Plateau Woes
Replies
-
Hi!
Thanks for the update.
Just a couple of things I want to respond to:
- do not worry too much about what the online calculators say your BF% is. They can be very off, and subject to a lot of error, both as a spot measure (they have me at 30% BF, when I am probably 6 -7% less than that...at least I hope I am!) due to the limited points you measure and the inaccuracies of measuring (how tight and where you measure) plus they can be inaccurate when measuring progress due to differenced in those aspects, or just math.
an example: I just weighed and measured myself - 158.6lb currently and if I put my measurements into the military BF calculator I get 29.5% (lol) which gives me a LBM of 111.8lb. If I use my measurements from the last time I measured myself (3 weeks ago), when I was 158.0lb I get a BF% of 28.2% which gives me a LBM of 113.4lb. Apparently I lost 1.6lb LBM in three weeks on a bulk!!
Obviously (I hope), that is not the case. It is just that the increase in my waist (evening bloatiness) was not proportional (according to the calculators) to the increase in my weight. The same is true going the other way - i.e. losing weight.
When we are dealing with small increments that can get skewed, such as measurements, and we have water weight fluctuations, the small changes can look like our BF% changes disproportionate to the changes in our weight. I can bet you that if I input the measurements each time I take them, there will be some more wacky looking data points.
Also, remember that LBM is not only muscle. It is everything that is not fat and therefore includes everything that supplies that fat. If your fat decreases, and your muscle and hydration levels stay the same, your LBM will decrease as a matter of course.
- all of ^^that is really kind of irrelevant however. What matters is that you are doing everything you need to maintain as much LBM as possible. You are having a reasonable deficit, getting enough protein and are on a good strength training program. The rest is down to factors beyond your control such as age, genetics etc .
- BMI is actually not too bad of an indicator with people of 'average' muscle mass.
- many people find that they need to lose more weight than they originally thought - I know I did. Even though I had a good idea of my LBM as I had a hydrostatic test done early on, I kind of ignored the math and thought I would be ok at about 158lb. I realized that to get to the BF% I wanted to be (and to what I wanted in the mirror more importantly) I would have to lose another 10lbs when I got close to my original goal. On talking to other people, that is not uncommon.
- and totally agree re trutein. I am ordering the chocolate PB one next I think. Although the cinnamon one sounds good also.0 -
Tagging to follow - lots of good stuff in this thread0
-
Something I have found interesting about your case Patrick is that you appear to be creating a huge deficit, with an apparent green flag from the moderators here. I've waited to see the advice of Sara and SS on this one and while I generally tend to agree with their advice, your numbers just don't seem to add up. I'm hoping someone can shed some light on this as, like it or not, people tend to read other people's scenarios and are often influenced by these examples, especially when the person has some degree of success. First, how is eating 1800 calories a day given your workout schedule and stats considered a "reasonable deficit"? On workout days, if your HRM calorie estimate is close to accurate, you are burning 1300 cals/day on average. An 1800/cal day diet leaves you with 500 calories on workout days (starvation). On non-workout days, any BMR calculator would easily put you at 2000+/cals per day. Even with a lightly active modifier (which you obviously are not) you are creating a 1000+ calorie per day deficit. Again, I don't see how this can be considered a reasonable deficit. With someone so close to their goal, when does fueling your body, the very one you would like to be lean, strong and healthy, take precedence over what the scale says? If I'm missing something glaringly obvious here I apologize, and I'm not trying to single you out. Best of luck!0
-
Something I have found interesting about your case Patrick is that you appear to be creating a huge deficit, with an apparent green flag from the moderators here. I've waited to see the advice of Sara and SS on this one and while I generally tend to agree with their advice, your numbers just don't seem to add up. I'm hoping someone can shed some light on this as, like it or not, people tend to read other people's scenarios and are often influenced by these examples, especially when the person has some degree of success. First, how is eating 1800 calories a day given your workout schedule and stats considered a "reasonable deficit"? On workout days, if your HRM calorie estimate is close to accurate, you are burning 1300 cals/day on average. An 1800/cal day diet leaves you with 500 calories on workout days (starvation). On non-workout days, any BMR calculator would easily put you at 2000+/cals per day. Even with a lightly active modifier (which you obviously are not) you are creating a 1000+ calorie per day deficit. Again, I don't see how this can be considered a reasonable deficit. With someone so close to their goal, when does fueling your body, the very one you would like to be lean, strong and healthy, take precedence over what the scale says? If I'm missing something glaringly obvious here I apologize, and I'm not trying to single you out. Best of luck!
Did you read the entire thread to get the background info before you wrote this?
Did you note that we incrementally raised calories and held them there for several weeks before reintroducing a deficit?
Did you note that we then incrementally decreased intake to find the point at which he could once again create fat loss?
Did you note that he is able to perform and function fine on his current intake of calories?
If he is clearly not losing fat, should we assume he is in a deficit because a calculator told you so?
Are you familiar with the concept that people who have lost a significant amount of weight may have a lower energy expenditure than those who have the same stats but haven't lost the weight to begin with? (Adaptive thermogenesis)0 -
Something I have found interesting about your case Patrick is that you appear to be creating a huge deficit, with an apparent green flag from the moderators here. I've waited to see the advice of Sara and SS on this one and while I generally tend to agree with their advice, your numbers just don't seem to add up. I'm hoping someone can shed some light on this as, like it or not, people tend to read other people's scenarios and are often influenced by these examples, especially when the person has some degree of success. First, how is eating 1800 calories a day given your workout schedule and stats considered a "reasonable deficit"? On workout days, if your HRM calorie estimate is close to accurate, you are burning 1300 cals/day on average. An 1800/cal day diet leaves you with 500 calories on workout days (starvation). On non-workout days, any BMR calculator would easily put you at 2000+/cals per day. Even with a lightly active modifier (which you obviously are not) you are creating a 1000+ calorie per day deficit. Again, I don't see how this can be considered a reasonable deficit. With someone so close to their goal, when does fueling your body, the very one you would like to be lean, strong and healthy, take precedence over what the scale says? If I'm missing something glaringly obvious here I apologize, and I'm not trying to single you out. Best of luck!
In addition to SideSteels comments, I would like to point out that while not specifically commented on here as no-one who tagged it seemed to be looking to apply our advice to them, we tend to make it clear that the advice is very individual and will not be appropriate for others as there are a lot of communications that happens behind the scenes. As noted in this thread as you should see if you read through it, there have been a lot of PMs and Skype calls between myself and SideSteel and between us and Patrick. We would hope that people apply some common sense and realize that a lot is discussed that is relevant to the OP that may not be completely apparent from the thread and will not be applicable to them.
We cannot make this caveat on every thread we have so we have to give people the benefit of the doubt that they will not automatically assume that what makes sense for one persons very individual circumstances will apply to them.0 -
No need (though you already have) get hasty or nasty on this one. And yes, I did read the entire thread (several times). This is not a personal attack, though you obviously see it as being one. I apologize if I made it sound that way.
I was using the calculators as an example. I know they are often bull****, but they are a place to start. What I'm really trying to understand (and I see from your response that you probably don't care) is whether in Patrick's case, he is losing via a VLC diet or he has indeed found a reasonable deficit.
Again, I apologize for ruffling any feathers..0 -
No need (though you already have) get hasty or nasty on this one. And yes, I did read the entire thread (several times). This is not a personal attack, though you obviously see it as being one. I apologize if I made it sound that way.
I was using the calculators as an example. I know they are often bull****, but they are a place to start. What I'm really trying to understand (and I see from your response that you probably don't care) is whether in Patrick's case, he is losing via a VLC diet or he has indeed found a reasonable deficit.
Again, I apologize for ruffling any feathers..
Patrick and I communicate on Skype regularly about how he is feeling and what rate of progress he is seeing.
Both of these metrics are reasonable. When he tracks his intake meticulously and actually hits near his goal of 1850, his gym performance is fine, he feels fine, and his rate of weight loss indicates that his net deficit is in a reasonable range for his stats.
Lastly, there is nothing inherently wrong with large caloric deficits under specific contexts. Although in this particular case I don't believe Patrick is creating a very large deficit. I believe it is a combination of him having a slightly lower total energy output than what a calculator would give him combined with him likely eating slightly more than he thinks he is. Both of these are quite normal considerations/circumstances.0 -
No need (though you already have) get hasty or nasty on this one. And yes, I did read the entire thread (several times). This is not a personal attack, though you obviously see it as being one. I apologize if I made it sound that way.
I was using the calculators as an example. I know they are often bull****, but they are a place to start. What I'm really trying to understand (and I see from your response that you probably don't care) is whether in Patrick's case, he is losing via a VLC diet or he has indeed found a reasonable deficit.
Again, I apologize for ruffling any feathers..
You really think that was nasty? lol
Also, what about the responses leads you to believe that we probably do not care. SideSteel highlighted the context.0 -
And do you judge "reasonable deficit" by what an estimation tool tells you, or do you judge it based on a combination of how the dieter feels, whether or not they can adhere, what rate of weight change they see weekly, how is their gym performance, whether they can hit their nutrient needs, etc?
I would prefer the latter over the former, and when I look at all of those metrics in combination I stand by the recommendations given in this thread.0 -
Patrick and I communicate on Skype regularly about how he is feeling and what rate of progress he is seeing.
Both of these metrics are reasonable. When he tracks his intake meticulously and actually hits near his goal of 1850, his gym performance is fine, he feels fine, and his rate of weight loss indicates that his net deficit is in a reasonable range for his stats.
Lastly, there is nothing inherently wrong with large caloric deficits under specific contexts. Although in this particular case I don't believe Patrick is creating a very large deficit. I believe it is a combination of him having a slightly lower total energy output than what a calculator would give him combined with him likely eating slightly more than he thinks he is. Both of these are quite normal considerations/circumstances.
Thanks for this response SideSteel. That explanation furthers Sara's point, which I did not try to contradict, that everyone's case is different. I don't remember seeing your comment about Adaptive thermogenesis when I read your first response. I know you've stated the the term "Metabolic Damage" is often misused here on MFP - but wouldn't Adaptive thermogenesis be one form of it?0 -
Patrick and I communicate on Skype regularly about how he is feeling and what rate of progress he is seeing.
Both of these metrics are reasonable. When he tracks his intake meticulously and actually hits near his goal of 1850, his gym performance is fine, he feels fine, and his rate of weight loss indicates that his net deficit is in a reasonable range for his stats.
Lastly, there is nothing inherently wrong with large caloric deficits under specific contexts. Although in this particular case I don't believe Patrick is creating a very large deficit. I believe it is a combination of him having a slightly lower total energy output than what a calculator would give him combined with him likely eating slightly more than he thinks he is. Both of these are quite normal considerations/circumstances.
Thanks for this response SideSteel. That explanation furthers Sara's point, which I did not try to contradict, that everyone's case is different. I don't remember seeing your comment about Adaptive thermogenesis when I read your first response. I know you've stated the the term "Metabolic Damage" is often misused here on MFP - but wouldn't Adaptive thermogenesis be one form of it?
AT likely happens to many people as they diet, to some degree or another, even if they do it without being aggressive. Metabolic Damage, to me, seems like an extreme case of AT where long-term damage may be taking place -- if the concept exists to begin with as it is something being speculated about.0 -
And do you judge "reasonable deficit" by what an estimation tool tells you, or do you judge it based on a combination of how the dieter feels, whether or not they can adhere, what rate of weight change they see weekly, how is their gym performance, whether they can hit their nutrient needs, etc?
I would prefer the latter over the former, and when I look at all of those metrics in combination I stand by the recommendations given in this thread.
I am gauging reasonable deficit as a reasonable amount of cut from TDEE. Obviously reality trumps all metrics, especially when it comes to the human body...0 -
Another update:
I'm still at the same numbers except I'm down int he 202-203 range so It appears that I'm losing about 1 lb a week - perhaps a bit less. I'm targeting 1850 cals a day with 162 grams of protein/carbs and 60 grams of fat and 30 grams of fiber. I am going over carbs by 10 - 30 grams a few days every week. I hit my protein target or exceed it 6 days week.
I do feel like I'm toning up a bit more. My man boobs are shrinking and now my body feels much lean than it did a few months ago. I have some visceral fat around my lower abdomen that seems a bit more pronounced because I've lost fat in other parts of my body. I am also noticing the fat in my upper inner thighs much more than I used to.
My goal remain the same - 15% body fat being the primary goal. I realize that while I don't care what my final weight is, to get to 15% body fat, I will weigh less than I had thought when I started a year ago. Luckily, I am able to maintain this diet exercise regimen without feeling deprived or hungry.
Even at 1850 cals a day, I drink a bottle of beer most every night and have lots of fruit to satisfy my sweet tooth. Once a week or so I have a piece of cake or other high calorie desert. Living this way has tough me to be much more cognizant of my eating habits. I used to eat sweets most every night and have much more carb intensive meals. I used to eat out a lot more and was trained from a young age by parents who survived the depression to not leave any food on my plate. I think my habits have changed a lot in this regard and logging everything I eat for the last year has made me think about what I'm eating in a way that I did not do. I don't think I ate too much all the time prior to starting this process almost a year ago. My weight gain was caused by sustained over eating / under exercising by perhaps 100 - 300 calories a day over a period of years. Sort of a death by a thousand paper cuts.
I figure I have another two months or so and I'll be in the 190 lb range. Hopefully when I get to that weight, I'll be at 15% body fat.0
