"it takes the body one year to adapt to a new weight"

Options
13»

Replies

  • psychod787
    psychod787 Posts: 4,088 Member
    Options
    annaskiski wrote: »
    The issue is that lean mass is far harder to recover than fat. So while fat also plays a role, the body's hormone levels provoke an 'eat' response until the lean mass is also recovered, which is long after the 'old' body fat percentage is reached.

    Hence, the hunger signals stay high long after the person even regains their old weight. Without vigilance on calorie counting, the person ends up at a higher weight, and higher body fat percentage.

    Yes, body fat over shooting. It has been studied in rats, but not really in humans I believe. Noted in humans. Could be that the new fat cells that are created from binges, usually binges, actually creates new fat cells that have to be filled to the size of the old fat cells? Along with the need to return lean mass.
  • annaskiski
    annaskiski Posts: 1,212 Member
    Options
    So in other words ^^ the person's TDEE dropped by 500 calories, but only 40-70 was RMR, the rest was due to NEAT (lethargy).

    So while some metabolic adaptions are permanent, they are small. The NEAT part is under a person's control, though its obviously not easy. For some time after weight loss, the person needs to be vigilant about CICO.
  • annaskiski
    annaskiski Posts: 1,212 Member
    Options
    psychod787 wrote: »
    annaskiski wrote: »
    The issue is that lean mass is far harder to recover than fat. So while fat also plays a role, the body's hormone levels provoke an 'eat' response until the lean mass is also recovered, which is long after the 'old' body fat percentage is reached.

    Hence, the hunger signals stay high long after the person even regains their old weight. Without vigilance on calorie counting, the person ends up at a higher weight, and higher body fat percentage.

    Yes, body fat over shooting. It has been studied in rats, but not really in humans I believe. Noted in humans. Could be that the new fat cells that are created from binges, usually binges, actually creates new fat cells that have to be filled to the size of the old fat cells? Along with the need to return lean mass.

    Lyle quoted the Minnesota study and Leibel study showing this phenomenon in humans.
  • peggym4640
    peggym4640 Posts: 156 Member
    Options
    Thanks everyone for sharing anecdotal and research on this topic. It makes so much sense and helps me understand a bit more why I struggled to keep weight off before.
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,345 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Something that has nothing to do with hormones though is that when you lose weight slowly, it gives you more time to make new habits.

    ^^ this
  • ITUSGirl51
    ITUSGirl51 Posts: 192 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Something that has nothing to do with hormones though is that when you lose weight slowly, it gives you more time to make new habits.

    By the time you enter maintenance, what you are eating should not seem like a restricted diet you are going off of. If it does, you are not nearly as likely to keep the weight off.

    I disagree. The only way I would not feel restricted is to eat as much as I want. The only way to maintain is to restrict the number of calories I eat.

    I don’t have rules about what food I can eat, but I do watch my total calories for the day. I am still hungry on some days and still have the urge to binge when not physically hungry on some days, but I’ve done well the first couple of months by watching my calorie intake. Even my husband who has maintained his weight within a 10 lb range his entire adult life, restricts what he eats so he can maintain his weight.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Options
    ITUSGirl51 wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Something that has nothing to do with hormones though is that when you lose weight slowly, it gives you more time to make new habits.

    By the time you enter maintenance, what you are eating should not seem like a restricted diet you are going off of. If it does, you are not nearly as likely to keep the weight off.

    I disagree. The only way I would not feel restricted is to eat as much as I want. The only way to maintain is to restrict the number of calories I eat.

    I don’t have rules about what food I can eat, but I do watch my total calories for the day. I am still hungry on some days and still have the urge to binge when not physically hungry on some days, but I’ve done well the first couple of months by watching my calorie intake. Even my husband who has maintained his weight within a 10 lb range his entire adult life, restricts what he eats so he can maintain his weight.

    There were two parts - "a restricted diet you are going off of". Yes, there are restrictions or maybe restraints is a better word. But what I meant is that if you are restricted so much that maintenance is a big change because you are going off of your restricted diet then you are less likely to be successful
  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    Options

    I like restraint better than restricted. I think of restricted as not allowing certain things and restraint as not having too much of things but allowing everything. Anyway, yes, I am still exercising constraint. But my point was/is that it was not a big adjustment. IME, the bigger the adjustment at maintenance, the greater the chance of failure. In the past, when I did crash dieting all the way down, I would return to my old habits but just try not to let eating get out of control. Never worked. This time, I wasn't eating a lot less than maintenance toward the end of the loss and the smaller adjustment was easier to make successfully (so far).

    I like this as well.

    Think of this analogy. My car will go 150MPH. It can accelerate to 60MPH in 5 seconds. I may show restraint by driving at 70MPH on the freeway, but I don't restrict myself by not using the acceleration to get to 70MPH as fast as possible from time to time.

    If one can drive at or near the speed limit even though their car can go twice as fast, you have the skills to show restraint in your eating by not exceeding your daily calorie limits. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy a decadent treat (fast acceleration.) But it does mean you will reach that limit quicker and have to get out of the throttle/put the fork down sooner.

  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Options
    Sometimes I bend restraint; I do make trade offs and roll forward. Tonight I made spaghetti with ground chicken. I took a small serving of noodles and a decent, but not ridiculous, amount of meat and sauce. I was leaving myself ~200 calories for fruit snacks later. I also made breadsticks for the kids. They came out so perfect - just browned, still soft but not doughy. I wanted one and I spent my fruit calories to get it. Now, I wish I could have a piece of fruit. So I am going to make another trade and have a piece of fruit that I log as if I ate it tomorrow. I do this sort of thing all the time. I never roll forward more than 100 calories. Rolling forward works for me because after breakfast I can pretty much plan the rest of the day with the budget I have left. I haven't gone over my limit by more than ~30 calories in 9 months, even though I have played funny math to make it average out across more than one day. I don't roll forward all that often; I may go 3 weeks without doing it and then do it 3 times in a week. I rarely roll more than one day in a row, but sometimes I do. In the long run, I get the calories allotted and no more.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Options

    I like restraint better than restricted. I think of restricted as not allowing certain things and restraint as not having too much of things but allowing everything. Anyway, yes, I am still exercising constraint. But my point was/is that it was not a big adjustment. IME, the bigger the adjustment at maintenance, the greater the chance of failure. In the past, when I did crash dieting all the way down, I would return to my old habits but just try not to let eating get out of control. Never worked. This time, I wasn't eating a lot less than maintenance toward the end of the loss and the smaller adjustment was easier to make successfully (so far).

    I like this as well.

    Think of this analogy. My car will go 150MPH. It can accelerate to 60MPH in 5 seconds. I may show restraint by driving at 70MPH on the freeway, but I don't restrict myself by not using the acceleration to get to 70MPH as fast as possible from time to time.

    If one can drive at or near the speed limit even though their car can go twice as fast, you have the skills to show restraint in your eating by not exceeding your daily calorie limits. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy a decadent treat (fast acceleration.) But it does mean you will reach that limit quicker and have to get out of the throttle/put the fork down sooner.

    My favorite analogy about making the small adjustment at the end is airplanes slowly descending for a soft landing. When they land by falling out of the sky the result usually isn't as successful.
  • try2again
    try2again Posts: 3,562 Member
    Options

    I like restraint better than restricted. I think of restricted as not allowing certain things and restraint as not having too much of things but allowing everything. Anyway, yes, I am still exercising constraint. But my point was/is that it was not a big adjustment. IME, the bigger the adjustment at maintenance, the greater the chance of failure. In the past, when I did crash dieting all the way down, I would return to my old habits but just try not to let eating get out of control. Never worked. This time, I wasn't eating a lot less than maintenance toward the end of the loss and the smaller adjustment was easier to make successfully (so far).

    I like this as well.

    Think of this analogy. My car will go 150MPH. It can accelerate to 60MPH in 5 seconds. I may show restraint by driving at 70MPH on the freeway, but I don't restrict myself by not using the acceleration to get to 70MPH as fast as possible from time to time.

    If one can drive at or near the speed limit even though their car can go twice as fast, you have the skills to show restraint in your eating by not exceeding your daily calorie limits. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy a decadent treat (fast acceleration.) But it does mean you will reach that limit quicker and have to get out of the throttle/put the fork down sooner.

    My favorite analogy about making the small adjustment at the end is airplanes slowly descending for a soft landing. When they land by falling out of the sky the result usually isn't as successful.

    I like that! Crash diet, crash landing ;)