Platue
Options
jaorti95
Posts: 65 Member
Should I uptake my calorie intake in order to boost my metabolism so I can lose weight? I've had it at a calorie deficit for awhile now.
0
Replies
-
How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.0 -
-
Stats? Height, current weight, daily goal, length of weight loss stall?0
-
janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.0 -
chandanista wrote: »Stats? Height, current weight, daily goal, length of weight loss stall?
Stats? I'm 5"5, 164.3, daily goal of calorie is 1,200, it's been about two weekend and half going on three0 -
1. If it's been less than 3 weeks or so, don't sweat it! Normal fluctuations happen and unfortunately sometimes we stall for a week or two even when we're doing everything right. Give your body some time to catch up with the changes you're making.
2. If you aren't already, be sure that you're logging everything. Sometimes people forget about things like veggies, drinks, cooking oils, and condiments. For some people these can add up to enough to halt your weight loss progress.
3. Consider buying a food scale if you don't already have one. They're about $10-$20 dollars in the US and easily found at places like Amazon, Target, and Walmart. Measuring cups and spoons are great, but they do come with some degree of inaccuracy. A food scale will be more accurate, and for some people it makes a big difference.
4. Logging accurately also means choosing accurate entries in the database. There are a lot of user-entered entries that are off. Double-check that you're using good entries and/or using the recipe builder instead of someone else's homemade entries.
5. Recalculate your goals if you haven't lately. As you lose weight your body requires fewer calories to run. Be sure you update your goals every ten pounds or so.
6. If you're eating back your exercise calories and you're relying on gym machine readouts or MFP's estimates, it might be best to eat back just 50-75% of those. Certain activities tend to be overestimated. If you're using an HRM or activity tracker, it might be a good idea to look into their accuracy and be sure that yours is calibrated properly.
7. If you're taking any cheat days that go over your calorie limits, it might be best to cut them out for a few weeks and see what happens. Some people go way over their calorie needs without realizing it when they don't track.
8. If you weigh yourself frequently, consider using a program like trendweight to even out the fluctuations. You could be losing weight but just don't see it because of the daily ups and downs.
9. Some people just burn fewer calories than the calculators predict. If you continue to have problems after 4-6 weeks, then it might be worth a trip to the doctor or a registered dietitian who can give you more specific advice.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.
I see this a lot. Serious question, is there actual science behind this or is this just one of those rule of thumbs? It just seems a little illogical to be sticking to something perfectly for 6 weeks without getting some sort of result. I wonder if someone cutting after a bulk would be expected to wait 6 weeks without seeing results before they're move on to something else. Pretty sure those people would start flipping out that they're not going to be beach ready or whatever in time. Why is the answer different for those with a real need to lose?0 -
Okay with those stats you should be losing easy, if you are eating 1200 cal/day. I plugged you into a TDEE calculator and if sedentary you should be maintaining at 1743~ cals/day. How tight is your logging? How often do you weigh yourself? And do you take measurements other than scale weight?0
-
CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.
I see this a lot. Serious question, is there actual science behind this or is this just one of those rule of thumbs? It just seems a little illogical to be sticking to something perfectly for 6 weeks without getting some sort of result. I wonder if someone cutting after a bulk would be expected to wait 6 weeks without seeing results before they're move on to something else. Pretty sure those people would start flipping out that they're not going to be beach ready or whatever in time. Why is the answer different for those with a real need to lose?
All I can say is that it was pretty frequent for my weight loss to pause for 3-5 weeks while I was losing weight even when I was staying on plan. I think just a little over two weeks is too early to begin worrying about a plateau.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.
I see this a lot. Serious question, is there actual science behind this or is this just one of those rule of thumbs? It just seems a little illogical to be sticking to something perfectly for 6 weeks without getting some sort of result. I wonder if someone cutting after a bulk would be expected to wait 6 weeks without seeing results before they're move on to something else. Pretty sure those people would start flipping out that they're not going to be beach ready or whatever in time. Why is the answer different for those with a real need to lose?
All I can say is that it was pretty frequent for my weight loss to pause for 3-5 weeks while I was losing weight even when I was staying on plan. I think just a little over two weeks is too early to begin worrying about a plateau.
So at the end of the 3-5 weeks do you lose more or just go back to losing the same amount you would have regularly in a week. Why didn't the calorie deficit produce a loss? Don't say muscle. No one is gaining muscle. Ever. (People say this in the forums all the time too.)-1 -
CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.
I see this a lot. Serious question, is there actual science behind this or is this just one of those rule of thumbs? It just seems a little illogical to be sticking to something perfectly for 6 weeks without getting some sort of result. I wonder if someone cutting after a bulk would be expected to wait 6 weeks without seeing results before they're move on to something else. Pretty sure those people would start flipping out that they're not going to be beach ready or whatever in time. Why is the answer different for those with a real need to lose?
All I can say is that it was pretty frequent for my weight loss to pause for 3-5 weeks while I was losing weight even when I was staying on plan. I think just a little over two weeks is too early to begin worrying about a plateau.
So at the end of the 3-5 weeks do you lose more or just go back to losing the same amount you would have regularly in a week. Why didn't the calorie deficit produce a loss? Don't say muscle. No one is gaining muscle. Ever. (People say this in the forums all the time too.)
I would usually lose what I planned to lose in a week or just a little bit more.
And I wouldn't say muscle, because that's ridiculous.
A deficit won't always produce a loss because our bodies aren't machines. Maybe my hormones were fluctuating, maybe I hit it too hard with cardio and my muscles were taking a long time to repair, maybe I was retaining water. Maybe I switched up some of the foods I was eating so I had more food weight in my body day-to-day. Maybe I was wrong on my best estimate for the calories in my weekly date night dinner out and I had much more than I thought I did.
But over time, I always resumed losing again, which is why I think it can be dangerous to switch up plans after a couple of weeks just because you think you're in a plateau.
0 -
CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.
I see this a lot. Serious question, is there actual science behind this or is this just one of those rule of thumbs? It just seems a little illogical to be sticking to something perfectly for 6 weeks without getting some sort of result. I wonder if someone cutting after a bulk would be expected to wait 6 weeks without seeing results before they're move on to something else. Pretty sure those people would start flipping out that they're not going to be beach ready or whatever in time. Why is the answer different for those with a real need to lose?
All I can say is that it was pretty frequent for my weight loss to pause for 3-5 weeks while I was losing weight even when I was staying on plan. I think just a little over two weeks is too early to begin worrying about a plateau.
So at the end of the 3-5 weeks do you lose more or just go back to losing the same amount you would have regularly in a week. Why didn't the calorie deficit produce a loss? Don't say muscle. No one is gaining muscle. Ever. (People say this in the forums all the time too.)
Water retention during the various points in a womans cycle can mask loss.
Water retention do to high sodium intake can mask loss.
I've had it where I've stalled for about 3 weeks before. Usually week 4 I would see a loss ranging from 0.5 - 1 lb for 3 - 4 days in week 4. When averaged out it always equaled the rate of loss I was aiming for.0 -
chandanista wrote: »Okay with those stats you should be losing easy, if you are eating 1200 cal/day. I plugged you into a TDEE calculator and if sedentary you should be maintaining at 1743~ cals/day. How tight is your logging? How often do you weigh yourself? And do you take measurements other than scale weight?
My logging is tight. I do weight my foods and measure. I weigh myself every two weeks. I have just recently started measuring my waist and legs and arms I lost about 2 inches in waist. Slightly in arms and more in legs(less fat thighs) so then should I eat at a higher calorie deficit then?0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.
I see this a lot. Serious question, is there actual science behind this or is this just one of those rule of thumbs? It just seems a little illogical to be sticking to something perfectly for 6 weeks without getting some sort of result. I wonder if someone cutting after a bulk would be expected to wait 6 weeks without seeing results before they're move on to something else. Pretty sure those people would start flipping out that they're not going to be beach ready or whatever in time. Why is the answer different for those with a real need to lose?
All I can say is that it was pretty frequent for my weight loss to pause for 3-5 weeks while I was losing weight even when I was staying on plan. I think just a little over two weeks is too early to begin worrying about a plateau.
So at the end of the 3-5 weeks do you lose more or just go back to losing the same amount you would have regularly in a week. Why didn't the calorie deficit produce a loss? Don't say muscle. No one is gaining muscle. Ever. (People say this in the forums all the time too.)
I would usually lose what I planned to lose in a week or just a little bit more.
And I wouldn't say muscle, because that's ridiculous.
A deficit won't always produce a loss because our bodies aren't machines. Maybe my hormones were fluctuating, maybe I hit it too hard with cardio and my muscles were taking a long time to repair, maybe I was retaining water. Maybe I switched up some of the foods I was eating so I had more food weight in my body day-to-day. Maybe I was wrong on my best estimate for the calories in my weekly date night dinner out and I had much more than I thought I did.
But over time, I always resumed losing again, which is why I think it can be dangerous to switch up plans after a couple of weeks just because you think you're in a plateau.
I guess. Six weeks is just a crippling when you're heavy and need actual results. Especially if you really are doing everything right. It's not exactly fun to do everything right and get zero result.
To put a little perspective. I've switched to 1500 calories because I've been stuck for weeeeeeeks at the same weight. So let's say I eat 1500 for the next 6 weeks with zero results. I've just starved and driven myself insane for 6 weeks to get the same result I would have gotten if I'd eaten more. I've just wasted 6 weeks of my life for nothing. And I'll still be fat. Meanwhile someone else lost 6 pounds. Someone who should speak up and say what they did differently to get results LOL.0 -
chandanista wrote: »Okay with those stats you should be losing easy, if you are eating 1200 cal/day. I plugged you into a TDEE calculator and if sedentary you should be maintaining at 1743~ cals/day. How tight is your logging? How often do you weigh yourself? And do you take measurements other than scale weight?
My logging is tight. I do weight my foods and measure. I weigh myself every two weeks. I have just recently started measuring my waist and legs and arms I lost about 2 inches in waist. Slightly in arms and more in legs(less fat thighs) so then should I eat at a higher calorie deficit then?
If you open your diary, you may get some more helpful advice. Sometimes these things come down to logging issues.
But if you're losing inches, I wouldn't worry too much about not seeing anything on the scale for a couple of weeks.0 -
CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CalorieCountChocula wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »How long has it been since you've lost weight?
If you aren't losing weight, it's more likely that you are at a calorie level to maintain -- and increasing calories won't result in weight loss.
I would say maybe less than a month
A plateau is six weeks of being on plan and no weight loss.
I see this a lot. Serious question, is there actual science behind this or is this just one of those rule of thumbs? It just seems a little illogical to be sticking to something perfectly for 6 weeks without getting some sort of result. I wonder if someone cutting after a bulk would be expected to wait 6 weeks without seeing results before they're move on to something else. Pretty sure those people would start flipping out that they're not going to be beach ready or whatever in time. Why is the answer different for those with a real need to lose?
All I can say is that it was pretty frequent for my weight loss to pause for 3-5 weeks while I was losing weight even when I was staying on plan. I think just a little over two weeks is too early to begin worrying about a plateau.
So at the end of the 3-5 weeks do you lose more or just go back to losing the same amount you would have regularly in a week. Why didn't the calorie deficit produce a loss? Don't say muscle. No one is gaining muscle. Ever. (People say this in the forums all the time too.)
I would usually lose what I planned to lose in a week or just a little bit more.
And I wouldn't say muscle, because that's ridiculous.
A deficit won't always produce a loss because our bodies aren't machines. Maybe my hormones were fluctuating, maybe I hit it too hard with cardio and my muscles were taking a long time to repair, maybe I was retaining water. Maybe I switched up some of the foods I was eating so I had more food weight in my body day-to-day. Maybe I was wrong on my best estimate for the calories in my weekly date night dinner out and I had much more than I thought I did.
But over time, I always resumed losing again, which is why I think it can be dangerous to switch up plans after a couple of weeks just because you think you're in a plateau.
I guess. Six weeks is just a crippling when you're heavy and need actual results. Especially if you really are doing everything right. It's not exactly fun to do everything right and get zero result.
To put a little perspective. I've switched to 1500 calories because I've been stuck for weeeeeeeks at the same weight. So let's say I eat 1500 for the next 6 weeks with zero results. I've just starved and driven myself insane for 6 weeks to get the same result I would have gotten if I'd eaten more. I've just wasted 6 weeks of my life for nothing. And I'll still be fat. Meanwhile someone else lost 6 pounds. Someone who should speak up and say what they did differently to get results LOL.
Yeahbut. @CalorieCountChocula, I hear what you're saying. But OP is at 3 weeks, not 6. I think this may be one of those (fairly rare) cases where the differences between women and men could be relevant. As a post-menopausal woman, I've never stalled for anything like 6 weeks. But some women hold on to water weight at ovulation, then again round the actual menstrual cycle . . . hit some extra sodium or carbs or new workouts in between, and you've possibly got 3-4 weeks of pseudo-plateau going.
Six weeks may be overkill to weight even for most women, but it's worth giving a thought to cycle, and waiting it out for at least a full cycle if one is sure there's a deficit (OP says she's at 1200 calories, 5'5", 164.5 pounds, logging tightly, and has lost inches). Letting folks look at her diary seems like a good idea, but if she's truly doing as she says, it's likely a temporary stall.0 -
I've been stalled for 5 weeks. It sucks, but I keep pushing through. I got sick last month and my weight dropped 5 pounds and then stalled. This week I even gained a little. I was feeling discouraged when I realized a few things: 1. my sodium is waaaayyy to high 2. I rarely drink anything close to the recommended fluid intake 3. my period should be starting at the end of this week and 4. I just started exercising after months of being very lazy. Even with a big loss, it's hard to be stuck for 5 weeks. I'm gonna keep doing what I'm doing and trust the process. I'll check my logging and make sure I'm accurate, I'll wait until TOM is over but mostly, I'll just keep moving forward because if i don't I'll go back to where I was and I'd rather be where I am now than where I was before I started.0
-
janejellyroll wrote: »chandanista wrote: »Okay with those stats you should be losing easy, if you are eating 1200 cal/day. I plugged you into a TDEE calculator and if sedentary you should be maintaining at 1743~ cals/day. How tight is your logging? How often do you weigh yourself? And do you take measurements other than scale weight?
My logging is tight. I do weight my foods and measure. I weigh myself every two weeks. I have just recently started measuring my waist and legs and arms I lost about 2 inches in waist. Slightly in arms and more in legs(less fat thighs) so then should I eat at a higher calorie deficit then?
If you open your diary, you may get some more helpful advice. Sometimes these things come down to logging issues.
But if you're losing inches, I wouldn't worry too much about not seeing anything on the scale for a couple of weeks.
Okay thank you! And thank you to everyone else for there comments! I will open my diary in a few and let you guys see!0 -
In some days you will see I don't post anything but that's because I work in the medical field and then go to school so I really don't go on my phone as much to plug in but I do keep a journal on hand and I'll write down what I ate and smacked on. I also do count the right calories by doing the 9x fat 4x the carbs 4x the protein0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions