Set point weight theory

xxzenabxx

Hey everyone!

So recently I’ve been dabbling in the ED recovery community/intuitive eating/anti-diet community and they all talk about everyone having a set point weight. Apparently there’s nothing we can do to change this and it’s just something that you have to live with for the rest of your life because of genetics. What is everyone’s opinion on this and is it scientifically valid? If so then that means I’m going to be stuck at 150-160 lbs for the rest of my life 😦. I’m 5’ 4” and small/medium boned (5.75” wrists!) so feel that’s waaay too much weight for my frame! Even with muscle. Exercise is harder as well when I weigh more (currently on a long diet break of 6-9 months).

Lietchi

I defy set point theory 😁 my weight has never been stable throughout my adult life, gaining weight gradually over 15+ years and then losing weight the past 18 months.

For those people who do seem to have a set point, I personally don't think it's 'genetic' (our body wanting to be a certain weight), I think it's just a matter of an array of personal habits (food, movement,...) combined with our metabolism leading to a certain weight. My totally non expert view 🙂

ninerbuff

BS. If that were true, then starting as a teen who was thin, you'd be thin your whole life. Ever wonder why so many people that migrate to America end up gaining a lot of weight even though they've been a normal size their whole life? It's because food is to easily available to buy cause much of it is cheap in the US. Here our society is build around have BIG everything. Big house, big car and big appetites. Hence advertisements for food try to give you as much as possible while spending as little as you can. As well as we have wholesale food places so you can buy in bulk. Never fails when I go to Costco and see some of the biggest people there have not a regular cart, but a flatbed to buy their food.


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

cmriverside

Yeah, I agree with Lietchi.

It may "feel" like a scenario with a sure outcome, but I can assure you it's not.

Does it sometimes feel really hard to stay or get to a particular weight? Yes, but that's all about hormones and they do balance out after a period of adaptation to lower or higher calorie management.

SnifterPug

There is such a theory but you can change your set point. If you are interested, I suggest you read Why We Eat (Too Much) by Dr Andrew Jenkinson, who is a bariatric surgeon.

richardgavel

I'll answer if this way, do you think the people you see on My 600 lb life are that weight because their bodies think they should be that weight or could something else be involved?

L1zardQueen

I’ve been a bit chunky my whole life but have managed to get to a normal weight for a few years now. by the way, I’m 5’4”/ 162.5, 122lb/55k and 60 years old. I don’t buy into the set point theory.

LivingtheLeanDream

Don't pay any heed, set point is not a thing.

quiksylver296

It's bull. Your "set point" is based on your habits. Change your habits and your "set point" will change, too.

janejellyroll

quiksylver296 wrote: »

It's bull. Your "set point" is based on your habits. Change your habits and your "set point" will change, too.

I agree with this. One set of habits results in my "set point" being about 150 pounds. When I was living with those habits, it did seem like my weight would never change.

With a different set of habits, my weight stays around 115.

If I went back to my old habits, I have no doubt I'd regain weight.

I think the reason why so many people believe in this is that we do tend to go on auto pilot when it comes to diet and activity. This can make our weight seem like something inevitable, but really our weight is just the outcome of the diet and activity choices we're making day after day.

SuzySunshine99

I don't believe anyone is genetically inclined to maintain at a certain weight.

I do think that everyone needs to find a weight that they are comfortable with and can easily maintain, ideally within a healthy range.

When I first started losing weight, I wasn't sure what my goal would be. I kind of leveled off at a certain range, I was happy with that, and I knew I could maintain it. I COULD lose more weight and still be in a healthy range...but I know I'd be fighting harder to stay there.

So, it's not a genetic "set point", but more of a lifestyle one.

ahoy_m8

This topic comes up in the forum from time to time. Set point theory was popularized in mainstream press around 1980 or a little earlier than that. 40 years is a long time for a hypothesis to garner evidence. Is there any scientific evidence supporting the set point mechanism at all?

The likely explanation for the observation (bodies tend to stay the same weight) is what quiksylver said -- habits tend to stay the same rather than any biological mechanism.

xxzenabxx

I feel better now and I recently realised I don’t want to stay at this weight after thinking about it. Also what about the obesity epidemic? I just felt like the set point theory didn’t make sense because it didn’t consider epi-genetics. Lifestyle and other factors, diet, muscle mass, stress etc. The intuitive eating community are also inline with HAES (a pretty toxic community!) that condemn anyone who loses weight. I think this also stems from fat activism and body positivity. With hindsight, I definitely don’t want to be part of such a community...I mean if I gain anymore weight then I won’t be able to do planks without my wrists hurting (I’m a pear shape with a naturally weaker upper body ) and apparently I’m being toxic if I want to lose weight...!
Long term goals: lose on the lower body and build upper body strength.

Theo166

If this theory of our DNA prescribing our weight was true, then why have Americans gained so much weight in the past 50 yrs?

4Phoenix

You can change your "set point".....my own personal journey provides me with evidence.

callsitlikeiseeit

The doctor who did my physical last year (not my normal one) made the comment of ' well, we all have a happy weight that our bodies like to be at'

I told my regular doctor (same practice, mind you) and he rolled his eyes.

I agree with my regular doctor.

breefoshee

It also doesn't make sense on a cellular level. Your body does maintain a certain number of fat cells (adipocytes) throughout your adult life... so that is what this theory seems to be built on.

But you don't keep the same cells forever and ever. Cells die and get replenished through cell division. I think the set point theory assumes that you are stuck at a certain size because the number of fat cells do not change much. So even if they are depleted of fat, they are overstretched and more inclined to be filled with fat.

But if your body is always making new cells, then eventually those cells would be replaced with not-so-fat-filled smaller cells.

sijomial

Funny how set point theory didn't apply for all the poor souls incarcerated in concentration camps, or anyone with very restricted access to food, or during famines but only applies to people exercising free will over their food choices and quantities.

Be cautious that drowning people can drag down others with them. Have courage and let them get on with their beliefs and suffer the health consequnces of those beliefs while you take positive action to improve your health.

PAV8888

The first two years after weight loss are extremely prone to weight regain in part because of hormonal changes that often take place during weight loss.

People who lose weight but are not prepared to apply a similar degree of continuing effort during the first two (to five, if you want your best statistical chance to retain your weight loss) years of maintenance often yo-yo up and down losing and then regaining and then losing again. Maybe a bit more maybe a bit less each time. Most of us know this drill, I think. And from that perspective it sure looks like there's a set point to which our bodies want to return.

In fact, maybe i should claim a set point of 155lbs.

I don't have my exact dates and numbers handy, but let's say that for the past 4 years I've lost and regained between scale weights of 158 to 149 lbs a number of times.

But time and time again my trending weight seems to circle near the upper part of that range, closer to the mid than the low 150s. In spite of logging my food and making some conscious effort to control my weight to try and balance out in the low 150s

While this 155 set point would appear a reasonable conclusion, it would fail to adequately address the fact that a good eight years ago I stopped getting on my then analogue scale after the needle had almost circled back to zero. Well above the 280 max on the dial.

I have not changed everything in my life during the past 7+ years, but I have made a substantial number of changes as time has gone on, most of them with some consideration to my general health.

elisa123gal

My husband sat next to a Health Department official at an event. She said trying to lose weight is useless..that the body will fight to get back to a certain weight no matter what, and win. She compared it to a refrigerator set a certain temperature and will stay there.

I thought that was a load of crap and still do. Yes, we have habits and lifestyles that lead us back to a certain weight. But those habits and lifestyles can be changed. It takes work..but it can be done. We all know when we regain weight, that we eat our way there...no mystery or genetics involved.

Who wants to listen to such negative feedback that we are predisposed to be obese.

rosebarnalice

I think the reason that set point theory got some traction for a while is because it's not at all uncommon to lose (or bulk up) to a target weight by changing eating or activity behaviors, then once the "target" is reached, slowly returning back to the behaviors that were associated with the starting weight.

So it's not that our BODIES have a "set point" weight, but that our BRAINS have "set point behaviors" that will take us to--and maintain us at-- a particular weight. (And as a long time yoyo weighter, I speak from experience :-) )

Permanent change in body weight means permanent change in mindset and behavior :-)

Speakeasy76

I do believe people have a weight that--for whatever reason (and there are probably many)--their bodies are just more comfortable at maintaining. I also believe people have weight were they just aesthetically look better. I know for me, personally, I wouldn't look good being at the low or below-average weight. I'm definitely one of those people who would look like a lollipop due to my big head! However, I don't think that means we are destined to stay at that set point, but it may take more work to MAINTAIN a lower set point.

Most of my life I have been a slightly bigger person, even though my brothers were never overweight, and 2 were "skinny" and probably underweight. I was somewhat stocky, with football player shoulders and wider hips (no shoulder pads for me, thank you 80's fashion). My parents were not overweight either (esp my mom), although my dad would go into that category from time to time and had to work harder at "watching his weight." It's possible my metabolism was slower than my brothers, or it's possible I learned at a young age to use food for self-soothing and/or dismiss hunger/fullness signals? Who really knows. Anyway, that doesn't (and in my case, didn't) mean I could lose weight, and eventually maintain a normal weight. I've recently even gone lower than what I thought my set point was, even though that old weight was still considered a healthy weight for my height.

cwolfman13

Meh...I have a "happy" weight which is a range of about 178 - 183. Happy in that I'm happy with the way I look and feel at that weight. I'm also relatively lean at that weight...right around 15%, maybe a little less. I don't really have any desire at that point to be leaner, nor do I want to make the effort...I could, but some of the habits I have (and enjoy) aren't really conducive to being super lean.

janejellyroll

elisa123gal wrote: »

My husband sat next to a Health Department official at an event. She said trying to lose weight is useless..that the body will fight to get back to a certain weight no matter what, and win. She compared it to a refrigerator set a certain temperature and will stay there.

I thought that was a load of crap and still do. Yes, we have habits and lifestyles that lead us back to a certain weight. But those habits and lifestyles can be changed. It takes work..but it can be done. We all know when we regain weight, that we eat our way there...no mystery or genetics involved.

Who wants to listen to such negative feedback that we are predisposed to be obese.

A refrigerator doesn't just magically do that . . . it requires energy in order to maintain that temperature, making this a good illustration of the point OPPOSITE of what she was trying to make.

I'd have asked her what happened if we unplugged the fridge or began giving it less power than it needs to run the motor all the time.

lgfrie

My bottom line with set point, which a relative of mine has spent years and years droning about and is totally convinced is the explanation for her obesity, is this:

Set point as a physical constraint, as in something the body drives toward all on its own such that you cannot escape your own weight-level prison, is ludicrous. Hundreds of millions of people have gone from thin to fat, fat to thin, or like me, their weight is in a constant state of flux throughout their lives, perhaps edging higher in middle age as they become more sedentary. There is clearly no "set point" at all, empirically speaking, other than that fat people tend to return to being fat people after a bout of dieting, which is, of course, what the dumb idea of set-point was invented to explain (or rationalize - i.e. obesity as something you have no autonomous control over, it's just those damn hormones! It isn't my fault I gained the weight back, I'm programmed to do it!).

Set point as a behavioral idea, though, is more interesting. The notion that the sum total of our habits, our discipline or lack thereof, and many other psychological components kind of come together to bring us to a certain weight level. So for instance, someone who's 250 lbs and used to being 250 lbs, whose whole wardrobe fits perfectly at 250 lbs, whose dinner plans and types of foods preferred and eaten, and dining out habits, and drinking habits, and everything else, just tend to result in a weight of 250. So, said person goes on a diet and gets to 210 lbs but then gains it back, because the weight loss was really a blip in a lifelong group of habits that result in a weight of around 250. It sort of "looks" like a physical set point but is just the sum total of the person's ongoing choices and preferences. Maybe at 250 lbs that person starts subconsciously watching what they eat or not picking up that next candy bar so they don't go up to the next size of clothing, but at 230 feels entitled to a treat or a time out. Maybe there's a long-established comfort level at 250 that the person would never admit to or acknowledge but it's the top weight he or she can tolerate without going all in on a diet, so their weight tends to rise back to that level after struggling through a diet for a while. It could be a million overt or subtle things that tend to drive a person back toward that 250 weight level.

The thing is, that 250 is not written in stone, and if the person can change their habits or routines or find within themselves some discipline that was previously lacking, then miraculously there can be a new, lower "set point". So many tens of millions of people have successfully dieted that it's obvious it can be done.

In the end set point is yet another excuse that people have for not changing what needs to be changed in order to lose weight and then maintain the loss. There are plenty of other kinds of excuses, too. It's all easier than doing the hard work of engaging with the new habits and attitudes required to maintain a lower weight level. I have previously gained back 100 % and then more of 50+ pound weight losses, so I don't mean to sound arrogant or flippant about it, I just think we should be honest with ourselves. Weight loss and maintenance is hard work and excuses don't help - set point is an excuse.

AnnPT77

I agree with the "habits" idea - that we have comfortable habits, and those habits tend to have a certain weight range as an output. Those habits change in different life phases, for some of us. I was somewhat overweight in high school, snacky and not very active; dropped to a healthy range in college, *much* more active and snacks not always at hand; then slowly gained after graduating and starting a mostly-sedentary career, plus getting used to eating with (and nearly keeping up with eating like) a taller and healthily-heavier husband. That last habit set eventually more or less stabilized my weight in a range right around the bottom of class 1 obese BMI (180s pounds or so at 5'5'). That weight persisted through a period starting in my mid-40s where I started training regularly, and even competing as an athlete (not always unsuccessfully 😆), because it was easy to eat the extra few hundred daily calories.

Now, starting at age 59/60, I've been in a healthy weight range (BMI lower half of 20s) for 5 years since - different eating habits. (I still count, but the eating level isn't something I perceive as restrictive).

Here's a question, to add to the good one about "if there's genetic set point, why is there an obesity epidemic?**": Why is "set point" so rarely mentioned as a reason that that keeps us from *gaining* weight . . . since many people steadily, maybe slowly, do gain weight as time goes on, if they don't intervene? Set points only act to prevent us *losing*? That seems odd.

** As an aside, as someone who's been adult through the whole obesity crisis, if it's perceived to have really gotten rolling around 1980, the changes in average habits - eating and activity - have been quite dramatic . . . more than enough to explain the few hundred daily calories it takes per person to account for the average weight creep over that time period.

xxzenabxx wrote: »

I feel better now and I recently realised I don’t want to stay at this weight after thinking about it. Also what about the obesity epidemic? I just felt like the set point theory didn’t make sense because it didn’t consider epi-genetics. Lifestyle and other factors, diet, muscle mass, stress etc. The intuitive eating community are also inline with HAES (a pretty toxic community!) that condemn anyone who loses weight. I think this also stems from fat activism and body positivity. With hindsight, I definitely don’t want to be part of such a community...I mean if I gain anymore weight then I won’t be able to do planks without my wrists hurting (I’m a pear shape with a naturally weaker upper body ) and apparently I’m being toxic if I want to lose weight...!
Long term goals: lose on the lower body and build upper body strength.

I don't think the bolded is really probable, at least in any grand sense, either. Sure, some people seem to have genetic advantages when it comes to adding muscle mass or strength, to some extent. But IMO there's also a big habit component in that, I suspect.

I tend to be stronger than many women my age who've I've known to have similar fitness practices (or similar lack thereof). I've also noticed that even when not "working out", I'm more likely to do chores/tasks that involve strength, whereas some of those same friends routinely call hubby to do it, don't try, hire somebody, etc. I suspect it makes a little difference, over time.

I also think one can have a virtuous cycle, or a negative one, when it comes to daily use of strength. The less one does, the weaker one is likely to become. The weaker one becomes, the less one is likely to attempt let alone do successfully. That's negative. (It's a little analogous to the way weight gain and inactivity can spiral into more weight gain and inactivity, over time, too.) On the opposite side, the stronger one gets, the easier strength-y chores get, so maybe one is more likely to do them. Speculative, I admit.

If you work at strength gain in a smart way, I'll bet you'll gain strength. (Again, kinda like weight management, eh? 😉)

PAV8888 wrote: »

The first two years after weight loss are extremely prone to weight regain in part because of hormonal changes that often take place during weight loss.

People who lose weight but are not prepared to apply a similar degree of continuing effort during the first two (to five, if you want your best statistical chance to retain your weight loss) years of maintenance often yo-yo up and down losing and then regaining and then losing again. Maybe a bit more maybe a bit less each time. Most of us know this drill, I think. And from that perspective it sure looks like there's a set point to which our bodies want to return.

(Snip other good stuff in PAV's post for reply length, because I'm gonna focus on one part)

To the bolded: I'm not saying that I found maintenance calories hard/challenging to stay within, mostly (or close 😉) while counting. It's been very manageable, and I've stayed in a healthy weigh range (per BMI) for 5+ years now that way. I had a little ultra slow creeping gain going on for about 3 or so of those years (after some months of level weight range at the start of maintenance), topping out around BMI 23; I'm am now nearing the end of a super-slow intentional creeping loss to BMI 20-ish over the course of about 18 months.

I feel like it's only about the past year or so where my capacity to eat, if I really loosen the reins as I sometimes enjoy doing, has scaled back from the amount that obese Ann could happily consume. My assumption is that this has something to do with the hormonal changes PAV is talking about. Obviously, that's speculative . . . maybe it's just habits? 😉 For sure, there's a subjective difference.

JoDavo66

There a mix of nature & nuture!
Your build is, to some extent genetic; in terms of approx height weight & certain functioning BUT what you do with that as enormous effect.
I can trace different body builds through old photos & they certainly ate less & moved more over 100 years ago but the trends are still there. Some family members, like me have to watch every morsal & keep very active: still tough, others can eat what they like & are like stick insects- we can see who they take after BUT the "icing onthe cake" is what you do with what you've got!

cmriverside

I'll throw out an interesting angle: endocannabinoids.

There's a lot there to get into.

I'm not willing to go into what I've learned because ain't nobody got time for that, but it's super interesting in regards to set point and "food addiction" - like behaviors.

springlering62

I’m just here for the disagree. Someone’s got a trigger finger.

A “set point” is utter nonsense. Believing that is an excuse, a rationalization, a procrastination.

* dusts off hands in satsifaction*. That oughta do it.

AshHeartsJesus

That my friend is called an excuse which I get to watch my parents and brothers continue in obesity over 😞
Guess what when I started MOVING my body and eating at a deficit I hit goal weight a lot faster then I ever thought possible! Now I don't believe it is always as easy for some people but it is totally obtainable. And for some they need ralistic goals it takes A LOT of work to be model size or body builder. That is not the normal, but living healthy can be with a lot less effort.
I know for me if I gain it is a set point sin of gluttony, that I have easy control over. What goes in my stomache is 100 percent my resposibility. I am not talking about special occassions or one day here and there of life, but the every day norm do I eat that 600 calorie piece of cake loaded with fat and sugar or make my own sugar free nutrious pumpkin pie that I can eat the whole thing for less then that! Do I eat a whole bag of ripple chips or buy the baked ones, do I eat a whole bag of reeses or a halo top low cal ice cream. Now reeses and chips and cake can totally be worked in but for me I will still be hungry and if I had made better choices in the end I would have been happier, fuller, and have more energy and probably not gained any real weight!

Lord Jesus guide💟

dsc84

Homeostasis comes to mind. In this case the body attempting to maintain balance. I don’t honestly believe there is a Set Point per say but at some point you will gain weight and then level off because our habits and intake typically stay the same. If we change habits we can gain or lose and then our body can reset into a homeostasis. The human body is amazing and can do great things.