5'3, running 20-25 miles a week, hit weight loss plateau...
karen5689
Posts: 17 Member
Hey everyone!
I'm Karen. 25-F. I am a runner who runs, usually, about 100 miles a month, between 3-5 hours a week of running.
While I trained for my most recent half marathon, I used 50c-25f-25p macros. Right before the half I got married (during my taper, really) and since then the weight has just not been coming off.
Prior to the taper and the half, I was eating 1470 calories a day BEFORE adding back my exercise cals, which are calculated accurately by a very expensive HRM. Usually I would average somewhere near 1800 a day.
I wondered if I should change my macros, and so switched to 45p-35c-30f. Same amount of calories. Still no weight loss!
Any suggestions? Women out there who are in their twenties, around my height, and are serious runners (logging big miles, with running as your primary workout with some cross training 1 or 2x a week... not the other way around), what works for you when aiming to lose?
I started at 198 lbs. I lost down into the 150's on Weight Watchers. At 158 I came over to MFP. Got down to 148. Gained back up to 153 from wedding, honeymoon, etc. Back in the saddle for over a month now, and wondering what's up.
I'm Karen. 25-F. I am a runner who runs, usually, about 100 miles a month, between 3-5 hours a week of running.
While I trained for my most recent half marathon, I used 50c-25f-25p macros. Right before the half I got married (during my taper, really) and since then the weight has just not been coming off.
Prior to the taper and the half, I was eating 1470 calories a day BEFORE adding back my exercise cals, which are calculated accurately by a very expensive HRM. Usually I would average somewhere near 1800 a day.
I wondered if I should change my macros, and so switched to 45p-35c-30f. Same amount of calories. Still no weight loss!
Any suggestions? Women out there who are in their twenties, around my height, and are serious runners (logging big miles, with running as your primary workout with some cross training 1 or 2x a week... not the other way around), what works for you when aiming to lose?
I started at 198 lbs. I lost down into the 150's on Weight Watchers. At 158 I came over to MFP. Got down to 148. Gained back up to 153 from wedding, honeymoon, etc. Back in the saddle for over a month now, and wondering what's up.
0
Replies
-
Take a week off, increase your calories by 1000 for 1 week. See what happens at the start of the 2nd week.0
-
Are you using a food scale to accurately measure your portions?0
-
how much do you have left to lose?0
-
Hmmm...I'm around your height, in my 20s, logging 20-25 miles/week, but I lift too so I'm not sure I'm a serious enough runner to answer......
At the end of the day, it comes down to calories in and calories out. Do you use a food scale? How much do you weigh? Have you recalculated your TDEE as you have lost?
Edit: I see your current weight now. Do you use a food scale?0 -
I don't think not accurately measuring portions would be the issue if you've successfully lost 50+ lbs prior to the plateau.
You could try cutting back your calories by 100-200 on your rest days. You could also try carb cycling between workout days and rest days... If you're not training for another half marathon in the near future, you could also switch up some of your runs for some HIIT workouts? Changing your macros to 45-35-30 is a good idea, I'd stick with that too if carb cycling isn't your thing.
Hitting plateaus for 2,3,4 weeks isn't uncommon, plateaus that last for months are when things need to be changed up big time.
Hope things go well for you!0 -
courtneybrooke27 wrote: »I don't think not accurately measuring portions would be the issue if you've successfully lost 50+ lbs prior to the plateau.
You could try cutting back your calories by 100-200 on your rest days. You could also try carb cycling between workout days and rest days... If you're not training for another half marathon in the near future, you could also switch up some of your runs for some HIIT workouts? Changing your macros to 45-35-30 is a good idea, I'd stick with that too if carb cycling isn't your thing.
Hitting plateaus for 2,3,4 weeks isn't uncommon, plateaus that last for months are when things need to be changed up big time.
Hope things go well for you!
Exactly.0 -
courtneybrooke27 wrote: »I don't think not accurately measuring portions would be the issue if you've successfully lost 50+ lbs prior to the plateau.
You could try cutting back your calories by 100-200 on your rest days. You could also try carb cycling between workout days and rest days... If you're not training for another half marathon in the near future, you could also switch up some of your runs for some HIIT workouts? Changing your macros to 45-35-30 is a good idea, I'd stick with that too if carb cycling isn't your thing.
Hitting plateaus for 2,3,4 weeks isn't uncommon, plateaus that last for months are when things need to be changed up big time.
Hope things go well for you!
As one loses weight, their TDEE drops. It's common to hit a plateau if you don't reevaluate your TDEE after every few pounds. Also, some people tend to slack off after months and months of counting calories. I've done it before. It's easy to start grabbing an extra bite or taste of food without logging, and pretty soon you eat your deficit away. Tightening up logging is the best place to start when addressing a plateau.
0 -
Eat a little less. Run a little faster.0
-
I too am a runner. I ran my first marathon in September so during training I didn't really track my food I ate when I was hungry as I was more focused on my training and not weight loss. Training and weight loss for me do not agree. During training but especially after my marathon I gained almost 10lbs. My body has gotten so good at being effective during runs I can no longer use that exercise for calorie burns unless it is over an hour. What I am trying to say is that since you run so much your body has adapted that when you run it is not as strenuous for it so it does not burn as many calories as when you first started to run. My resting heart rate now is in the 40's so it takes ALOT for me to increase my heart rate in order for it to burn calories when I run. I have had to take on other forms of workouts as now my body doesn't think of running as a workout. Right now I am toying with 40/30/30 the last couple weeks. Good luck. Feel free to add me.0
-
I would start incorporating strengthening exercises. Your metabolism increases with muscle and your body can only lose so much weight with running alone. I would also start incorporating sprint workouts.0
-
I too am a runner. I ran my first marathon in September so during training I didn't really track my food I ate when I was hungry as I was more focused on my training and not weight loss. Training and weight loss for me do not agree. During training but especially after my marathon I gained almost 10lbs. My body has gotten so good at being effective during runs I can no longer use that exercise for calorie burns unless it is over an hour. What I am trying to say is that since you run so much your body has adapted that when you run it is not as strenuous for it so it does not burn as many calories as when you first started to run. My resting heart rate now is in the 40's so it takes ALOT for me to increase my heart rate in order for it to burn calories when I run. I have had to take on other forms of workouts as now my body doesn't think of running as a workout. Right now I am toying with 40/30/30 the last couple weeks. Good luck. Feel free to add me.
+1 to this. My resting heart rate came way down when I regularly started to run and started losing weight. I am in no means in your category when it comes to the amount you run, but you definitely aren't going to see the effect of running all those miles after your body gets used to it (damn that efficiency of the body). Definitely incorporate some weight training into your regimen and that will up your BMR so that you'll be able to start losing again. You may see an initial weight gain due to muscles retaining water after you tear through them to become sore. It's normal, you'll lose that within a couple of weeks of the weight training. Bottom line though, if you aren't getting sore with higher heart rates after your running and any other workouts, it isn't going to burn as many calories as you think it will. Therefore, you are eating more than you should in order to be in a calorie deficit, and not losing.0 -
Plateau means you are eating more than you are burning or the same.
Even though you may be running a ton, once your body hits "pro level" of anything, reevaluation is needed for diet AND exercise.
Carb cycling is great for change, as well as different calorie amounts on different days and switching up macros. What about strength training a bit?? I'd highly recommend it or at least doing some OTHER form of movement. Your body is not requiring the effort it once did when running, so you could be burning less without realizing it because it doesn't take as much energy to expel these days...
Good luck! I'm 5'3", 32 and I run a bit.
0 -
dunnodunno wrote: »Are you using a food scale to accurately measure your portions?
Indeed I am! I weigh, measure, scan and track EVERYTHING.0 -
Looking to get down to 130 from current 152!TavistockToad wrote: »how much do you have left to lose?
0 -
The same thing happens to me so I can relate! It's a big bummer. I did an entire half marathon training plan and didn't lose a pound.
I certainly haven't found the perfect answer, but here's a few things you could try. 1) Increase your fiber intake to 25 grams per day 2) Substitute 1-2 days/week with interval/circuit/strength training 3) Include speed training in your runs - alternate jogging 5 minutes and running at 90% top speed for 1 minute.0 -
And I see what everyone's saying about extra bites and also about accurately measuring calories. I have been vigilant re: not over-eating, almost a little obsessive. And while I realize the body becomes more efficient, I am still using a heart rate model (a top of the line Garmin Premium no less) and have been trusting its estimate of my caloric burn since it's literally measuring how hard my heart is working. Is this a bad idea?0
-
HRMs are known to be inaccurate, even the best of them. Try eating fewer of your exercise calories back...maybe only 75% of them. See what happens over the next 2-4 weeks with your weight.0
-
To trust the HRM implicitly, yes, this is a bad idea. This is a good indicator, but they aren't 100% accurate for the upper and lower end of the bell curves. You sound like you should be on the upper end (more efficient), and it won't capture the body's own efficiency well. Same goes on the down side, if you were just starting out, it would over estimate what you're doing because the heart goes crazy over a little exercise. The Average Joe is who the HRM is made for (thinking of the bell curve again, it is the majority of people).0
-
And I see what everyone's saying about extra bites and also about accurately measuring calories. I have been vigilant re: not over-eating, almost a little obsessive. And while I realize the body becomes more efficient, I am still using a heart rate model (a top of the line Garmin Premium no less) and have been trusting its estimate of my caloric burn since it's literally measuring how hard my heart is working. Is this a bad idea?
Try trimming off 100 calories a day and see what difference that makes. You don't need to make drastic changes. Just tweak a little something and give it a week or two. If you're not losing then you're at maintenance and you'll either need to run more or eat less.
Calories burned even with a HRM is just a good guess. It's not a 100% exact calculation of what you really burned. It's just a formula that gets you in the ballpark.0 -
Looking to get down to 130 from current 152!TavistockToad wrote: »how much do you have left to lose?
I'm 140 lbs
Male
5 ' 6
18 years old
I'm also trying to lean down to 130 lbs of pure muscle! Maybe someone will help us with our goals.0 -
GenesiaElizabeth wrote: »Plateau means you are eating more than you are burning or the same.
Even though you may be running a ton, once your body hits "pro level" of anything, reevaluation is needed for diet AND exercise.
Carb cycling is great for change, as well as different calorie amounts on different days and switching up macros. What about strength training a bit?? I'd highly recommend it or at least doing some OTHER form of movement. Your body is not requiring the effort it once did when running, so you could be burning less without realizing it because it doesn't take as much energy to expel these days...
Good luck! I'm 5'3", 32 and I run a bit.
Agreed, I have run 6 half marathons 7 full. It really doesn't matter what exercise you are doing your body eventually adapts. I workout and run 40+ miles a week. If I dropped down to 25 milrs/week my weight would creep up. 25 miles is a light week( for me) now. Increase your miles (slowly so as not to get injured) or add in different forms of cardio. Check your logging as welll. Make sure you are truly being accurate.0 -
Hi, Karen. I'm quite a bit older than you (44), but the same height, and I also run about 100 miles a month (120 last month) with some cross training. I just did a half this past weekend and a prior one in late August, so my training has been focused on that distance, with a long run each weekend, so all that seems pretty similar. I'm at 134 or so now, and am losing about a pound a week. The biggest change I've noticed recently (other than gradual slowing as I'm getting closer to goal and don't want such a big deficit because I'm focusing on athletic performance) is that my losses are less consistent. I'm more likely to have a couple .5 lb weeks and then a 1.5 lb week or some such. But they still seem to average out to the 1 lb range.
I suspect macros don't matter here, but I do 40-30-30.
One change I made a month or two ago was to stop eating back exercise calories and instead switch to TDEE minus a reasonable deficit. I was never hungry enough on my big exercise days and felt like I was eating more indulgently just because I wanted the calories and then felt really deprived on off days. I'm much more comfortable eating similar calories every day, although I do let myself eat a few extra on a big run day if I want them and don't worry if I'm a bit under on a lower exercise day. My goal is 1650, but I sometimes eat closer to 1700 on average, which is also what I was averaging when I did the MFP method, just spread differently. I never have regularly used a HRM and I'm suspicious that mine overstates burn, since I believe my max heart rate is higher than average for my age (I'm certain it does for longer bike rides). What I know is true is that Runkeeper/MFP overstate burn for longer runs, and I think the reason is that they don't take into account what you would have burned anyway during the 2+ hours of exercise.
One thing I've noticed is that it's really easy now that I feel pretty good about where I am and am more okay if my weight loss is slower is that it's really easy to get careless about logging and "fit in" meals that probably are somewhat more calories than are being logged (restaurant stuff or otherwise hard to log items or a spoonful of something that's ignored, so on).
In any case, I'd try lowering calories a bit to see if it helps or, as others have said, maybe add in some slightly different exercise. I felt like I was stalling a bit and found it helped to get more strict about the logging (although you say you are doing that already) and, for my training more than weight loss, started doing more speed intervals and some circuit training stuff, since it's easy for me to go overboard with long easy pace runs. If nothing else doing something new can sometimes just get you more excited again and so lead to more energy being expended.0 -
I too am a runner. I ran my first marathon in September so during training I didn't really track my food I ate when I was hungry as I was more focused on my training and not weight loss. Training and weight loss for me do not agree. During training but especially after my marathon I gained almost 10lbs. My body has gotten so good at being effective during runs I can no longer use that exercise for calorie burns unless it is over an hour. What I am trying to say is that since you run so much your body has adapted that when you run it is not as strenuous for it so it does not burn as many calories as when you first started to run. My resting heart rate now is in the 40's so it takes ALOT for me to increase my heart rate in order for it to burn calories when I run. I have had to take on other forms of workouts as now my body doesn't think of running as a workout. Right now I am toying with 40/30/30 the last couple weeks. Good luck. Feel free to add me.
+1 to this. My resting heart rate came way down when I regularly started to run and started losing weight. I am in no means in your category when it comes to the amount you run, but you definitely aren't going to see the effect of running all those miles after your body gets used to it (damn that efficiency of the body). Definitely incorporate some weight training into your regimen and that will up your BMR so that you'll be able to start losing again. You may see an initial weight gain due to muscles retaining water after you tear through them to become sore. It's normal, you'll lose that within a couple of weeks of the weight training. Bottom line though, if you aren't getting sore with higher heart rates after your running and any other workouts, it isn't going to burn as many calories as you think it will. Therefore, you are eating more than you should in order to be in a calorie deficit, and not losing.
Yeah ... just so ya'll know. You do not improve in efficiency so much that you don't burn calories. And the decrease you do have just isn't significant. No matter what, you are still moving your body weight over the same distance. That's physical work, and that takes calories to do.
Your body improves as far as how much blood it moves per heartbeat, how much power is produced per muscle contraction (if you've been doing strength training or sprints or hill repeats), and how effectively it clears lactic acid from your muscles. None of that reduces the calories you burn much, if at all. It does make the same workout seem easier.
What does reduce calories burned, is improving your running economy, which is partly form, and partly improvements in physiology so you waste less energy per distance traveled.
Findings from:
Energy cost of running
R. Margaria , P. Cerretelli , P. Aghemo , G. Sassi
Journal of Applied PhysiologyPublished 1 March 1963Vol. 18no. 2, 367-370
(Summary of conclusions)
Well-trained runners burn five to seven percent fewer calories than their nonathletic counterparts. A run you did as a newbie athlete that burned 500 calories, for example, might burn 465 to 475 calories when you’re better trained, assuming you’ve stayed the same weight.
What does happen is you burn significantly fewer calories if you weigh less now than when you started running, because you're doing less work.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions