Those now with at maintenance, have you beaten your set point.

surreychic

Hi all, I have posted on a few boards the same question and seen a great post above requesting info on the non food ways to success). I am curious though, I know when they lose weight (through hard work) they only go and find the reward system in their brains lights up even more with food and they regain the weight.

I am really keen to hear if anyone has managed to lose weight, and keep it off, without surgery.

I am learning more and more about the body set point and how hard people work to achieve weight loss, try and change their lifestyle but stopping food giving them that intense reward feeling, especially following weight loss is tough. I wonder if it's possible to break trough..

It would be great to collate how people did it (if they have). I appreciate bariatric patients tend to do better but I would like to know if there are other ways to overcome it!

allierat84

There's plenty of people who have lost and kept it off. Go look at the success stories on here.

IremiaRe

I guess I don't meet the criteria... I had lap band and lost 100 lbs about ten years ago. I kept it off - and have lost another 57 lbs in the last year. Now, please keep in mind - even with the most drastic surgery - you still have to eat right and exercise... you still have to follow the laws of physics - which means CI cannot exceed CO if you are going to lose weight. Surgery is no more a "magic pill" than anything else - it's just a tool to make it easier to do the whole CICO thing.

How I did it? I lost the first 100 doing Low Carb... I lost another few pounds pushing my husband in a wheelchair - and I lost the last 50 on MFP by logging and weighing, and doing daily exercise. No specialty eating plan, this time - just eating like a "normal" weight person would - 2 tacos instead of four... 2 slices of pizza instead of half the pie. I added some weight training in the last few months and that has had some great results, also.

So, anything that is a "diet" implies you will some day "go off" of the diet - and that's when the yo yo thing happens... what you need to do is just change the way that you eat - permanently.

Do what works for you - for the long haul. IF you think you can eat fat free mayonnaise for the rest of your life - then go for it. Otherwise, learn to eat less real mayo, now... If you can live the rest of your life without a dinner roll, then do the low carb thing... just figure out what you can live with, and do it. It will take some time and some experimentation to figure out what really works for you.

Will you focus on less calorie intake? Or will you focus on burning more calories with exercise? Are you going to use the traditional food pyramid? Or go with Low Carb, or High Protein, or whatever? Are you going to eat three meals a day with snacks? Or do some form of Intermittent fasting? There are a hundred different ways - and none of them is any less valid than the next IF it works for you. The only hard rule is, you have to have less calories in than you use every day. After a while, you will find out what you consider to be worth a big calorie hit - and what you don't. That discovery might surprise you.

One thing that helps with the "changing the way that you eat forever" plan is to not try to go too fast. Eating 1200 calories a day requires some serious sacrifice... and even with exercise calories, it just doesn't get you a lot of good stuff... but, if you are only going for 1 lb. a week - it's a little easier. Once you find that formula that works for you, it becomes nearly effortless...

Lastly - just be aware that, even if you are going slow and even if you have found the formula that works for you - there will be those days when you just have to eat that Hershey bar. Don't beat yourself up too much - just get back on plan as soon as you can and keep on trucking.

Good Luck.

sijomial

I don't believe in set points. My adult weight has varied between 11 and 15 stone and when I've put my mind to it I've always been able to change my weight.
Did maintain overweight for 20 years but that was because I used an excuse that it "wasn't my fault" - when I got my head in gear and cut calories I lost weight. Simple - not easy, just simple.

It's a matter of eating consciously for me and tracking my weight trend whether I'm calorie counting or not.

ccsernica

I suspect you'll find that most here regard the body set point as a myth.

It exists to this extent: If we eat all the foods that give us pleasure, and eat them until sated, we will almost always eat more calories than we expend in our daily activities unless we are very very active. This will cause us to put on weight. At some point, we will weigh enough that our daily calorie expenditure, which increases with body weight, reaches equilibrium with our food intake. That's just biochemistry and thermodynamics. But to regard this as some kind of preferred state which our body is striving to achieve is, I think, a mistake. It's a problem we have in a prosperous society because the amount of food we have available is, for all intents and purposes, unlimited, and we can always eat to satiety. This is highly anomalous in human history and among human societies. There is no "set point" in evidence in more typical societies, where food scarcity is the norm.

I know this: If I take care for the amount of food I eat and stay active, I lose weight if I'm too heavy and maintain a healthy weight if I am not. If I take no care for the amount of food I eat and become sedentary, I gain weight up to a certain maximum. That I do not go over, or very much over, a certain maximum is due to the facts that I have amusements other than eating, that my tastes in food are simple, that I do not eat for emotional reasons, and that I engage in a certain minimum of physical activity even when generally sedentary. So I have natural limits on the number of excess calories I'll habitually consume even when many more than that are available.

But that's all. My body doesn't have a "set point" at 210 lbs that it's somehow striving to spring back to now that I'm at 175. That's simply where I end up if I pay no attention to how much I eat, and if I get no more regular exercise than walking from my car to my desk and back again every workday.

We succeed by taking responsibility for our consumption and activity, without looking to cruel fate dooming us to being forever overweight by having imposed an undesirable body set point upon us, as if we have no control over how much we eat and how much we move.

You have one very useful and important insight: This is about a lifestyle change, not a short-term sprint to being skinny. My approach is this: I eat all the foods I love so that I don't feel deprived. I just eat less of them. I eat them mindfully, so I enjoy them to the fullest in the amounts of them which I allow to myself. There's no reason for weight loss to be unpleasant or painful. That is, I think, why so many successful dieters yo-yo. They diet in such a way that they feel deprived. When they reach their goal, all restraint is released and they dive back into their own habits, having been unsuccessful in developing new ones because those they were trying to develop were so unpleasant. Make your new eating habits pleasant. We are naturally built to enjoy eating. Why fight it? Just don't enjoy it to excess.

kommodevaran

What you need to beat is the set point theory. It's basically *kitten*. Woo.

Your body weight is determined by calories in vs calories out. How easy it is to manage calories in vs calories out, is individual, but basically up to whether you make it as easy as possible or as difficult as possible.

A smaller body needs less fuel. If you eat for a larger body than you have, you gain weight. Eating is pleasurable. Eating too much is not more pleasurable than eating enough, but some people derive perverse pleasure from it - perverse because it's often more about compulsion and bad habits, feelings of envy and entitlement, hopelessness and helplessness, desperation fed by cyclic self-induced restriction, worry, and unhealthy environments, than pleasure.

I have been there. Knowledge and mindfulness helped me break out of it. I decided I was not going to deprive myself anymore, but take lovingly care of myself. This means listening to my needs and wants and get those two in line, and stop listening to all the shoulds and musts we are surrounded by. I was obese, struggled with weight or fear of weight gain for twenty years, but I have a healthy weight now, and I maintain it almost effortlessly, over two years in. I eat what I like, when I want it, but responsibly.

girlgroves

^^ so much this. My adult weight has varied vastly between 9.5 and 14 stone but when my head has been in the game I've maintained lower weights very well (3 years the last time I was at my current weight). When I look back at the times I've put on substantial amounts of weight it's always been in circumstances where I've almost given myself permission with excuses. Starting work for example = 'have so much less time to exercise', getting pregnant = 'eating for two', career upheaval = 'comfort eating', juggling childcare and going back to full time work = 'no time at all to exercise'.

With regards your question on "stopping food giving that intense reward feeling" I'm actually finding (maybe due to the combination of being so active and feeling so good at my current maintenance weight) that my healthier food choices are tasting soooo good! And those more fat-filled snacks and foods that I used to over-indulge in? - when I do treat myself to them occasionally they actually don't give me such an intense reward feeling anymore. I think I could now take them or leave them. How good is that?

zyxst

I didn't know I had a set-point.

I've lost 182# in 5 years (last 9# were unintentional while finding maintenance last year). BMI is 24. Ooo, I barely qualify with that, lel.

Machka9

surreychic wrote: »

I am really keen to hear if anyone has managed to lose weight, and keep it off, without surgery.

Yes.

paperpudding

surreychic wrote: »

I am really keen to hear if anyone has managed to lose weight, and keep it off, without surgery.

Me! Me! Pick me!

I lost my weight in 2013 and have kept it off since, maintaining within a 3 kg window with a BMI of 23.

How did I do it?

ate net of 1460 per day (on average) as MFP told me to, whilst losing, and 1710 per day whilst maintaining.

Not rocket science.

CattOfTheGarage

surreychic wrote: »

... stopping food giving them that intense reward feeling, especially following weight loss is tough. I wonder if it's possible to break trough..

You don't "break through" that and there's no way to stop it. You use it.

The increased reward from food can affect you one of two ways. Either it makes you eat more (which is what the body wants) - OR it can make you happier with less of something. When I'm in a deficit, I can get as much joy from a single chocolate as I previously could from a whole tray. You just have to learn to live with the tension of wanting more, and not allow yourself to use it as an excuse to give up.

Edit: I know this is paradoxical, but that is the nature of pleasure. The pursuit of it, the longing, is often better than the thing itself.

Derpy_Hooves

I'm not actually sure what your question is, what you mean by body set-point?

I simply started using MFP, back in 2011, and then it worked. I slowly lost the weight and it's still gone. I allow myself to fluctuate a few pounds, but other than that, it's pretty easy.
For me it was mostly about awareness. Even though I don't log my food anymore, I do know roughly how much I'm eating/should be eating.

youdoyou2016

I have ... You could also read the success thread.

One thing I've noticed, if I may share: you can drive yourself crazy reading everything about how it's difficult to lose weight whether it's set-point, age, menopause, gender, height, carb ranges, medications, and on and on and on. This is why I recommend reading the success thread -- hang out around stories about how it's been done. The way you write your post makes it sound like you believe that there is such a thing. I'm sure you can find study after study about it. Don't go there. 1000s of people share their stories about losing weight on this site despite all of the above. You can too!

MelanieCN77

I always thought I had a set point, but I'm embarrassed to see it was one of those things you want to believe because the alternative is doing some work. I hovered around 160 for a while (I'm 5'5) and got to 185 two years back, back down to 160 on WW and then up to 173 last summer. I did my own casual version of eating 'clean' and got back to 160 again and stuck there. Counting calories and making sure to come in in a deficit moved the scale down again.

Maxematics

As stated above, I don't believe in a set point. In my personal opinion, it's just another excuse as to why someone isn't losing weight. I started losing weight at the end of June 2015. I'm 5'3". I went from 139 pounds to 107 pounds. I am now between 111 and 112 pounds; not because my body made me gain, but because I chose to put on a few pounds.

For me, this wasn't just about making a scale shift; it was a lifestyle change. I went from a person who loafed around depressed and was often to lazy to walk up the block to someone that's happy about life, exercises daily, is fit and happily maintains her weight on ~2200 to 2500 calories daily. I'll take the person I am now any day, even if one day my body decides to have me gain a few pounds. However, I'm fairly certain that will not happen.

Machka9

What exactly is "set point"?

Maxematics

Machka9 wrote: »

What exactly is "set point"?

The set point theory, if I recall correctly, is that your body has a weight that it is supposed to be and even if you lose weight, your body will make sure that you get back to that weight. Others claim that they can never get below a certain weight because it's their body's "set point", but the reality is that since weight loss slows down as one loses more weight, the person isn't noticing the small losses or underestimating their food intake which is making them think they've "plateaued".

Machka9

Maxematics wrote: »

Machka9 wrote: »

What exactly is "set point"?

The set point theory, if I recall correctly, is that your body has a weight that it is supposed to be and even if you lose weight, your body will make sure that you get back to that weight. Others claim that they can never get below a certain weight because it's their body's "set point", but the reality is that since weight loss slows down as one loses more weight, the person isn't noticing the small losses or underestimating their food intake which is making them think they've "plateaued".

Ah yes ... I have heard of it.

smotheredincheese

I don't know where the Set Point theory came from but I'm pretty sure it's a myth. It just doesn't make any sense.
I've known so many people who have said "I can never weigh less than x because my body won't let me" etc, and have then smashed through their goals and realised that set point never existed. I think some people also use it as an excuse, "I can't lose any more weight so why even bother".

SezxyStef

I lost over 50lbs and have kept it off...but set point psh

what is mine? my heaviest weight, my lightest weight? mid weight? current weight? the weight I got to before I went back up?

\please tell me what is my set point and how do I figure it out...

Pawsforme

I do believe at least somewhat in the set point theory. After all, homeostasis is a thing. So summarily dismissing set point theory isn't logical to me. And I've certainly had long periods of time in my life where it was quite easy or quite challenging to maintain a certain weight.

I guess I've had two success stories.

When I was 25 I lost 64 pounds and successfully kept it off for years and years. Fast forward to when I was around 50. I'd been through two pregnancies and was mostly through menopause when I found my weight creeping up no matter what I did. I couldn't figure it out. No matter how little I ate and how much I exercised the number on the scale kept slowly increasing. Eventually I was diagnosed with hypothyroidism, started medication and the weight started coming off. It wasn't effortless but neither was it overwhelmingly difficult. I lost about 24 pounds and have kept it off for over a year now.

Assuming set point is a thing I do believe it can be changed by slow weight loss, getting at least some regular exercise and by maintaining the lower weight long enough to give the body time to recognize a new normal. Of course I don't mean that eventually you'll be able to eat as much as your overweight self did and maintain a lower weight, but that the lower weight will become reasonably easy to maintain.

SezxyStef

Pawsforme wrote: »

I do believe at least somewhat in the set point theory. After all, homeostasis is a thing. So summarily dismissing set point theory isn't logical to me. And I've certainly had long periods of time in my life where it was quite easy or quite challenging to maintain a certain weight.

I guess I've had two success stories.

When I was 25 I lost 64 pounds and successfully kept it off for years and years. Fast forward to when I was around 50. I'd been through two pregnancies and was mostly through menopause when I found my weight creeping up no matter what I did. I couldn't figure it out. No matter how little I ate and how much I exercised the number on the scale kept slowly increasing. Eventually I was diagnosed with hypothyroidism, started medication and the weight started coming off. It wasn't effortless but neither was it overwhelmingly difficult. I lost about 24 pounds and have kept it off for over a year now.

Assuming set point is a thing I do believe it can be changed by slow weight loss, getting at least some regular exercise and by maintaining the lower weight long enough to give the body time to recognize a new normal. Of course I don't mean that eventually you'll be able to eat as much as your overweight self did and maintain a lower weight, but that the lower weight will become reasonably easy to maintain.

so how do you know what your setpoint is? and how does your story confirm setpoint?

and what if you want to gain weight not lose....

mir1104

I have lost it and kept it off, from a starting bmi of 36.4 been right at bmi 24 or slighty under for about 5-6 years.
The reason I'm back here is because I need to get closer to 20 for sports.

So yes, it's possible. I did it.

dutchandkiwi

Edited

SezxyStef wrote: »

so how do you know what your setpoint is? a

I was wondering that too - red flashy lights, a beep or ????

Francl27

The set point issue is due to habits. Yeah, I'm naturally going to keep gaining weight if I don't keep myself on track all the time - that's just how it works.

crzycatlady1

I don't believe in set points. I lost 50lbs and now weigh less than what I did in my 20s (I'm in my late 30s and have also had 3 kids). I've been successfully maintaining my loss and a bmi of around 21, for almost 4 years now.

butcher206

There are no set points. I think most people are just looking for an excuse to fail / or justify why they failed. I maintain my weight because I chose to do this as a lifestyle change, not a quick-fix diet solution.

sonic_corset

My goal weight is more of a range, 124-130. I have been maintaining this since September with the help of MFP. thats it.

TimothyFish

My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.

SezxyStef

TimothyFish wrote: »

My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.

if this is the case my set point is continually changing as I will if I am not careful eat and gain consistently and possibly not stop...

Maxematics

SezxyStef wrote: »

TimothyFish wrote: »

My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.

if this is the case my set point is continually changing as I will if I am not careful eat and gain consistently and possibly not stop...

Exactly. It's not a set point that makes someone weigh a certain amount, it's their eating habits. One can't expect to maintain a lower weight unless they eat the calories to match their TDEE. The problem is that for people who treat weight loss as being all about a number on the scale, they go back to making unwise food choices the minute they hit their goal weight thinking that they won't gain but they do. Then they'll buy into excuse theories like set point and assume they just can't stay a certain weight. Then you'll have people who say "Well her set point must be lower than mine because we're the same height and eat the same but she's SO skinny!" These people fail to take TDEE into account.