When I first started PP in January, I didn't pay any attention at all to calories. Then I wasn't losing so I played around with them and found that if I could get in about 1800 a day, I would lose. Any less, I wouldn't. Now that I'm closer to my goal, I can't seem to lose unless I eat about 1000 a day. I'm messing up my metabolism with that few calories, aren't I? Not sure what else to do, though, and I'm starting to get hungry all the time. This is deja vu from the low-fat, high-carb days and I hate it! I started PP at 161 lbs but had already lost 20 doing lf/hc. Yeah, the low calories are working for the short-term but long-term...hmmm, I'm stuck here. I keep protein at about 100 g/day and carbs below 30 g/day. I've got 14 lbs to go and not sure how to deal with these last few as straight PP doesn't seem to be working for me anymore. Any suggestions? Thanks in adavance

Tara

100g of protein and 30g of carbs would be about 520 calories. That would put your calories from fat percetnage at about 48%. You might try upping your calories with pure fats - more butter, sippng oil or something like that - and see what happens.

If we follow the 10x rule and 70% fat rule, that would put your protein into the 80g per day range. So you are in the ballpark on that. You might back the protein off a bit, but be sure to compensate with more fat.

Good luck!

What I have to say may not go over very well. That said...maybe you may need to rethink your goal weight. You are 5'6" and want to be 135? Maybe you are truly at your ideal body weight right now. Just a thought. Even so, you should not have to eat only 1000 calories to maintain or lose weight. It may be a throwback from your low fat days. Another thing...when you are so close to your goal weight, weight loss generally is slower. So don't be too impatient with yourself. Victoria

Victoria makes a real good point - I didn't even bother to check your height. The Met Life Tables (which are a good initial guide - but are only that) show that 135 would only be a reasonable weight for you if you are a small framed or very light-medium framed woman. So that is definitely something you want to consider. Society sends all of these messages (to everyone, but particularly to women) that ultra-thin is ultra-desireable. But that doesn't mean that it is at all healthy.

Livj...

Be careful not to mistake a natural stall or plateu, during which your body takes a break from loosing to adjust, with a permanent stop in weight loss. The closer you get to your goal, the slower the weight will come off. It's easy to get impatient and try to start up the weight loss again by doing what worked in the past (lowering caloric intake), but give your body some time to adjust. Wbahn makes a good point with the fat intake, too. At your current weight, you should be taking in at least 1,500 calories a day, 60-70% of which should come from fat.

2 of you mentioned impatience in your posts and, as much as I hate to admit it, I really think that nailed it. Guess I needed to be reminded that this is a process, not an event! I'll work on the caloric intake by lowering protein a bit and adding some fat as you suggested, Wbahn. A big thanks to all of you for your input

Tara

Tara--one more piece of advice. Get your body fat tested (not the measurement method in Eades, but calipers wielded by an expert or a higher-tech method). Those weight tables assume women are undereating protein and don't lift weights. If you're eating adequate protein, your Lean Body Mass is probably higher than average. If you lift, it's probably higher still.

Nat has more extensive tables, but the general guide for healthy body fat in women is:

age 16-25: 18-22%
age 25-40: 19-24%
age 40-menopause: 22-25%
post-menopause: 26-28%

If you're a performance athlete and are making a living off that job, 12-17% BF is okay for the years you're a pro (you're being compensated for the risk, at least); for the rest of us, trying to get there is unhealthy, nearly impossible, and unsustainable. Fashion models run around 10%...so if we keep comparing ourselves to their unhealthy bodies, we'll never feel okay about being at a healthy BF%. That sense of disatisfaction is, of course, what the fashion and weight loss industry is trying to engender...but why let them win at the cost to your pocketbook, your self-concept, and your health?

Last, but not least --

Think about taking measurements! They may indicate more change in body composition than the scale.

Also, if you don't exercise, consider adding it in! Weight training in particular can really change things around!

Lisa

Razzle, you are so right! It is exactly what they try to engender. I think the thing that frustrates me the most is that the majority of people, when comparing the average woman with a fashion model, will state (when it all comes down to it) that the latter is beautiful and the former healthy. It sort of gives me the impression that to be healthy, you'll end up looking "good but not as good as they do." IMO, though, fashion models have the bodies of 13 year-old girls, not grown women (minus the help from our friends, the "plastics"). A close to 6-foot model weighs less than my goal weight so that for a 5'6" woman, I don't feel that my goal is at all unrealistic. When I first started this woe, my goal was 125 but I realized that what I really want is to look like a woman, not a child. I would like to be at about 20-21% body fat. I'm 24-25% now. But that's using those tables so I'll take your advice and have someone test with calipers. I have already added weight training but haven't been at all consistent with it. Need to work on that too. I love the strength and energy I get from lifting weights more than anything else!

I appreciate all your advice.

Tara