not that I'm eating at maintenance.

let me know if my thinking is wrong and why please.

SergeantSausage

By definition - I say again *DEFINITION* The caloric intake at which you neither gain nor lose weight is "maintenance"

If your weight is not moving, you are at maintenance. Regardless of any (mis)counting, projections on a random web site (even this one), charts, estimates, or calculations.

If your weight is stable and not moving, you are at maintenance calories.

Sued0nim

Marianna93637 wrote: »

So those of you who say that a person must be eating at maintenance if they stopped losing weight - I strongly disagree with you.
-
This is why: I upped my calories for the last 2 days. Some of my friends said that it worked for them. My point is that I am 175 lb, until now I have been finishing every day right under 1300 calories. I deduct exercise, and I eat back most of it, so a lot of times I eat 1600 calories but exercise 400 etc. I know you're probably saying that the exercise calories are not accurate, logging is not accurate, etc (I use a food scale and I'm very careful).
So today I ate 1963 calories, deduct 251 exercise calories, I end up with 1712. Even if you don't deduct it, I'm at 1963, and MFP said when I completed the entry, that if i ate like this every day I would be at 171 lbs in 5 weeks. That means that at 1900 calories I would still be losing 1 lb / week.
So my maintenance calories must be higher than that. Even if not, there is NO way that i think I'm ending up with 1300 every day, but in reality it's over 1900. There is NO way I miscalculate 600 calories every single day. Therefore the problem is not that I'm eating at maintenance.

let me know if my thinking is wrong and why please.

What MFP says and what happens are / can be different

By definition if you stop losing weight you are at YOUR maintenance and you need to cut from there .. but this is only if you have been sticking to it over a period of 6 - 8 weeks .. anything less may be a natural stall / non-linearity of weight loss

You can get as tied up in the numbers as you want - calculators can only ever give you an average estimate, calorie logging is only ever an estimate, exercise burn is only ever an estimate .. if your estimate results in you not losing weight over a period of 6-8 weights, those estimates for YOU are your maintenance and you need to CUT calories to lose

SETTEESPUD

Am I being thick here?
Surely as you lose weight, your calorific needs become lower too? And you need to be making adjustments accordingly?

sijomial

"Eat less to break your plateau!"
FIFY

With that duration of plateau you are eating at maintenance calories. Eat less or increase internsity or duration of exercise/activity to get you back into a calorie deficit.

mckennasihde

obscuremusicreference wrote: »

What size bikini do you wear currently, and are you losing inches?

ETA: I don't have any specific advice. I would change my exercise, get in more cardio to widen the deficit, but perhaps you've considered that.

HAHA yes this this this this

47Jacqueline

Your body will give up a plateau when it's good and ready. Eating too little will slow you down, so will eating too much. Exercising to little will slow you down, so will exercising too much.

Yes, your body does get used to a certain intake and activity level. When you get more fit, you burn less energy than when you started.

I don't know whether eating more will help break a plateau. I have a friend who swears by it. Increasing your intake to eating for a day or so at maintenance will certainly not hurt anything.

Exercise operates on the principle of specificity. The more you do something the better you get at that something, but it won't translate to something else. That's why cross-training is effective.

I don't wear a bikini, but I bet I'd look better in it than you.

kommodevaran

If setting a higher calorie goal makes you able to exercise more and adhere better to your eating plan, it makes sense to "eat more to lose more". But only then. Good advice gone myth through oversimplifying.

TimothyFish

The easiest way to break a plateau is to fast for a day or two and not go over your calorie goals the rest of the week.

As for eating more to lose weight, the only way that works is if eating more is to fuel your workout, so that you can exercise longer and harder.

SLLRunner

TimothyFish wrote: »

The easiest way to break a plateau is to fast for a day or two and not go over your calorie goals the rest of the week.

As for eating more to lose weight, the only way that works is if eating more is to fuel your workout, so that you can exercise longer and harder.

Fasting would be looking for a quick fix instead of taking accountability for eating more than you think you are. The only reason fasting would "break a plateau" is because you would be eating less calories than you burn.

SLLRunner

kommodevaran wrote: »

If setting a higher calorie goal makes you able to exercise more and adhere better to your eating plan, it makes sense to "eat more to lose more". But only then. Good advice gone myth through oversimplifying.

I know what you're trying to say, but this would only work if you are still in a calorie deficit. People who are plateauing are not in a calorie deficit. It's science.

yoovie

i think it's more rewarding to help someone with less to lose. It's harder. but I think you know what you need to do to get there. You'll be alright, even if it sucks sometimes.