To think I’ll be stuck at 16 stone forever

[justmeandthedogs]

I’m in the process of losing weight and since the start of the year I’ve lost about 13lbs.

But I seem to be in a loop. I’ll hit 16 stone 0.3 on the scales and then go back up to 16 stone 4, then go back down, then back up. It’s like an annoying cycle.

I eat well:

breakfast - yoghurt with berries and sometimes a drizzle of honey. On low protein days I’ll add some skyr.

lunch - something from home. Usually soup, a salad or a bit of meat with some veg.

dinner - again something prepped. Can be another big salad, cottage pie, pasta bake.

I eat 1550 calories a day, which is a deficit for my height and weight. I go to the gym twice a week (under the direction of a PT, to lift weights), try to run 3 times a week but I’m waiting on some new running shoes, and the other two days a week I’ll walk 10k steps minimum. I try to drink 4 litres of water a day at least.

my clothes fit better but the scale just won’t change 😥 do I just accept I’m stuck here?

Also, people are completing ignoring the effects hormones have on metabolism when they adhere solely to the idea of calories in calories out.

Try Berberine supplement to help manage blood sugar levels.

Yes but you might die a lot quicker than I would even if we started at the same starting weight. Thats the point! Some bodies are just more efficient. Its actually a great advantage if we live in food scarcity. Not so much in our obesogenic environment....

From the app OP uses. Sourdough, eggs, and avocado can absolutely be incorporated into a balanced, calorie-controlled diet.

I think the flaw in all of this is the idea of number of calories needed.

For example the NHS has a guide (very outdated from the 1950s when everyone was more active) of 2000 cals a day for women.

My normal intake now for my age and size is more like 1200 a day- 3 meals of 400 cals.

I don't think people quoting "the science" understand how specific "the science" is.

A scientific study is set up to test a theory based on an extension of existing scientific knowledge, sometimes to include anecdata. (ALL science comes from anecdata - we observed, theorise and tested to turn "chewing willow bark makes pain go away" into "willow bark contains a painkiller").

But some science is more broadly applicable than other parts. And some scientific rules overlap with other science, which varies the rules.

And we don't know all the rules.

And when a weight loss study is done, it is usually targeting just one or two of the rules we know, for a set period of time, for a cohort people who all come from different ethnicities, age backgrounds etc, or whatever else it is the study is targeting. Then some medical journalist had to put that into something pithy the public will understand and engage with, like "eat less move more".

But the scientists are still busy sciencing.

I work for a medical research charity. We're not working on pithy bullshit like "eat less move more". We're working on "here's a complete genetic and situational profile of the person with this condition and which treatments will work best for these individuals" approach.

Because pithy bullshit doesn't actually work. It's generalised PR. It's not science that helps the individual.

That just means the avocados for sale in Tesco and M&S are smaller than the ones BHF used. I am currently tracking my food to make sure I get my 30g+ of fibre. Half an avo for me is 50-55g.

It helps that I have a very active dog! I basically have no choice!

Where did I say it did? I said that calories in and out is a massive oversimplification.

OP weighs and records everything so she knows how many calories an avocado can be. She has had a LOT of snidey and disingenuous responses on this thread,

Incidentally, if swearing upsets you, you might be on the wrong website.

There’s no way the OP needs 1200 cals though, she’s 16 stone and exercising
she could have a 600 cal lunch, 400 for lunch and breakfast and still be fine

Care to back this up with any evidence? How does a body "cling to carbs"?

I feel for you, OP. I have v similar difficulties despite weighing and tracking everything! My gynae told me that I need to re-set my hormones by doing a strict Ketogenic diet for 6 months or I would never lose weight- I haven’t been able to maintain that but definitely find that I have better losses when I restrict carb calories.
I found this article useful to explain the difference in calorie sources:
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/6-reasons-why-a-calorie-is-not-a-calorie#TOC_TITLE_HDR_6

My hairdresser was as big as you. She cut out all carbs (bread, pasta, etc) and within a year came down to a size 14. Might this be an option for you?

Literally the only thing that could be happening is that you're counting wrong. Perhaps you're confusing cooked weight with packaged weight, or you're miscalculating something else.

There is no way that a 16 stone women doing that much exercise won't lose weight at those (genuine) calories.

Oh gosh! Not the eyebrows!

FFS. It was perfectly clear that she is not just constantly noshing bread. Poor comprehension, or just being nasty?

I agree that a calorie is not just a calorie, in the wider sense, and if OP were an elite athlete looking to fine-tune an already impeccable body, she would do well to pay close attention to where her calories were coming from, but the difference our calorie sources make to our overall metabolic rate is negligible.

At 16 stone, a calorie is just a calorie.

Incidentally, swearing doesn't upset me. I'm absolutely fine on MN, thanks for your concern.

More sad that the OP felt she needed to post in that manner.

Is it the set point thing? It must be incredibly frustrating OP.

Could you try a day or 2 of less calories per week.

I burn more calories a day now than when I was younger and sat at a desk all day!

I genuinely believe in years to come we will learn that TDEE and CICO is too simplistic, especially for those of us who have yo-yo dieted for years and fucked our metabolisms.

I am a little bit lighter than you, OP, and used to be 22 stone. I also tracked religiously – everything was weighed and accounted for. I did not lose weight until I a) cut my weekday calories down to 1000-1200 (I would allow myself 1500-1800 on Saturdays as a treat), b) started fasting from 8pm to 12pm the next day and c) cut out carbs almost entirely. This is despite my TDEE allegedly being 2000 calories – I tried 1500 calories for months and just kept losing and gaining the same 3lbs.

I've relaxed a bit now and no longer weigh everything because I'm happy to lose more slowly, but I still do fasting and very low carb, and lose at approx. 1lb a week.

I can only speak from my own experience, but for me, TDEE was a lie, and my body does not seem to react the same way to calories from protein and fat as it does to calories from carbs.

Are you looking for an argument?

I'm not.

Hello, have you considered having your thyroid function checked? If the GP won’t do it, there are tests where you can take your own blood and send them off online. Around £30-£50 each. It sounds like you are doing everything right, so it might be worth checking everything‘s alright with your body.

Like a few previous posters have said, I weigh 9 to 10 stone and eat more than that, so this regime/diet should be working for you.

I'm in a similar situation! Remember if you're gaining muscle you'll see less difference on the scales. I calorie count everything (I'm on 1400) but find pasta makes me gain much more than say rice. Even if I've counted the calories! I'm mid forties so that doesn't help! Don't give up or get disheartened, you're doing really well x

"Bread has zero impact on wait loss" ...now that's what I call bollox.

Lots of… isn’t necessarily good.
more positively, muscle weighs more than fat. Perhaps you e built muscles and will lose weight if you carry on calorie counting. Salads and whole meal pasta are healthy but can still be higher calorie than you might think. Try smaller portions? Veg are your friend. No creamy dressings. X