Plateaued With Heavy Exercise. Troubleshooting?

AnnPT77 wrote: »

IDeserveBetter wrote: »

So, here is the issue.
Since December 2017 I've lost 40 pounds.
Major progress.
But that does include a period of gaining most back and losing it again, so ups and downs related to life circumstances.
Now, I'm plateaued.
I thought that going from distance walking to running, thus raising my heart rate would solve that issue. I'm doing some pretty serious running, you guys. ten miles at about a 13 minute pace yesterday. Is not panning out weight loss wise. I'm also at a loss as to further improving my fitness level according to the Fitbit app

<Images snipped, for length>

On another thread, you say you've gone but down from 224 to 184, and are around there now. You also mention elsewhere that your runs are actually walk/run intervals.

You're struggling, IMO, because of several issues:

* Having started at about your weight, I'm also skeptical about your exercise calories. On the thread over in the Fitness forum, someone gave you the estimating formula for net calories from walking and running. Use that**. However, I see that you have your Fitbit synched, which should (maybe) be giving you a more sensible calorie adjustment. You can use the formula for a gut check, but recognize that the Fitbit adjustment covers more than the run.
(**For others reading, the formulas are weight in lbs x 0.63 x distance in miles for running; weight in pounds x 0.30 x distance in miles for walking.)

* Others have pointed out that it appears you're not using a food scale, using "servings", using what looks like generic entries from the database, etc. Tightening that up is a high-potential-benefit route. The first tens of pounds come off with less precision; as you get lighter, better precision can be helpful.

* You mention (in the other thread?) that you've recently begun running (vs. walking) and that you're adding strength training. Any new exercise, especially strength exercise, can temporarily add water weight, and mask fat loss on the scale for a couple/few weeks. Perhaps that's part of the current picture for you.

Despite seeing major improvement on the running aspect with times and endurance, I'm still fluxuating between the same four pounds......for the last ten weeks or so. Having said that, my resting pulse is lower than it has ever been.

I think I know why, but I over think things.

1: I'm not allowing myself enough rest. I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around exercise more and eat less isn't gospel.

It pretty much is gospel. But, if calorie counting is the weight loss strategy being used, accuracy is important.

Adequate rest is also important, though. If you get over-fatigued, it tends to reduce daily life activity (we rest more, do less vigorous things in work/chores, maybe even sleep more) which reduces calories burned in daily life, effectively wiping out some of the exercise calories. (Your Fitbit might not catch all of this effect, but should catch most.) Also, rest is important for performance in exercise (muscle recovery as well as energy level; well-managed rest and recovery is vital to fitness improvement.

2: I realize that the huge deficits I'm recording (my food recording is very accurate. I'm very practiced and suuuper careful with it. How I lost 40 pounds) may not exist. I understand that once you hit a peak, you stop burning calories despite what my Fitbit versa might record

Huh? No.

The "fat burning zone" is a myth (from a calorie-counting standpoint: it matters for endurance fueling); your body doesn't "get used to an exercise" and burn fewer calories when doing it. In most common exercises (such as walking/running), the efficiency difference between a skilled person and an unskilled one is trivial. And a fit person and unfit person of the same size, running the same distance, burn roughly the same number of calories. It just feels much easier to the fit person, and many heart rate monitors will (inaccurately) estimate a lower calorie burn for the fit person vs. the unfit one. That's one of the many limitations of heart rate as a proxy for calorie burn.

Of course, in any weight-bearing exercise (like walking/running) you burn fewer calories as a lighter person than you did as a heavier one, for the same exercise (same pace, distance, intensity, duration, etc.). Of course, as you get fitter, you can work out harder (higher intensity) for the same amount of time, without incurring an impairing fatigue penalty, and burn more calories that way.

Your Fitbit may or may not accurately estimate your workout calories, but the reasons have nothing to do with "reaching your peak", whatever you mean by that.

3: I academically know I need to vary my exercises; I've started incorporating some weight training and I'm about to start yoga, but I'm having a hard time not doubling those days up with cardio instead of giving cardio a break. I'm not internalizing the lesson

You don't need to vary your exercise for calorie-burn purposes, for reasons outlined above. Strength training is worth doing (preserves existing muscle while losing weight; adds muscle in the very long run; adds strength in the short run (mainly through neuromuscular adaptation); can help your running pace; strengthens bones to help avoid osteoporosis, which is a major mortality risk and independence factor for we women as we age; and more). Rest is absolutely vital for strength training, and overdoing on an overall basis is counterproductive for weight loss as described above.

Varied exercise modalities are good for fitness, in the sense that they improve different aspects of fitness, of course.

4: I'm unsure if I should be eating less, or more. If the deficits are accurate, eating more may help because of avoiding starvation mode. If they aren't, I may barely have deficits at all. I'm aware muscle weighs more, and I AM seeing tape measure differences, but not big ones.

Starvation mode, in that sense, is not a real thing. If it were, no one would ever starve to death, and, sadly, many people worldwide do so every day, and they aren't fat when it happens. It's true that undereating can sap your energy and cause some slowdown, but if you're eating less than you're burning, you'll lose weight.

Have you adjusted your base calorie goal every 10 pounds or so along the way? Unfortunately, the lighter we are, the fewer BMR/NEAT calories we burn, so we may need to adjust to keep weight loss coming.

Beyond adjusting for bodyweight changes, eating more/less is a probably-irrelevant tweak until the bigger and more probable factors are pinned down.

I don't really know what I'm asking.
I'm probably going to consult a trainer and a nutritionist for more educated insight.

Pictures included for posterity:

Really good muscle gain for even a young woman under perfect circumstances would be a quarter pound a week (and perfect circumstances would include a calorie surplus). If new to exercise and strength training, you can maybe, possibly gain a bit of muscle mass in calorie deficit with an good progressive weight training program done diligently, but it's very unlikely to achieve that quarter pound a week rate. In contrast, losing a quarter pound of fat a week would be such a slow rate of weight loss that one probably wouldn't notice it in less than a month or two, even with a weight-trending app and daily weigh-ins for the app to work with.

As far as fitness improvement, it's inherently a slow process. You've seen some fast gains initially (like resting heart rate improvement), but it slows down. Patience and persistence are essential.

In your other thread, you mention not being very good with "one size fits all" plans like C25K. It's a really good thing for us to know our own inclinations and work with them rather than fight them . . . but those kinds of plans really are the way to make the best fitness progress. Something like one of the Hal Higdon running plans suitable to your goals (or a good one from another source), and a weight training program from the thread below would be your best bet if maximum fitness progress is the most important goal, vs. doing things in a way that's more congenial/pleasurable for your personality. That tradeoff is totally your call, of course.

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10332083/which-lifting-program-is-the-best-for-you/

Your best route at this point, IMO and IME, is to
1. Tighten up your logging (food scale for a while, at least - great use of $20 or thereabouts, and quicker than cups/spoons once you learn the tricks);
2. Gut-check your exercise calories with the estimating formula given;
3. Make sure your intake level is right for your current body weight;
4. Get a weight trend app (Happy Scale for iOS, Libra for Android, Trendweight, etc.) if you don't have one;
5. Start the strength training for long-run fitness benefits rather than weight loss per se;
6. Consider running and weight training programs if fitness improvement is a vital goal, vs. DIY preference.

You can get past this plateau, and make progress, if you look at the situation as analytically and dispassionately as possible, and adjust accordingly.

Best wishes for much success!

sijomial wrote: »

My point in responding was to help you. As people helped me when I started out - when things I thought I knew turned out to be incorrect....

Take free advice given in good faith or discard it - entirely your choice. You asked for help because you aren't getting the results you expect, you stated many things that are simply incorrect, I thought it was helpful to point out those inaccuracies. I'm very chilled thanks, doesn't spoil my day in any way if my advice is ignored.

The process is more simple than you believe and more in your control than you believe.

Good luck.

BTW - the book The Chimp Paradox would be a very good read for you. It gives a great insight as to how our minds work and tools to improve those aspects that need work (the struggles you mention).

yirara wrote: »

Yes, calories burns from exercise are often overstated. Doesn't matter whether it's from fitness machines, apps like map my run (that one's notorious for it), this database or fitbit for many people. Just to give you an example. I went on a small, slow cycle ride on Sunday. 83km sounds like a lot, but if you just cycle about and enjoy the weather, stop every now and then to take a photo, and have lunch somewhere it isn't. My fitbit gave me 1800kcal for that. I'm a smallish, normal weight woman. If I use strava's estimate for power, distance and weight then I probably end up at 800kcal. Now imagine I did this more often, and ate those 1800kcal in addition that Fitbit gave me.