Plateau idea (please advise)

E

EazyE1

Banned
Hi,
Ive been on a plateau for approx 4 months.
I havent gained any weight, but i have lost about 4lb over the 4 months which is too slow really. And also its most likely because i stopped weighing with shoes on. Which weigh 2lb by themselves, so in reality ive lost 2lb in 4 months.
Over Xmas i put about 3lb on, so that period should have got rid of the plateau because i had more calories over that time, but no i still have it.

I thought it might help if i dont go above 1000 calories for approx 1 week just to see if it makes a difference. My scales calculate BF% and Muscle % so i will know if any muscle has gone after the week.

Starvation mode takes months to actually have an effect so should i do this 1000 calorie thing just to find out? Seems silly to continue on a 1500-1800 calorie deficit if it hasnt been doing much for months.

Ive also tried increasing my exercise but no results. Weird for a 15 y/o to get this, most people claim weight loss is a lot easier for teens.

Please reply.
 
You say you ate a lot at XMas time. Question for you. How long were you chronically undereating before Xmas?
 
Starvation mode does not take 3 months to take affect.

All the experts say that a person can survive for 3 days without water and 3 weeks without food.
 
Steve said:
You say you ate a lot at XMas time. Question for you. How long were you chronically undereating before Xmas?
Click to expand...

Erm, i was doing about 400-750 cals deficit from July 2006 right up to Xmas. And i was getting good results until around November onwards.

So is the idea any good?
 
Kaitie said:
Starvation mode does not take 3 months to take affect.

All the experts say that a person can survive for 3 days without water and 3 weeks without food.
Click to expand...

The effects of starvation mode are not nearly as drastic as made out. Your metabolism doesnt shut off completely as that is simply impossible, it only decreases by a couple hundred calories.
No tests have been conducted for either arguement though, unless i'm wrong and you could provide a link.
 
No. I wouldn't do it.

You don't repair a slowed metabolism by eating a few big meals at Xmas. We don't work like that.
 
EazyE said:
The effects of starvation mode are not nearly as drastic as made out. Your metabolism doesnt shut off completely as that is simply impossible, it only decreases by a couple hundred calories.
No tests have been conducted for either arguement though, unless i'm wrong and you could provide a link.
Click to expand...

Read up on Leptin, for starters, and see how difficult weight loss can be after prolonged periods of under eating.
 
Steve said:
No. I wouldn't do it.

You don't repair a slowed metabolism by eating a few big meals at Xmas. We don't work like that.
Click to expand...

Well ive gained a lot more muscle than i had also, which increases metabolism, but still no weight loss.
 
You did not gain "a lot more muscle" if you were in an energy deficit. That is not how physiology works.

Edit to add: The effects of adding muscle are not so drastic, as you make them out to be.
 
Steve said:
You did not gain "a lot more muscle" if you were in an energy deficit. That is not how physiology works.

Edit to add: The effects of adding muscle are not so drastic, as you make them out to be.
Click to expand...

You can. Especially when young and you get noob gains regardless of your diet. Plus i know for a fact because ive increased weight on the barbell.
 
EazyE said:
You can. Especially when young and you get noob gains regardless of your diet. Plus i know for a fact because ive increased weight on the barbell.
Click to expand...

Do you really want to debate this with me?

This is true, the "newb factor" plays a role in the hypertrophy results in the early stages of program initiation. However, they are minimal at best, even for the genetically gifted.

Strength, on the other hand, does increase significantly and rapidly for the "newb." Unfortunately for your side of the debate.... strength increases do not equal hypertrophy.

You get stronger quickly in the early stages as your body learns to lift heavier and heavier weights. Not because your muscles have grown.
 
Steve said:
Do you really want to debate this with me?

This is true, the "newb factor" plays a role in the hypertrophy results in the early stages of program initiation. However, they are minimal at best, even for the genetically gifted.

Strength, on the other hand, does increase significantly and rapidly for the "newb." Unfortunately for your side of the debate.... strength increases do not equal hypertrophy.

You get stronger quickly in the early stages as your body learns to lift heavier and heavier weights. Not because your muscles have grown.
Click to expand...

Yea but i can see and feel that they have grown. Its stupid telling me they haven't just because you read that they cant while on a diet. I'll admit that progress in weight lifting is a lot slower than other peoples ive seen on forums but they are on monster bulking high cal and protein diets.
Anyway thats not what i wanted to talk about, if you were me what would you do to start losing again?
 
EazyE said:
Yea but i can see and feel that they have grown. Its stupid telling me they haven't just because you read that they cant while on a diet. I'll admit that progress in weight lifting is a lot slower than other peoples ive seen on forums but they are on monster bulking high cal and protein diets.
Anyway thats not what i wanted to talk about, if you were me what would you do to start losing again?
Click to expand...

What does "its stupid" mean in this context?

Are you implying that I am stupid?

I would have to assume that you are considering the fact that you followed this first, quoted, ignorant remark with:

"just because you read that they can't while on a diet."

Have you ever stopped to think for a moment that I have dealt, hands on, with people in every facet of weight loss and physical development? Reading and understand science is only part of it. You are missing the fact that I applied this time and time again.

Last time I checked science coupled with real world results time and time again leads to pretty conclusive evidence that I am correct.

You can see that your muscles have grown. This couldn't be the fact that you dieted down, lost some fat due to the diet, and uncovered the muscle that was already there? And because some of the fat has been shed, you feel more firm. This couldn't be the case, could it?

Since you are so well versed on the subject at hand, why are you even asking.

I can't remember what you stupid ticker says, but I think it said something along the lines of you weighing a monstrous 175 lbs.... right? Close enough. That being said, your maintenance caloric intake is approximately 2600 calories. You magically pulled numbers out of your arse I see, and reduced your caloric intake to 1500ish, if I remember correctly.

Ummm, yea, last time I checked.... cutting calories by more than 40% is going to lead to a metabolic slow down.

How do you fix it. Eat more.

But hey, what do I know? I only read a lot.
 
Steve said:
What does "its stupid" mean in this context?

Are you implying that I am stupid?

I would have to assume that you are considering the fact that you followed this first, quoted, ignorant remark with:

"just because you read that they can't while on a diet."

Have you ever stopped to think for a moment that I have dealt, hands on, with people in every facet of weight loss and physical development? Reading and understand science is only part of it. You are missing the fact that I applied this time and time again.

Last time I checked science coupled with real world results time and time again leads to pretty conclusive evidence that I am correct.

You can see that your muscles have grown. This couldn't be the fact that you dieted down, lost some fat due to the diet, and uncovered the muscle that was already there? And because some of the fat has been shed, you feel more firm. This couldn't be the case, could it?

Since you are so well versed on the subject at hand, why are you even asking.

I can't remember what you stupid ticker says, but I think it said something along the lines of you weighing a monstrous 175 lbs.... right? Close enough. That being said, your maintenance caloric intake is approximately 2600 calories. You magically pulled numbers out of your arse I see, and reduced your caloric intake to 1500ish, if I remember correctly.

Ummm, yea, last time I checked.... cutting calories by more than 40% is going to lead to a metabolic slow down.

How do you fix it. Eat more.

But hey, what do I know? I only read a lot.
Click to expand...


There is no way to know what my maintenance calories is. But from my more ACCURATE method, my maintenance is less than what you predicted.
I use the Lean Mass calculator found on this link:




Fill in your details and then click advanced and type in your BF%.
And when i do that it claims 2156 cals for maintenance.
50% of that is 1078, i have 1500 a day, sorry but that should not decrease BMR.
I dont think you're stupid, just a bit ignorant.
My arms have never been very fat, nearly all my weight comes from my back, shoulders and stomach. So i know if i have gained muscle on my arms for example. And i know i have. End of. I dont need you to tell me i haven't.

I try to have a lot of protein, maybe that is why i have gained muscle. Oh and i only started weight lifting in September, and as you know weight loss stopped in November, so how could my body have decreased in size and started showing more muscle? It couldn't because i'm on a plateau.
 
EazyE said:
There is no way to know what my maintenance calories is. But from my more ACCURATE method, my maintenance is less than what you predicted.
I use the Lean Mass calculator found on this link:




Fill in your details and then click advanced and type in your BF%.
And when i do that it claims 2156 cals for maintenance.
50% of that is 1078, i have 1500 a day, sorry but that should not decrease BMR.
I dont think you're stupid, just a bit ignorant.
My arms have never been very fat, nearly all my weight comes from my back, shoulders and stomach. So i know if i have gained muscle on my arms for example. And i know i have. End of. I dont need you to tell me i haven't.

I try to have a lot of protein, maybe that is why i have gained muscle. Oh and i only started weight lifting in September, and as you know weight loss stopped in November, so how could my body have decreased in size and started showing more muscle? It couldn't because i'm on a plateau.
Click to expand...

I am not even going dignify this with an educated response. You are right. I am ignorant.

Good luck with your fitness endeavors.

Hint: You are going to need it.
 
Last edited:
*shakes head*

Why did you even bother asking for advice if all you were going to do is debate and insult the person who answered your question? *this is of course a rhetorical question b/c I really don't care what your reasoning is*

Plainly put. You asked a question, you got an answer and now your b*tchin' because it doesn't match your preconceived answer.
 
Yea thats right, sulk because you cant back up your statement. And that "hint" at the end "hints" you dropped out of high school.
Would anyone advise the 1000 cals for a week just to see if it ends the plateau? I dont know what else to do.
 
EazyE said:
Already have. Why keep replying?

has anyone here tried kickstarting their weight loss again by lowering cals for a few days?
Click to expand...

I kickstarted my weight loss by reading some of Steve's posts and applying his advice. :D :D :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top