LACEY ~ I have been here a while, and I have heard people say this again & again. While we may not know the exact reason this is happening, we do know that it IS happening. I have seen this in myself as well; so I have been doing calorie cycling -- moving my calories up & down (1800;1600;1700;1900;1600;1800, and so on).

BTW, I was eating fewer calories at one point 1500-1600 and hit plateaus there too; that's when I started the cycling (upwards). I will try whatever works; and have advised others to try various tactics too (increase cals or decrease them; increase exercise, and yes, even decrease in a few cases).

I know that I am getting smaller ~ my clothes are getting looser and I can see my face is thinner, and others have commented on that (and my skinny fingers: my wedding band no longer fits). Only time will tell, how it goes; and I'm tracking carefully.

I suspect that after years of yo-yo dieting, my body is fighting me just a bit -- possibly for self-preservation. It may not see less food as a good thing like we do; I think my body may be over-efficient now, so I have to try to fool it. And, I am trying to finds ways to increase my metabolism & my energy "output" to see if that helps too (with some physical challenges, I have to be more creative).

Of course, this is just my own personal theory; I have no other proof except that I am losing weight again -- and I refuse to give up ... :D

Originally Posted by JohnP:
You misunderstand the point I was making. I believe it can happen. I believe it is happening to you. We simply don't agree on the reason why it is happening. Regardless of the "why" the important thing is that you have discovered a plan that you can live with that allows you to consistantly lose for now. That is wonderful. I apologize I assumed that the output side of the equation was being affected because it is very common for this to happen. My mistake for assuming.

Having said that in every study I have read I've yet to read ~anything~ that suggests someone's metabolism would speed up to the tune of 1250 calories a day by consuming an additional 300 calories per day. (This is the math you've presented us with) If activity level (NEAT) did not fall your BMR/RMR is the only other part of the output equation that could be so greatly affected to cause such a difference.

On the other hand I have read a tremendous amount about under reporting consumption even when not voluntary or conciously. Thus it seems that what is most likely true is the input side was not accurately recorded based on your comments regarding the weekends.

There are many other possible variables to consider of course. The science of our bodies is complex and it is difficult to isolate single variables.

The only reason I post here is to try and help people. Understanding why things happen the way they do is very helpful to everyone reading. The alternative is we're left with myths and inaccurate conclusions.

My apologies for sounding catty in my last post. I do understand that you're trying to help others by contributing, I shouldn't have felt attacked.

And thanks to everyone for your support. I never meant for it to sound as if everyone needs to go raise their calorie levels to lose weight, that wasn't my intention at all. I simply wanted to throw the possibility out there, for those who are stuck and might be too scared to try to experiment with their levels (like I was).

puneri: It was $30 to sign up plus the cost of books, but please don't take my post to mean that WW is only option out there. IMO, calories are calories, whatever you call them.

No worries. What is kind of funny if you look at my posting history I am often suggesting people who are stuck raise calories via a diet break. :D

I think Weight Watchers is the best commercial program out there because it teaches a simplified calorie couting mechanism + support + accountability at a very reasonable price. Win/Win