Frantic about adhering to the "right" calorie intake? Read t

I hate to complicate a really useful article, but I have questions.

No way, that's why I posted it. Guide some people who are struggling with something that typically isn't worth getting anxious about AS WELL AS hopefully stimulating some questions.

So thanks.

First, there seems to be a scenario of under-eating causing plateaus for some people, especially if they've dieted a lot before.

The article is really geared towards people just getting into the weight loss game. People who've been dieting for a long while generally can follow the same advice. However, if they're truly plateaued, there can be a cause that's not typical of a newcomer, which I'll get into below.

When you get up to step 4, lets say you haven't noticed any change at all, but you already have a deficit that you think is in the region of 750-1000 cals/day. Is there any indicators as to wether you should reduce further on the assumption that your estimated deficit is just wrong, or wether you should increase on the basis that you're under-eating and hurting your own progress that way?

If you're supposedly in that large of a deficit and you're not losing (given enough time) there's only so many possible explanations. They are, generally speaking:

1. You're eating more than you think you are, which is by far the most common case, even in those who feel they're overestimating if anything. I posted research in my other thread showing how even dietitians were significantly off on their own estimated intakes.

2. You're not expending as much as you think you are. This is also pretty common.

3. You calculated maintenance in the beginning, have since lost an appreciable amount of weight, thus lowering your calorie requirements, yet, you've not adjusted your intake. Smaller body means less tissue to support (even fat is metabolically active) and less energy required to move around. So obviously, and I'm sure most people around here know this, when you lose weight, you've to adjust your intake to follow suit. If you don't.... especially if you lose significant weight, what was once a deficit can easily become maintenance.

4. The calculation you used to determine your calorie needs was wrong - either entirely or wrong for you.

5. Lifestyle changes - remember - the energy out side of the equation is very much dynamic. Exercise comprises part of the energy out side, but so does NEAT or SPA (non-exercise activity thermogenesis or spontaneous physical activity respectively), thermic effect of feeding, and basal metabolic rate.

6. You're holding onto water, thus masking true fat loss, which is BEYOND common as I discussed in the lean people getting leaner thread.

7. You're adding muscle, which isn't typically significant or usual while dieting, but it does indeed happen. Especially if you're applying novel stimuli to the body - prime example would be someone doing true strength training for the first.

8. Adaptive thermogenesis. I'm guessing this is what you're getting at. This is what some people refer to as "starvation mode." And what it is is when metabolism slows down more than what would be expected given a specific weight loss. So you lose 20 pounds, you'd expect calorie needs to fall by 200 or so, yet, when you account for that 200 and eat what should be maintenance, you gain, indicating you're in a surplus. Which can be the case if adaptive thermogenesis is playing a role.

If this is the case, and more often than not I'd say it's not given all the above possibilities that are much more common, I'd suggest taking a break. And this is really topic for another article all together. But a population of exercisers exist who take the extremist approach. They workout hard enough to feel pain each time. They diet forever without letting up. They use huge calorie deficits for extended periods of time. They're anxious people by nature, always stepping on the scale, worrying about the next workout, wondering if they should try the next diet, or whatever. On and on it goes. Genetics can play a role too. But due to various stress response issues, adaptive thermogenesis hits them harder than others.

Our bodies are constantly working to manage stress. It's the good old GAS principle (general adaptation syndrome). Our bodies have finite capacities to handle stress. And stress is cumulative - physical and psychological. If we outpace our bodies abilities to manage this stress.... whacky things can happen and select dieters often display this repeatedly. This is why it's a good idea to remove some of the stress and let some of our "biology" settle down and reset.

I've had women ramp up to maintenance over a month's time and while doing so, remove exercise. Then they'd stay at maintenance for a week or so and by then, things should be settled enough where they can start back at the original goal but this time using much saner parameters.

Hopefully this is at least a start to answering what I think was a great question. Let me know.