2017 SEP 30 -- Day 42

My weight is down again. And not just down. I'm at 388 lbs which is lower than my lowest point so far. I successfully broke that nasty plateau. I'm hoping it's all downhill from here. When I do my weigh-ins, I know I've mentioned that I step on and off the scale many times until I see three of the same number (generally in a row). Today it had stopped on 387.8 lbs a couple of times. This is how I know that 387 lbs is just around the corner. Perhaps that will be tomorrow's weight. I don't know.

Starting weight: 415 lbs
Current weight: 388 lbs ⇩ 
Long-term Goal: 145 lbs
Short-term Goal: 359 lbs

So I read more about that one person's thoughts on the set-point theory; they believe it is incorrect, or, in the very least, not whole. While there are some good points presented by the writer, there are a few glaring problems. I don't profess to be an expert, but I think I have a fairly good mind about things. I won't say that I'm absolutely correct and someone else is absolutely wrong, but I would like to point out some issues I have. Theories are, after all, unproven by their very definition. I feel I can question them as I see fit.

If you would like to view the article in its entirety, I read How to break through a plateau on the GettingStronger.org blog.

"The set point theory is ultimately a rather pessimistic view."

The writer discusses set-point theory from various sources and seems to settle on one that is clearly incorrect based on evidence, and then argues against it. One source he used a view from Seth Roberts' set-point theory of Shangri-la Diet fame, but going on the other set-point theories instead of Roberts', he concludes, "In the end, try as you might, you just can’t budge your set point weight." This is not at all was Seth Roberts' theory states. In fact, Roberts makes it clear that the set-point is completely changeable. It's like changing a thermostat, and one need only find the controls for it.

This made me want to toss out the whole article and stop reading, but I continued to read with full faith that there would be some valid points. At the very least, the title promises to show me how to bust a plateau. I want to know how.

" The big mistake in the Set Point theory is that it fails to realize that homeostasis applies only to our internal environment, not to our external physical condition."

I'll concede that point. The set-point theory the writer has chosen to focus on doesn't take homeostasis into account at all. The writer is correct. Neither does Roberts' theory, though. However, with Roberts' theory, homeostasis is not that important and doesn't factor in at all.

"When you look closely at the day by day weight measurement in any period of a few weeks, you tend to see only a lot of fluctuation over a range of about 4-6 pounds.  These are plateaus.  A plateau does not mean a constant weight, but rather what stock investors might call a “trading range” — a normal range of variation around some average weight. But periodically there is a move of 3-4 pounds that seems to endure... And then there is a new average weight with a range of variation around it. "

This sounds right, but not complete. I have seen these plateaus myself in my own graphs. And you, too, may have seen my graphs to see these same plateaus; however, this is not the whole story. It can't be. While there are "steps" in my graph showing plateaus, I have plateaus that generally last days and not weeks. I don't lose two pounds and then stick to the same 4-6 lb range for weeks at a time as the writer experienced or suggests. My body doesn't work that way. 

"To summarize, I think there are three important principles to keep in mind:

1. Make a deliberate, discrete step–and write it down!

2. Keep records and establish a range of variation for each plateau.

3. Allow yourself adequate time on each plateau."

These steps do not seem correct to me. For example, making a deliberate, discrete change is not accurate. At least not in how the writer explains it. The writer had cut back from 5 alcoholic beverages to 2 a week. I don't imbibe. What do I cut out? I drink water. I drink calorie-free Monster. I eat very little food. Do I stop eating completely so I can drop to a lower plateau? Then what? Am I going to be stuck there forever because I cannot change anything else? 

In considering this, I was thinking that the thing I could change is adding slightly more calories and then cutting them back again. Keeping records is what I'm doing already, but I got stuck in plateaus anyhow. I'm not doing the "allow adequate time" bit because the writer took 10 months to lose 20 lbs. Of course, the writer was going from, like, 160 to 140, so it could be that my plateau jumps would need to increase according the amount of weight I need to lose. If so, as the amount I need to lose is roughly 10 times this writer's, the plateau level jumps should be 10 times as big. In other words, my plateaus should jump by 20 lbs. They don't. 

I won't argue that the homeostasis theory he presents has merit, but it seems inadequate especially since it's been based almost wholly on an incomplete or pessimistic version of the set-point theory that isn't even the one that Roberts presents in the Shangri-La Diet method. I will keep these ideas in mind for future plateaus, but I will also be following SLD religiously and monitoring my weight fluctuations closely for patterns that may emerge over time. 

Take my thoughts as you wish. I may be biased in the pro-SLD direction right now, and that could greatly influence my thoughts, views, and opinions. I'm skewed toward Seth Roberts' theories, and I admit that. Please take this information with the proverbial grain of salt it deserves. 

Set-point theory is good theory graph:

That's a fairly predictable wibble-wobble I've got going on this month. That's very interesting. I expect to dip lower, and then up and over another lump before continuing the general downward trend. I'm eager to find out if this pattern holds. It's not a 4-6 lbs plateau as far as I can tell. In fact, 393 lbs - 388 lbs is 5 lbs. Am I to believe that this whole time, I've been on one giant plateau? Doubtful. What do you think?