why platea if calories in calories out?

shosh413
shosh413 Posts: 135 Member
in Food and Nutrition
. I don't understand how a plateu can happen if all you need to lose weight is to have a calorie deficit. I hear all the time "calories in calories out" etc... so i don't understand how this can happen.... and if it's because your body just does sometimes... then it's not just calories in calories out is it? How about the types of food you eat... how does that come in with calories in calories out?

Replies

  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    A plateau is generally defined as 4-6+ weeks without any movement on the scale while doing the same things.

    A week or two without weight loss is a normal stall, usually caused by water weight fluctuations masking any fat loss that's happening. Exercise, sodium, stress, hormones, etc. can all affect scale weight without affecting fat loss.

    Longer plateaus tend to be because someone is either overestimating the number of calories their body burns (eating back too many exercise calories, slow metabolism, etc.) or underestimating the amount of food they're eating (logging inaccuracies, secret eating, etc.)
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    The vast majority of plateaus that I have come across are due to a lack of dietary adherence...even if people think they're right on, they'v gotten sloppy somewhere.

    Other than that, jacked up hormones and nutrient deficiencies can play a role as can adaptive thermogenesis...but it's still calories in/out...it's just that someone who's jacked there hormones up due to a lack of proper nutrition and/or overly aggressive calorie goals will now fall outside of the statistical norms used by these calculators to estimate an appropriate intake.

    There was a girl on here just today who had her BMR professionally tested and it should have been in the 1300 - 1400 range, but was in the 900 calorie range...she's a perfect example of someone who falls outside of the statistical norms due to either medical condition, hormones, nutrient deficiencies, whatever...but that individual is still subject to the laws of thermodynamics.
  • castlerobber
    castlerobber Posts: 528 Member
    . I don't understand how a plateu can happen if all you need to lose weight is to have a calorie deficit. I hear all the time "calories in calories out" etc... so i don't understand how this can happen.... and if it's because your body just does sometimes... then it's not just calories in calories out is it? How about the types of food you eat... how does that come in with calories in calories out?

    <sarcasm>
    Shhh...you aren't supposed to think about these things. It's heresy. You must Believe. The human body is a machine, just like your car engine. You can eat anything you want If It Fits Your Macros and you run a Calorie Deficit.

    If you hit a plateau, it is always your fault. You're lying/mistaken about how much you eat, you aren't measuring, you aren't measuring accurately, you aren't exercising enough, you aren't exercising right. Hormones can't possibly affect your metabolism, nor can medicines, nor can eating a diet high in grains and sugar; you're just eating more and don't realize it. You must cut your calories to account for your reduced weight, but never go below 1200 or you go into the feared Starvation Mode, from which your metabolism may never recover.
    </sarcasm>

    You've asked some good and valid questions. :flowerforyou: Unfortunately, you'll have a hard time getting good answers on these forums. :grumble:
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    Hormones can't possibly affect your metabolism, nor can medicines, nor can eating a diet high in grains and sugar; you're just eating more and don't realize it. You must cut your calories to account for your reduced weight

    I believe I addressed that...it's still calories in and calories out...someone with jacked hormones, medical conditions, etc just falls out of the statistical norms...so Shhhhh yourself.

    I take a medication that reduces my basal rate by about 5-8%...I take that into account...it's still calories in and out, it's just that my calories requirements aren't what others with similar stats are that's all...laws of thermodynamics still apply though....
  • michael300891
    michael300891 Posts: 275
    . I don't understand how a plateu can happen if all you need to lose weight is to have a calorie deficit. I hear all the time "calories in calories out" etc... so i don't understand how this can happen.... and if it's because your body just does sometimes... then it's not just calories in calories out is it? How about the types of food you eat... how does that come in with calories in calories out?

    <sarcasm>
    Shhh...you aren't supposed to think about these things. It's heresy. You must Believe. The human body is a machine, just like your car engine. You can eat anything you want If It Fits Your Macros and you run a Calorie Deficit.

    If you hit a plateau, it is always your fault. You're lying/mistaken about how much you eat, you aren't measuring, you aren't measuring accurately, you aren't exercising enough, you aren't exercising right. Hormones can't possibly affect your metabolism, nor can medicines, nor can eating a diet high in grains and sugar; you're just eating more and don't realize it. You must cut your calories to account for your reduced weight, but never go below 1200 or you go into the feared Starvation Mode, from which your metabolism may never recover.
    </sarcasm>

    You've asked some good and valid questions. :flowerforyou: Unfortunately, you'll have a hard time getting good answers on these forums. :grumble:

    I respect your sarcasm.


    Doctoral Researcher in Exercise Adaptation and Metabolism
  • Akimajuktuq
    Akimajuktuq Posts: 3,037 Member
    Very good question. Maybe WHAT one eats does matter just a bit for some people? It does for me, more than just a bit. When I get inadequate nutrients, no amount of calories fills me up. When I am adequately nourished, I don't need to over-eat. That's my own personal experience after 26 years of experience with dieting.

    Of course the calories matter, but so does the food. For some of us.
  • AwesomeGuy37
    AwesomeGuy37 Posts: 436 Member
    If a legit case, it often has to do with water retention, anti-depression/bipolar medications, or hormonal reasons like TOM.
  • chezjuan
    chezjuan Posts: 747 Member
    . I don't understand how a plateu can happen if all you need to lose weight is to have a calorie deficit. I hear all the time "calories in calories out" etc... so i don't understand how this can happen.... and if it's because your body just does sometimes... then it's not just calories in calories out is it? How about the types of food you eat... how does that come in with calories in calories out?

    <sarcasm>
    Shhh...you aren't supposed to think about these things. It's heresy. You must Believe. The human body is a machine, just like your car engine. You can eat anything you want If It Fits Your Macros and you run a Calorie Deficit.

    If you hit a plateau, it is always your fault. You're lying/mistaken about how much you eat, you aren't measuring, you aren't measuring accurately, you aren't exercising enough, you aren't exercising right. Hormones can't possibly affect your metabolism, nor can medicines, nor can eating a diet high in grains and sugar; you're just eating more and don't realize it. You must cut your calories to account for your reduced weight, but never go below 1200 or you go into the feared Starvation Mode, from which your metabolism may never recover.
    </sarcasm>

    You've asked some good and valid questions. :flowerforyou: Unfortunately, you'll have a hard time getting good answers on these forums. :grumble:

    I think cwolfman13 provided a good answer that addressed the OPs question pretty adequately. In the grand scheme of things, it is calories in/calories out. Hormones, medication, the thermic effect of food, inaccurate logging, failure to be consistent, and other factors all affect either the calories in or calories out side of the equation, and that can cause people to think they are at a deficit when they are not.
  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    Some good answers so far. I think sometimes it can also be that your body has become accustomed to your "routine". You aren't burning the calories you were when you were heavier and less fit. If using MFPs values for calorie burns, this can be a problem. For those using a heart rate monitor, when was the last time they set their weight on it? If you still have it set for 200 pounds and you're now at 170, you're burning less calories than it says and therefore probably eating more than is being burned each day.

    My advice to someone who's plateaued for awhile is to shake things up. Add intensity to workouts or try something new (running instead of walking, biking instead of swimming) which will make you have to work harder and will therefore burn more calories.
  • Lea_8D
    Lea_8D Posts: 106 Member
    . I don't understand how a plateu can happen if all you need to lose weight is to have a calorie deficit. I hear all the time "calories in calories out" etc... so i don't understand how this can happen.... and if it's because your body just does sometimes... then it's not just calories in calories out is it? How about the types of food you eat... how does that come in with calories in calories out?

    <sarcasm>
    Shhh...you aren't supposed to think about these things. It's heresy. You must Believe. The human body is a machine, just like your car engine. You can eat anything you want If It Fits Your Macros and you run a Calorie Deficit.

    If you hit a plateau, it is always your fault. You're lying/mistaken about how much you eat, you aren't measuring, you aren't measuring accurately, you aren't exercising enough, you aren't exercising right. Hormones can't possibly affect your metabolism, nor can medicines, nor can eating a diet high in grains and sugar; you're just eating more and don't realize it. You must cut your calories to account for your reduced weight, but never go below 1200 or you go into the feared Starvation Mode, from which your metabolism may never recover.
    </sarcasm>

    You've asked some good and valid questions. :flowerforyou: Unfortunately, you'll have a hard time getting good answers on these forums. :grumble:

    Yes indeed, that is the creed of the dominant religion on this site, and woe be to blasphemers who suggest anything different! Except I thought they didn't subscribe to the starvation mode doctrine? Or maybe that is one of the offshoot sects...
  • castlerobber
    castlerobber Posts: 528 Member
    I respect your sarcasm.


    Doctoral Researcher in Exercise Adaptation and Metabolism

    Thank you, good sir! That's one of the nicest things anyone has ever said to me on MFP--and I'm not being sarcastic this time.

    (walks away, chuckling quietly)
  • piercedarachne
    piercedarachne Posts: 5
    What you eat definitely matters because goal weight with hair falling out and heart palpitations is not usually the desired goal. Metabolism does vary a lot and the formula that MFP uses is very simplified. Measuring the "out" in "in vs out" is tough and does depend some on what you are eating. At a plateau it is good to evaluate that you are eating what you think you are, as active as you think you are, have adjusted calories for your current weight, and not having any health or hormone issues.
  • scottkjar
    scottkjar Posts: 346 Member
    Elves come into my apartment at night, eat food, and repaint the marks on my scale. I heard them scampering about one night. The next day, I threw away all of the leftovers in the fridge, so the elves would have nothing to snack on. Within a few days, the elves quit visiting me so the scale repainting ended. That's when the scale started dropping again.

    At least, that's my belief about the absence of that food from the fridge and my weight loss being stalled. I can't imagine any other logical explanation.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,223 Member
    A plateau is generally defined as 4-6+ weeks without any movement on the scale while doing the same things.

    A week or two without weight loss is a normal stall, usually caused by water weight fluctuations masking any fat loss that's happening. Exercise, sodium, stress, hormones, etc. can all affect scale weight without affecting fat loss.

    Longer plateaus tend to be because someone is either overestimating the number of calories their body burns (eating back too many exercise calories, slow metabolism, etc.) or underestimating the amount of food they're eating (logging inaccuracies, secret eating, etc.)
    We have a winner.
  • prattiger65
    prattiger65 Posts: 1,657 Member
    If you are in a calorie deficit/energy surplus, you will lose weight. That's not hocus pocus, dogma, group think etc. All theses things that people always bring up to make excuses why it can't possibly be their fault that they aren't losing, if in fact they are valid, are just reasons that the energy/calorie ratio is off. People it is science, thermodynamics and no one is excused from it. Not even special snowflakes. But keep saying it if it makes you feel better, when you get tired of making excuses, you will take a look at your calories, make adjustments and start losing.
  • Achrya
    Achrya Posts: 16,913 Member
    Hormones can't possibly affect your metabolism, nor can medicines, nor can eating a diet high in grains and sugar; you're just eating more and don't realize it. You must cut your calories to account for your reduced weight

    I believe I addressed that...it's still calories in and calories out...someone with jacked hormones, medical conditions, etc just falls out of the statistical norms...so Shhhhh yourself.

    I take a medication that reduces my basal rate by about 5-8%...I take that into account...it's still calories in and out, it's just that my calories requirements aren't what others with similar stats are that's all...laws of thermodynamics still apply though....

    But your response made too much sense, so everyone is going to ignore it and blame it on...um. actually I'm not sure what they're going with? Food quality? "My metabolism is slower than average so the calories in<calories out doesn't work?"

    But never "damn, I must be eating too much."

    When I stopped losing in November/December it was clearly not because my adherence slipped and in fact totally related to (insert special snowflake reason here) and when I dropped five pounds in January it wasn't because I stopped slacking off. It was fairies. Or gnomes? Carbs?

Categories