Losing 30 pounds in 3 months?
Replies
-
10lbs a month isn't too bad, that's only a half pound a week more than is recommended. Not everyone's body is the same so you could realistically lose this without really losing muscle.1
-
trigden1991 wrote: »Probably. If you're a male at 30%, you could aim for between 1-2lbs per week.
Uhhh, ... 2 lbs times 13 weeks (3 months) = 26 lbs
1 lb times 13 weeks = 13 lbs
How does aiming for a total of 13 to 26 lbs during the specified time period equal "probably" achieving goal of losing 30 lbs in said time period?0 -
moonstroller wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »amyrebeccah wrote: »If you want to lose a lot of muscle, sure
^^^^^
What Malibu said. 210 to 180 isn't a (relatively) lot to lose. 10lbs/month is dangerously aggressive weight loss that will likely bounce right back after the 3 months are over, and then you'll be back to trying all over again. It'd be easier and take less time if you lost at a more reasonable rate (1% of body weight-ish) to start with.
Agreed-and just so we're clear, in case you're thinking you're cool with the muscle loss, please be aware that your heart is a muscle.
Are you actually saying that the human body will consume its own heart to keep the body fat?
Actually, yes, it will. But not "to keep body fat." It is a matter of being unable to synthesize protein to repair tissue fast enough under high caloric stress situations.
Nope, you're wrong. The body will not destroy vital organ tissue first. Obese people on a highly restricted diet saw less than 25% loss of muscle, none in vital organs, and people who performed resistance training saw no muscle loss at all. Instead of the body destroying vital tissue to rebuild muscles being worked, it will simply delay or slow the repair of those worked muscle groups so that recovery takes longer.
Your heart is a muscle that gets "worked" every day, and needs to be repaired every day.3 -
Why the rush? and why specifically 30lbs?
My advice would be to just get on with losing the weight. Wherever you are in 3 months could be a big improvement on where you are now.
If you stick with it long term you may get to the goal you have in your head.
IMHO arbitrary over overoptimistic short term goals can lead to frustration and "falling off the wagon".
3 -
moonstroller wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »amyrebeccah wrote: »If you want to lose a lot of muscle, sure
^^^^^
What Malibu said. 210 to 180 isn't a (relatively) lot to lose. 10lbs/month is dangerously aggressive weight loss that will likely bounce right back after the 3 months are over, and then you'll be back to trying all over again. It'd be easier and take less time if you lost at a more reasonable rate (1% of body weight-ish) to start with.
Agreed-and just so we're clear, in case you're thinking you're cool with the muscle loss, please be aware that your heart is a muscle.
Are you actually saying that the human body will consume its own heart to keep the body fat?
Actually, yes, it will. But not "to keep body fat." It is a matter of being unable to synthesize protein to repair tissue fast enough under high caloric stress situations.
Nope, you're wrong. The body will not destroy vital organ tissue first. Obese people on a highly restricted diet saw less than 25% loss of muscle, none in vital organs, and people who performed resistance training saw no muscle loss at all. Instead of the body destroying vital tissue to rebuild muscles being worked, it will simply delay or slow the repair of those worked muscle groups so that recovery takes longer.
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough for you. I was affirming that muscle mass is inadequately protected in very rapid weight loss situations, not through scavenging (as incorrectly attributed) but through lack of adequate repair. As others said, you are now arguing with me for making the exact same point you made later.3 -
I did it last year with keto, which is a muscle-sparing woe.
I'm currently keto-adapted with a slightly higher protein intake to protect muscle gains. I eat ~1100 a day (high fat, moderate protein), lift 3 times a week, and EC stack with excellent results. Very pleased with the way body recomposition is going, and my energy level is through the roof. Only unpleasant side effect is bewb soreness
Keto is only muscle sparring if you get adequate protein. The majority of LCHF studies and keto studies put protein high enough to support that. If you are on a low calorie and keto diet, it absolutely will not support muscle retention. General recommendations for protein are 1.5-2.2g/kg (or roughly.6-1g/lb); towards the higher end if you are lean.
OP, it depends how tall you are. In general terms, you should aim for .5-1% per week. Once you start getting more aggressive than that, you risk increased muscle loss. And when you are losing muscle, your body fat % is reducing at a slower pace.1 -
moonstroller wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »amyrebeccah wrote: »If you want to lose a lot of muscle, sure
^^^^^
What Malibu said. 210 to 180 isn't a (relatively) lot to lose. 10lbs/month is dangerously aggressive weight loss that will likely bounce right back after the 3 months are over, and then you'll be back to trying all over again. It'd be easier and take less time if you lost at a more reasonable rate (1% of body weight-ish) to start with.
Agreed-and just so we're clear, in case you're thinking you're cool with the muscle loss, please be aware that your heart is a muscle.
Are you actually saying that the human body will consume its own heart to keep the body fat?
Actually, yes, it will. But not "to keep body fat." It is a matter of being unable to synthesize protein to repair tissue fast enough under high caloric stress situations.
Nope, you're wrong. The body will not destroy vital organ tissue first. Obese people on a highly restricted diet saw less than 25% loss of muscle, none in vital organs, and people who performed resistance training saw no muscle loss at all. Instead of the body destroying vital tissue to rebuild muscles being worked, it will simply delay or slow the repair of those worked muscle groups so that recovery takes longer.
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough for you. I was affirming that muscle mass is inadequately protected in very rapid weight loss situations, not through scavenging (as incorrectly attributed) but through lack of adequate repair. As others said, you are now arguing with me for making the exact same point you made later.
Okay, thank you for clarifying your statement.
When I made the comment about the human body consuming its own heart and you said "Actually, yes, it will." I interpreted that as you claiming the body will, in fact, destroy heart tissue in an effort to protect and/or rebuild other non vital muscle. Just to make sure I've got you correctly this time, what you're saying is when someone is eating a very low calorie diet and doing a lot of exercising, thereby stressing the heart at a much higher rate, the body will not have enough nutrients, namely protein, to repair the heart muscle quickly enough to withstand the next workout. Am I on target?2 -
At 210 with 30% fat--how'd you get that number? most measures aren't very accurate--you could reasonably aim for 2 lb/week and might lose a bit more at first. As you get leaner (I am assuming 180 is at least an initial goal weight), it will likely slow down, and I am guessing you'd like to maintain and even build muscle, so I wouldn't prioritize keeping up the loss rate vs. doing what you can to maintain muscle (exercise and protein also being extremely important). So I'd say not impossible but not something I'd focus on at your weight (if you were 300 lbs, or even 250 trying to get to 180, it would be much more likely, of course).
If you end up losing 20 or 25 instead of 30 in 3 months, and need a bit more time, but have more muscle than if you'd gotten there faster, I can't imagine you'd be that sorry when looking in the mirror.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
If you end up losing 20 or 25 instead of 30 in 3 months, and need a bit more time, but have more muscle than if you'd gotten there faster, I can't imagine you'd be that sorry when looking in the mirror.
This^^^
I think for many of us, our goals start out somewhat arbitrary like that. I was no different. I started at 240, wanted to get to 195, but then as I learned how things worked, I revised it to 170 for "classification" reasons - i.e. I wanted to go from obese (at 32%) to the normal range. I picked an arbitrary date and went aggressive when I started.
Now, at 203, I am rethinking both my goal weight and the time - for a number of reasons.
1) I realized that my target weight is just a scale number (and not a measure of my body composition)
2) I realized that the reason I wanted to reduce weight, is so that I could look more fit.
3) I realized that in order to look more fit, I needed to be more fit.
4) I realized that, since I am 54, being more fit is far more important than looking more fit anyway. It's not what I look like I can do, it's what I actually can do. So the reason to be more fit is not about looking more fit anymore, even though that was the reasoning from #2 to #3 above.
5) When I'm 64, I want to be in as good or better shape than I was at 34. And that is not impossible.
So now the goals become both long-term and short-term. Short-term I want to improve what I can do every day. Long-term I want to reach that fitness goal. Looking better (for my own vanity - which is admittedly a part of things, but a not a big part) will be a side benefit, but not the thing.
So what started off as "I need to lose weight and stop looking like a pile of goo" morphed into "I need to be healthy and able to do stuff better". As I get more addicted to activity, I much prefer the 2nd option.7 -
Know your body and speak with your doctor regularly. Everyone is different and there is no steadfast rule that applies to everyone. At the beginning of March, I weighed 355. My doctor said that my A1C was high and suggested putting me on diabetes medication and I suggested that we wait three months to see what I can do own my own through diet and exercise. I now weigh 298. I have averaged about 5 lbs a week and feel fine.2
-
Hoyasfan459 wrote: »Know your body and speak with your doctor regularly. Everyone is different and there is no steadfast rule that applies to everyone. At the beginning of March, I weighed 355. My doctor said that my A1C was high and suggested putting me on diabetes medication and I suggested that we wait three months to see what I can do own my own through diet and exercise. I now weigh 298. I have averaged about 5 lbs a week and feel fine.
I would recommend that since you speak with your doctor regularly, you check with him about your rate (hopefully you already have). At 355 when you started, 5 pounds per week could be fine, especially since early loss is probably more fluid. I'm not going to tell you that your rate is bad or unhealthy, only that it might be. And your doctor may have a very good reason for allowing you to be so aggressive. The caution I would recommend is that you probably don't want to just "know your body" because the potential side effects of an overly aggressive loss rate (not saying that yours is) won't show themselves until later.
So be careful with that.1 -
moonstroller wrote: »moonstroller wrote: »amyrebeccah wrote: »If you want to lose a lot of muscle, sure
^^^^^
What Malibu said. 210 to 180 isn't a (relatively) lot to lose. 10lbs/month is dangerously aggressive weight loss that will likely bounce right back after the 3 months are over, and then you'll be back to trying all over again. It'd be easier and take less time if you lost at a more reasonable rate (1% of body weight-ish) to start with.
Agreed-and just so we're clear, in case you're thinking you're cool with the muscle loss, please be aware that your heart is a muscle.
Are you actually saying that the human body will consume its own heart to keep the body fat?
Actually, yes, it will. But not "to keep body fat." It is a matter of being unable to synthesize protein to repair tissue fast enough under high caloric stress situations.
Nope, you're wrong. The body will not destroy vital organ tissue first. Obese people on a highly restricted diet saw less than 25% loss of muscle, none in vital organs, and people who performed resistance training saw no muscle loss at all. Instead of the body destroying vital tissue to rebuild muscles being worked, it will simply delay or slow the repair of those worked muscle groups so that recovery takes longer.
What she said. ^
The heart is a muscular organ. Anorexics, who experience long term, severe calorie and protein restriction can eventually experience heart failure, but consuming 1200 calories for a few months, especially if it's protein rich, nutritious food, is not a problem. And certainly not anything to instill fear of your body consuming the heart for energy. Lol1 -
You'll end up saggy with loose skin if you lose weight that fast. It needs to be relatively slow and must include weightbearing exercise otherwise you'll just end up looking worse (lots of loose excess skin is a far worse look than firmly overweight).0
-
You'll end up saggy with loose skin if you lose weight that fast. It needs to be relatively slow and must include weightbearing exercise otherwise you'll just end up looking worse (lots of loose excess skin is a far worse look than firmly overweight).
Please explain how losing weight slowly will make someone's skin more elastic. Or provide a medically proven link.
Skin elasticity is genetic, and is not determined by how quickly or slowly someone loses. This is a myth.1 -
gabriellejayde wrote: »You'll end up saggy with loose skin if you lose weight that fast. It needs to be relatively slow and must include weightbearing exercise otherwise you'll just end up looking worse (lots of loose excess skin is a far worse look than firmly overweight).
Please explain how losing weight slowly will make someone's skin more elastic. Or provide a medically proven link.
Skin elasticity is genetic, and is not determined by how quickly or slowly someone loses. This is a myth.
You've countered an assertion and asked for explanation, while making an assertion yourself - without explanation (by calling it a myth).
For the benefit of readers like me, who are not sure about either claim, maybe you can offer why it's a myth...
I would also ask the same question you asked of @Muana1005.0 -
I am a 5'5 20 year old female. I started at 211 pounds, as per 2 days ago, I was 184, my weight loss started pretty much Feb 21 and 3 months later ive built muscle and lost 27 lbs . it is possible. I will say I have been gyming for 3 hours a day as much as i can and my job is pretty active. my heart has been getting more strong, as ive been tracking it with my fitbit this whole journey, things like my resting heart rate , would be 65-70 and now its 58- 61. when running, my heart was pounding at my high weigh, my heart was pounding at 188-190 and now its 179 when i run at max peak1
-
Silentpadna wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »You'll end up saggy with loose skin if you lose weight that fast. It needs to be relatively slow and must include weightbearing exercise otherwise you'll just end up looking worse (lots of loose excess skin is a far worse look than firmly overweight).
Please explain how losing weight slowly will make someone's skin more elastic. Or provide a medically proven link.
Skin elasticity is genetic, and is not determined by how quickly or slowly someone loses. This is a myth.
You've countered an assertion and asked for explanation, while making an assertion yourself - without explanation (by calling it a myth).
For the benefit of readers like me, who are not sure about either claim, maybe you can offer why it's a myth...
I would also ask the same question you asked of @Muana1005.
Saggy skin can be caused by rapid weight loss because skin cannot respond and tighten as quickly as the fat is being lost, however skin can recover over time, but it can take up to two years. It's not that losing weight slowly gives the skin more elasticity, it merely gives skin time to adjust to a smaller amount of body to cover. Even losing weight slowly won't necessarily prevent saggy skin if the amount of fat being lost is large.
Major factors regarding skin elasticity are genetics, age, diet, sun exposure, smoking, how far and for how long was the skin stretched. How much weight is being lost appears to be the #1 factor. Someone who is losing 50 pounds doesn't have to worry as much about saggy skin as someone losing 250 pounds. It doesn't matter how slowly you lose the weight, if you're going from 320 pounds to 160 pounds you're going to have a lot of excess skin remaining.
If the amount of saggy skin is minimal it can be taken care of through weight training to build and tone the underlying muscles, or through a dermatologist. In extreme cases, like morbidly obese people who've had gastric bypass surgery, the excess skin needs to be surgically removed.1 -
I was 212 when I started, I lost 72lbs in 1 year, that averages to 6 lbs a month. I only aimed to lose 1lb per week. I didn't exercise. I think 10 lbs a month is too aggressive. You will put your body through starvation that maybe you can handle , but it might come back to bite you. Some people create bad habits or eating disorders. It's a very fine line. I wish you luck. Btw, I didn't read previous comments, if this was already stated, I'm sorry.1
-
I am at my 3 month mark. I have lost 30lbs in the 3 months, I even had weeks where I gained! I am 5'2" and started at 246lb. I have my MFP set at losing 1.5 lb a week. I eat my 1410 calories I am allotted and sometimes more (some days 2100 calories). I have been doing cardio and toning the entire time and feel I am getting stronger. I understand the theory/science behind it all, the muscle loss stuff, however I am considered "morbidly obese" and work a sedentary desk job. I'm not here to argue science, statistics, or be subject to ridicule for doing so.
My intentions on here are to become more healthy/fit and losing weight happens to be a plus side to that. I work out/exercise 4-5 days a week, 30 min minimum. I am not starving myself nor depriving myself by ANY means at all. I have enjoyed wine, chocolate, and what not during this 3 months. I have made MANY changes to my habits, and have learned a lot from this. I am far from perfect, but it is attainable. It is a learning process for the rest of your life. There will be ups and downs.
I am happy with where I am at, and the direction I am heading. I am also proud of what I have accomplished. Set your goal and do the work. I agree, even if you fall short a little and need a little more time, you still may be VERY happy with the changes that have occurred in the process.0 -
Has anyone tried topomax or phentermine for weight loss before ?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions