Hey Ladies! I am a longtime lurker but decided to come out of hiding and hopefully inspire, or relate, to others during this journey.
My weight started at 186. On January 30th, I joined weight watchers and I'm 1lb and 10 days away from having lost 30lbs in 3 months!
Anyways, I was stuck in the 160s for almost a month and a half! Some weeks I gained, some I lost .08lb. Last week I weighed in at 158.9 and this week at 157.6! I am not complaining by any means, but is it normal to get through some decades faster than others?
Nothing in my diet or activity has changed. I'm pretty consistent in tracking and how many weeklies I use, but it just feel like the 150's are going so much faster than the 160's have.
Any insight would be lovely, and it's nice to finally meet you all!
I'm a pretty big believer in set point theory. My weight is extremely sticky from roughly 168-173, and I've spent a large portion of my life in that zone. Above it, it's relatively 'easy' to get back there. But I have to fight like **** to get below it; it's some Bermuda triangle zone where the standard laws of thermodynamics don't apply. Once I clear that range, my loss rate does change. It's been a couple years since I was below it, but at least I'm armed with the knowledge that the scale is likely to accelerate its pace soon.
What I'm most interested in/most concerned by is whether you can 'reset' your set point to a lower weight, if you stay there long enough. I've read a lot of conflicting research on this point, but I'm hopeful.
I don't know if it's set point or I'm too comfortable. Or too close to goal or what, but the 170s (especially 170-175) have been MURDER. I've basically been here since December. Well, sort of - I have to give myself some slack for taking a month off mid december through mid-January and then needing to relose, but SINCE that weight has come off I've still been stuck around there for a couple more months.
Goal for this month is 165 and to NEVER see 170 plus again... WOrking on it, but it's TOUGH!
I'm a pretty big believer in set point theory. My weight is extremely sticky from roughly 168-173, and I've spent a large portion of my life in that zone. Above it, it's relatively 'easy' to get back there. But I have to fight like **** to get below it; it's some Bermuda triangle zone where the standard laws of thermodynamics don't apply. Once I clear that range, my loss rate does change. It's been a couple years since I was below it, but at least I'm armed with the knowledge that the scale is likely to accelerate its pace soon.
What I'm most interested in/most concerned by is whether you can 'reset' your set point to a lower weight, if you stay there long enough. I've read a lot of conflicting research on this point, but I'm hopeful.
Makes sense. I've been fighting tooth and nail for the last year to get below 170 (I had managed 2 years ago, but shot back over 170 after a few weeks)
Seems like I finally did it...but time will tell...
You know, even when I stuck to plan 100%, there were some times when the weight would come off in a timely manner and times when it just wouldn't. Our bodies don't always do what we want them to.
If you stick with it, the weight eventually comes off though!
For me the 150s took forever!! I would lose very very slightly each week and have random big wooshed every three weeks or so. It averaged about a pound a week. Now that I'm in the 140s I seem to be dropping weight really easy! And I'm not even being that great.. so idk. I thought that the 150s took longer because I was finally in a healthy weight but now that the 140s are going faster again I'm not so sure what the reason was! I've been doing weight watchers for 40 something weeks now and I've lost about 70 lbs. There have been some slower times and some really quick loses so just keep doing what you're doing and I'm sure you'll be successful!
I actually think this is the problem, rather than any set point theory. You've lost 30lb- wouldnt it make sense that someone weighing 30lb less would have different energy requirements than someone 30lb heavier? I think you need to relook at what you are eating and reduce it a little, and up the intensity of your workouts. Your body has probably changed, so your plan needs to change too!
I actually think this is the problem, rather than any set point theory. You've lost 30lb- wouldnt it make sense that someone weighing 30lb less would have different energy requirements than someone 30lb heavier? I think you need to relook at what you are eating and reduce it a little, and up the intensity of your workouts. Your body has probably changed, so your plan needs to change too!
I'm sorry if I was a little unclear. After I got into the 160's I started using more of my weeklies, and some weeks I'd have a big woosh, and others not so much. I never go over half of my weeklies, but I noticed when I used them I tended to lose more.
I did an experiment and tracked everything with weight watchers and a calorie counter and noticed my calories were usually 1200 or less. So that's when I started using more calories and upping my fruits/veggies. I think 30lbs in 3 months is pretty good, it just felt like forever to get to 165 and here 2 weeks into the 150's I'm 2lbs away from half.
I know the next 30 will go slower, but I thought that made some decades went faster, while others just slow. Either way, I'm still happy
I got into the 190s in early February and (BARELY) got out of it today. Ugh! two months too long! But then again, I'm taking a loooooong, leisurely road to weight loss. My 43 pounds have come off since July 4th, '11.
Some decades easier than others?
