How to break plateau/weight creeping up

Those bad days here and there could be the cause. Calories add up quickly. Are you drinking pleny of water?

What i would actually suggest is to eat at maintenance for 1-2 weeks, you will gain some water weight but nothing to panic over. Then go back to eating at a deficit and see if the scale goes down.

how often do you weigh yourself and do you keep track of your daily read.. that way you can start to form a trend of what is going on... I would do that, keep track and then you can see what your body is doing daily..

the maintenance idea is good as well if its been awhile. Could also switch up your macro's.

I'm not expert but what has worked for me in the past is switching up my workout schedule to keep my body guessing. For example swimming, cardio kickboxing, and a body pump class (weight lifting) one week and then doing a dance cardio, circuit training (bursts of jump roping, burpees, squats, leg lunges, ect), and yoga the next week. I always vary my routine so I am working my muscles differently. The other thing I do is an all natural diet with the right pairing for each meal. I make everything whole made. Nothing comes premixed or out of a box. Their seems to be a lot of fillers and additives in food these days that your body can't break down. Hope this helps a little bit. Good luck! Hang in there. And never give up!

I lost the 40 pounds between mid-Feb to October of this past year, and I had that set at 1 lb/week loss. I was lifting at that time, but I have increased it a bit since then. At the current moment, cardio is my main focus, as my first 5K is scheduled for next weekend, and cardio let me have a few more calories to eat. My body fat percentage has decreased since I first started my weight-loss journey, but has stayed about the same in the past 3-ish months. My work has become slightly more sedentary since the plateau, but I have MFP set to sedentary to begin with. I haven't really had a formal diet or exercise break, but I did have to decrease exercise a lot last week due to the need to rest a tendon in my ankle, and I have had days of eating higher than the deficit, which I count as a diet break.

Thanks for all the helpful suggestions!

40 lbs if fat x 3500 = 140,000 deficit calories / 31 weeks = 4516 weekly deficit.

You had set a 3500 cal deficit.

So you lost more than your setting, which either means your maintenance was higher than MFP estimated and therefore you had bigger deficit than expected. But by 1000 calories weekly, or 142 daily on top of 500? Possibly.

Now maybe you didn't log your lifting, or any exercise for that matter, and correctly eat those calories back to maintain that 1 lb loss deficit. That could also explain the bigger deficit.

Did you and do you log your exercise and eat back the calories to keep that current 250 cal deficit, or have you made it bigger by not doing so?
If you did NOT eat back exercise calories, was your average workouts you say only burning 1000 calories weekly?
Sounds like you did though, so that's good, just want to confirm.

Was BF% average for your weight then, or much higher? The point being you may, or may not, have lost muscle mass and have a slower metabolism than what MFP is doing the math on. For instance, if you lost 40 lbs but only 30 lbs of fat mass, well, we know.

So after the 5K would be great time to take an exercise break.
Only walk during your workout times. Log and eat back 85% of those calories. Keep the net eating goal the same.
This should remove a great stress from your body.

When you come back from that week off, start up exercise again, but take a diet break now to remove that stress. Change MFP settings to maintain.
Log your workouts and still eat back 85% of them.
Workouts should be real strong now with rest and eating more, your body will know what to do with extra calories for sure. You should be able to maintain any improvements once you go back into deficit.
You should gain fast water weight. Always keep the math in mind, you'd have to eat 250 calories over maintenance for 2 weeks to see just 1 lb of gain - if fat. Faster is therefore water weight.

Then the next week out take the deficit again with 0.5 lbs weekly setting.

One suggestion since you mentioned wanting to eat more calories by burning more.
Except for that week eating at maintenance, you aren't going to make that much improvement on the lifting eating in deficit anyway, and since done correctly with cardio supporting it, requires lots of energy for repair that you aren't eating, it'll just make you hungry.
Suggest you go to heavy circuit training 3 times weekly. 5-7 lifts, 1 min rest max, 20 reps, 4 circuits. Logged as circuit training in MFP, much higher calorie burn than lifting, but done right you can maintain progress from lifting.
With dumbbells and lat-pull down machine if you can, or lat pull-over if not.
Squats, lat pulldown, straight-leg deadlift, bench press, stomach, shoulder press.

1 day a week keep your lifting if desired. You'll need to throw split routine back together, keep the bigger stuff. For time and energy to finish, you may need to reduce the sets, but keep the reps and most importantly the working weight. Actually, with 1 less set, increase the weight slightly.

If those 2 weeks of taking some stress off the body don't work, I'm betting you'll need a longer diet break, slowly increasing calories to get your metabolism back to par.

If you are fit now, and you likely are with doing cardio that whole time, the Polar is underestimating your calorie burn for sure if your BMI is still above healthy range. It assumes bad BMI bad fitness level, which isn't true anymore.
That assumption means low HR means low calorie burn, which isn't true either. The more fit you are (higher VO2max), the more work you can do at a lower HR.

I'd log the weight lifting, it's not that difficult to estimate, the MFP entry for strength training may seem low, but it's actually based on good studies. That's weight lifting with reps and sets and rests of 2-4 min waiting to recharge to hit it hard again.
If you do the circuit training suggested, that is listed under that and much higher calorie burn, which is true.

So you really are eating with a much bigger deficit than you realize.

If you are fit now, and you likely are with doing cardio that whole time, the Polar is underestimating your calorie burn for sure if your BMI is still above healthy range. It assumes bad BMI bad fitness level, which isn't true anymore.
That assumption means low HR means low calorie burn, which isn't true either. The more fit you are (higher VO2max), the more work you can do at a lower HR.

I'd log the weight lifting, it's not that difficult to estimate, the MFP entry for strength training may seem low, but it's actually based on good studies. That's weight lifting with reps and sets and rests of 2-4 min waiting to recharge to hit it hard again.
If you do the circuit training suggested, that is listed under that and much higher calorie burn, which is true.

So you really are eating with a much bigger deficit than you realize.

Playing thread jacker for a moment because i'm really glad to have read this. I have the same hrm as the OP and i have been battling with myself for 3 months not knowing whether the calories burned are accurate or if it is overestimating. For example, this morning, i stepped on my elliptical for 35mins for a low intensity workout, keeping my heart rate between 130-144 and my hrm reported 365kcal burned.

I normally use shapesense.com to calculate my gross calories burned then convert it to net calories burned by using my reported average heart rate which was 137, it said my gross was 299 and my net kcal burned was 253. I also took the 365kcal to estimate my net kcal burned and got 319. Now, using my stats, which one is more likely to be accurate? Sorry if all the numbers have confused you.

I realise there isn't that much difference between both net kcal but when i exercise at a moderate/high intensity level, the difference in kcal is usually higher. It would be great to know this because i want to fuel my body the right way and not let my metabolism suffer.

Female
187cm
27yrs
90.1kg (last confirmed 04.04)

My heart rate monitor is a Polar FT7. I put in the calorie amount it says I burned, and I successfully lost weight and have been maintaining. If it's burning too high or two low perhaps it is not properly calibrated.

I have my age, sex, height and weight inputted just fine, unless there's something else that i'm missing?

I can totally relate to you! I had lost about 49 pounds when I got a new job and my lifestyle became sedentary, at least at the office. It is amazing how sitting at a desk fro 8 hours a day can throw your body for a loop, even though you're still eating at goal and exercising regularly. I've gained back about 19 pounds and am now reworking my weight loss strategies.

Maybe start looking at WHAT you're eating vs. HOW MANY. For example, take a good look at how much processed sugar and non-whole food items are in your diet right now. Try shaking things up (after your 5K - don't want your tummy in a tizzy for that!!) food wise and see if that reignites your loss and breaks your plateau.

If you are fit now, and you likely are with doing cardio that whole time, the Polar is underestimating your calorie burn for sure if your BMI is still above healthy range. It assumes bad BMI bad fitness level, which isn't true anymore.
That assumption means low HR means low calorie burn, which isn't true either. The more fit you are (higher VO2max), the more work you can do at a lower HR.

I'd log the weight lifting, it's not that difficult to estimate, the MFP entry for strength training may seem low, but it's actually based on good studies. That's weight lifting with reps and sets and rests of 2-4 min waiting to recharge to hit it hard again.
If you do the circuit training suggested, that is listed under that and much higher calorie burn, which is true.

So you really are eating with a much bigger deficit than you realize.

Playing thread jacker for a moment because i'm really glad to have read this. I have the same hrm as the OP and i have been battling with myself for 3 months not knowing whether the calories burned are accurate or if it is overestimating. For example, this morning, i stepped on my elliptical for 35mins for a low intensity workout, keeping my heart rate between 130-144 and my hrm reported 365kcal burned.

I normally use shapesense.com to calculate my gross calories burned then convert it to net calories burned by using my reported average heart rate which was 137, it said my gross was 299 and my net kcal burned was 253. I also took the 365kcal to estimate my net kcal burned and got 319. Now, using my stats, which one is more likely to be accurate? Sorry if all the numbers have confused you.

I realise there isn't that much difference between both net kcal but when i exercise at a moderate/high intensity level, the difference in kcal is usually higher. It would be great to know this because i want to fuel my body the right way and not let my metabolism suffer.

Female
187cm
27yrs
90.1kg (last confirmed 04.04)

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

Given the amount of exercise that you are doing, i'd say the problem is likely on the intake side of the equation.

How much fat are you eating? Too much will slow you down, ESPECIALLY VEGETABLE OILS!!!!

How much of your diet consists of fruits? Vegetables? The nutrients in those foods help to keep your hunger under control. Also, the calorie density of those foods are very low, but the fiber content and water content are high. They keep you satiated, and keep your calories low.

I don't know what you've got your carb/protein/fat percentages set at, but given that you exercise a lot, you might want to up the % of protein. You need enough to make sure your lean muscle has enough to rebuild after exercise (she says like she knows what she's talking about).

Only description of lean meat is when you are at the butcher.

Would protein be used differently by marbled or fat muscle? There is no such description.

Perhaps your are thinking of Lean Body Mass, which is everything that is not Fat Mass, and would of course include muscle. Which may have fat in it may not, but you aren't going to control that much - except endurance cardio encouraging fat store near the muscles used.

I eat a lot of fruits and vegetables (fruit at breakfast, apple and carrots at lunch, banana for a snack, salad and other veggies at dinner). As of now, my goals are set at 50% carbs, 20% protein, and 30% fat, but I typically go over on carbs (from fruit/oatmeal) and over slightly on protein. I have considered increasing my protein intake, but I have found it a little difficult. I'm not vegetarian (as can be seen in my diary), but sometimes I do tend to lean towards vegetarian meals to save some money (I am a grad student). I will try to increase it more.

0.82 grams protein per lb of body weight.
0.35 grams fat per lb of body weight.

That's all you need, more won't hurt, but no extra benefit either if protein is hard to get in.

Carbs fall where they may.