Those now with at maintenance, have you beaten your set point.
Options
Replies
-
I do believe at least somewhat in the set point theory. After all, homeostasis is a thing. So summarily dismissing set point theory isn't logical to me. And I've certainly had long periods of time in my life where it was quite easy or quite challenging to maintain a certain weight.
I guess I've had two success stories.
When I was 25 I lost 64 pounds and successfully kept it off for years and years. Fast forward to when I was around 50. I'd been through two pregnancies and was mostly through menopause when I found my weight creeping up no matter what I did. I couldn't figure it out. No matter how little I ate and how much I exercised the number on the scale kept slowly increasing. Eventually I was diagnosed with hypothyroidism, started medication and the weight started coming off. It wasn't effortless but neither was it overwhelmingly difficult. I lost about 24 pounds and have kept it off for over a year now.
Assuming set point is a thing I do believe it can be changed by slow weight loss, getting at least some regular exercise and by maintaining the lower weight long enough to give the body time to recognize a new normal. Of course I don't mean that eventually you'll be able to eat as much as your overweight self did and maintain a lower weight, but that the lower weight will become reasonably easy to maintain.
so how do you know what your setpoint is? and how does your story confirm setpoint?
and what if you want to gain weight not lose....2 -
I have lost it and kept it off, from a starting bmi of 36.4 been right at bmi 24 or slighty under for about 5-6 years.
The reason I'm back here is because I need to get closer to 20 for sports.
So yes, it's possible. I did it.
0 -
-
The set point issue is due to habits. Yeah, I'm naturally going to keep gaining weight if I don't keep myself on track all the time - that's just how it works.7
-
I don't believe in set points. I lost 50lbs and now weigh less than what I did in my 20s (I'm in my late 30s and have also had 3 kids). I've been successfully maintaining my loss and a bmi of around 21, for almost 4 years now.2
-
There are no set points. I think most people are just looking for an excuse to fail / or justify why they failed. I maintain my weight because I chose to do this as a lifestyle change, not a quick-fix diet solution.5
-
My goal weight is more of a range, 124-130. I have been maintaining this since September with the help of MFP. thats it.3
-
My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.5
-
TimothyFish wrote: »My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.
if this is the case my set point is continually changing as I will if I am not careful eat and gain consistently and possibly not stop...4 -
TimothyFish wrote: »My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.
if this is the case my set point is continually changing as I will if I am not careful eat and gain consistently and possibly not stop...
Exactly. It's not a set point that makes someone weigh a certain amount, it's their eating habits. One can't expect to maintain a lower weight unless they eat the calories to match their TDEE. The problem is that for people who treat weight loss as being all about a number on the scale, they go back to making unwise food choices the minute they hit their goal weight thinking that they won't gain but they do. Then they'll buy into excuse theories like set point and assume they just can't stay a certain weight. Then you'll have people who say "Well her set point must be lower than mine because we're the same height and eat the same but she's SO skinny!" These people fail to take TDEE into account.5 -
TimothyFish wrote: »My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.
if this is the case my set point is continually changing as I will if I am not careful eat and gain consistently and possibly not stop...
If you haven't reached the point at which you stop gaining weight without being careful of what you eat then you haven't reached your "set point." There is a limit to how inactive a person will be (they won't stay in bed all day), so their calorie burn will never drop below some number. There is also a limit to how much food they will eat. This is partly because we don't like the discomfort of stuffing ourselves. As a person gains weight, their calorie burn increases. When their calorie burn equals their average intake, their weight will stay constant.0 -
Having been a yo-yo dieter for most of my adult life I fell for the "set point" theory in the 80's (at least I think that was the decade it became popular). It was a good excuse to not try anymore. Now, I realize you reach "maintenance" and eat so many calories to maintain a specific weight. If you don't like that weight, eat less and lose some more. I can't believe I wasted so many years without an understanding of this basic concept.5
-
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.
if this is the case my set point is continually changing as I will if I am not careful eat and gain consistently and possibly not stop...
If you haven't reached the point at which you stop gaining weight without being careful of what you eat then you haven't reached your "set point." There is a limit to how inactive a person will be (they won't stay in bed all day), so their calorie burn will never drop below some number. There is also a limit to how much food they will eat. This is partly because we don't like the discomfort of stuffing ourselves. As a person gains weight, their calorie burn increases. When their calorie burn equals their average intake, their weight will stay constant.
so not true...people do it all the time...eat to discomfort...I've done it frequently when I was heavier...that's how I got even bigger...and I watch family do it frequently as well ...those who are obese and those who aren't.
People have literally eaten themselves to death...have you not watched my 600lb life...there is no such thing as set point...4 -
I've more or less maintained going on four years. I don't believe in "set points"...I believe our "set points" are a derivative of our behavior. People regain their weight in large part because they return to "normal" and fail to establish a new normal.
My old normal...I was very sedentary...my diet wasn't the worst, but it most certainly wasn't the best and I just heaped food on my plate, snacked regularly, drank 3-5 sodas per day, spent my evenings drinking beer and smoking cigarettes on my patio, etc....
My new normal...I eat very healthfully with a diet consisting largely of whole foods...I for the most part prepare my meals at home...I brown bag my breakfast, lunch, and snacks most days...dining out is an occasional activity...I watch maybe 3-4 hours of television per week...I do some form of exercise daily...I monitor my weight regularly and make adjustments as necessary...I don't mindlessly eat...I don't stress eat, etc...8 -
TimothyFish wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »My view of "set point" is that it is what you will weigh if you just follow your normal habits and eat whatever you want. At some point, the availability of food combined with our activity level will reach a state of equilibrium. If a person changes their habits so that they are more active and they reduce the availability of food calories, that state of equilibrium will be a lower weight. If they are inactive and choose foods that are easy to prepare and high in calories, the state of equilibrium will be a higher weight.
if this is the case my set point is continually changing as I will if I am not careful eat and gain consistently and possibly not stop...
If you haven't reached the point at which you stop gaining weight without being careful of what you eat then you haven't reached your "set point." There is a limit to how inactive a person will be (they won't stay in bed all day), so their calorie burn will never drop below some number. There is also a limit to how much food they will eat. This is partly because we don't like the discomfort of stuffing ourselves. As a person gains weight, their calorie burn increases. When their calorie burn equals their average intake, their weight will stay constant.
So my weight set-point is somewhere around 400#? I can be lazier than a dead sloth and pack food in like it's my job.6 -
Set point is a lie people tell themselves to justify obesity. I used to tell myself I was just made to be big. I was lying to protect my fat. Pretty common coping mechanism I think.6
-
Part of the problem is the mindset of being on a diet vs. changing your way of eating permanently. If you think that all you have to do is diet for a few weeks or months to lose weight and then you can go back to your normal eating and activity levels, you will regain the weight back to where you were or beyond.
I have maintained a healthy weight for several years by making exercise a daily part of my life and limiting the extra treats that I enjoy but don't need on a daily basis. The times I've gained back some weight were always when travelling, when I exercised less and ate a lot more, justifying it by saying, "It's vacation." In each case, as soon as I got home and went back to my normal life, the weight came off again, because the active lifestyle with a controlled WOE works for me.1 -
I don't believe in set point either but feel there is a point where a person may feel like they have to work extremely hard to eat few enough calories to lose more weight. For instance, I can stay at 130 pounds relatively easy at a NEAT of 1,500. To get and stay below that feels like torture and requires a level of work and consistency that I haven't yet been able to accomplish. I wish I could blame a set point.2
-
There is no such thing as a set-point. As mentioned above, there are lots of maintenance success stories in the Success Stories forum on MFP.1
-
Thank you for all you brilliant and well thought out comments.
I actually eat healthy stuff, porridge, lean proteins, granary bread, seeded bread... I just eat too much. When I lose weight I regain again by overstuffing on what others may call healthy foods. It's not because I deprive myself either, I have small amounts of chocolate desserts etc. My problem is I just overeat and feel miserable when moderating.
I generally struggle with not comfort eating and portion sizes. Sometimes I get home from work and want to stuff my self silly, and that can be with cheese salad, seeded bread or even weetabix!! So I don't thinks it's the content o my diet, rather quantities.
I do notice if I cut down on kcal to say 1500 by the. End of the few weeks I suddenly can't get food off my mind, nothing seems to satiate my food desire that's where I wonder if I have a set point as I gain that little bit of weight and then the massive binge urge stops.
However, I am aware I comfort eat, and maybe like another poster stated if I let myself eat what I want to, I would be permanently eating!1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 394 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 939 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions