Thoughts on weight loss plateau for the petite lady!

I'm a small framed 4' 11" tall lady and over the last two years I've lost 20lbs, I'm currently 144lbs, which is still officially overweight for my height and BMI, and would like to get down to somewhere between 120-110lbs. But for the past three months I've just stalled. so after reading up I've tried changing my cardio routine, I'm currently burning about 1500 calories a week in different types of cardio and my calorie intake is always, a relatively clean , c1000 a day mark. I have found in the past that keeping my carbs under 30 and my calories around the 800 mark and keeping my exercise burn the same do get the scales moving, but its unsustainable and i always creep back up the to the 144 mark.

I'm getting disillusioned now, I've read a few articles that say its harder when your petite because you actually need less energy than non-petite people, so I'm just wondering if anyone else has any advice, I'm keeping an accurate diary, so I'm just wondering if my petiteness is actually working against me and if anyone has any ideas how to break out of this plateau and lose my last 20 or so pounds? Thanks guys :)
«1

Replies

  • tarap003
    tarap003 Posts: 16 Member
    Thanks for the reply, yes I do weigh all my food and for exercise I use a polar heart rate monitor, which has always served me well over the past two years, i've read the arguments for their accuracy, but i always found in the past that if its telling me i've burned 1500 cals, i should expect a pound or two weight loss that week in conjunction with my calorie deficit. but it's just stalled and left me a bit stumped.
  • IsaackGMOON
    IsaackGMOON Posts: 3,358 Member
    OP, open your diary so we can see your logging.
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,658 Member
    If you're stalled for three months, you're eating at maintenance.
  • tarap003
    tarap003 Posts: 16 Member
    Diary is open! You mean I should be eating at less than I am ...not sure that's do-able! :)
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,658 Member
    Then you'll need to exercise more. If you haven't lost weight in three months, you're not eating at a deficit.
  • tarap003
    tarap003 Posts: 16 Member
    Ok so all the calculators ive consulted say i need an intake of 1500-1800 a day and i've been aiming for the 1000 a day mark, so how much more of a deficit do you think is required to see some sort of result?
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,658 Member
    You're not eating 1000 a day or you'd be losing weight. You don't have any deficit, at all, or you'd be losing weight. That's what deficits do.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    tarap003 wrote: »
    Ok so all the calculators ive consulted say i need an intake of 1500-1800 a day and i've been aiming for the 1000 a day mark, so how much more of a deficit do you think is required to see some sort of result?

    The most common cause of a plateau, is inaccurate logging. How positive are you that you're logging accurately?
  • tarap003
    tarap003 Posts: 16 Member
    I'm absolutely positive that I'm logging accurately and meticulously, I went a bit obsessive about it a while back and even have two sets of kitchen scales to make sure. In the mornings I set out my eating plan for the day and stick to it, there hasn't been a case of me not logging anything i've eaten. That's why i'm confused, and i've had friends who have said to me its because i'm little in stature it's harder, just wondering if there's any truth in that?
  • Marilyn0924
    Marilyn0924 Posts: 797 Member
    Are you consuming liquids other than water? Adding condiments? Sugar/cream in tea/coffee? Salad dressings? Sauces? Or is is just water and everything bone dry? Many times it comes up that because they are such small amounts it couldn't matter, but it does.

    For the record, I'm not saying you aren't logging everything, but thought I'd put it out there as a possibility/oversight?
  • dhimaan
    dhimaan Posts: 774 Member
    tarap003 wrote: »
    I'm absolutely positive that I'm logging accurately and meticulously, I went a bit obsessive about it a while back and even have two sets of kitchen scales to make sure. In the mornings I set out my eating plan for the day and stick to it, there hasn't been a case of me not logging anything i've eaten. That's why i'm confused, and i've had friends who have said to me its because i'm little in stature it's harder, just wondering if there's any truth in that?

    It has nothing to do with your stature. The laws of thermodynamics do not differentiate between tall people, short people, fat people or skinny people. It is the universal law. You have to be in a deficit to lose weight. If you are not losing weight you are not in a deficit.

    That being said you can exercise more to increase your deficit however there still has to be a deficit with very tight logging.
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,658 Member
    tarap003 wrote: »
    I'm absolutely positive that I'm logging accurately and meticulously, I went a bit obsessive about it a while back and even have two sets of kitchen scales to make sure. In the mornings I set out my eating plan for the day and stick to it, there hasn't been a case of me not logging anything i've eaten. That's why i'm confused, and i've had friends who have said to me its because i'm little in stature it's harder, just wondering if there's any truth in that?
    If your logging is accurate, then your maintenance is 1000. That's the bottom line.

    It's harder in that you have a lower TDEE than larger people, but a 250 deficit will get you half a pound a week just like it would for me.

  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    tarap003 wrote: »
    I'm absolutely positive that I'm logging accurately and meticulously, I went a bit obsessive about it a while back and even have two sets of kitchen scales to make sure. In the mornings I set out my eating plan for the day and stick to it, there hasn't been a case of me not logging anything i've eaten. That's why i'm confused, and i've had friends who have said to me its because i'm little in stature it's harder, just wondering if there's any truth in that?
    If your logging is accurate, then your maintenance is 1000. That's the bottom line.

    It's harder in that you have a lower TDEE than larger people, but a 250 deficit will get you half a pound a week just like it would for me.

    Yes, I have to agree.
  • dhimaan
    dhimaan Posts: 774 Member
    tarap003 wrote: »

    Yes it maybe more difficult because your TDEE is lower but you still need a deficit.

  • tarap003
    tarap003 Posts: 16 Member
    Yes I hear what you're saying guys, but looking at my diary i'm sometimes hitting 600, 700 or 800 calories a day intake, so assuming it would be wrong to try to and survive on less than this, is my only option to exercise until i reach 0 net calories a day?
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,658 Member
    edited September 2015
    Not 0 net calories. A net deficit of some kind.

    Also, 600-800 a day on a consistent basis would be a very bad idea indeed.
  • tarap003
    tarap003 Posts: 16 Member
    Wouldn't a net calorie with an "-" before it mean i'm running on empty?
  • Coley88
    Coley88 Posts: 114 Member
    Are you really and truly weighing absolutely everything you eat? Taking a peek at your dairy, you have a lot of foods that are always entered with the same weight. I mean, it's possibly that you are. I know with most of my snacks I pre portion baggies of them that are all the same weight. Most foods though usually fluctuate in weight.