I'm not finished with Induction yet, but I have read lots of gripes the same
as yours.  It seems people often do stall for a bit after induction so try
to stick with it.  You should start losing again soon.  Best of luck.

Yes, I stalled for three weeks after a 20lb loss during Induction.
Stick with it, weight loss will start again.

--
Lexin
(300/231/182) (5'7)
LC since 9 June 2003

Yes, this is VERY common.  Also, the majority of the 13 lbs will have been from
water loss as the emergency glycogen stores in the liver become depleted.  Once
that has occurred, weight loss generally slows down considerably as the body
turns to burning fat for fuel.  There also seems to be a week or two after
induction where the body simply takes some time to adjust to the change in its
energy source.  

Often, however, you'll find that your body DOES get smaller during that period,
even though it isn't reflected on the scale.  Did you take starting measurements
or "before" photos?  If not, do so NOW.  It can be a nice boost for you to KNOW
you are making progress.  You don't have to SHARE the photos and measurements
with anyone if you don't want to.  Most cameras have a 2-10 second timer
function, so you don't even have to have someone else TAKE the photo.  Also, you
may notice small changes that aren't easily quantified such as:

- fingers are smaller - clasping them together can make that apparent to you
- cheeks may be smaller
- clothes fit better
- shoes become looser
- I raised my arm at one point and realized it was LIGHTER :-)
- I rubbed a shoulder and realized that it was smaller
- my belly became "squishier" because fat was dissolving underneath it
- thighs started to look saggier (they (and the belly) firm up again)

Sometimes it's the LITTLE things that can keep you on track and reassure you that
you ARE losing fat.  

This was posted by Doug Freyburger on 1/29/04 4:16pm:

http://www.lowcarb.org/josh_yelon/topic3.html

There are 3 listed studies.  The first explains the
biochemical basis for the standard post-Induction pause,
the reason that most folks lose best near that CCLL not
at 20, why so many stall if they stay at 20, and hints
why folks who stay low over 6 months can fall out of
ketosis Eskimo-style.

This implies that low carbing is not bad for the thyriod.
The thyroid serves as a throttle, but it does not appear
to be harmed by low carbing if T4 levels are any indication.

This shows that thyroid is *how* weight loss gets throttled
while low carbing.  As the level of thyroid decreases, the
general metabolic rates goes down as well.

This explains why no matter what plan you follow, early loss
rates are higher than later loss rates.

Bingo.  This study has located the metabolic cause of the
standard post-Induction pause in week 3.  *Extremely*
interesting.  The initial loss during Induction is fast
because the body has not had time to become more efficient.
The sticks test dark early on then and then move towards
light in week 3 just as the study predicts.

Folks, HERE is the CORE of why less is not more.  Eat too
little carbs, and your thyroid turns down its output.  Eat
enough carbs and the thyroid does not turn down its output.
This is why finding your CCLL works better for most than
staying low.

Something similar happens to low fat folks, but the study
did not identify what it was.

Here is the entire text of the abstract.

The effect of varying carbohydrate content of a very-low-caloric diet
on resting metabolic rate and thyroid hormones.
Mathieson RA, Walberg JL, Gwazdauskas FC, Hinkle DE, Gregg JM
Metabolism 1986 May;35(5):394-398

Twelve obese women were studied to determine the effects of the
combination of an aerobic exercise program with either a high
carbohydrate (HC) very-low-caloric diet (VLCD) or a low carbohydrate
(LC) VLCD diet on resting metabolic rate (RMR), serum thyroxine (T4),
3,5,3'-triiodothyronine (T3), and 3,5,3'-triiodothyronine (rT3). The
response of these parameters was also examined when subjects switched
from the VLCD to a mixed hypocaloric diet. Following a maintenance
period, subjects consumed one of the two VLCDs for 28 days. In
addition, all subjects participated in thrice weekly submaximal
exercise sessions at 60% of maximal aerobic capacity. Following VLCD
treatments, participants consumed a 1,000 kcal mixed diet while
continuing the exercise program for one week. Measurements of RMR, T4,
T3, and rT3 were made weekly. Weight decreased significantly more for
LC than HC. Serum T4 was not significantly affected during the VLCD.
Although serum T3 decreased during the VLCD for both groups, the
decrease occurred faster and to a greater magnitude in LC (34.6% mean
decrease) than HC (17.9% mean decrease). Serum rT3 increased similarly
for each treatment by the first week of the VLCD. Serum T3 and rT3 of
both groups returned to baseline concentrations following one week of
the 1,000 kcal diet. Both groups exhibited similar progressive
decreases in RMR during treatment (12.4% for LC and 20.8% for HC), but
values were not significantly lower than baseline until week 3 of the
VLCD. Thus, although dietary carbohydrate content had an influence on
the magnitude of fall in serum T3, RMR declined similarly for both
dietary treatments.

Comments: they split 12 women into two groups of 6. Half were given a
1000-calorie low-carb diet, the other half a 1000-calorie high-carb
diet. The metabolic rate of the low-carbers declined by 12.4%, the
metabolic rate of the high-carbers declined by 20.8%.

--
AmyB
LC since 12/01/03
238/224/165

i didn't just stall in the third week, i gained back everything i had
lost during induction .. but then it went right back away over the next
two weeks.  give your body some time to adjust to the new way of eating,
and remember that sometimes low carb takes a fair bit of tweaking to
figure out what's right for *you.*