Weight loss has stopped/plateaud

Options
13»

Replies

  • ncboiler89
    ncboiler89 Posts: 2,408 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    galgenstrick wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    My body handles 100 calories of eggs differently from 100 calories of apple juice. In fact, the only time I'm allergic to cats is when I've been eating too much sugar. YMMV.

    The OP was looking for suggestions and gigglybeth's was a perfectly reasonable one.

    So you're saying because you think eating less sugar helped reduce your cat allergies that if OP ate less sugar she would break a weight loss plateau? That logic is perfectly sound, right?!

    My point is that if one is at a plateau, the suggestion to tweak one's macros is perfectly reasonable.

    Explain. So you are saying if a person has reached a plateau eating the same number of calories but changing macros will cause them to start losing again?
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,897 Member
    Options
    "Will cause" - no. "Might case" - worth a try.
  • ncboiler89
    ncboiler89 Posts: 2,408 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    "Will cause" - no. "Might case" - worth a try.

    How?
  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,203 Member
    Options
    BFDeal wrote: »
    All people are going to tell you (and I know because my situation is exactly the same as yours) is to weigh your food. When you tell them you do they'll tell you you're doing it wrong. If you say you're 100% sure you're doing it right they'll tell you to lower your calories, which is probably the answer until you eventually need to make them so low to get the scale to move that other people will tell you how dangerously low your calories are and to eat more. That will of course make your weight stall or go up again.

    Interesting. This didn't happen to me at all. I waited it out and started losing again. I regularly stall for 3 weeks and then have a "whoosh" and lose 3 or more pounds at once. If you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight because science.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,897 Member
    Options
    Look, the standard for suggestions here isn't "Must be FDA approved after a double blind clinical study" - it's "No Promotion of Unsafe Weight-Loss Techniques or Eating Disorders." So I think all these challenges to the "try eating less sugar" suggestion are silly and I'm not going to address them anymore.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,897 Member
    edited May 2015
    Options
    One must use entirely scientific terms to describe one's own experience? O...K...

    I had the same experience when I first used MFP. I'd lose 1/2 # per week, or nothing, and then have a multi pound drop.
  • richln
    richln Posts: 809 Member
    Options
    ncboiler89 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    "Will cause" - no. "Might case" - worth a try.

    How?

    1. Protein has a higher TEF. Although the end result is minimal net calorie difference daily, it adds up over long periods of time.
    2. Tinkering with macros is good. Some people experience better workouts or find they just enjoy eating slightly off the normally recommended amounts, and are therefore more likely to successfully stick to the deficit long-term.
    3. Protein is more satiating than sugar, which may lead to less binging.
    4. Increasing protein while decreasing carbs during a deficit can lead to lower glycogen levels, therefore less water retention. People often mistake increased water retention for stalling bodyfat loss during a deficit.
  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,203 Member
    edited May 2015
    Options
    BFDeal wrote: »
    maidentl wrote: »
    BFDeal wrote: »
    All people are going to tell you (and I know because my situation is exactly the same as yours) is to weigh your food. When you tell them you do they'll tell you you're doing it wrong. If you say you're 100% sure you're doing it right they'll tell you to lower your calories, which is probably the answer until you eventually need to make them so low to get the scale to move that other people will tell you how dangerously low your calories are and to eat more. That will of course make your weight stall or go up again.

    Interesting. This didn't happen to me at all. I waited it out and started losing again. I regularly stall for 3 weeks and then have a "whoosh" and lose 3 or more pounds at once. If you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight because science.
    "Whoosh" being an entirely scientific term. O...K...

    EDIT: Any scientific studies on this whoosh you speak of? Also I never said you won't lose weight if you eat less than you burn. Only that eventually some people have to drop their calories so low that the number seems crazy. This seems to be a theme with people who have lost very large amounts of weight. I've lost over 135lbs. I'm still 230ish. To lose less than a pound a week I have to eat 1800-2000 calories. All that and work out 4-5 days a week.

    Um, no? I just said that the experience you described wasn't mine. I put "whoosh" in quotes exactly because it's not a scientific term. And it's what happened to me, why would there be studies on it? :laugh:

    ETA: The science comment referred to calories in, calories out, which you seem to agree with so I am not entirely sure why you're being so belligerent about it.
  • PeachyCarol
    PeachyCarol Posts: 8,029 Member
    Options
    maidentl wrote: »
    BFDeal wrote: »
    All people are going to tell you (and I know because my situation is exactly the same as yours) is to weigh your food. When you tell them you do they'll tell you you're doing it wrong. If you say you're 100% sure you're doing it right they'll tell you to lower your calories, which is probably the answer until you eventually need to make them so low to get the scale to move that other people will tell you how dangerously low your calories are and to eat more. That will of course make your weight stall or go up again.

    Interesting. This didn't happen to me at all. I waited it out and started losing again. I regularly stall for 3 weeks and then have a "whoosh" and lose 3 or more pounds at once. If you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight because science.

    Same here.

    Now, while I think some of the specifics of what was said in regards to macro tweaking in this thread was bunk, I was given advice by SideSteel that possibly reducing carbs (in general, not sugar specifically) by about what worked out at the time to be 10-15% of my intake at the time might get things moving again.

    However, the scale moved before I had a chance to implement his suggestion.

    I also agree with the advice that a 2 pound a week weight loss goal is too aggressive.

    Lastly, OP, how long have you been eating at a deficit? Have you ever taken diet breaks?

  • ncboiler89
    ncboiler89 Posts: 2,408 Member
    Options
    richln wrote: »
    ncboiler89 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    "Will cause" - no. "Might case" - worth a try.

    How?

    1. Protein has a higher TEF. Although the end result is minimal net calorie difference daily, it adds up over long periods of time.
    2. Tinkering with macros is good. Some people experience better workouts or find they just enjoy eating slightly off the normally recommended amounts, and are therefore more likely to successfully stick to the deficit long-term.
    3. Protein is more satiating than sugar, which may lead to less binging.
    4. Increasing protein while decreasing carbs during a deficit can lead to lower glycogen levels, therefore less water retention. People often mistake increased water retention for stalling bodyfat loss during a deficit.

    Thank you

Categories