Now it's my turn to plateau!

Options
Jthanmyfitnesspal
Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,521 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I've responded so many posts of people reporting a brief plateau during weight loss, recommending they just stick with it and it will resolve. But, I acknowledge that when it happens it is both aggravating and de-motivating.

I started the cut at the new year at 189lbs, shooting to reclaim 170lbs (BMI of ~25). My net deficit goal is 500kcals/day, which should give a weight loss of 1lb/week. I exercise regularly (swim, ride, run) and log fairly accurately (not perfectly and often quite after-the-fact). Mostly, I stick to a very habitual eating pattern, having the same thing for breakfast and lunch most days. Exercise calorie estimates are provided by my Garmin watch. The point is that I haven't changed my eating habits (much), but my weight trend has clearly changed. And, I don't recall this happening before.

1zb5y4m8fttg.png

The difference this time (I think) is that I'm older and my metabolism is now capable of cutting way back. When I sit at my desk, my hands sometimes get cold. I'm often extraordinarily tired after dinner and end up lying down early. All of this reduces my calorie burn and I think are examples of "metabolic adaptation" to eating fewer calories. So, even with a ~500kcal workout, my daily caloric burn is not as high as as before, and my plan puts me closer to maintenance than weight loss, which is exactly what I see in my weight trend.

I can also report that I've had true hunger pangs at various moments in the past couple of weeks. It feels like alarm bells going off in my stomach! 🤤 It's ridiculous, of course: I'm not starving to death or anything. My target deficit is perfectly reasonable.

So, taking my own advice, I plan to tough it out, staying on plan, trying to be more active during the day. I may do a fasting day next week and see what happens. I'm open to any other suggestions.
«1

Replies

  • Lietchi
    Lietchi Posts: 6,161 Member
    Options
    Your trend still looks downwards to me, I don't see the big change you seem to see?
    I would recommend using a weight trending app like Libra or Happyscale, which more clearly shows the trendline.

    My example of the last months: dots are weigh-ins, line is the trendline
    xzq4aheuk0ob.jpg


    Patience is the only thing I would recommend, looking at that graph 🙂
  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 1,716 Member
    Options
    When you lose weight and your activities are the same you need to lower your calories to continue losing as your maintenance gets lower however I’d give it another 2-3 weeks to be sure as you’ve only stalled for less than 2 weeks. You may be getting ready for a whoosh.
  • springlering62
    springlering62 Posts: 7,576 Member
    Options
    I’m going to plump for the opposite. When my weight doesn’t move, I eat more.

    I don’t know what contrarian principle is at work, but I start losing.

    I think the tiredness is indicative of underfueling. Afternoon nappiness ismy number one red flag that I am not eating enough.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,729 Member
    edited April 2023
    Options
    Refeed. High carb but filling (potato, apple). Maintenance calories not above. 2-3 days?

    Play with timed snacks. Apple right before or after exercise?

    You sure sound as if you're reducing neat possibly in response to exercise and underfueling
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,387 Member
    Options
    There's evidence that aging related metabolic changes are quite small from 20-60, and quite slow/gradual for some time after that. I don't think you're seeing anything dramatic age-related over that timespan.

    You say you've been shooting for a 500 calorie deficit, but you've not told/shown us how fast you've actually been losing? With 19 pounds to lose, even a pound a week becomes aggressive fairly soon, and you've been at this for many weeks already. I don't know how tall or old you are, but it seems like going from 189 to 170 isn't going to make maintenance calories 500 lower (maybe 150?).

    The part about being cold and tired suggests losing faster than ideal (or losing for too long), so the diet break or eat more options are tempting. Napping or going to bed early of course reduces calorie burn (NEAT). Keep in mind that losing too fast (or trying to) is a stress, and stress potentially increases cortisol, which potentially increases water retention and confuses things on the scale. Hunger pangs may also suggest overdoing either the size of the deficit, or the length of time at that deficit.

    So, yeah, maybe try a maintenance break? Not sure about 2-3 days only.

    I assume you've read the refeeds and diet breaks thread. In case not:

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10604863/of-refeeds-and-diet-breaks/p1



  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 1,716 Member
    edited April 2023
    Options
    springlering62 wrote: »
    I’m going to plump for the opposite. When my weight doesn’t move, I eat more.

    I don’t know what contrarian principle is at work, but I start losing.

    I think the tiredness is indicative of underfueling. Afternoon nappiness ismy number one red flag that I am not eating enough.
    many times eating more isn’t what caused the loss as your body can be a week or 2 behind on getting the calorie amount memo so the loss can be because of a low period from the previous week or even longer sometimes due to water shifting around so much or just an overall slower response.

    I know at 70 the changes happen so damn slowwwww…
    I’d just keep the pace. Your graph shows a sudden plateau and that usually is a sign of water retention.

    You can raise calories however in the long run that most likely will cause a temporary water shift however to continue losing fat, unfortunately that will require fewer calories or more activity with the latter being the best approach if possible.

    If your calories are low enough now it may take you to the finish line but that’s a big if.

  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,521 Member
    Options
    Yep. I'm stuck right at 175 still since 3/30. Cycling season is about to start, and that is a big calorie burner. Done with a slight deficit, it usually makes me lose weight.
  • cryonic_273
    cryonic_273 Posts: 81 Member
    Options
    I had the same feeling - for about 2 weeks no movement - however it did finally shift and the long term trend is still a fairly consistent down. Messsage is - dont obsess over specific weights or even short periods - stick with it and it will pick up again.

    4dc4tcjjoy81.png

  • celestialsecrets7232
    celestialsecrets7232 Posts: 10 Member
    edited April 2023
    Options
    From what I've learned over the years, the body will plateau every 20 lbs or so, to re-adjust the hips. If a person is large, the hips readjust in size and get smaller as one loses weight. So most times it's a plateau every 20 lbs or so. However long it takes the body to make the hips smaller to match the body weight. It didn't mention gender but it could only apply to women? So not sure.
  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,521 Member
    Options
    @cryonic_273 : I'm assuming that is in kg, in which case, you have lost quite a bit overall. I see your reduced delta from 3/30 - 4/13.

    I have continued to stall since 3/30. I'm down a small fraction this morning, so maybe things will pick up again. My stomach is not happy about it and hunger signals have been a factor.
  • cryonic_273
    cryonic_273 Posts: 81 Member
    Options
    @Jthanmyfitnesspal - yes in kg. Had a 2 week period where it felt nothing was happening. Then a fall. The slope is not always at the same gradient - but it is downhill.
  • jenbrowntextile
    jenbrowntextile Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    This plateau happened to me, too, and based on my chart I’m not reaching my goal weight anytime soon which is just 10 lbs less. I also don’t always feel great digestively. Might try Ayurveda to see if that helps. Not a bad idea to keep a diary to help figure out which foods make you feel good and energized (and help you eliminate) as well as those that may be making you feel gassy, constipated, and sluggish because they could be causing inflammation
  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,521 Member
    Options
    After my 2 week pause, I'm starting to lose again. I'm within 5lbs of goal weight, but I want to overshoot by 2lbs as I always bounce up a little bit. Again, this is not a super low weight for my height. My BMI will be ~20 and I expect my %BF will be well into normal for my age, also evidenced by my persistent, stately, and handsome muffin top!

    @jenbrowntextile : Your point is very important. We need to determine what foods agree with us. I have honed that pretty well, but my digestive system is aging and temperamental even on a fairly stable diet. Life is full of contradictions, as exercise can be inflammatory and can have a large effect on digestion (particularly jogging), yet seems an overall benefit. I don't think the same can be said of foods. Those that give you an inflammatory response should probably be avoided!
  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,521 Member
    Options
    I’m starting to see some changes. I really can’t explain why this happened, and as we all seem to agree, it’s very common. I can only say that I feel like I have more energy, which probably means I’m burning a few more kcals daily. I felt very strong doing my calisthenics last night, and I haven’t been focusing on them lately. (Body weight exercises are easier when you’re lighter, who knew?)

    Anyway, I’m ridiculously eager to be done with my cut, but it could take until the end of May. 😫 I’ll just pretend I’m strong. 💪

    (Again, I’m just shooting for a BMI of 20, which is the high end of “normal.”)

    jdcajvxpnp73.jpeg
  • SuzanneC1l9zz
    SuzanneC1l9zz Posts: 452 Member
    Options
    Normal BMI range is 18.5 to 24.9. 20 is comfortably within that, but I wouldn't call it "on the high end." Just don't want people unfamiliar with BMI to get the wrong idea 🙂
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,948 Member
    Options
    Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »
    I'm open to any other suggestions.

    Do you train with weights at all?
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,387 Member
    edited April 2023
    Options
    SuzanneC1l9zz wrote: »
    Normal BMI range is 18.5 to 24.9. 20 is comfortably within that, but I wouldn't call it "on the high end." Just don't want people unfamiliar with BMI to get the wrong idea 🙂

    It also tends to be low-ish for males. I'm not saying OP is wrong, because I have no idea what his build is. But in a statistical sense, it's more likely for women to be at a good weight lower in the normal BMI range, men to be at a good weight higher in the range (maybe even a bit over if more muscular than average).

    If one looks at ideal weight charts - which are also statistical norms, not individual gospel, it's common to see that suggested weights for men are noticeably heavier at the same height.

    For example, I'm 5'5". Normal BMI range for my height is about 111-150 pounds. That's unisex. There are web calculators** that will apply multiple research-based so-called "ideal weight" formulas, and consider sex.

    For me, as a female, the formulas' "ideal weights" range from 125-132 pounds, which equates to BMI 20.8-22.

    If I were male, the same BMI range applies, but the formulas suggest 134-139 pounds, which is BMI 22.3-23.1.

    ** Random example: https://www.inchcalculator.com/ideal-body-weight-calculator/

    That site applies an age-neutral set of formulas. There are others that consider age, and sometimes other factors.

    Note that I'm not advocating that calculator specifically, or the concept of universal "ideal weight" generally. Not at all! I think choices about one's weight are very, very individual, and suspect that there's a fairly wide range where any individual has reasonably good odds of long-term good health. From reading here, it seems fairly common for people to target or prefer weights higher than what those formulas suggest, and there are realistic reasons why that might be so. There are also some people who target or prefer lower weights, and there are also realistic reasons to prefer that. (The practice of a sport(s) that rewards lighter body weight is certainly one such thing.)

    Like you, I'm not second-guessing JthanMyFitnessPal, just speaking in general contextual and statistical terms.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,729 Member
    edited April 2023
    Options
    Typo? Or high end of normal for you due to hill climb cycling?
  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 1,716 Member
    Options
    Ideal body weight doesn’t take into consideration body composition, so it can be very misleading
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,387 Member
    Options
    tomcustombuilder wrote: »
    Ideal body weight doesn’t take into consideration body composition, so it can be very misleading

    Some ways of suggesting good/ideal body weight do. The ones I mentioned above don't. Clearly, body fat percent makes a different, a huge difference - or relative muscularity, to put the same thing in different terms.

    IMU, that's the main "why" behind differences in suggested ideal weights for men vs. women, in the formulas that don't make the fat/lean distinction explicit. On average, men have more muscle mass than women at the same weight. On average. Not universally.

    As with other statistical kinds of things, these recommended-weights things tend to be semi-reasonable for average people, not so reasonable for non-average ones. For example, I'm aware of a woman here about my height who is tens of pounds heavier than I am, and many percent lower in body fat: She's muscular well beyond the statistical averages for our height range, and she's sometimes above the normal BMI range, but clearly not overfat at that weight. She's statistically unusual, not "wrong" or "non-ideal". With my current body composition, I was overfat at her body weight. There are also women I see here who are around my weight, but clearly lower in muscle mass, even though I'm not massively muscular. Individuals vary.

    Quite a few people have no clue what their body fat percentage is. There are ways of estimating that, too, but they're also statistical in nature, and can mislead.

    If I were making general recommendations, I'd be suggesting multiple modes for considering goal weight or evaluating current weight, including body fat percent estimation, waist/hip ratio, blah blah blah. (Those kinds of things, and personal aesthetic preference, cultural context, etc.) That wasn't the thread of conversation in this case.

Categories