[stormywind]

I had wanted to lose weight a few years ago and started a walking program.

After I was where I wanted to be , I continued to walk 5 miles. I maintained my new size. About six months ago, I wanted to lose a few more pounds and increased it to 6-7 miles. I lost a size.

I'm still walking the 6-7 miles and am maintaining my new size. Due to time constraints, I would like to go back to walking the 5 miles.

I'm confused as to why I maintained my size at the five miles and now maintain it at 6-7 miles.

I'm not going by weight as I know muscle weighs more than fat.
My diet has stayed the same and I'm very diligient about it.

I had a trainer tell me that if I went back to the 5 miles, I wouldn't lose my current size. He said that after a certain point, more exercise doesn't make a difference.

Is this true?

[disconcertainly]

I am not sure on that. I think diet has more to do with weight than exercise.

[Jezzie]

First - good for you for keeping fit!

Could be that you've hit a point where your body genetically considers itself 'right.' Everyone genetically has a point where they will not lose weight unless they seriously cut back on calories, and then their body may think there's a food shortage and will store the calories it gets instead of using them. It's a vicious cycle. We're all only supposed to be healthy - not thin. If you're fit and feel good and your doctor says you're healthy with regards to your weight, you shouldn't need to increase exercise or cut calories.

[teck21]

Unless you have physical disabilities that prevent you from doing so, why don't you run three miles instead of walking five? Takes a a lot less time too. Change your routine, give your body a jolt, get your metabolic thingy flowing.

[moimeme]

You must have reached a point where the calories you are burning are balancing the calories you're taking in. So yes, you either have to change exercise somehow or change your diet.

I wouldn't advocate running - it's bad for your joints. Can you walk with weights - either wear weights or carry a backpack? Can you change your route so that you take more hills or walk faster? And can you do some more in terms of changing your diet?

[teck21]

moimeme, 'I wouldn't advocate running - it's bad for your joints'

That is a blanket statement that makes as much sense as saying 'sugar/salt is bad for one's health'.

It's all about how it's done.

Besides, alot of women wear silly heels alot which is worse than putting on the right footwear, choosing the right surface and going for a low-to-moderate intensity run.

taking your statement to an illogical extreme, we may as well give up on walking at all since that also puts stress on the joints. It's all a matter of not over doing it.

[moimeme]

Besides, alot of women wear silly heels alot which is worse than putting on the right footwear, choosing the right surface and going for a low-to-moderate intensity run.

I don't advocate wearing heels, either.

taking your statement to an illogical extreme, we may as well give up on walking at all since that also puts stress on the joints. It's all a matter of not over doing it.

I have known a lot of runners who have not 'overdone' it but ended up with problem knees, feet, etc. I've yet to meet a walker who has.

[teck21]

moimeme, 'I have known a lot of runners who have not 'overdone' it but ended up with problem knees, feet, etc. I've yet to meet a walker who has.'

That's anecdotal evidence for your case that's simply not backed up by a million studies that show running, if properly done offer far more health benefits than drawbacks.

Walk by all means, it's a matter of choice, but to say running is bad on your basis is plain incorrect.

I'm gonna keep running.

[stormywind]

I just want to go back to the amount I was doing before which was maintaining my weight/size. I'm not sure if I go back to that amount if it'll maintain it now since the amount I'm doing now is maintaining it.

I mean if what some people say on here is true, you would have to continually keep increasing your exercise more and more (in distance or speed, etc...) just to maintain. If you did that, you'd end up exercising all day long.

Same with calories. I don't eat too little so it's not that it's going in starvation mode. But some people say to cut down on what you eat. Now why would that be when it will lower metabolism and if that theory (about cutting down helping) is true, then you'd have to keep cutting down until you weren't eating at all.


Someone told me this all could be related to a body's setpoint. And that if I went back to my previous level of exercise, it wouldn't change me for the worse.

I don't know.

[sophia34]

"Calories in, calories out"

Stormy, I think you can solve your problem with simple mathematics, plus a little faith in your current metabolism. If you don't already, start recording what you're eating every day and counting up the calories (there are all kinds of calorie counters online that will tell you how many calories certain foods have, in addition to the nutritional information on packaging). This is a pain, of course, and there's no way to do it long term (at least in my opinion), but it will give you a rough number on the number of calories you're eating now to maintain your weight.

Then, visit a site with a "calories burned" calculator (like www.nutritiondata.com), and plug in your height, weight, age, activity, and amount of time you spend doing it to get a rough number of calories you burn through exercise.

These two figures will give you a baseline of the number of calories you're taking in now to maintain your weight.

Then, return to your 5-mile routine, keeping your "calories in" number the same. See what happens. If the scale stays the same, you'll know your metabolism has adjusted well to the new routine and you can rest easy. If the scale starts to inch up, then you'll know you need to make an adjustment, either to "calories in" or "calories out".

However, that adjustment isn't necessarily going to be cutting back calories even further. That adjustment means that you need to change the exercise you do to something more challenging. Your body has gotten used to walking, so you need to try something else to jump start it again, to burn more calories in the same amount of time and get your CICO in balance again. I agree wholeheartedly with teck21 on that point. You're right that if you continue to walk 6-7 miles, your body would start finding THAT easy and would burn fewer calories as a result. You can't keep doing the same exercise indefinitely without having your body get used to it and hitting a plateau.

I switched from walking to jogging a couple months ago, with no ill effects on my knees as yet (and I have sensitive knees!), for that very reason. However, you could also throw a martial arts class in the mix, try spinning, jump rope, or some other more intense cardio activity. Or, you could place more emphasis on weight training.

In short, you've already proved that you've taken control of your health and weight and succeeded. So, if going back to 5 miles makes you gain weight, it doesn't mean that you should panic, or that you have to necessarily eat less, if you feel like you've already cut what you eat as far as you'd like. It simply means your body is bored and wants to try something new!