The accepted wisdom on this forum is that if you keep your calories up to a reasonable level, you can lose weight while preventing your body from going into starvation mode. I'm willing to believe that works for people with 20 or 30 or even 40 pounds to lose. They can probably trick their bodies into losing the weight without thinking they are staving, because they can lose all the weight they need to lose in a reasonable period of time. However, I'm wondering if this advice applies to us in the TDC.

It seems to me that most of us in the TDC experience a significant weight loss slowdown or stall somewhere around the vicinity of 80 to 100 pounds off. For some people this point is sooner (60 or 75 pounds) and for some people this point is later (125 or 150 pounds), but around 80 to 100 pounds seems to be about average. At some point, most (not all) of our bodies seem to decide they have lost enough weight and they are going to make us really work for every single additional pound that comes off, if they are going to let go of any additional pounds at all. From what I have read, the same thing often happens to people who have weight loss surgery -- they lose really fast for the first 100 pounds, but then have to really work at it to lose more weight.

What I am wondering is if this could be happening because there is a limit to how long we can trick our bodies into losing weight without causing them to think that they are starving and therefore should hold on to every last pound. People with only moderate amounts of weight to lose may not encounter this point, but those of us with over 100 pounds to lose often seem to do so.

If this is what is happening, rather than continuing to battle with our bodies, does it make sense for us to accept this fact and decide to simply maintain our weight loss for a while (six months or a year), until our bodies feel better nourished and decide they are not starving, and then try to lose more weight again? Or, is it best to just continue with what we are doing and accept the fact that our weight loss is likely to be extremely slow from here on out? Any thoughts on this from other TDC members who have lost a significant amount of weight?

Hey I'll take slow losses! It's better than gaining fat!

I agree with you but wonder also how many people who do stall after losing a good amount are people who do not progress into OWL and mix things up. Your body gets bored as we all know. I also think our bodies try to catch up with all that we've lost, and readjusts. So a stall would make sense somewhat. Then there's the standard statement for everything in this WOL: everybody is different.

I seem to be in the same predicament, haven't been losing much anymore, and I had a six month stall. I'll admit though, that my nutrition wasn't what it should be and I haven't been doing cardio at all. So I've cut the frankenfoods, started doing cardio in addition to weights again starting today. Hopefully it'll work. I'll be back tearing my hair out if it doesn't

Wow that thought is just too depressing to contemplate.

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to depress anyone. To put a more positive spin on this -- I've lost 100 pounds and regained my life. Two years ago I could barely walk to the corner because my knees and back hurt so much. When I took my daughter to a shopping mall, I had to sit down while she shopped by herself. Getting up off the couch was a major effort. Now, I can ride a bike, climb a mountain, and keep up with my family anywhere. Two years ago I was contemplating a lifetime on blood pressure medication. Now, my blood pressure is normal even without medication.

Even if I never reach my goal weight, I've made such a wonderful improvement in my health and well being that I will be satisfied. I want to reach my goal weight, I don't want to have to be satisifed being where I am now, but I'm not sure what I need to do to reach that point. Should I stop trying to lose for a while and just maintain or should I keep trying to lose?

Part of what brought this up is that I went on maintenance for almost two months this fall when my stepfather was dying and I was under a lot of stress. I did not gain any weight during that time. After that, when I cut my carbs back down, I rapidly lost eight pounds and then stopped losing again. This is making me think that I might need to go back on maintenance again for a while, rather than trying to continuously lose weight.

Liz: I hope you don't mind a response here in the TDC from someone who had/has only a moderate to small amount of weight to lose. I tend to agree with your premise, and I have accepted that. Things go so slowly for me.....believe it or not, I have sometimes envied those who had more to lose and saw the weight coming off more rapidly. Maybe not envied, but I missed the excitement some of you have experienced.

For me, this whole WOE has been more like slogging along through mud, weight loss wise. But I love what I can eat these days, and if I lose a pound or half a pound a month, I'm happy.

I do wish you continued success, and it sounds as though you have really turned your life around in very positive ways. My improvements have mostly been in the lowered cholesterol level area, and of course, my clothes fit better. Can't say that I have ever experienced the oh, boy do I ever feel energized side of LC, but then , as you have mentioned, we all vary.

Kay

I would continue eating what you've normally been following for at least a couple of more weeks...If nothing happens then try to up your carbs some. I'd document it so you could refer to it again if it should happen...I'm not convinced that the same thing will work for every stall...even if it's the same person. I slowed way down for Dec but didn't get too upset thinking my body needed to adjust. (and maybe my mind too)
Like you, the benefits of my current loss are so amazing and wonderful that I focus less on the speed of my losses. Every day is so much better than it was!
Whatever you decide, I hope you are able to get things moving again.

tulips

What happens, is when you diet you lose both fat and lean tissue, at rates up to 50% each. Since a pound of muscle requires 50 calories a day to keep it functional, the loss of muscle through dieting is slowing down your metabolism.

For example, if you lose 100 lbs, and of that 65% was fat (65 lbs) and 35% muscle (35 lbs), you have reduced your maintenance calorie level by 1750 calories.

Couple this with the fact that you are probably eating the same amount of calories as you did 100 lbs heavier, there is less of a difference in the energy equation Energy in (calories) = Energy out (maintenance + exercise)

The answer to solving these problems is adding muscle back, ie lifting weights. I learned this the last time I yo-yo'ed back from 308 to 410. I wrecked my metabolism from losing so much muscle. So this time, I started weight training like a demon. As a result, my rate of loss only decreased 0.26 lbs per week (1.36 lbs to 1.10 lbs) from 2002 (49 lbs lost in 36 weeks) to 2003 (57 lbs lost in 52 weeks).

Jerry that is the best answer I have read so far (that I can understand) - also if you are exercising you are increasing muscle - and muscle weighs more than fat - it stands to reason that weight loss would be slower. (loosing fat - gaining muscle) That is part of my slow weight loss - I have gained an inch on my upper arms and calves - although I have lost 21 lbs and 50 inches overall.

Also now I understand that I would need to decrease calories as I loose weight to feed my new body at the rate it demands.

I expected a greater weight loss - staying on 20 carbs, exercising hard 6/7 days etc. - now I understand better what is happening.

Thanks

I'm not eating the same number of calories I did when I was 100 pounds heavier. When I was 100 pounds heavier I ate three meals a day plus a couple of snacks. The meals I ate then were bigger than the meals I eat now. I have pretty much given up snacking except on days when I get more than an hour of exercise and I'm excessively hungry. Even 50 pounds ago I could snack on nuts and still lose weight; now I cannot. However, I am probably not eating 1750 calories less than I was 100 pounds ago -- I have no way of knowing for sure because I have never tracked calories. I try to listen to my body and only eat when it is hungry, and it is a lot less hungry than it was 100 pounds ago. I don't think I can go down to eating less than I am eating now without being ravenously hungry and I'm not willing to do that because I don't think I could sustain it and I would just end up binging and gaining the weight back. I'd rather maintain where I am now than do something that could potentially cause me to balloon back up again.

I do exercise a lot (brisk walking, swimming, hiking, some biking), and I exercise longer and harder than I did 100 pounds ago, but I don't do weights. Perhaps I should. As a 46-year-old woman who was raised at a time when girls never got near weights, I find them somewhat intimidating. I went through a training at my local YMCA on how to use their machines, but I found it totally overwhelming and never went back.

Does anyone have suggestions for a good book or video that might orient me toward free weights I could do in my basement? I think I would find that less overwhelming than trying to master 15 different machines at the Y.

Liz,
Yes, eating less isn't the way to go, you need to work on bringing your metabolism up by adding weight training to the exercise you do now.

I guess the gold standard for beginners is Body for Life by Bill Phillips. I'd start there. As far as where to work out, the are womens only fitness centers in most medium to large size cities, like Curves or Figure World......they must be good because they won't even let me watch

I will confess that I actually eat more now (and with more carbs) because of the muscle I've added over the past year and a half......it sure makes dieting easier.

LCing minimizes LBM losses. Other plans, such as low fat, do not spare muscle. There have been studies on it, it's in the atkins book as well. I do agree that weight training will help tremendously, as you are adding LBM which allows you to eat more and burns more calories than fat does.

Right, that would be a big mistake. You undoubtedly know your own body and your own mind best - after all, you are already very successful in doing what you wanted to do!! Only you can do any fine-tuning necessary. Your stall may be just a simple backlash from Christmas. I'm trying to mentally prepare myself for MY next stall, because I don't think I can eat any less, either.

Btw, I have wondered if using weights might be a good idea, but didn't know where to start; maybe I should check out that "Body for Life" that Jerry mentions. I have a small hesitation, in that I don't want to start something I won't be able to maintain into old age (I'm closer than most here ) but maybe that's faulty thinking.

If you do decide to maintain for a while, maybe don't put a "time" on it (you mentioned 6 months or a year). Just do what feels right.
-DusterCat

Hi folks,

Thanks for your suggestions. I looked into Body for Life, but it is six days a week and there is no way I can commit to that. I have a full-time job that is often more than full-time, two teenage kids still living at home, a fairly long commute, and a husband who occasinally likes me to pay some attention to him. It's been everything I can do to consistently work in four days a week of exercise; I can't do six days at this stage in my life. Perhaps in a few years when my kids are out of the house -- my youngest is almost 14. I know that sounds like a cop-out, but I'm just being realistic. Occasionally I am able to do five or six days a week of exercise, but I can't do it on a regular basis.

I may have the wrong impression about Curves, but from what I have read it is aimed at women who have never done much exercise and are fairly out of shape. I can swim a mile, climb a mountain, and walk for extended distances much faster than many younger people I know. I regularly do three miles on the treadmill at a 7 percent incline and at 3.5 miles per hour. I sometimes do substantially more than that. Although I don't lift weights, I'm in pretty decent shape. If I'm wrong about Curves, let me know, but I don't think it is the answer. Also, getting some place is difficult for me. I do much better with exercise I can do on my own schedule in my own basement.

I do think I need to start doing some weights, but I need someone to teach me how to do that at home so I don't injure myself.

Liz, I was just reading the Insulin Resistance Diet book last night. Here are some suggestions from the book:

If your goal is fat loss, it is better to stop aerobic activity after twenty-five minutes and add in some muscle-building or brisk activity...we see muscle mass actually decrease over time in people who do too much aerobic activity.

They suggest adding light hand or ankle weights when you walk. One or two pound weights, alternating feet one day, arms the next. Muscles need time to recover, so it's best not to work the same muscles two days in a row.

Maybe that would be an option for you to start with till you can work your way up to actual weight lifting. I also wonder, though, if you start weight lifting, do you have to continue it even after you are at goal...

I also wondered about stalls and have been tinkering with the idea that it is related to insulin levels. It would make sense that the higher the insulin level, the less fat is lost. So is there a point where we need to get our insulin levels lower? Or maybe not lower altogether, but just more level throughout the day, avioding any swings whatsoever. Eating 5 smaller meals throughout the day to level out might just help. I'm still researching this, though, so don't know a lot about it yet.

Good post, I'll be interesting in hearing what else the more experienced people have to suggest.

[QUOTE=liz175]
I may have the wrong impression about Curves, but from what I have read it is aimed at women who have never done much exercise and are fairly out of shape. I can swim a mile, climb a mountain, and walk for extended distances much faster than many younger people I know. I regularly do three miles on the treadmill at a 7 percent incline and at 3.5 miles per hour. I sometimes do substantially more than that. Although I don't lift weights, I'm in pretty decent shape. If I'm wrong about Curves, let me know, but I don't think it is the answer. Also, getting some place is difficult for me. I do much better with exercise I can do on my own schedule in my own basement.
[QUOTE]

Curves is really as challenging as you make it. Since it's all resistance machines, it gets harder the faster you go. I've been there with women over 400 pounds and women who are in such good shape that I can't believe it--and everyone seems to get something out of it.

However, I'm switching to a regular gym for one of the reasons you stated--I have a fiance I hardly ever see, and if I'm going to try and go five times a week, I'm going to go somewhere where we can go together. *shrugs*