Low Carb Friends  
Netrition.com - Tools - Reviews - Faces - Recipes - Home


Go Back   Low Carb Friends > Main Lowcarb Lobby
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-28-2013, 11:45 AM   #1
Way too much time on my hands!
 
CarolynF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kansas
Posts: 38,539
Gallery: CarolynF
Stats: 195/141/139
WOE: Eat Fat, Get Thin
Start Date: January 2001
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..
__________________
Aghast at our Weight Loss Challenge

149
CarolynF is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old 03-28-2013, 12:58 PM   #2
Major LCF Poster!
 
jazills's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toms River, NJ
Posts: 1,276
Gallery: jazills
Stats: 241.8/241.8/145 - 5'2"
WOE: VLC/NK
Start Date: July, 7 2014
Does this explain when people get a certain weight they have a stall for weeks maybe even years?
jazills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 01:04 PM   #3
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,578
Gallery: Strawberry
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!

Last edited by Strawberry; 03-28-2013 at 01:06 PM..
Strawberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 01:07 PM   #4
Way too much time on my hands!
 
CarolynF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kansas
Posts: 38,539
Gallery: CarolynF
Stats: 195/141/139
WOE: Eat Fat, Get Thin
Start Date: January 2001
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.
CarolynF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 02:03 PM   #5
.
 
ravenrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,672
Gallery: ravenrose
Stats: lost 130 lb so far, and miles to go before I sleep
WOE: low carb controlled calorie
Start Date: June, 2009
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.
ravenrose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 02:28 PM   #6
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
MtherGoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,044
Gallery: MtherGoos
Stats: 300.6/129.6/150
WOE: Atkins 72
Start Date: 2/22/13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenrose View Post
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.
MtherGoos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2013, 02:31 PM   #7
Senior LCF Member
 
creseis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ancramdale, NY
Posts: 940
Gallery: creseis
Stats: 157/156/135
WOE: Atkins/Eades's/Volek and Phinney/Attia.. Ketogenic
Start Date: Jan 4, 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenrose View Post
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.
creseis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 08:29 AM   #8
Major LCF Poster!
 
synger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,408
Gallery: synger
Stats: Start: 310 Current: 259
WOE: Calorie and carb counting, IR Diet framework
Start Date: IR/PCOS: Dx pre-diabetic 3/2010
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.
__________________
"Let's fight heart disease and obesity with bacon and butter!"
synger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 08:56 AM   #9
Senior LCF Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 914
Gallery: Punkin
Stats: 160/95/100
WOE: NK or LC
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.
Punkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2013, 05:44 PM   #10
Senior LCF Member
 
zombiegoat2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 766
Gallery: zombiegoat2000
Stats: Start 296.0#/258/150# 5'8" Female
WOE: Low Carb
Start Date: January2012
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".
zombiegoat2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:36 PM.


Copyright ©1999-2014 Friends Forums LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
LowCarbFriends® is a registered mark of Friends Forums, LLC.