I hit the dreaded plateau

LuckyMe2017

There are some good suggestions here. I'd reempasize not lowering your calorie goal. Based on what you've posted, you're only netting 900 calories a day. I'd personally up calories to make sure your body is not responding to deprivation if things don't change once you start weighing your food.

strong_curves

ndj1979 wrote: »

texasf1ght wrote: »

Thanks guys! So on the 16:8 would you stick to your normal daily calorie goal, or also a reduced calorie goal?

i would suggest tightening up logging and getting a food scale before doing this.
IF is just a tool to get into a calorie deficit. If you switch to IF and your logging is still inaccurate, and you are not in a calorie deficit, then you will not lose.

Totally agree with all of this. I'd tighten up my logging with the food scale before I would attempt IF, especially if I don't know too much about IF.

janejellyroll

MidwaysT wrote: »

There are some good suggestions here. I'd reempasize not lowering your calorie goal. Based on what you've posted, you're only netting 900 calories a day. I'd personally up calories to make sure your body is not responding to deprivation if things don't change once you start weighing your food.

If OP isn't losing weight, eating MORE isn't going to help. We can't state with confidence what OP is netting because she isn't weighing her food.

texasf1ght

ndj1979 wrote: »

texasf1ght wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

texasf1ght wrote: »

vivmom2014 wrote: »

Also, OP, there's no need to do a 21 day "no junk food" diet... what a headache and thoroughly unenjoyable. The advice here to get a scale and eat in your calorie deficit is sound and will give you results. Eat all the foods you enjoy, and stay at/under your goal. No use being miserable.

I enjoy challenges, so I don't see it as something miserable, but more of a fun push for myself.

I don't eat a ton of junk food anyway, this is really just cleaning things up a bit, and a push toward a more paleo type of eating.

The point that poster is making is that it is completely unnecessary ...

What is a"paleo type of eating?"

And my point was that I don't consider it necessary, just something fun that I want to try.

To me a paleo type of eating just involves a diet consisting of mainly lean proteins, healthy fats, and veggies. Limited fruits at the right times.

That's not a Paleolithic diet......

It's not? I must be reading something wrong then.

Thanks anyway for your support and encouragement. It's always good to empathize with others who share in your struggles and successes. Be well.

ndj1979

texasf1ght wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

texasf1ght wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

texasf1ght wrote: »

vivmom2014 wrote: »

Also, OP, there's no need to do a 21 day "no junk food" diet... what a headache and thoroughly unenjoyable. The advice here to get a scale and eat in your calorie deficit is sound and will give you results. Eat all the foods you enjoy, and stay at/under your goal. No use being miserable.

I enjoy challenges, so I don't see it as something miserable, but more of a fun push for myself.

I don't eat a ton of junk food anyway, this is really just cleaning things up a bit, and a push toward a more paleo type of eating.

The point that poster is making is that it is completely unnecessary ...

What is a"paleo type of eating?"

And my point was that I don't consider it necessary, just something fun that I want to try.

To me a paleo type of eating just involves a diet consisting of mainly lean proteins, healthy fats, and veggies. Limited fruits at the right times.

That's not a Paleolithic diet......

It's not? I must be reading something wrong then.

Thanks anyway for your support and encouragement. It's always good to empathize with others who share in your struggles and successes. Be well.

Just trying to share some knowledge with you. A paleo diet would be one where you eat raw meat, roots, legumes, etc, and where said foods come from about a thirty mile radius of where you live.

Also, any modern diet is not going to be paleo...

starwhisperer6

Pa·le·o di·et.


[ˈpeɪlioʊ ˌdīət]





NOUN


1.
a diet based on the types of foods presumed to have been eaten by early humans, consisting chiefly of meat, fish, vegetables, and fruit, and excluding dairy or grain products and processed food:


I am assuming the OP was talking about this idea of paleo diet. Yes she probably won't be killing large mammals with her bear hands and ripping the steak straight from the animal with her teeth... But it is very possible she could follow this modern rendition and it isn't an unhealthy way to eat.

WendyLaubach

Maybe not Paleo, but Paleo-like, for her purposes. Lots of people have good luck with concentrating on meat and veg, with limited fruit.

OP, my impression is that most of us undercount calories, and overcount calorie burn. Then if we let ourselves eat more to reflect the calorie burn, we're comparing apples to oranges, like getting paid in pesos but spending in dollars. The acid test is: is that combination of eating and exercising resulting in weight loss? If not, change one or both. In other words, don't believe the calorie numbers, believe the weight change. When you started, your combination of eating and exercising was enough to reduce, but now maybe it's just enough to maintain you at 168 lbs. That's pretty great that you've established a routine that maintains your reduced weight for an extended period.

But now for the future: If you've been doing the same tough workout for a long time, might it be time to make it tougher? You're much stronger now than when you started. There are interesting books out there about using your heart rate to make sure you're gradually increasing your effort as you get stronger. You ramp up your effort until you hit the heart rate range that you're aiming at. It could be that you used to burn a lot more calories doing that same workout than you do now. Or maybe what you think is 1500 calories in food is really more than that, either because of measurement issues or because you're increasing your intake to give yourself credit for exercise. If you wouldn't be hungry or uncomfortable, why not give yourself only a fraction of credit for the workout calorie burn?