Set Points / Plateaus are they real?

I think there is something to the set point & plateau theory. I think basically your body does to some extent tries to get back to your old weight even if it was an unhealthy one. I think it's especially hard if you yo yo diet for so many years. I also think as much as the body might want to go back to the old weight it can get used to your new weight, but you have to stay there for awhile to reset your set point.

I don't have any data to back it up but it does seem that the longer you stay at your new weight, the less likely your body will want to go back to the old one, then it becomes more of a mental thing, like not turning to food to cope with stress, than a physical one, i.e your body thinking famine or feast time.

You can get to your goals but it might take longer to get there.

What does "BMR" stand for?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate

My over simplified summary -- the amount of calories you burn every day just by being alive.  Any activity burns extra calories on top of that.

I think it's crap. Bodies are not "happy" at a certain weight -- brains are. Your set point is simply how many calories you take in vs how many you burn.

There have been many studies taking people who were convinced they were "broken," or at some kind of set point. They ate low calories, but still couldn't lose weight. When put into the study, where their food and activity were really closely watched, they all lost weight. All of them.

If you have not lost in 4 months, you are at maintenance. If you eat less, you will lose more. No ifs, ands, or buts.

Set point - hmmm, not so much a real thing. I think many people, even in the medical field, don't understand how massive weight loss changes calorie needs during the loss cycle. They mistake a set point in calorie balance between intake and use as the body signaling it's done losing weight. Well, yes, it's done at that caloric intake level, BUT lower your calorie intake and you will lose weight. 

What happens is this: You lose, you lose, you lose... as your weight drops your caloric need drops, too. For some people the caloric need and caloric intake even out and, presto!, you're in maintenance. For example, when I weighed close to 300 pounds I could eat easily 2500-3500 calories a day and maintain my weight. When I weigh 170 I maintain on roughly 1700-1900 calories per day. To get below 170, I have to drop my calories to about 1000-1200 and even then the loss is slow. Prior to VSG to prep for surgery I went on a 1000 calorie a day diet. I lost an average of 3-4 pounds per week and lost 20+ pounds in just about 6 weeks. Now I eat the same number of calories at a much lower weight and I lose slowly - just about a pound per week. 

Hope this makes sense. Truly monitor (weigh, measure, track) your intake and you will see the scale begin to move again. 

I think that there is something to the set point idea, though probably nothing very significant. I know that I paused on the way down at the same weights where I had been stable in previous years, so there may be some "sweet spots" that the body kinda likes, though nothing that will overcome a significant caloric deficit. In my case, I'm talking about a few days' pause at most - I only had one week where I didn't lose something during that loss phase - but it is notable when looking at a weight over time curve. A pause/stall/plateau of four months is basically maintenance.

On the metabolic formulas, any that use body weight are near useless to us, as they are intended for people of normalish weight and body composition. Try to find one that uses either lean body mass or "ideal" weight. The reasoning is that our resting metabolism is most closely correlated to our muscle or lean body mass - it's the muscles that burn the calories along with the other basic life functions (it really is "burn calories as you sleep!) An increase in muscle mass will yield an increase in metabolic rate while a loss of muscle mass will result in a decline in BMR. This is why many programs emphasize strength or resistance exercise as a means of minimizing muscle loss during our weight loss phase. Fat does virtually nothing to BMR, though the excess weight we carry/carried does burn some calories in moving around, so our overall metabolism will usually drop some as we move toward goal weight unless one seriously ramps up the exercise (as in marathon training levels of exercise.)

If one uses ones ideal or goal weight in these formulas, that should provide a "close enough" estimate to get into the ballpark - consider any extra calories burned from carrying all that excess fat around to be a bonus to your efforts - one of the problems we sometimes see, particularly with the idea of increasing calorie intake as we progress, is running into that decreasing calorie burn as the fat comes off, yielding an early fall into maintenance, so it really helps to be conservative on calorie estimates and always try to err on the side of increasing caloric deficits when possible.

I think that Gwen has the right idea with experimenting - that at least will provide some real world data on your individual situation. Track your intake and see how that corresponds to your weight over time. My final months of losing was a fairly consistent 10lb per month, which implies about a 1000 calorie per day deficit. Sure enough, in maintenance my intake is in the 21-2200 calorie range compared to 1100 when losing, so the rough numbers make sense (and my Harris-Benedict BMR is about 1750, so the ballpark is still intact.)

Another issue that may be playing to the OP's problem is the idea of metabolic damage (sometimes referred to as "the fat trap") wherein as former fatties, we don't burn calories as readily as our never-fat counterparts, so this can play havoc with these formulas. The idea, while not all that well characterized, is that our history of morbid obesity and dieting has altered our metabolism - maybe to a minor degree or possibly significantly. It's something to consider when trying to figure out "why can't I lose weight when I'm only eating 1000 calories and the formula says that I should be burning 1500?"

Thanks for your thoughts everyone.  I truly feel like there is some type of setpoint.  I have had a few stalls along the way and they were at weights that I have had "life events" (for lack of any other word) that happened at those weights.

This one...I don't know...I can't recall weighing what I do now.  I simply cannot live on 600 calories a day with my activity level.  I lift heavy weights with barbells (deadlifts, OHP, squats, bench, barbell row, push press etc.) minimum of 1 1/2 hours a day/3 -4 days a week.  Plus cardio on off days.  My BMR according to the calc mentioned above comes out at 1767 (and doesn't include activity) and I know for a fact I don't eat that much in a day to maintain.  I just can't fit that much in.

But...I feel great and the lifting/exercise makes me feel awesome so I'll keep on.  I know I will get more weight off.  I'm not done yet!

As formerly obese/MO/SMO people- yes, we will have a little more headway to make metabolically just due to basic lingering insulin resistance/fat cell abundance.. however, through all laboratory experiments, regardless of subjective "broken metabolism" excuses- it still is well less than 20% and more along the lines of 10% less efficiency of caloric intake vs. expenditure. I lost over 100% of  my excess by staying 800-1000 and very low carb till past goal. In order to maintain, I still need to stay sub 150g carbs, to lose- sub 50.

Do I agree with "set-point"? If we are speaking about behavioral- yes. Biological- no! I do not expect to ever maintain (comfortably) a "slim" body type post-op. I do expect that my surgery will allow me to maintain a "normal" body type, even if it is slightly above what I aesthetically want. The low you attain post-op for most, is not where you will stay in 2-3 years, so plan on that. I went as low as the 130's at 5'7" and with the excess skin from being over 300lbs- that was not good- and my hormonal system alerted me of this. I am officially "normal" now, 5 yrs out- I have about 20-25lbs I could lose if I stopped living silly crazy carb levels), but regardless, I have maintained well over 100lbs lost since April 2011, under extreme stress.. I did this without surgery in my 20's and was unable to maintain it this long.. under much less stress. 

I can only say- pu**** as low as you can, continue to track and measure for a couple years post-goal, and any time you start to loose control.. and know this just gave you a reset button, NOT a permanent cure. You will likely always need to keep control of carbs (frankly normies need to as well.) If you start to think you are "fixed" that's where the problems start. Things relax (I still cannot eat 2 HB eggs fast, fyi- but I CAN regain, quick).. it's a reset of choices, and a  buffer that lets you slow things down- but not stop it. It's still all your decisions. The sleeve is not malabsorptive, you still are 100% responsible for what happens. The sleeve makes it easier to live on less, but changes nothing significantly, biologically.