Metabolic Suppression, Global Warming, and Sasquatch,.....Which one is real?
Replies
-
sidcorsini wrote: »It is claimed that neuroscience creates a 'set-pointe' in our brain that locks in a weight our body fights to retain. Can a force of will overcome this potential incarceration, or should we just go looking for Bigfoot?
Habits are neurological. What else would they be?
We slip into a mode of living, it's easier to continue than change - our behavior just keeps driving along the ruts in the same ol' road. To change, we have to apply some some mental energy.
It's neurology, in easier words.
Yes: Force of will can change it.
Looking for bigfoot would likely burn a few helpful calories, 'cos hiking. Lots of hiking.10 -
@AnvilHead I read that article you posted a few posts up. It was a fascinating read. I feel likr a lot of people especially those who think they are "stuck" at set point should read it.. both parts though.
@bpetrosky so sasquatch smells like eggs? I always thought that was the ever elusive barking spider...
2 -
Crafty_camper123 wrote: »@nettiklive I think you explained the set point theory pretty well here. The only thing I'm not sure about is the fat cells. I have heard that fat cells will reduce if they are empty for long enough... This is how someone can lose weight, and how their body achieves a new state of homeostasis. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but this part does make sense to me. Wouldn't this be how one's hunger hormones would adjust after weight loss? After so many months, the person is used to their new calorie intake, the body absorbs those old fat cells, and the hunger hormones act accordingly. Then, they could theoretically eat and have activities at their new lifestyle without tracking and maintain whatever weight they ended up at. They have created a new set point for their body. Still though, whether or not our emptied fat cells are angrily demanding we feed them, or if it's just all a mental game, set point can be overridden. If it couldn't no one could maintain their new weight long term.
https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/are-fat-cells-forever/
https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20080505/fat-cells-slim-up-but-dont-ship-out10 -
nettiklive wrote: »WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
But if "set point" is a thing, why didn't your body fight against gaining that weight? Why would it only fight someone trying to lose weight?
I have mentioned a number of times on this thread that I personally had the experience of maintaining the same weight for over ten years with no tracking and plenty of times where I must have been going over tdee, but I wasn't doing it extremely or consistently so it simply wasn't affecting my weight. I'm a mere 5-6 lbs more (gained during pregnancy) yet I haven't been able to lose them for two years in spite of tracking and eating less than I did then. If I haven't gotten pregnant, I would have most likely still been maintaining the same weight as before. Likewise I know a number of people who are thin and remain that way in spite of never tracking, not exercising, and eating whatever they want in whatever amounts they want and never gaining. So the body does fight against gaining as well. We're just evolutionary more predisposed towards preserving energy rather than spending. People who do gain large amounts of weight with no medical issues are generally those who overeat in large amounts, ignoring natural hunger and satiety signals; if you watch shows like 600 Lb life, most of them have severe emotional issues they self-medicate with food. If you give the body a consistent large surplus or large deficit, weight will of course move. Yet for the majority of people, it stays stable for years without tracking at all, which says something for the body wanting to maintain a weight (notice I said 'a weight' - not any specific weight, but the given weight the body is at right now). And for those who have lost a large amount of weight, there are mechanisms such as increased hunger and decreased metabolic rate which work to try and regain, as they've said about Biggest Loser participants. I've also heard the theory mentioned above that fat cells can be formed but can't be removed, only shrunk, and fat cells produce hormones such as leptin that influence hunger.
Most obese people didn't get there by eating 100-200 calories a day over maintenance. Nor are you likely to lose weight on that much of a deficit (measurement issues aside, let's assume we can measure perfectly). The body makes subtle adjustments to make up for the minor fluctuations in intake that pretty much all of us have daily.
https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/set-points-settling-points-and-bodyweight-regulation-part-1.html/
Read both part 1 and part 2 before you start screaming "See????? I was right!!!!!"
I don't see how that negates anything I was saying, and part 2 does not contradict part 1.
OF COURSE, behavior plays the main role in weight change or maintenance. However, that doesn't negate the fact that there ARE biological mechanisms designed to try and maintain weight - and Lyle states so himself several times, and does not refute that point. Unlike mice, we can override these mechanisms, we have the rational brain to think, 'hey I may be extra hungry after losing all that weight and want to eat everything in sight, but I won't".
But all I was trying to say, and this article backs me up, is that those mechanisms do exist. I am tired of reading over and over on here posters claiming that "the BODY does not 'want' to do anything, it's all YOU and your habits". No, the body DOES have evolutionary adaptations to weight change, loss in particular. Which of course does not mean one can't overcome them to lose or gain weight.
I would compare it to body temperature. Our body strives to keep it normal, though some people run naturally a bit 'colder', like myself, and some hotter. If exposed to a cold environment, it will make us shiver and eventually limit movement to try and generate/ conserve heat much as possible. If exposed to heat, we will sweat to try and cool off. We have no control over these things, they just happen (and again, some people will sweat/shiver more than others and cool down or warm up more effectively). However, obviously if you continue to sit out lightly dressed in extremely cold temperatures, shivering won't help - you'll eventually freeze to death, or get heatstroke in heat. Because the body's defenses can only do so much. Sure, your habits and lifestyle dictate whether you're exposed to extreme temperatures. That's under your control. But your physiological response to them isn't. Two different things that are not mutually exclusive.14 -
The fact that people aren't tracking does not mean that they aren't eating the right amount of calories. They eat 200 cals over one day, they eat 200 cals under the next day and over time they are generally matching their calorie needs. You keep making the assumption that if people aren't trying to gain or lose weight, they are eating the wrong amount of calories and therefore their bodies must be adjusting to maintain their current weight. I don't understand why you assume this. I would be far more likely to assume these people simply have accurate hunger cues and lifestyles that keep them from mindlessly snacking.
The reason I assume that is because I've read here over and over again how, unless you're not just tracking but weighing every single crumb you eat on a food scale, you "have no idea how much you're eating" and are likely grossly underestimating intake which is making you gain. Even for people who are measuring and tracking to create significant deficit (which, even if the figures are slightly off due to measurement error, is usually still less than how much they were eating before, so technically they should still be losing. People who are starting to try and lose weight don't typically just keep eating the same amounts of food and expect to start losing). Yet people who don't even think about calories or their tdee or anything close are just magically maintaining for years, creating the perfect balance of calories? I mean it's possible, but it's just sooo hard to wrap my brain around!3 -
nettiklive wrote: »
The fact that people aren't tracking does not mean that they aren't eating the right amount of calories. They eat 200 cals over one day, they eat 200 cals under the next day and over time they are generally matching their calorie needs. You keep making the assumption that if people aren't trying to gain or lose weight, they are eating the wrong amount of calories and therefore their bodies must be adjusting to maintain their current weight. I don't understand why you assume this. I would be far more likely to assume these people simply have accurate hunger cues and lifestyles that keep them from mindlessly snacking.
The reason I assume that is because I've read here over and over again how, unless you're not just tracking but weighing every single crumb you eat on a food scale, you "have no idea how much you're eating" and are likely grossly underestimating intake which is making you gain. Even for people who are measuring and tracking to create significant deficit (which, even if the figures are slightly off due to measurement error, is usually still less than how much they were eating before, so technically they should still be losing. People who are starting to try and lose weight don't typically just keep eating the same amounts of food and expect to start losing). Yet people who don't even think about calories or their tdee or anything close are just magically maintaining for years, creating the perfect balance of calories? I mean it's possible, but it's just sooo hard to wrap my brain around!
You're missing context. Yes, when someone says they are eating in a deficit and aren't losing weight, we tell them if they aren't using a food scale they are probably eating more than they think. It doesn't mean everyone in the world who doesn't use a food scale is eating the wrong amount. We just know this individual is eating the wrong amount, because they aren't losing.
Humans have been reading their hunger signals for thousands of years. It's when yummy food becomes abundant and cheap that we even have the opportunity to eat when we don't need to, and for some people they stop being able to tell what a normal amount of food is because of that (among other things). So without logging and the scale, they're not good at determining what a portion looks like. There are lots of veteran posters who are eating at maintenance without using a food scale, or even logging. They relearned the stuff many do without thinking about it - listen to hunger signals, visually monitor body weight, knowing what a reasonable amount of food is.18 -
WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
But if "set point" is a thing, why didn't your body fight against gaining that weight? Why would it only fight someone trying to lose weight?
I figured it was because meds like those change your set point. Simple as that.15 -
nettiklive wrote: »nettiklive wrote: »WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
But if "set point" is a thing, why didn't your body fight against gaining that weight? Why would it only fight someone trying to lose weight?
I have mentioned a number of times on this thread that I personally had the experience of maintaining the same weight for over ten years with no tracking and plenty of times where I must have been going over tdee, but I wasn't doing it extremely or consistently so it simply wasn't affecting my weight. I'm a mere 5-6 lbs more (gained during pregnancy) yet I haven't been able to lose them for two years in spite of tracking and eating less than I did then. If I haven't gotten pregnant, I would have most likely still been maintaining the same weight as before. Likewise I know a number of people who are thin and remain that way in spite of never tracking, not exercising, and eating whatever they want in whatever amounts they want and never gaining. So the body does fight against gaining as well. We're just evolutionary more predisposed towards preserving energy rather than spending. People who do gain large amounts of weight with no medical issues are generally those who overeat in large amounts, ignoring natural hunger and satiety signals; if you watch shows like 600 Lb life, most of them have severe emotional issues they self-medicate with food. If you give the body a consistent large surplus or large deficit, weight will of course move. Yet for the majority of people, it stays stable for years without tracking at all, which says something for the body wanting to maintain a weight (notice I said 'a weight' - not any specific weight, but the given weight the body is at right now). And for those who have lost a large amount of weight, there are mechanisms such as increased hunger and decreased metabolic rate which work to try and regain, as they've said about Biggest Loser participants. I've also heard the theory mentioned above that fat cells can be formed but can't be removed, only shrunk, and fat cells produce hormones such as leptin that influence hunger.
Most obese people didn't get there by eating 100-200 calories a day over maintenance. Nor are you likely to lose weight on that much of a deficit (measurement issues aside, let's assume we can measure perfectly). The body makes subtle adjustments to make up for the minor fluctuations in intake that pretty much all of us have daily.
https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/set-points-settling-points-and-bodyweight-regulation-part-1.html/
Read both part 1 and part 2 before you start screaming "See????? I was right!!!!!"
I don't see how that negates anything I was saying, and part 2 does not contradict part 1.
OF COURSE, behavior plays the main role in weight change or maintenance. However, that doesn't negate the fact that there ARE biological mechanisms designed to try and maintain weight - and Lyle states so himself several times, and does not refute that point. Unlike mice, we can override these mechanisms, we have the rational brain to think, 'hey I may be extra hungry after losing all that weight and want to eat everything in sight, but I won't".
But all I was trying to say, and this article backs me up, is that those mechanisms do exist. I am tired of reading over and over on here posters claiming that "the BODY does not 'want' to do anything, it's all YOU and your habits". No, the body DOES have evolutionary adaptations to weight change, loss in particular. Which of course does not mean one can't overcome them to lose or gain weight.
I would compare it to body temperature. Our body strives to keep it normal, though some people run naturally a bit 'colder', like myself, and some hotter. If exposed to a cold environment, it will make us shiver and eventually limit movement to try and generate/ conserve heat much as possible. If exposed to heat, we will sweat to try and cool off. We have no control over these things, they just happen (and again, some people will sweat/shiver more than others and cool down or warm up more effectively). However, obviously if you continue to sit out lightly dressed in extremely cold temperatures, shivering won't help - you'll eventually freeze to death, or get heatstroke in heat. Because the body's defenses can only do so much. Sure, your habits and lifestyle dictate whether you're exposed to extreme temperatures. That's under your control. But your physiological response to them isn't. Two different things that are not mutually exclusive.
FWIW, I agree with all of this. The problem I run into is that people take the idea of those biological mechanisms you mentioned and use them as an excuse to why they can't lose weight. "Oh, I guess my body just wants to weight 9 thousand pounds. I guess there's nothing else for me to do but to have more chips ahoys." No. Just no.
I will also add that while those mechanisms exist, they are pretty weak in comparison to our habits, decision making, etc. It is exceptionally easy to counter balance them such that we can gain or lose weight despite what the body "wants to do."
Additionally, I DON'T believe that the body works to be a specific weight. I think it works to to maintain a healthy body composition.
3 -
nettiklive wrote: »nettiklive wrote: »WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
But if "set point" is a thing, why didn't your body fight against gaining that weight? Why would it only fight someone trying to lose weight?
I have mentioned a number of times on this thread that I personally had the experience of maintaining the same weight for over ten years with no tracking and plenty of times where I must have been going over tdee, but I wasn't doing it extremely or consistently so it simply wasn't affecting my weight. I'm a mere 5-6 lbs more (gained during pregnancy) yet I haven't been able to lose them for two years in spite of tracking and eating less than I did then. If I haven't gotten pregnant, I would have most likely still been maintaining the same weight as before. Likewise I know a number of people who are thin and remain that way in spite of never tracking, not exercising, and eating whatever they want in whatever amounts they want and never gaining. So the body does fight against gaining as well. We're just evolutionary more predisposed towards preserving energy rather than spending. People who do gain large amounts of weight with no medical issues are generally those who overeat in large amounts, ignoring natural hunger and satiety signals; if you watch shows like 600 Lb life, most of them have severe emotional issues they self-medicate with food. If you give the body a consistent large surplus or large deficit, weight will of course move. Yet for the majority of people, it stays stable for years without tracking at all, which says something for the body wanting to maintain a weight (notice I said 'a weight' - not any specific weight, but the given weight the body is at right now). And for those who have lost a large amount of weight, there are mechanisms such as increased hunger and decreased metabolic rate which work to try and regain, as they've said about Biggest Loser participants. I've also heard the theory mentioned above that fat cells can be formed but can't be removed, only shrunk, and fat cells produce hormones such as leptin that influence hunger.
Most obese people didn't get there by eating 100-200 calories a day over maintenance. Nor are you likely to lose weight on that much of a deficit (measurement issues aside, let's assume we can measure perfectly). The body makes subtle adjustments to make up for the minor fluctuations in intake that pretty much all of us have daily.
https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/set-points-settling-points-and-bodyweight-regulation-part-1.html/
Read both part 1 and part 2 before you start screaming "See????? I was right!!!!!"
I don't see how that negates anything I was saying, and part 2 does not contradict part 1.
OF COURSE, behavior plays the main role in weight change or maintenance. However, that doesn't negate the fact that there ARE biological mechanisms designed to try and maintain weight - and Lyle states so himself several times, and does not refute that point. Unlike mice, we can override these mechanisms, we have the rational brain to think, 'hey I may be extra hungry after losing all that weight and want to eat everything in sight, but I won't".
But all I was trying to say, and this article backs me up, is that those mechanisms do exist. I am tired of reading over and over on here posters claiming that "the BODY does not 'want' to do anything, it's all YOU and your habits". No, the body DOES have evolutionary adaptations to weight change, loss in particular. Which of course does not mean one can't overcome them to lose or gain weight.
I would compare it to body temperature. Our body strives to keep it normal, though some people run naturally a bit 'colder', like myself, and some hotter. If exposed to a cold environment, it will make us shiver and eventually limit movement to try and generate/ conserve heat much as possible. If exposed to heat, we will sweat to try and cool off. We have no control over these things, they just happen (and again, some people will sweat/shiver more than others and cool down or warm up more effectively). However, obviously if you continue to sit out lightly dressed in extremely cold temperatures, shivering won't help - you'll eventually freeze to death, or get heatstroke in heat. Because the body's defenses can only do so much. Sure, your habits and lifestyle dictate whether you're exposed to extreme temperatures. That's under your control. But your physiological response to them isn't. Two different things that are not mutually exclusive.
FWIW, I agree with all of this. The problem I run into is that people take the idea of those biological mechanisms you mentioned and use them as an excuse to why they can't lose weight. "Oh, I guess my body just wants to weight 9 thousand pounds. I guess there's nothing else for me to do but to have more chips ahoys." No. Just no.
I will also add that while those mechanisms exist, they are pretty weak in comparison to our habits, decision making, etc. It is exceptionally easy to counter balance them such that we can gain or lose weight despite what the body "wants to do."
Additionally, I DON'T believe that the body works to be a specific weight. I think it works to to maintain a healthy body composition.
This is pretty much what I was going to say. The body does have mechanisms in place to maintain homeostasis, at least in the short run...like you're not going to put on a bunch of fat with a big calorie day because your body can utilize excess energy in the short run. This is not set point though.
Our habits and behaviors can easily override the body's abilities to maintain homeostasis.4 -
WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
But if "set point" is a thing, why didn't your body fight against gaining that weight? Why would it only fight someone trying to lose weight?
I figured it was because meds like those change your set point. Simple as that.
And if you don't take any meds? Then what?3 -
WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
But if "set point" is a thing, why didn't your body fight against gaining that weight? Why would it only fight someone trying to lose weight?
I figured it was because meds like those change your set point. Simple as that.
But if your set point can be changed, is it really a set point? You gained weight due to exactly what you said - the meds changed your appetite and satiety, and perhaps slightly affected your metabolism (I have no idea if this is true or not). The idea of set point is that your body has a weight it mysteriously wants to keep you at, regardless of what you do. What you are describing isn't set point then.2 -
WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
Great article at metaboliceffect.com/metabolic-damage6 -
they're all real!
the 'squatch ended up so huge because years of crash diets 'ruined' his metabolism and caused him to get stuck at his 'set point'. Out of frustration, he resorted to his most extreme diet yet: the Egg Diet. This has given him a major case of the Egg Farts for the last 20 years. Egg Farts contain methane. Methane contributes to- you guessed it- global warming.
it's all connected. wake up, sheeple.
Beetches - you all been Scienced!7 -
WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
I gained 25lbs in 6 weeks when zyprexa gave me vicious sugar cravings, but I went back to the doc for a follow-up and discussed other options. I'm kind of angry at your doctors for either not having a reasonable follow-up appointment or not paying attention to severe changes in your body.
By the by, I thought the extra weight would drop off after discontinuing the medication, but I continued to put on a little more weight over the following months until I got a new food scale and got serious about every aspect of self-care.7 -
That's not a "great article" on the topic. It's a blog entry from a website selling supplements and weight loss programs (as seen in the Huffington Post, Oxygen magazine and Women's Health, y'all). Veritable bastions of evidence-based research, LOL.PiperGirl08 wrote: »WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
Great article at metaboliceffect.com/metabolic-damage
Now that's science.10 -
I appreciate the feedback and opinions here. There is more wisdom, and humour here than in 90% of the rubbish I see in the online 'fitness' industry. Blessings to you all and good health.4
-
I dont think it’s a real thing. I feel like it’s human nature to over-eat. So our “set point” would be really fat. If it were real.2
-
I dont think it’s a real thing. I feel like it’s human nature to over-eat. So our “set point” would be really fat. If it were real.
Due to environment (I think), there are cultures of folks who are more efficient in their usage of calories, and when they later populate a calorie-rich environment like the 1st world, they balloon like Orson Wells or Lt. Riker (John Frakes). But in short, I think you are right. Cheers.0 -
quicksilver, I think if you understand anything, Willing to loose, Needed the medication had she not, she would not be in the situation she has found herself with the weight, though she would probably be very ill, it becomes no choice really. An unfortunate side effect of many medications is unwanted weight gain, please include steroids on the list.
All the very best, Willing to loose, sorry it takes more than it does for the average Jo.4 -
craygslyst1 wrote: »I’m still pulling for Bigfoot
Sasquatch is definitely real. If anyone doesn't believe me I can show them my legs on the first day of spring after not shaving them all winter. I could be a body double for Chewbacca in that department.
4 -
craygslyst1 wrote: »I’m still pulling for Bigfoot
Sasquatch is definitely real. If anyone doesn't believe me I can show them my legs on the first day of spring after not shaving them all winter. I could be a body double for Chewbacca in that department.
Though not named 'Patty', she is real. On reasonably good authority, I was told that Patty passed about 10 years ago. She will be continually missed.
2 -
Of all the options given, I've seen the most evidence for Bigfoot. My husband wears size 16 shoes. He *says* his family are just big (as in tall, not fat), but I've seen his mom and dad and sister. They're all Sasquatch.2
-
I saw Bigfoot on a Netflix documentary, so it must be true.5
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »nettiklive wrote: »WillingtoLose1001984 wrote: »quiksylver296 wrote: »Why do people get fat then? Why does this only kick in when people try to lose weight?
I have only gained very large amounts of weight in my adult life because of medications that totally altered my appetite, metabolism, cravings and satiety levels. I only gained about 20 or so lbs during pregnancy but certain psych meds, antipsychotics, contributed to my gaining over 120 lbs in a few months.
But if "set point" is a thing, why didn't your body fight against gaining that weight? Why would it only fight someone trying to lose weight?
I have mentioned a number of times on this thread that I personally had the experience of maintaining the same weight for over ten years with no tracking and plenty of times where I must have been going over tdee, but I wasn't doing it extremely or consistently so it simply wasn't affecting my weight. I'm a mere 5-6 lbs more (gained during pregnancy) yet I haven't been able to lose them for two years in spite of tracking and eating less than I did then. If I haven't gotten pregnant, I would have most likely still been maintaining the same weight as before. Likewise I know a number of people who are thin and remain that way in spite of never tracking, not exercising, and eating whatever they want in whatever amounts they want and never gaining. So the body does fight against gaining as well. We're just evolutionary more predisposed towards preserving energy rather than spending. People who do gain large amounts of weight with no medical issues are generally those who overeat in large amounts, ignoring natural hunger and satiety signals; if you watch shows like 600 Lb life, most of them have severe emotional issues they self-medicate with food. If you give the body a consistent large surplus or large deficit, weight will of course move. Yet for the majority of people, it stays stable for years without tracking at all, which says something for the body wanting to maintain a weight (notice I said 'a weight' - not any specific weight, but the given weight the body is at right now). And for those who have lost a large amount of weight, there are mechanisms such as increased hunger and decreased metabolic rate which work to try and regain, as they've said about Biggest Loser participants. I've also heard the theory mentioned above that fat cells can be formed but can't be removed, only shrunk, and fat cells produce hormones such as leptin that influence hunger.
Most obese people didn't get there by eating 100-200 calories a day over maintenance. Nor are you likely to lose weight on that much of a deficit (measurement issues aside, let's assume we can measure perfectly). The body makes subtle adjustments to make up for the minor fluctuations in intake that pretty much all of us have daily.
Actually, yes, most obese people DID get there by eating 100-200 calories a day over maintenance. It doesn't take that much for slow but steady weight creep.
Then, at some point, their weight stabilizes at the obese weight where their intake and activity normalizes.
A poster on here calculated her weight gain at one point, and realized that she had only been eating 75 extra calories a day.
Hey, I can do that as well! Gained 14kg over 14 years, thus 1kg pretty much steadily per year. That's a mere 19kcal over maintenance every year again. Thus my maintenance went up a tiny amount, but so did my overeating. It's really that simple. Ok, it was probably more than that as I was a lot more active than before I gained weight. So...1 -
Could reaching/creating a "set point" be equal to hitting a plateau? A point at which the body resists loosing any more weight even when the person is holding themselves accountable, (Why delude yourself) weighing all foods including liquids like milk, etc, and logging everything religiously, after all we are built to be prepared for a famine. May be, the whoosh of weight loss some say they experience at the end of their plateau happens when the body gives in and finally agrees, there was a little more weight which it could safely sacrifice. Till the next plateau. All this weight-loss business assumes every single body works perfectly well all the time with no glitches. IMV.3
-
OP, I think bf set point is a real thing. Now I also believe that environment and society we live in effects this. We have become a culture that wants everything now with as little ease as we can get it. I ate my way up to 400 lbs through being a hedonic/binge eater. I now weigh 178 as of this am. I do find myself hungrier than I used to with less satiety. I am driven to seek calorie dense food. Now wether that is my fat cells, my hypothalamus, or just the recovering hedonic eater? I am not sure. I do know that i maintain on less calories than would be expected for my size, though this is individual at best. I know I burn about 70 cals a mile walking give or take. Less than what would be expected, though still individual. Kind of lines up with Liebels studies though. The one exception to all the line ups is my NEAT. I find myself far more well let's say antsie? Could be food seeking behavior or just the way I always was. As far as Bigfoot? Well there was a giant ape that roamed the earth long ago, A. Giganticas. Now extinct. Though, several species have returned from the fossil record. I am doubtful of this with this species. Even if so, the only giant ape probably running around the North West US, is probably a Seattle native. Global warming. Well i would not call it that, but a shift in climate? Yes. Man made or natural? I'm think both. We might be in a natural warming cycle that is being made worse by human activity.1
-
Wanted to add something I forgot. In lost much of my weight very rapidly. I mean not quite biggest loser style, but quick. I also got sub 9% bf. I am wonder if this is why i have some of my issues. Maybe both. I received horrible dietary advice from my doctor. Lesson learned. I have been at a slllooowww lean bulk for about 4 months. Well, I have had a high of 184lbs... post going out for a sodium bomb, carb heavy meal, and a low of 176. Still technically what some people would call maintanace for a year. Sorry for the rant. Anyways, i go back to the idea that there i believe there is a range of bf we like to hang out at. What that is, is different for all of us. I find it really hard... yes I know, pick your hard...to maintain this low bf and weight. Will it be easier 25lbs heavier at 16-20% bf? Only one way to find out! Now the body fighting weight gain in a non weight reduced person. Well, yes. We tend to forget that there was a time when humans were not APEX predators. We had to run from scary stuff. Would only make sense to me that if we could not run and climb a tree, being overweight would be the least of our problems.1
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
- 427 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