What's the flaw in this regimen? [long plateau]
Replies
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
Can you explain what your concept of "reverse dieting" is? Eating more to lose weight?I'm not saying reverse dieting is the only way. But it is helpful for some people who have been restrictive dieting for too long.
And your observation of restrictive dieting does not apply to the OP. She's clearly been eating at maintenance levels for 6-7 months now.
Her maintenance level is too low. She can up the maintenance level by maintaining, recomp, and upping calories gradually for lasting results. Then when she cuts calories she won't be so low and can comfortably lose again. Or not. It is just a different method. There are plenty of other ones. I'm not saying my success is the only one! But it is good to look at all of the possibilities.
Recomping is a very long process. You are making a couple of assumptions here. The first one is that you're going to put on a significant amount of muscle during recomp. The second is that this amount of muscle is going to be of a great enough amount to generate enough metabolic activity to give you significantly more calories to eat. The third is that she will have patience enough to do this after stalling for 6 to 7 months.
I disagree with all of your assumptions. I don't think I've ever seen anyone get super jacked during recomp and muscle is really not all that metabolically active.
You are misinterpreting0 -
I'm not talking about jacked up-- more about preserving muscle loss0
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
Can you explain what your concept of "reverse dieting" is? Eating more to lose weight?I'm not saying reverse dieting is the only way. But it is helpful for some people who have been restrictive dieting for too long.
And your observation of restrictive dieting does not apply to the OP. She's clearly been eating at maintenance levels for 6-7 months now.
Her maintenance level is too low. She can up the maintenance level by maintaining, recomp, and upping calories gradually for lasting results. Then when she cuts calories she won't be so low and can comfortably lose again. Or not. It is just a different method. There are plenty of other ones. I'm not saying my success is the only one! But it is good to look at all of the possibilities.
Recomping is a very long process. You are making a couple of assumptions here. The first one is that you're going to put on a significant amount of muscle during recomp. The second is that this amount of muscle is going to be of a great enough amount to generate enough metabolic activity to give you significantly more calories to eat. The third is that she will have patience enough to do this after stalling for 6 to 7 months.
I disagree with all of your assumptions. I don't think I've ever seen anyone get super jacked during recomp and muscle is really not all that metabolically active.
You are misinterpreting
How so?0 -
I'm not sure I saw how the OP is measuring calorie burns...did I miss that? (It's entirely possible that I did).
I think it's most likely that you're over-estimating your calorie burn from exercise, accidentally eating back too many calories and erasing your deficit, but it's hard to tell without an open diary. Since you're already light and admittedly sedentary, you don't have a ton of wiggle room in your deficit to begin with anyway (it sucks being a short girl! I'm in the same boat, and it's not fun). That said, a diet break would probably not be a bad idea at this point, if only to give you a mental break from the grind, since it sounds like you've been at this awhile.
Personally, here's what I would think about doing:
1. Take a couple of weeks and eat at your theoretical maintenance. Don't worry if you see a small jump on the scale; it's going to be mostly water weight.
2. Re-calculate your TDEE and take your deficit from there. I wouldn't eat-back my exercise calories, but if you go by the TDEE method, it should give you a slightly larger base number than MFP.
3. Work on increasing your NEAT by doing things like slowly upping your step count.2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I'm going to disagree with the advice you've been given here. If you've been stuck at your weight, you've been eating at maintenance.
I think the niggle with you is your calculation of net calories.
Calculating calorie burns, especially for lifting, is really a tough thing to estimate.
While I wouldn't recommend necessarily dropping your calories for calculation purposes, I'd recommend dropping your intake slightly, especially since you're not getting much cardio (which tends to give you more calories to eat back). Drop your intake just 100 calories a day and see if that gets you moving again.
Sorry, but OP honestly should not be at maintenance at 1200 calories and is probably miserable. People told me what you are saying, and I even tried dropping down to 1100 calories (before MFP) but it was too low to be happy on. Now I am very happy and upped my calorie maintenance level close to 1800-2000. I can eat normally again! Recomp and reverse dieting works for me.
She's not "eating" 1200, she's"netting" 1200.2 -
I'm not talking about jacked up-- more about preserving muscle loss
Preserving muscle loss is not recomp. Recomp is building new muscle through progressive overload resistance training while eating at maintenance.
In order to have any kind of raise in BMR like you've been talking about, someone would have to build a tremendous amount of muscle tissue. The best way to build significant muscle tissue is through bulk and cut cycles since a caloric surplus is generally needed (along with a good lifting program) to build significant muscle.
None of this applies to the OP.2 -
I'm not sure I saw how the OP is measuring calorie burns...did I miss that? (It's entirely possible that I did).
I think it's most likely that you're over-estimating your calorie burn from exercise, accidentally eating back too many calories and erasing your deficit, but it's hard to tell without an open diary. Since you're already light and admittedly sedentary, you don't have a ton of wiggle room in your deficit to begin with anyway (it sucks being a short girl! I'm in the same boat, and it's not fun). That said, a diet break would probably not be a bad idea at this point, if only to give you a mental break from the grind, since it sounds like you've been at this awhile.
Personally, here's what I would think about doing:
1. Take a couple of weeks and eat at your theoretical maintenance. Don't worry if you see a small jump on the scale; it's going to be mostly water weight.
2. Re-calculate your TDEE and take your deficit from there. I wouldn't eat-back my exercise calories, but if you go by the TDEE method, it should give you a slightly larger base number than MFP.
3. Work on increasing your NEAT by doing things like slowly upping your step count.
+1.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I'm not talking about jacked up-- more about preserving muscle loss
Preserving muscle loss is not recomp. Recomp is building new muscle through progressive overload resistance training while eating at maintenance.
In order to have any kind of raise in BMR like you've been talking about, someone would have to build a tremendous amount of muscle tissue. The best way to build significant muscle tissue is through bulk and cut cycles since a caloric surplus is generally needed (along with a good lifting program) to build significant muscle.
None of this applies to the OP.
Three types of people who should recomp:
http://romanfitnesssystems.com/articles/body-recomp/0 -
I'm not sure I saw how the OP is measuring calorie burns...did I miss that? (It's entirely possible that I did).
I think it's most likely that you're over-estimating your calorie burn from exercise, accidentally eating back too many calories and erasing your deficit, but it's hard to tell without an open diary. Since you're already light and admittedly sedentary, you don't have a ton of wiggle room in your deficit to begin with anyway (it sucks being a short girl! I'm in the same boat, and it's not fun). That said, a diet break would probably not be a bad idea at this point, if only to give you a mental break from the grind, since it sounds like you've been at this awhile.
Personally, here's what I would think about doing:
1. Take a couple of weeks and eat at your theoretical maintenance. Don't worry if you see a small jump on the scale; it's going to be mostly water weight.
2. Re-calculate your TDEE and take your deficit from there. I wouldn't eat-back my exercise calories, but if you go by the TDEE method, it should give you a slightly larger base number than MFP.
3. Work on increasing your NEAT by doing things like slowly upping your step count.
@43501 what percentage of your exercise calories are you eating back? Try halving that for a while.
@WinoGelato I think you are also 5'3", yes? I know you eat more than the OP and lose. What do you do with your exercise calories?0 -
Not WinoGelato, but I'm the same height as OP, am a slave to the desk like OP, and been that weight a couple of times - the 1st time I lost weight to 117lbs (no exercise), and then a couple more times during bulk/cut cycles. My lowest weight has been 115lbs, and that was after lifting.
The first time I lost, I had no trouble getting to 117lbs and never dropped below 1300cals net (remember, I wasn't exercising). By the end, it was taking a month to lose a pound, but it still came off like clockwork.
The other times I lost, I was doing All Pro's free weight workouts, either the beginner or one of the intermediate ones. If you look at the strength standards for women, my lifts were at the high end of beginner/low end of intermediate weights. I also was running. The last time, I was doing 1/2 marathon training. I would net 1400 cals. I added 100 cals for each weight training session, and (0.63 * weight in lbs * miles) cals for each run. Again, weight came off like clockwork - a little over 1 lb per month.
One thing that makes me wonder - if OP has been doing Starting Strength for 6-7 months and is still using machines because she's not strong enough to use free weights, that's odd. Even starting with 2.5lb dumbbells, she should have progressed to lifting 45lbs by now. At least on one lift. Is the weight lifting newer than what I read into your post, OP?
0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I'm not talking about jacked up-- more about preserving muscle loss
Preserving muscle loss is not recomp. Recomp is building new muscle through progressive overload resistance training while eating at maintenance.
In order to have any kind of raise in BMR like you've been talking about, someone would have to build a tremendous amount of muscle tissue. The best way to build significant muscle tissue is through bulk and cut cycles since a caloric surplus is generally needed (along with a good lifting program) to build significant muscle.
None of this applies to the OP.
Three types of people who should recomp:
http://romanfitnesssystems.com/articles/body-recomp/
Nothing in that article backs up what you've been saying, nor does it help the OP. What kind of point are you trying to make?
The article simply explains the recomp process. The OP has said that she'd like to weigh less. Recomp isn't going to help her.1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »I'm not sure I saw how the OP is measuring calorie burns...did I miss that? (It's entirely possible that I did).
I think it's most likely that you're over-estimating your calorie burn from exercise, accidentally eating back too many calories and erasing your deficit, but it's hard to tell without an open diary. Since you're already light and admittedly sedentary, you don't have a ton of wiggle room in your deficit to begin with anyway (it sucks being a short girl! I'm in the same boat, and it's not fun). That said, a diet break would probably not be a bad idea at this point, if only to give you a mental break from the grind, since it sounds like you've been at this awhile.
Personally, here's what I would think about doing:
1. Take a couple of weeks and eat at your theoretical maintenance. Don't worry if you see a small jump on the scale; it's going to be mostly water weight.
2. Re-calculate your TDEE and take your deficit from there. I wouldn't eat-back my exercise calories, but if you go by the TDEE method, it should give you a slightly larger base number than MFP.
3. Work on increasing your NEAT by doing things like slowly upping your step count.
@43501 what percentage of your exercise calories are you eating back? Try halving that for a while.
@WinoGelato I think you are also 5'3", yes? I know you eat more than the OP and lose. What do you do with your exercise calories?
I'm not @WinoGelato, but I know her and I know she's very active and gets a lot of steps in. That's a striking difference between her and the OP. I also know that she's in maintenance and eats back what her Fitbit gives her.
For us short people, upping step counts can make a big difference to our caloric intakes.1 -
JustMissTracy wrote: »I'm only 5'2, 47 years old....I am still losing eating anywhere from 1500-1900 calories a day (working out at least 5 days a week, and getting lots of movement on rest days). Have lost 80 lbs this way...I was inactive when I started here too, but getting a Fitbit helped me to realize exactly HOW terribly inactive I was, and I've managed to increase my activity level from Sedentary to Lightly Active since Christmas. You can too.
This is basically me. I'm 5'2 and almost 42. When I started on MFP 3 years ago I was mostly sedentary, I have an office job, and went for a walk maybe a couple times a week, other than that my only activity was chasing around after my kids. As I started to lose, and started to see how increased activity level was beneficial on so many levels (improved mood, more calories to eat, more energy for other activities) I started trying to increase it more and more. When I first got my FitBit in Aug 2013 I was averaging 8-9K steps/day. Now I average 15K steps/day, and my TDEE according to my FitBit is ~2100. I lost most of my weight eating b/w 1500-1900 calories as well and am now maintaining my weight in a range of 118-122.
I eat back all of those exercise calories from the FitBit. The activity level matters so much more than height, in my opinion...
OP, sorry if I missed this, I got beetlejuiced in here by @kshama2001 and @GottaBurnEmAll
and have read through the OP and comments, but are you weighing your food with a food scale? I just have a hard time with the fact that you have been netting that low and not losing for a prolonged period of time, if logging accurately. 0 -
She's eating 1300-1400. I'm advising her to eat 1200-1300.
That's correct and that just made me think of something.
Should I maybe just stop accounting for exercise losses and eat to a hard-defined, non-net calorie limit for a while and see how that works? That sounds like what you're suggesting.
When you get close to your ideal weight it just becomes harder and harder to keep losing. Even if you're not factoring weight training in to your exercise cals, any over-estimate that worked out for you when you had more to lose is going to start becoming a factor if you're eating all your exercise calories back. I wouldn't necessarily ignore them all but maybe drop your intake as advised and then eat back half of them.0 -
What stuck out to me is that you are using machines for your workout because you are just not that strong. A woman with more muscle will burn more calories when working out. I'd check your intake of calories then start a true strength training program to build muscle/strength with free weights. Can't wait to hear what worked for you!0
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
She's not metabolically adapted. She's eating at maintenance.
So you're advocating that a 5ft 3" individual should be netting below 1000 Cal a day to demonstrate commitment and see things through? Because she is currently doing what? Not demonstrating courage and commitment by trying to fix her metabolically adapted body?GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »My advice to you is to take a diet break, and then reassess your goals. Do you want to weigh less and be really lean? If the answer is yes, the break might give you the push you need to come back with enough commitment to see through sticking to a slightly lower intake. If not, you can always come back from the break and do recomp and stay your current weight.
@GottaBurnEmAll
She is eating at maintenance BECAUSE she is metabolically adapted.
I draw your attention to equation 7 and to references 2, 3 which you seem unwilling to countenance:
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/at-niddk/labs-branches/LBM/integrative-physiology-section/research-behind-body-weight-planner/Documents/Hall_Lancet_Web_Appendix.pdf
Less math oriented discussion (with more references of this non existent phenomenon at the bottom): http://dynamicduotraining.com/4-harsh-realities-weight-loss-potential-solutions/
@EvgeniZyntx also includes a lot of references to this non existent issue in this thread: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/EvgeniZyntx/view/not-starving-but-metabolic-adaptation-and-weight-loss-567546
To get you started on the second fallacy you champion, i.e. that muscle cannot be built unless at a surplus, you can read Eric Helms and Lawrence Judd's article: http://muscleandstrengthpyramids.com/calorie-deficit-gain-weight/
Or you can just take a moment to consider that if maintenance has become net 1000 Cal... the solution is not a further reduction in calories.5
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 422 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