Weight Loss Plateau

Options
2

Replies

  • jenniferinfl
    jenniferinfl Posts: 456 Member
    Options
    Very normal! Everyone is different, but a stall 3-4 weeks in is pretty typical. Usually you've dumped more weight than what matched your calorie in/calorie out. I think it's pretty typical to spend a couple weeks stalled after that as your body plays catch up. For me, it always happens at week three.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    1650 is not low...lord, I need to stop reading these message boards, the misinformation here just never ends...you need to run a deficit of 1000 calories PER DAY to lose 2 lbs in a week...I am a 252 lb guy and my BMR is 2500 calories a day..if I was 200lbs it would be 2050 calories a day...everyone seems to be under some delusion that an office job or regular wandering around burns like 1000 calories a day, it doesn't...1650 is a totally acceptable calorie goal.

    Alex, really?

    I believe that you're missing the point.

    The OP has just a few more pounds to go. 2 pounds a week is too aggressive for how much weight he has to lose.

    It would be different for you. You are 252 calories, therefore it is reasonable for you to have a goal of losing 2 pounds a week.

    Let me use me as an example: I weigh 139 pounds and would love to lose an extra 4 pounds just to see that magic 135 on the scale (that part is not real, I am happy where am now). My BMR with my exercise level is around 2200.

    If I were to set my goals to lose 2 pounds a week, I would be at 1200 calories a day. Does that seems sustainable to you for a woman at a healthy BMI who heavy weight lifts three times a week, runs 3 days a week, and does other cardio type activity, plus is always on the go? Do you think that's enough to fuel my body?

    I suggest looking at the bigger picture and taking into account people's goals and where they are at any stage in their weight loss before accusing people of spreading misinformation, especially when they are not doing so. :)
  • Paul_Collyer
    Paul_Collyer Posts: 160 Member
    Options
    Plateaus happen you need to keep the faith. However......

    Make sure your activity calories are not overestimated. I did this last year training for a marathon, by using the exaggerated Strava numbers, and didn't really lose much. I am not convinced by some of the MFP database calorie burn estimates either. Safest is to use a HRM I think....for me I found the Garmin calculations with one of these lower and hence more effective in terms of MFP.

    I think your macros ( carbs vs fat vs protein ) also have more effect as you get closer to target weight. When I started out all I needed was a moderate deficit but as I've got fitter the details seem to have made more difference. After some trial and error I've settled on balanced ratios ( 35:40:25 ) that work for me with a moderate deficit although we are all different!
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    Plateaus happen you need to keep the faith. However......

    Make sure your activity calories are not overestimated. I did this last year training for a marathon, by using the exaggerated Strava numbers, and didn't really lose much. I am not convinced by some of the MFP database calorie burn estimates either. Safest is to use a HRM I think....for me I found the Garmin calculations with one of these lower and hence more effective in terms of MFP.

    I think your macros ( carbs vs fat vs protein ) also have more effect as you get closer to target weight. When I started out all I needed was a moderate deficit but as I've got fitter the details seem to have made more difference. After some trial and error I've settled on balanced ratios ( 35:40:25 ) that work for me with a moderate deficit although we are all different!

    Love what you say about accuracy in counting for both food and exercise.

    Macros would certainly have an effect on energy levels, which in turn determines how much steam you put into those exercise sessions, as well as nutrition toals, but as far as calories in/calories out, I would say they don't matter at all.
  • toyrobot78
    toyrobot78 Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    Thanks folks, some great advice and above all else, encouragement. There's seems to be a bit of confusion with regard to my daily calorie intake. I never stated that 1650 was my goal. I said that over last week that my intake ranged from 1650 to 1950. Some days I ended up having less due to differing meals and circumstances. I have no intention of setting such a low daily goal, simply because I'd be creating a problem for myself. I'd be miserable which would make me want what I can't have. I'd far rather control the quality of what I'm eating and increase my exercise.
    As has been pointed out, I'm getting down to the heavier end of 'healthy weight' and am happy - feeling good, visibly changed and enjoying exercise because of my increased fitness. I'd simply like to drop that little bit more for fitness reasons. Summer's coming and I'd love to be able to have a right blast on the bike during my time off work.
    My initial goal was to drop 1lb a week. I want whatever I do to be maintainable so don't have interest in 'extreme' measures. I understand that my intake will drop and perhaps it's time to recalibrate mfp to take my loss into account. Also, my calorie burns come from strava but I had already decided that the predictions are quite generous.
    I'll keep going and am confident I'll see the next drop soon.
  • rachylouise87
    rachylouise87 Posts: 367 Member
    Options
    i have 17lbs to go and losing now on average of .5lbs per week. 1200 calories is too low for me right now and increasing was better for my nutrition and energy levels. i stalled on 1200 for 5 weeks and then started losing after the increase i was doing 5-6 days of HIIT and still not losing. different things work for different people. one day the weight just came off
  • fnoblebrown
    fnoblebrown Posts: 61 Member
    Options
    I don't think the calorie intake is your problem - you're well within a range that will lose weight based on your activity level.

    At this point, I would suggest mixing in some strength training - have a look at the Stronglifts 5x5 program. It's easy, requires very little time, and is pretty effective.

  • fnoblebrown
    fnoblebrown Posts: 61 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    I don't think the calorie intake is your problem - you're well within a range that will lose weight based on your activity level.

    At this point, I would suggest mixing in some strength training - have a look at the Stronglifts 5x5 program. It's easy, requires very little time, and is pretty effective.

    What are you using to base that on? What makes you say that is fine for a grown man that bikes so many miles per week should be eating as low as 1650 calories?

    I dunno, maybe the fact that, as a grown man myself, I've lost weight consuming in that same calorie range while running 20 miles a week?

    He's trying to lose weight. Good on him for not being a cupcake about it and eating all his calories back. Honestly, I think it's a bit delusional to think that you can crush 2200 calories a day and really see much in the way of weight loss over any reasonable measure of time, especially in cases like his where he's not morbidly obese or anything.
  • HeySwoleSister
    HeySwoleSister Posts: 1,938 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    I don't think the calorie intake is your problem - you're well within a range that will lose weight based on your activity level.

    At this point, I would suggest mixing in some strength training - have a look at the Stronglifts 5x5 program. It's easy, requires very little time, and is pretty effective.

    What are you using to base that on? What makes you say that is fine for a grown man that bikes so many miles per week should be eating as low as 1650 calories?

    I dunno, maybe the fact that, as a grown man myself, I've lost weight consuming in that same calorie range while running 20 miles a week?

    He's trying to lose weight. Good on him for not being a cupcake about it and eating all his calories back. Honestly, I think it's a bit delusional to think that you can crush 2200 calories a day and really see much in the way of weight loss over any reasonable measure of time, especially in cases like his where he's not morbidly obese or anything.

    Oh really? You sure about that? How many calories do you think I ate as I lost 75 lbs to not be obese anymore and get in shape? I'll tell you that it was much more than 1650, as a grown man, but I'm sure I'm shorter than both of you, and I do no cardio. Does that make me a cupcake? Does that make me delusional? Did that actually not happen?

    Also, where are your progress pictures?

    IDK, but I think I'll call you cupcake from here on out. ;)

    Also, I feel like poor Leo is in the pound. I don't like it.
  • FatFreeFrolicking
    FatFreeFrolicking Posts: 4,252 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    I don't think the calorie intake is your problem - you're well within a range that will lose weight based on your activity level.

    At this point, I would suggest mixing in some strength training - have a look at the Stronglifts 5x5 program. It's easy, requires very little time, and is pretty effective.

    What are you using to base that on? What makes you say that is fine for a grown man that bikes so many miles per week should be eating as low as 1650 calories?

    I dunno, maybe the fact that, as a grown man myself, I've lost weight consuming in that same calorie range while running 20 miles a week?

    He's trying to lose weight. Good on him for not being a cupcake about it and eating all his calories back. Honestly, I think it's a bit delusional to think that you can crush 2200 calories a day and really see much in the way of weight loss over any reasonable measure of time, especially in cases like his where he's not morbidly obese or anything.

    You say 2200 calories like that's a lot…

    Many men (even some women) can and do lose weight eating 2000+ calories a day.

  • fnoblebrown
    fnoblebrown Posts: 61 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    I don't think the calorie intake is your problem - you're well within a range that will lose weight based on your activity level.

    At this point, I would suggest mixing in some strength training - have a look at the Stronglifts 5x5 program. It's easy, requires very little time, and is pretty effective.

    What are you using to base that on? What makes you say that is fine for a grown man that bikes so many miles per week should be eating as low as 1650 calories?

    I dunno, maybe the fact that, as a grown man myself, I've lost weight consuming in that same calorie range while running 20 miles a week?

    He's trying to lose weight. Good on him for not being a cupcake about it and eating all his calories back. Honestly, I think it's a bit delusional to think that you can crush 2200 calories a day and really see much in the way of weight loss over any reasonable measure of time, especially in cases like his where he's not morbidly obese or anything.

    You say 2200 calories like that's a lot…

    Many men (even some women) can and do lose weight eating 2000+ calories a day.

    Yes, many men and women can lose weight on 2000 calories a day; but we're talking about a man that is already reasonably fit, doing cardio, trying to lose weight.

    Likewise, 1600-1900 is enough to not necessarily raise any alarms about undernourishment. I think it is somewhat disingenuous to tell someone stuck in a plateau to eat more.

    My point is that his calorie count is fine. If he's in that range, and he's able to do all the cardio he says he's doing, then he will lose weight. Plateaus are a normal part of the process; in my experience, the best way to break them is to throw something new at the body that it's not expecting. For me, that has been weight training, and thus my suggestion.
  • LAWoman72
    LAWoman72 Posts: 2,846 Member
    Options
    What exactly does constitute a plateau? Time-wise (i.e. amount of weeks, months)? I see people saying "X amount of time isn't a plateau," and I was wondering whether there's some sort of general rule on this.

    Sorry I couldn't help, OP. Hang in there!
  • toyrobot78
    toyrobot78 Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    LAWoman72, I looked into this exact question a little, before I posted. I read that 3 weeks is usually considered a plateau but I'm sure that's only one way of looking at it and there will be several other theories and opinions.
    On advice i recalibrated MFP to see if I should reduce my intake and whilst the new number is lower than previous it is suggesting I'm eating within (usually with a couple of hundred cals to spare) so I'm going to continue eating as I am and add to/ increase my exercise. Perhaps some running for example. Also, regardless of exercise I don't "eat back" my calories burnt and stay within my original intake goal. I suppose if I went crazy with the exercise and felt I needed extra input I would but that's not been the case as yet. 9 days out of ten I feel like I've eaten very well, thank you very much. At lunch times my packed lunches are the talk of our table and whilst I'm probably consuming 2/3 to a half the cals of everyone else, I think I'm actually consuming more food.
    So it's either a bike run or an actual run tonight. Also, do press ups/ sit ups burn many cals? I'm thinking of doing 100 of each per day (something my girlfriend got me into doing a couple of years back and they seemed to have an impact. I was getting ready to fit into a wedding suit).
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,342 Member
    Options
    press ups /sit ups don't actually burn many calories as more strength exercises but they are great for the abs/arms, and more muscle = calorie burn lasting longer which is win win :smile:
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    Options
    A plateau is 8-10 weeks, you are but stalled. Are you using a food scale?
  • eldamiano
    eldamiano Posts: 2,667 Member
    Options
    " I've read this a common phenomena"

    Nope. It is a make-believe phenomenon. It means you are eating at a maintenance level when you think you should be losing weight....
  • toyrobot78
    toyrobot78 Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    A plateau is 8-10 weeks, you are but stalled. Are you using a food scale?

    Hi Liftng4Lis, I do have a food scale but don't use it religiously. For example when my other half is kind enough to cook a family meal for me to enjoy, I wouldn't expect her to measure every ingredient for me. Where I can I use it though. I'm sure that I'll be loosing out here and if it gets to the point where I'm desperate, I'll have to become much more picky. I've been loosing at a constant and comfortable pace so far though. If I don't see continued results within a reasonable time I know I can make changes here.