Is there a point when the body can't lose any more weight healthily?

Hi everybody,

I'm wondering if my body just can't lose any more weight in a healthy way. Before I left for college last August, I weighed about 110. When I came back from college in May, I was 120. I'm 19 years old and 5'1" tall. I realize that both of these weights are healthy for my height and age, but the way my body changed for the worse just really bugged me. I started my workout plan mid-May and have since lost 6.5 pounds. The only problem is, I seem to be stuck where I am right now. Just as an example, on June 7, I weighed 113.5, and today I weighed 113.5. I know that I could be gaining muscle, but my body shape isn't really changing either.

Since I started my plan, I've switched around a lot of my eating habits, like eating wheat bread instead of white, using I Can't Believe It's Not Butter instead of regular butter, and limiting sweets. I eat about 1200-1300 calories a day (which CC has recommended for a .5 weight loss per week) and run anywhere between 30-60 minutes a day.

I'm wondering if my body just doesn't want to let go of the fat I have. I am by no means fat, but I would like to get the excess off my body. Am I doing something wrong? Have I only just lost water weight? Is this a "plateau?"

Sorry that this is like every other thread on here. I'd just like some insight from someone who may have gone through this as well.

Oh and P.S., my goal weight is 100 lbs. Is this unrealistic? It's in the healthy range for my height and age, but it seems like I'll never get there because I'm stuck at my current weight.

100 lbs is not unrealistic for you as long as you're able to maintain it without continuing a restricted diet. I'm also 5'1 with a goal of 100 lbs. It works for some people, and not for others.

Regarding your inability to lose more weight... Sounds like a standard plateau. Those can last weeks or months. The most common advice I hear is to change your exercise routine or stagger your calories. Some people recommend eating your "maintenance" calories for a few days to jump-start your metabolism before returning to your "diet" calories.

Good luck!

Well, I'm not sure, but, for my own metabolism, this is what I do to try and keep it from shutting down on me:

1. Eat every 3 hours, even if it's just a 100 snack.
2. Have omega pills, and other vitamins, every day.
3. Drink real green tea after lunch and dinner, and coffee with breakfast.
4. Exercise an hour a day (continuously and not broken up).
5. Get at least 7 hours of sleep a night.
6. Make my diet 70% protein and only consume simple carbohydrates.
7. Absolutely avoid salt at all costs.
8. Weight train at least 15 minutes a day.

I don't know, too, but I think you always weigh a little more each year as you get older through no fault of your own. I guess our bodies become more efficient as age. I don't think I would eat less, if I were you, but, if you want, you could try more exercise? Just be careful.

Original Post by airlily:

I don't think I would eat less, if I were you, but, if you want, you could try more exercise? Just be careful.

Definitely don't eat less. I just realized you said you're 19. According to the information available on this site, you should not be eating less than 1500 calories per day (more if you exercise).

Because you're almost 20, I won't lecture you about eating that amount (1500 is the minimum for teens who are dieting), but I will warn you not to ever go under the 1200-1300 range for sure.

Thanks for both of your replies!

yummy_kitty:

I used to be a gymnast and have a decent amount of muscle on my body (especially upper arms and the legs) so I don't know if getting to 100 lbs is realistic given that a decent portion of me is muscle and only a little is fat. I will definitely try and switch my routine around. I was afraid my body would adjust to all the workouts I've been doing and make it harder to burn fat.

airlily:

Thanks for all the tips! I need to work on the snacking thing. I have an odd sleep schedule and usually end up missing breakfast, so I'm careful all day about how my calories are spent and usually after dinner I've only eaten 900! Snacks would definitely help with that. Oh and a question, why so much protein? I know it fills you up and satisfies the appetite, but isn't too much protein counterproductive? Also, what kind of carbs would you recommend? I'm an italian girl so I love breads and pastas...it's my downfall :P

The more muscle you have, the more difficult it will be to reach a low weight (assuming you want to maintain that muscle). Based on what your calories are, you will probably lose quite a bit of that muscle.

Based on what you've said, I don't think 100 lbs is a good goal for you. It's doable, but I have a feeling you won't like the results at all. You would probably look a bit flabby. But that's just my opinion.

Ok, thanks, that's helpful to know. I'd like to maintain the muscle I have, but make it look leaner. It sounds like there's really no way to do that except to keep working out and eating right, so I'll be working on that. It's not the number I'm really interested in...I'd just like to get to a lower weight by trimming off the fat on my body.

Sounds like a classic plateau to me.  You may want to try adding a few higher calorie days to your week.  Or change up your workout like adding HIIT cardio if you don't already do it.  These things could give your body the boost it needs to burn more.

I also think 100 lbs is unrealistic.  It's at the very bottom of the healthy BMI range, and the bottom of the range is really meant for small framed women who don't have much muscle.

I really do think you're not eating enough.  If you're excercising every day, 1200 is much too low.  And skipping breakfast never helps.  Eating breakfast tells your body to start revving up the metabolism for the day, and eating every few hours tells it to keep it going.

Is running your only excercise?  If so, try adding in some weight training every other day.  Cardio doesn't really do much to help maintain your muscle while you're eating at a calorie deficit. 

Protein is good, and getting enough of it every day is important, but 20-30% of your calories from protein is perfectly reasonable.  70% would be quite excessive.  I know if I did that, I'd be cranky and probably wouldn't be getting enough fiber in my diet.

It looks like you've reached your set point, which is the weight your body's comfortable with.

http://www.mirror-mirror.org/set.htm

I think I'm at my setpoint too cause no matter how much I workout or what I ate, my weight won't budge. Even though I was pretty sure my body was burning more calories (I'm pretty active) than I consume at one point, I saw no effect. I later on learned that overtraining could be counterproductive and that the body will burn less energy at rest to compensate. Most of the articles say take a break from your diet  to "reboot" or jumpstart your weight loss again. Or cut back on too much training or try something different. It's pretty hard. Up to now, I haven't moved beyond my setpoint.

airlily:

Thanks for all the tips! I need to work on the snacking thing. I have an odd sleep schedule and usually end up missing breakfast, so I'm careful all day about how my calories are spent and usually after dinner I've only eaten 900! Snacks would definitely help with that. Oh and a question, why so much protein? I know it fills you up and satisfies the appetite, but isn't too much protein counterproductive? Also, what kind of carbs would you recommend? I'm an italian girl so I love breads and pastas...it's my downfall :P

Well, for me, I feel less bloated when I eat protein versus carbs. When I eat breads, noodles or pastas, I feel sluggish and sleepy. Protein seems to wake me right up. Also, I heard if you're trying to tone and whatnot, you should incorporate more protein into your diet.

When it comes to carb, I joke with myself that if it's processed, I don't eat it. So, I stick to fruits, vegetables, red potatoes, and maybe brown or wild rice. Maybe pretend you're from Florence; I hear the diet there is less about carbs. :D

Oh! Be careful about sauces; they have loads of calories, and you might be taking in more than you think you are.

josethemonkey wrote:

"I'd like to maintain the muscle I have, but make it look leaner. It sounds like there's really no way to do that except to keep working out and eating right"

Actually, there IS a way to do that.  Do Pilates!  Working out on the machine lenghtens the muscles, so you should look leaner without losing more weight.  QVC sells the machines for very reasonable prices.  I use mine every day...and I LOVE IT!

Original Post by asha_3_28:

It looks like you've reached your set point, which is the weight your body's comfortable with.

http://www.mirror-mirror.org/set.htm

I think I'm at my setpoint too cause no matter how much I workout or what I ate, my weight won't budge. Even though I was pretty sure my body was burning more calories (I'm pretty active) than I consume at one point, I saw no effect. I later on learned that overtraining could be counterproductive and that the body will burn less energy at rest to compensate. Most of the articles say take a break from your diet  to "reboot" or jumpstart your weight loss again. Or cut back on too much training or try something different. It's pretty hard. Up to now, I haven't moved beyond my setpoint.

This is interesting and the thing I was wondering about. However, less than a year ago, I was under 113.5 lbs. I haven't grown heightwise, but have gained weight. That makes me think that 113.5 is not my set weight. Hell, even a few weeks ago I was at 112 lbs, but my body quickly reverted back to around 114. I don't wanna fight my setpoint, but I'm just not sure that 113.5 is where my body is demanding to be or not.

1-2 pounds difference is nothing.  It could be water weight, or just food that has not "cleared" your system.  Don't worry about such small fluctuations.  I mean seriously, you could weight yourself, drink a 16 ounce bottle of water, weight yourself again and you would be up a pound. 

Also just because you are not getting taller does not mean that your bones are not getting denser, and that you are not getting wider hips and shoulders as your body matures. 

Also, hate to say it but Pilates cannot lengthen your muscles, nor can it make the leaner.  By definition muslce is *lean* and muscles cannot grow longer without surgery as they are attached to your bones. 

If you enjoy Pilates and want to do it, it's better than nothing, but it can't live up to those claims.

Original Post by alphawordsmith:

josethemonkey wrote:

"I'd like to maintain the muscle I have, but make it look leaner. It sounds like there's really no way to do that except to keep working out and eating right"

Actually, there IS a way to do that.  Do Pilates!  Working out on the machine lenghtens the muscles, so you should look leaner without losing more weight.  QVC sells the machines for very reasonable prices.  I use mine every day...and I LOVE IT!

Oh dear, will this myth never die? Muscle attaches to bone through tendons and attachement points, and does not change in length in response to anything but surgery to move those attachment points.

 Pilates isn't frickin' magic and will not cause you to achieve results only obtainable through radical surgical intervention. It's a rather bog-standard rehabilitation protocol designed 80 years ago and we've learned a lot about exercise physiology since then.

 Don't interpret this to mean that I think Pilates is useless, merely that it's oversold by marketing people more interested in having you pay them money than in you learning the truth about Pilates.

Original Post by melkor:

Original Post by alphawordsmith:

josethemonkey wrote:

"I'd like to maintain the muscle I have, but make it look leaner. It sounds like there's really no way to do that except to keep working out and eating right"

Actually, there IS a way to do that.  Do Pilates!  Working out on the machine lenghtens the muscles, so you should look leaner without losing more weight.  QVC sells the machines for very reasonable prices.  I use mine every day...and I LOVE IT!

Oh dear, will this myth never die? Muscle attaches to bone through tendons and attachement points, and does not change in length in response to anything but surgery to move those attachment points.

 Pilates isn't frickin' magic and will not cause you to achieve results only obtainable through radical surgical intervention. It's a rather bog-standard rehabilitation protocol designed 80 years ago and we've learned a lot about exercise physiology since then.

 Don't interpret this to mean that I think Pilates is useless, merely that it's oversold by marketing people more interested in having you pay them money than in you learning the truth about Pilates.

 That was a very interesting article, melkor! THANKS for the link!  Actually, the author wasn't "dissing" Pilates as much as comparing it with strength training and other forms of exercise.  He even referred to Joseph Pilates as "the grand old man"! Personally, I found in his article very little to dissuade Pilates users. In fact, I'd say it's a pretty good "sales tool" in itself!

 As a daily user of my Pilates "Performer" (a smaller adaptation of the Reformer) I can categorically state that this particular form of exercise is superior to many others that I've engaged in over the past 40 years.  I started exercise with Jack LaLanne (on TV) in the 50's.  I've trained with weights for years; I was an aerobics instructor in the early 80's for two years and participated in "Jazzercise" for about six years; and I've participated in swimming (since the age of three), running, and skiing.

 Six years ago, I tore my right rotator cuff and my doctor put me in Physical Therapy...where I was introduced to the Pilates Reformer.  Since I was morbidly obese at the time (due to Chronic Fatigue Syndrome), this turned out to be the one type of exercise that I could actually DO.  And I fell in LOVE.  I was addicted to exercise before I got CFS and being able to exercise again was a DREAM for me.  Using the Pilates Reformer, I have rebuilt muscle that I had lost...all over my body.  I now have biceps and developed lats again...and my calves and Gluteus Maximus are rock hard.  My balance is better, my posture is MUCH better, and I feel better after my workout than I did before I began.

 Now the real CLINCHER...I have three degenerated discs in my lower spine, so ANY high-impact exercise is a total NO-NO for me.  And I used to have to go to the chiropractor about once a week.  But, a couple of years ago, I went through a "bad patch" and couldn't afford to go to the chiropractor...even with health insurance.  But I continued my daily Pilates workouts.  About a year ago, I went by the office one day to pay off the final $15 of my bill, and saw my doc.  He complimented me on my weight loss and asked if I'd like an adjustment.  I said, "OK...Let's do a quick one".  Well, he adjusted me and only ONE vertebra was out.  And the REAL kicker was that he didn't have to adjust my lower spine AT ALL.  He remarked, "That's the first time THAT'S ever happened!"  He asked me what I'd been doing and I told him, "Pilates...every day".  Then I asked him if he wanted to see me again and he said, "There's no POINT. You'd just be wasting your money. Just keep doing your Pilates."

 If I DON'T do my workout for a couple of days, I can hardly WALK.  (I joke that I walk like Quasimodo.) And, other than the fact that using the Pilates machine is a no-impact form of exercise, it also "holds" your body in the correct alignment, so you CAN'T injure yourself.  The author of the article you provided even said as much.  And Rebecca Romijn said on a talk show that Pilates straightened out her scoliosis! I'm inclined to believe her because my spine is much straighter and my posture MUCH better than before I began Pilates training.

 If you were attempting to convince me that Pilates is not "all that", I'm afraid your article did just the opposite.

Eh, no, not that it's not "all that" - but that it's rehab exercise. For you who are actually in need of rehab (or at this point more correctly - prehab, to avoid needing rehab) it's useful; for anyone else who aren't actually rehab patients, it's not terribly useful compared to other, more strenuous forms of exercise.

 Like I said, not useless, but oversold by marketing people.

 Who go around making claims like "Pilates can lengthen muscle", or "Pilates can give you a dancer's body", both of which are complete fabrications from people who wouldn't know exercise physiology if it bit them.

 That's not a reflection on people who buy into the marketing, but I do wish people would stop repeating these falsehoods and stick to telling the truth - Pilates is rather sedate exercise that promotes good posture and flexibility and can be a decent intro to exercise for otherwise sedentary individuals and has uses in the pre/rehab space for individuals in need of physical therapy, but outside of that you're better off doing something more vigorous and useful.

Original Post by melkor:

Eh, no, not that it's not "all that" - but that it's rehab exercise. For you who are actually in need of rehab (or at this point more correctly - prehab, to avoid needing rehab) it's useful; for anyone else who aren't actually rehab patients, it's not terribly useful compared to other, more strenuous forms of exercise.

 Like I said, not useless, but oversold by marketing people.

 Who go around making claims like "Pilates can lengthen muscle", or "Pilates can give you a dancer's body", both of which are complete fabrications from people who wouldn't know exercise physiology if it bit them.

 That's not a reflection on people who buy into the marketing, but I do wish people would stop repeating these falsehoods and stick to telling the truth - Pilates is rather sedate exercise that promotes good posture and flexibility and can be a decent intro to exercise for otherwise sedentary individuals and has uses in the pre/rehab space for individuals in need of physical therapy, but outside of that you're better off doing something more vigorous and useful.

 Dear Melkor...Your are obviously a heavy-duty exerciser. And I can appreciate that, having been one myself when I was younger. But for you to make a statement like "it's not terribly useful compared to other, more strenuous forms of exercise" indicates that you have a very narrow view of what constitutes "useful". If the end result of any form of exercise is greater strength and flexibility, better balance and more energy, then I fail to see what is not "useful" about it.

 You are obviously unaware that the newer Pilates machines come equipped with a rebounder which attaches where the footbar normally goes. This enables one to rebound while lying down! This has two benefits... 1) As in most of the exercises, the body is stabilized by its position on the machine, which "equalizes" the body, keeping it in balance. This also minimizes the possibility of injury.  2) In comparison to working out on a treadmill, the heartrate actually increases more rapidly...an effect which results from the legs being higher than the heart.  I don't have a rebounder yet, but am looking forward to being able to get one soon, so that I can include cardio in my workout.

 "Doing something more vigorous" is fine for young, fit people who haven't had any injuries. But many people who have engaged in running for a long time have some type of injury.  And if a person has been overweight for awhile, they just may be out of shape.  And Pilates is also a boon to anyone who is older or has been injured. Wouldn't you expect that constitutes a very large demographic?

 The Pilates machine is literally "just what the doctor ordered" for those of us who want to get in shape but don't have a need to win marathons and weight-lifting competitions. Or for those of us who want or need a low-impact/no-impact exercise.  AND it's a total body exercise which, in my opinion, is every bit as good as weight lifting, floor exercises, and isometrics combined.

 One question: Have you ever actually USED a Pilates machine?  If you've ever gone through a complete routine, I would expect that the benefits and "usefulness" would be obvious.

Here's the thing. To have a training effect at all the exercise you do must pass something called the Minimum Essential Strain; if a training stimulus doesn't pass this threshold value it doesn't have a training effect. For a complete beginner coming off bed rest or starting from sedentary inactivity this threshold can be as low as 40% of your current capacity for the first 6-8 weeks of a training regime, but the MES value for most physical qualities are at 60-80% of your current max capacity. (Trainees at the intermediate levels need to pass 80% of MES, elite level trainees frequently need a MES of 90-95% to have a training stimuli that does more than maintain current capacity.)

 As long as your current capacity is low it's possible to pass the MES threshold using body weight exercise, but you will very quickly progress to the point where you will not pass the MES for the physical qualities that are useful for a dieter. I refer you back to rules 1 and 2 of the fitness forum FAQ - everything you do will have some effect, but not all effects will be useful in relation to a weight loss goal.

 While dieting you absolutely must include some form of progressive resistance training in your exercise regimen or you're setting yourself up for long-term failure through loss of lean mass and long-term downward adjusting of your BMR. I've seen one study that tracked the BMR's of dieters for two years, and the non-strength-training group had BMR's that were significantly downregulated compared to both strength trainees with similar weight loss histories and normal-weight people who hadn't dieted to get to that weight.

 Which means that dieters who don't strength train will have a significantly  lower maintenance intake than dieters who do, and will thus have a considerably harder time maintaining post-diet. (Hunter et.al. : Resistance Training Conserves Fat-free Mass and Resting Energy Expenditure Following Weight Loss. )

 To pass the MES for strength training you need to do an exercise strenuous enough that you pass 60-80% of your 1RM, which corresponds to a resistance where you can only complete between 8 and 12 reps before momentary muscular failure.

 Any time you're doing an exercise where you can complete more than 12 repetitions of it, you're not achieving a sufficient training stimulus to preserve lean mass while dieting, and the results of that are uniformly bad for anyone wanting long-term results.

While you can potentially do things with form modifications and mechanical disadvantages that place greater strain on individual muscles, this is dangerous to you joint health and tendons over the long haul.

 While Pilates can pass the MES threshold for a lot of physical qualities (balance, flexibility), there's a very definite upper limit to how long it's at all useful for diet-related goals.

 I don't need to personally try out every workout idea or system to evaluate the exercise in terms of how it will impact a human physiology and how useful it will be in relation to certain goals.

'How Can I Get Longer and Leaner?'

Debunking the claims of Lotte Berk, Gyrotonics, Pilates and more workouts.

Claim: Lengthen your muscles!

Just as noses, eyes and feet come in all shapes and sizes, so do muscles. A muscle is attached to the bones of surrounding joints. Claims that purport to lengthen muscles are ludicrous because it's impossible to lengthen a muscle without surgically un-attaching one end and attaching it somewhere else on the bone. Bones can’t be lengthened, either, unless you are a growing child or teen.

-Martica Heaner, Ph.D., M.A., M.Ed., is a Manhattan-based exercise physiologist and nutritionist

I don't agree with everything Heaner says in her columns, but the disagreements tend to be over detail issues that really only matter to performance and optimization nerds like me.

i'm also 5'1.  when i was in high school the highest weight i've weighed was 128 and slowly and unknowingly after 2 semesters of college i lost a lot of weight just by eating healthier and got to my lowest 90lbs and the most active workout i've ever had was 10 min of jumprope and it wasn't even 10 min straight i had breaks in between.

what i'm saying is i really don't know whether this "set point" does exist, but being 100lbs for your weight is definitely healthy.

Original Post by justice4me:

i'm also 5'1.  when i was in high school the highest weight i've weighed was 128 and slowly and unknowingly after 2 semesters of college i lost a lot of weight just by eating healthier and got to my lowest 90lbs and the most active workout i've ever had was 10 min of jumprope and it wasn't even 10 min straight i had breaks in between.

what i'm saying is i really don't know whether this "set point" does exist, but being 100lbs for your weight is definitely healthy.

Thanks for the reply! I appreciate this kind of reply instead of the pilates argument that seems to have hijacked my thread. :P

It just seems so easy for you, and I'm jealous of that. I run every day and have been trying very hard to eat healthy meals. I do let myself "cheat" every once in a while, and I think maybe that's what's holding me back. I'm back at 115 lbs, which is a huge disappointment for me. It's really terrible to see yourself working so hard only to result in gain.

Do you have any tips for meals? I'm living at home for the summer and I eat whatevers put on the table for dinner, so I may have to start cooking my own meals. Suggestions?