Are plateaus real?

sheldonklein

There are constant threads about plateaus, filled with advice about changing diet, or exercise or otherwise "fooling your body." Obviously there are people who experience prolonged periods of no weight loss, preceded and followed by weight loss, but is it any more complicated than: (1) inaccurate tracking or (2) random scale noise? Stated differently, is there ever any good advice other than 54 check your tracking and be patient?

slaite1

Not really. A diet break can sometimes help. Otherwise you said it-accuracy and patience.

DeguelloTex

And check that you're actually targeting a deficit.

Protranser

High Sodium intake can mask your weight loss due to water retention, so that's kind of option 3

initialsdeebee

I've also noticed that a lot of people who complain about plateaus will say like "Oh maaaan. It's been a whole week and a half and I haven't dropped 4 pounds." Which seems silly to me. Like they're expecting too much in too short a time.

Carnhot

Yes, but when you are emotionally invested in the process - like most of us are - all logic goes out of the window when it comes to applying it to ourselves, however obvious it seems when other people are involved. I speak as one whose weight loss has slowed right down, as I knew it would, and am having to give myself a serious talking to in order to maintain a rational response to that.

DeguelloTex

Protranser wrote: »

High Sodium intake can mask your weight loss due to water retention, so that's kind of option 3

That's part of "be patient."

Kalikel

I believe in them because I hit one. The weight loss had crawled to a stop. I took a long break and that was great because I was kind of sick of the whole losing thing - the weighing and counting and all of it. I took months off. When I went back to it, I was mentally ready for it and I began losing again.

I'm a huge fan of the break, lol.

I read a post from someone who had lost like 200 pounds. They hit a plateau for five months, but they stuck with it through the whole thing, God bless them. After five months of nothing, they began losing again.

People who have hit plateaus believe in them. People that don't - some believe it happens, others don't. Weight loss experts believe in them and many suggest six months of dieting followed by six months of maintaining.

However, one week or two without a loss does not a plateau make. Not IMO. That's just a week without a loss. It may show the next week. A lot of people whoosh. A lot of people whoosh. I used to lose all my weight in whooshes. No loss for 2-3 weeks, then several pounds in a few days.

People can do math and say, "According to the math, it should be X," but actual weight loss, at least for me, doesn't follow the math.

Protranser

DeguelloTex wrote: »

Protranser wrote: »

High Sodium intake can mask your weight loss due to water retention, so that's kind of option 3

That's part of "be patient."

Actually, maybe you'd have the answer to this, lets say the person in question maintains a high sodium intake, would they always be retaining x lbs of water? Or would the body flush it out eventually?

DeguelloTex

Protranser wrote: »

DeguelloTex wrote: »

Protranser wrote: »

High Sodium intake can mask your weight loss due to water retention, so that's kind of option 3

That's part of "be patient."

Actually, maybe you'd have the answer to this, lets say the person in question maintains a high sodium intake, would they always be retaining x lbs of water? Or would the body flush it out eventually?

Doesn't matter, in this context. If the water level is constant, the caloric deficit will still eventually bring down the weight and you won't be in a plateau, even if your scale weight is higher than it would be without the water.

My understanding is that it would be more or less a constant battle between the water and the sodium but someone could have a more or less "permanent" amount of excess water because of it. I eat a crapton of salt, but my weight still spikes for about two days when I eat especially salty meals.

Protranser

DeguelloTex wrote: »

Doesn't matter, in this context. If the water level is constant, the caloric deficit will still eventually bring down the weight and you won't be in a plateau, even if your scale weight is higher than it would be without the water.

Thanks. That makes sense :-)

snowflakesav

Lots of people don't understand that the scale is impacted by salt, glycogen levels, time of day you get on the scale, time of month, muscle inflammation.

I sometimes weigh myself after a 12 mile run on a hot humid day just because I am curious. That weight is about 5 pounds less than my hydrated, fueled normal morning weight. I don't record that weight...but it is nice to know I am heading in that direction. I really think people are getting on the scale at the gym after their workout and recording that as a meaningful weight.

nordlead2005

Protranser wrote: »

DeguelloTex wrote: »

Protranser wrote: »

High Sodium intake can mask your weight loss due to water retention, so that's kind of option 3

That's part of "be patient."

Actually, maybe you'd have the answer to this, lets say the person in question maintains a high sodium intake, would they always be retaining x lbs of water? Or would the body flush it out eventually?

Your body must maintain the proper ratio of water to sodium (and all electrolytes) in the bloodstream to function properly. When you have a high sodium intake you increase the amount of sodium in the blood, which means the body must preserve water to keep the proper ratio.

Your body will naturally use (or excrete) the sodium (and all electrolytes). As the electrolyte level drops, the amount of water your body needs to retain also drops. If you maintain a high sodium intake, then the body will try to maintain the same amount of water.

But otherwise, Tex is right, in this context it doesn't matter. If you are losing fat the scale will drop even if you maintain a high sodium intake.

Liftng4Lis

I think it's often a combination of inaccurate logging and water retention masking a loss.

rrruuunnn

I thought that i had hit a plateau. But I think sometimes the body is retaining water or poop. My weight graph has bigger dips and peaks. But if I look at a month or two graph, I see that Im still maintaing weight loss.

Southpaw100

I hit plateaus every so often,I just decrease my calorie intake and that usually breaks it

ncboiler89

Plateaus are simply eating at maintenance.

barbecuesauce

Having lost 68/70 pounds without it happening once, I'm inclined to believe they're not. But I've stalled with new exercise and lazy logging.

hekla90

If you are staying the same weight for a prolonged period of time after accounting for normal fluctuations, it's not plateauing it's called "maintenance."

Lourdesong

Kalikel wrote: »

I believe in them because I hit one. The weight loss had crawled to a stop. I took a long break and that was great because I was kind of sick of the whole losing thing - the weighing and counting and all of it. I took months off. When I went back to it, I was mentally ready for it and I began losing again.

I'm a huge fan of the break, lol.

I read a post from someone who had lost like 200 pounds. They hit a plateau for five months, but they stuck with it through the whole thing, God bless them. After five months of nothing, they began losing again.

People who have hit plateaus believe in them. People that don't - some believe it happens, others don't. Weight loss experts believe in them and many suggest six months of dieting followed by six months of maintaining.

However, one week or two without a loss does not a plateau make. Not IMO. That's just a week without a loss. It may show the next week. A lot of people whoosh. A lot of people whoosh. I used to lose all my weight in whooshes. No loss for 2-3 weeks, then several pounds in a few days.

People can do math and say, "According to the math, it should be X," but actual weight loss, at least for me, doesn't follow the math.

I guess I tend to think of a plateau as doing everything you should yet the scale isn't moving and having to wait it out. If 6-8 weeks goes by and the scale still hasn't moved, or no "whoosh" has happened, then it's time to get concerned and that perhaps it's time to consider seriously if you're not in a deficit but are in maintenance.

I personally have a very hard time believing that someone has any deficit going on during a 5 month stall. It's easier for me to believe that because of the stall they took action to get back into a deficit.

jaga13

sheldonklein wrote: »

There are constant threads about plateaus, filled with advice about changing diet, or exercise or otherwise "fooling your body." Obviously there are people who experience prolonged periods of no weight loss, preceded and followed by weight loss, but is it any more complicated than: (1) inaccurate tracking or (2) random scale noise? Stated differently, is there ever any good advice other than 54 check your tracking and be patient?

I don't think there's much more advice that can be trusted outside of those two. Maybe option (3) recalculate your numbers after each weight loss to ensure you are still creating a sufficient deficit?

allyphoe

Assuming you're defining a plateau as no change in scale weight between any two readings, you can need an awfully long time between those readings to be sure you're ruling out random fluctuation.

For example, say I have an average deficit of 250 calories a day for the entire period in question, which should result in a loss of 0.5 pounds per week. Also assume that I have random scale fluctuation of 3 pounds up or down from my theoretical "true" weight, depending on how much sodium / glycogen / hormone / exercise / sleep is affecting things. (The first is true for me, confirmed by a year of steady downward trend; the second is true for me, confirmed by many years of daily weighing.)

If Scale Reading #1 happens to be on an unusually low day, and Scale Reading #2 happens to be on an unusually high day, I'd need an actual 6 pound weight loss just to make it appear that I'd maintained my weight. Which is 12 weeks of diligent effort, long enough that most people would (incorrectly) identify it as a plateau.