Hmmm... Caveman's post is making me think. I've become paleo simply because everything else seems to hurt my health, but I'm not 100%. Every now and then I succumb to something not entirely paleo.

Well, I'll give the next couple of weeks a 100% paleo effort and see if that helps.

My approach (quite accidentally since I have never read any paleo books) is paleo + cheese, based on what Caveman has to say. I eat meat, veggies, cheese primarily. I eat limited amounts of nuts. I eat quite a decent amount of salad dressings - ranch, Italian, vinagrettes. The LC tortillas are extremely useful, and I'd hate giving those up.

I indulge in Diet soda & coffee, which I'm sure the paleos do not, and sugar free ice cream.

Limiting the cheese would be difficult, but possible. I could get to paleo easier than I could get to zero-carb. Trade cheese, LC treats, and dressings for nuts. My problem is that right now, I'm not losing weight but I'm really enjoying my life and eating without gaining any either. But 245 is too heavy for a 5'11' non-athletic man, even a broadly built one like me. So I need to do something.

Well, cheese is off-limits for me due to a casein intolerance. Nuts might even been off-limits too, seems to aggravate my intestines. I didn't think I could give up dairy either, but it isn't that difficult. Couple of weeks of longing and then I was beyond it.

I'm far from convinced that diet sodas or coffee are causing my stalls. So uh... well, I guess I'm not really 100% paleo while I have them.

I guess I could consider myself a paler shade of Paleo.

Actually the very first sentence I wrote stated the intent of my post was not to place blame. The only purpose of blaming is eliciting a feeling of shame in those who struggle to lose (and "superiority" in those successful). That is unproductive and pointless.

I stated my purpose as such: people wonder why they stall, they try all kinds of silly gimmicks and approaches to get the scale to move.
I propose - most of the time for most people - the solution is as simple as just not having an effective plan or not sticking to it for whatever reason.

Now maybe this sounds like blame because "whatever reason" sounds a lot like "get over it lazy fatty", but that isn't my intention. I remember what it was like. I full well understand the complexities involved in losing weight - you change who you are. The "whatever reason" part is crucial to getting and staying thin. More later.


If you choose to universalize what I said, I can't stop you. I specifically used the qualifier most in my opening statement so people would (hopefully) understand I was not making a sweeping generalization of the character of the entirety of those who don't lose weight successfully (therefore, stigmatizing every person who struggles with weight). That would just be stupid, since that's like all of western society.

I look at it like this.
Obesity is a problem.
Problems come from dysfunctional systems.
There are a few systems relevant to weight loss. All have to work if weight is to be lost and maintained:
1) Physiology (always the cause of obesity)
2) The plan itself (to restore physiology)
3) Everything upstairs - how we feel, think, history (learned behavior) ... (our capacity to develop and adhere a plan which will restore physiological integrity )

We can scratch off 1 and 2 for most of the crowd, since the most common cause of garden variety obesity is carb poisoning and almost all of us are on plans low enough in carb to work, or know that we should be. *
So that leaves "everything upstairs"...ourselves (who are we but our minds?)

Now, back to stalls. Look at the way most people respond to a stall, for those who do stall (commonly). People add little bits and pieces into their way of eating as if trying on a costume; they change their daily activities as a novelty, something to do. Now, playing scientist is groovy in of itself. It's something we all have to do not just to successfully lose weight but to grow and learn as people. However, I can't but help notice how false it all seems. Most changes adopted always seem so superficial and hollow (at least from afar). The more alien or ridiculous a weight manipulation intervention, the more popular it seems to be! (SEE: Bear diet, IF, fat fasting, all meat/eggs).

I think we intentionally keep dieting attempts as periphery. I propose it all belies an unwillingness to really confront and accept the need to transform ourselves. In fact, I would expect you could draw a linear association between how outlandish a person's dieting history is, and psychological assessments of openness to self transition/change. It isn't incidental that the most extreme changes and interventions usually attract the most attention. It is so specifically because we don't think of weight loss correctly: a problem of malfunctioning system: body as a primary cause of obesity, plan/education and maybe self as a contributing factor.

We don't think of "weight problem" in the terms of "an area with a need for transformation"... we think of "weight problem" in the terms of "I really don't like this result, and it interferes with my otherwise comfortable lifestyle which produces obesity". We can readily accept the need to change systems in other kinds of problems: when our car breaks down, we take it to a mechanic. When we develop illness as a result of carb loading, we take our body to a physician to try to fix the system(s) affected. We readily acknowledge the concept of systems producing problems in all areas except obesity, and I think a big reason that is so is because no one really wants to change themselves.

Face it. Change sucks. Familiar and comfortable is automatic and natural. Transforming oneself is the equivalent to erasure and death; no healthy being seeks destruction. Only when there is an ever conscious notion that staying the same is truly death (and life is only possible through conscious change) can we embrace transformation. Otherwise we will persist in illusory, unproductive habits and behaviors that will truly hurdle us into death and destruction.

Recently in the triple digits forum, a fellow posted that he equates carb eating with death. He couldn't fathom how people don't stick, why they go back, why they stall, why all this difficulty. Coulda wrote that 2 years ago myself. I think that statement says it all. I suspect that guy will not be obese for long.

I hope I clarified my thoughts but I have a feeling I just confused them more. Sorry in advance if I bored and/or confused my opinions more.




*Please be mindful of my use of the word most. If you are an end stage diabetic with no insulin receptors or pancreas or thyroid dependent on drugs just to function, consider yourself exempt Or, if you are *certain* what I say doesn't apply to you, then maybe the problem really IS physiological still even if undiagnosed with anything. Either way, I am *not* trying to define individuals, so please don't interpret my post as such. Thanks!

Woo, I understand what you are trying to say. Really. I didn't intend to imply you were being accusatory in some way. I was just trying to say, badly perhaps, that sometimes the problem isn't behavioral. Sometimes it is physiological. And I prefer the method of starting with a blank slate when you are trying to figure out the reason for something, rather than making an initial presumption. I am quite willing to agree quite a lot of the time the stall is because of non compliance. But not always.

so true!! we really do have to be ever conscious.
I'm so guilty of adding stuff into (or taking things out of) what I eat, and then I just justify what I do by saying that I am slow at losing weight. Truth is, if I really do work at it, the way it is intended to be, I do lose weight, fairly quickly (nothing monumental, but a few lbs a month).
Reading all of this just makes me realize that I am making this harder on myself than I have to - because I am playing these stupid little mind games with myself instead of just doing what works.
I think a lot of us try to tweak things here and there to make it easier. I for one have been influenced by many threads on here talking about the different things people do. I tried m/e, yes it worked, but when I stopped, I gained weight. I thought about IF, but this thread made me decide against it and just go back to the basics that do work.
We all know there is no magic here, maybe it's just hard for some of us to accept it.

I loved Caveman's response!

I have found that when I stall, it's because I've eaten too many carbs!

I've noticed a trend in Low carber's to follow Calorie counting, because let's face it - low can be a slower route long term.

Perhaps impatience can push some to calorie count?

A low carb diet, starts at zero. Go zero carb for a month, and see if you don't start losing again!

One very good point made in a post above is that as the weight comes off we are supposed to move up the ladder (in most plans to something like Ongoing Weight Loss) and start adding carbs until we reach our carb intake limit. And I believe Dr. A says at that point our fat intake should be going down naturally to compensate for the extra carbs (to keep calories even). HOWEVER I know in my case that did not happen. I continued to eat the fat and protein as my carbs went up. And believe me I added only a tiny amount of carbs back in. Did not go above 25 ever. So what's my point? Well, as my appetite was surpressed with the fat and protein, it got "unsurpressed" if I tried to lower them and the added salad and veggies (carbs) did NOT help. So to avoid hunger I kept the fat up. Disaster!!!

In my opinion this is a fact - total calories must not go up when you add stuff into your diet - something has to give.

So some kind of hunger must be involved I think. Doesn't have to be severe but IMHO we must learn to feel "light" and not stuffed all the time especially at night.

I'd just like to point something out here......and I'm speaking from my own experience based on losing over 100 lbs. I was able to eat a whole lot more food and lose at 270 than at 170.....things change as our weight comes down and its not a starting weight. My caloric needs were greatly reduced at 170 and I needed to remove calorie dense foods to break a stall. For my body, it was less about carb levels( I still ate my veggies and fruit but no flour) and much more about calories.

That being said, I still did/do not count calories officially....I just knocked out cheese and nuts and that cut a bunch of calories right away.

I agree with the OP about finding the true cause of the stall. Sadly, carbs make me gain no matter the calories. I do count calories and I lose well on meat and egg. When I "fool with the plan" it bites me in the rear. Everyone has to find what works for them. My DR once said, "In order to lose weight, one must suffer to a degree and be willing to be hungry." I think it's OK to feel hungry. Not ravenous, but hungry. We were meant to feel hunger.

Does anyone else find that 'dairy' can stall weight loss?

Cheese is the enemy!

Hi, I have been reading up since my last post with interest. Two things strike me.

1) People often like Atkins because it 'seems' from the book that you can pretty much eat all you like and lose weight, this might be correct in the first throws of the plan, but sadly, they fail to really read between the lines in the book (I personally don't think it is made plain enough about going through the phases) and see that as you up the good carbs (veggies etc) you should naturally reduce the fats....hence cutting calories naturally. However, this doesn't work for everybody. After all, we all have a pre-disposition to over eat or we wouldn't be here right?

2) I have often wondered why there are SO many people on LC who have been on LC and are still trying to reach their goal maybe 2 years or more after they started - I often read in magazines or on the net about people who have lost say 100lbs in a year or less....it makes me wonder why this is....how come they can lose weight (seemingly) so efficiently, on weight watchers or other similar plans, when most of us are still here struggling along on our plans....I'm not saying that those people succeed completely in the end, they may very well gain all their weight back, but it makes me curious as to how they can lose so fast, they are not cutting out ANY of the food groups...do they have the answer and are we all just playing along in this great big game which eventually leads to nowhere? (I don't believe that, but this is my thought process)

I do have to agree with everyone on the points you have made, if you cheat on a plan then it's your own darn fault if you gain weight or you stall out and those people really do need to stop and think and quit bitching about being stuck. (I have been one of those people on the past) I am absolutely sure that if I cut down on my calories I will break through my stall, but going back to my earlier post, if I DO cut down on my calories I am going to feel like I am on a diet....it's a no win situation, I just have to bite the bullet and start eating less calories but deprivation isn't a word I like the sound of!

Who WOULDN'T like the idea of being able to eat whatever we want? IMO, it's how you handle the fact you just can't that makes a difference in whether you feel deprived, defrauded (in the case of Atkins and his groaning banquet tables of food, with the teeeeeeny fine-print disclaimer hidden in the book that you can maybe get away with a couple hundred more calories than non-lowcarbers and still lose...) or just resigned to te way the real world works... that we can't have our cake (even low-carb cake) and eat it too.

Yep, it's my own darn fault that I go off-plan and don't lose... but I don't presume to know what the next person is or isn't eating based on my OWN trips off the wagon.

It's too easy to project our own shortcomings on others.

Since when is it not okay to feel "deprived'? There are times I feel deprived, or I think how UNFAIR it seems that I must watch so closely what I consume. However, I like being "deprived" of 45+ pounds. It really boils down to choice. You cannot eat whatever, whenever you like and lose weight. You are going to feel deprived! It's not supposed to be a diet. It is meant to be a way of life. Bring on the deprivation!