Low Carb Friends

Low Carb Friends (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/)
-   Main Lowcarb Lobby (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/main-lowcarb-lobby/)
-   -   Set Point Theory Explained (http://www.lowcarbfriends.com/bbs/main-lowcarb-lobby/800547-set-point-theory-explained.html)

CarolynF 03-28-2013 11:45 AM

Set Point Theory Explained
 
Went to my LC diet doctor (love her) and she was talking about the set point theory.

Your body likes XXXX weight, especially if it has been there for many years. Even though it might not be a healthy weight, it likes it and will fight against
you losing below it. When you do get past the XXXX weight and get to goal
you need to stay there for a year before you have established a new set point.

Wowza..That does make a lot of sense. Going on vacations and gaining 5 pounds (been there, done that) can mess you up for sure..Don't know if you have to start all over again, but I thought this was very interesting..

jazills 03-28-2013 12:58 PM

Does this explain when people get a certain weight they have a stall for weeks maybe even years?

Strawberry 03-28-2013 01:04 PM

I read something about this just yesterday!!

It was related to "nonexercise activity thermogenesis", abbreviated NEAT.... meaning energy expended for everything that is not sleeping, eating, or sports-like exercise. So basically things like, how much you fidget in your chair watching TV or move your hands when talking... little stuff that really adds up.

In several studies, they found that if they restrict peoples calories, they will subconsciously reduce their "NEAT", and they can actually exert up to 600 calories less per day doing this. And as a result they would not lose the expected amount of weight.
And then if they overfed people, they would also subconsciously increase their "NEAT" so that they wouldnt gain the expected amount of weight based on calories alone.

It was actually pretty frustrating to read, because it now I feel like...great, if I just cut calories a little bit or try to exercise more, my body is going to realize it and do everything to not expend more energy! GRRRRR!

CarolynF 03-28-2013 01:07 PM

I think so. There needs to be a consorted effort to get past that point. Maybe doing an induction for a couple of weeks until things start moving downward again.

ravenrose 03-28-2013 02:03 PM

this has been a theory for decades. I don't buy it.

I think it's just an example of us NOTICING certain things and thinking it's a pattern, when it's really not. this is one of the most common of the typical irrational behaviors we all have. just the way our brains are wired.

MtherGoos 03-28-2013 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ravenrose (Post 16341833)
this has been a theory for decades. I don't buy it.

I think it's just an example of us NOTICING certain things and thinking it's a pattern, when it's really not. this is one of the most common of the typical irrational behaviors we all have. just the way our brains are wired.

I agree with that. For me, I think it's more that when I hit certain weights, I get more comfortable, or lose focus somewhat, and quit trying as hard. I think it's more in my head, and less about my body.

creseis 03-28-2013 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ravenrose (Post 16341833)
this has been a theory for decades. I don't buy it.

I think it's just an example of us NOTICING certain things and thinking it's a pattern, when it's really not. this is one of the most common of the typical irrational behaviors we all have. just the way our brains are wired.

I agree. The science seems to show that water retention is a more likely explanation. I mean within adipocytes.

synger 03-29-2013 08:29 AM

I'm not sure if I buy the science or not, but experience sure seems to bear it out. The 260s have been my "happy weight" most of my married life. I was married at 265, and I've bounced up higher, but almost never lower.

I have been able to fairly easily lose from 310 to 260. Then gained some back. And back down to 260. I find it REALLY hard to get into the 250s. My calories and carbs are the same as they were last month, but I'm bouncing between 262 and 259 every single week this month.

Getting below 255 would be serious VFT for me (virgin fat territory).

Sometimes I just have to bull through, because if I overthink it I want to give up. But there is NO way I can not lose this weight on an average of 1300 calories and fewer than 40 carbs. It's just a matter of time, whether the scale shows it now or not.

Punkin 03-29-2013 08:56 AM

No this isn't true in my experience. It seems that way because of a few things that happen. First of all we have a certain number of lipophilic tissues in our bodies, and they will accumulate fat until they are full. Then your body creates what is known as an energy balance. The other factor then tends to create the "theory" is that when you decrease your calories too low, your body will shift into downregulation which means that it will expend less energy to compensate for the lower number of calories. Dropping below 1000cal a day, will result in the loss of body mass which will eventually create a weight loss but you wouldn't want to do that. The other issue is that exercise creates a bit of a problem for people following a higher carb diet, the body spends a lot of time converting carbs to fats to use for energy. The body starts becoming very good at this and it tends to result in the skinny fat look, which most people don't like. In other words exercising to lose weight ends up becoming futile.

The only way to avoid this so called "theory" from occurring is to basically track calories as well as carbs and exercise appropriately. You need to count calories so that you don't drop your calorie intake too low. You have to stay below your maintenance to lose weight, but not too low that you shift into downregulation or start losing LBM. This means that for most people it will be a really slow loss in body fat over time and it will will be masked by water weight changes. For me, I don't notice weight loss until one day I put on a pair of pants that I haven't worn for a while and notice that they are practically falling off. Day to day observations and scale weight don't seem to reflect any progress.

zombiegoat2000 03-31-2013 05:44 PM

I think that the human body has a weight that it will top out at(highest) and bottom out at (lowest). I think my top out was 311# I haven't been under 200 since I was 18 so IDK what my bottom out number is but I was about 145 thru H.S. @ 5'8".


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:23 PM.