Progress is so slow
Options
Replies
-
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
That assumes that someone is happily eating at maintenance with no work/effort/thinking what so ever. That's not the case for most of us. For most of it, it takes work to maintain. So to work harder, just to lose 10lbs over the course of the year? No thanks. I'd rather bust my *kitten* for 3 months and be more or less done with it.
So you bust your butt for three months, what then? Isn't that why people end up yo-yo-ing? I'm really confused why my silly comment is getting so much push-back. Yeah, maintenance takes work, maintaining a small deficit takes work, maintaining a large deficit takes work. I just don't see how it's arguable that maintaining a small deficit is actually harder than maintaining a large one.deannalfisher wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
is it better to set weight loss to 1lb a week and consistently lose weight without falling off the proverbial horse, or be more aggressive and routinely scum to temptation and have cheat days because of the restrictions?
Are those the only 2 options? What about cutting really aggressive for a short period of time, then leveling off into a more balanced/sustainable diet?
Do most people actually do this successfully, though? This sounds a lot like the yo-yo dieting my mom did back in the 90s. Making slow changes that one can sustain seems like a better bet to me, but to each their own.2 -
gabriellejayde wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
I think that on the surface, that sounds like an easy plan, but how many of us make a simple change like that and find themselves thinner at the end of the year without trying anything else. Most of us will make other, not-so-great changes as well that completely counter-act the slight deficit ("oh look, a frozen yogurt shop opened up nearby!" or "mom's gotten into baking, now I always have cookies at home!").
Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
Like I mentioned above (sorry for the multi-posts, I'm feeling lazy), I did set a 2 year goal, and it doesn't feel like a prison sentence at all. It feels like I'm eating a reasonable amount of food, setting (and reaching!) achievable goals, and like I have control over my body for the first time in years. A pound a week for 8 months is 32 pounds. I'm a little under that (28-29ish down) and it feels great. I would absolutely recommend taking the extended plan to anyone hoping to make permanent, lasting change.2 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »I'm really confused why my silly comment is getting so much push-back.
Because I don't think it's representative of the vast majority of people on this site. Simply swap your afternoon soda for a tea and you'll have success??? I dunno, maybe I'm the minority... but for me, a small change like that is not the difference between success and what's normal for me.
Then again, maybe I'm just in an especially argumentative mood today. I just think that most people will need to see more significant progress to stick with something they don't otherwise enjoy doing.3 -
gabriellejayde wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
I think that on the surface, that sounds like an easy plan, but how many of us make a simple change like that and find themselves thinner at the end of the year without trying anything else. Most of us will make other, not-so-great changes as well that completely counter-act the slight deficit ("oh look, a frozen yogurt shop opened up nearby!" or "mom's gotten into baking, now I always have cookies at home!").
Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
Interesting story...a friend of mine started this with me 5 years ago...actually right around this time in September. I had 40-50 Lbs to lose...he had around 50-60 Lbs to lose. We both started off with a goal of 2 Lbs per week...I pretty quickly realized that I wasn't going to make it on that calorie target so switched it to 1 Lb per week which was very manageable and easy to sustain.
He on the other hand kept with the 2 Lbs...he would do well for a couple weeks and then run completely off the rails...get back on it and then run off the rails again...meanwhile I had a pretty easy time sticking to things and being consistent. While he would have bigger losses at times when he was on, his losses were far more inconsistent and he would put weight back on...basically for every two steps forward, he'd take one step back while I lost at a pretty consistent rate of 1 - 1.5 Lbs per week depending on the week.
I went to maintenance in April of 2013 and have been maintaining ever since. It took him around 2 years to finally get 60 Lbs off...it took me 7-8 months to take off 40...with a more reasonable calorie target, it was very easy to remain consistent and thus my weight loss was more efficient.
Tortoise and the hare...15 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »I'm really confused why my silly comment is getting so much push-back.
Because I don't think it's representative of the vast majority of people on this site. Simply swap your afternoon soda for a tea and you'll have success??? I dunno, maybe I'm the minority... but for me, a small change like that is not the difference between success and what's normal for me.
I think you're taking my comment out of context. I was only responding to the post above me that claimed that reducing one's intake enough to lose ten pounds in a year requires a lot of effort. I meant it as an illustration of how one could hypothetically do that, was all. Clearly that didn't come across, so my apologies.0 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
I think that on the surface, that sounds like an easy plan, but how many of us make a simple change like that and find themselves thinner at the end of the year without trying anything else. Most of us will make other, not-so-great changes as well that completely counter-act the slight deficit ("oh look, a frozen yogurt shop opened up nearby!" or "mom's gotten into baking, now I always have cookies at home!").
Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
Like I mentioned above (sorry for the multi-posts, I'm feeling lazy), I did set a 2 year goal, and it doesn't feel like a prison sentence at all. It feels like I'm eating a reasonable amount of food, setting (and reaching!) achievable goals, and like I have control over my body for the first time in years. A pound a week for 8 months is 32 pounds. I'm a little under that (28-29ish down) and it feels great. I would absolutely recommend taking the extended plan to anyone hoping to make permanent, lasting change.
Wow, that's really great that you've gotten to that point... that you're comfortable in your groove and seeing steady, sustainable progress. And I do mean that sincerely... no sarcasm or passive-aggressiveness. I'd love to get there one day myself, but mentally I'm not in that place.1 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
That assumes that someone is happily eating at maintenance with no work/effort/thinking what so ever. That's not the case for most of us. For most of it, it takes work to maintain. So to work harder, just to lose 10lbs over the course of the year? No thanks. I'd rather bust my *kitten* for 3 months and be more or less done with it.
So you bust your butt for three months, what then? Isn't that why people end up yo-yo-ing? I'm really confused why my silly comment is getting so much push-back. Yeah, maintenance takes work, maintaining a small deficit takes work, maintaining a large deficit takes work. I just don't see how it's arguable that maintaining a small deficit is actually harder than maintaining a large one.deannalfisher wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
is it better to set weight loss to 1lb a week and consistently lose weight without falling off the proverbial horse, or be more aggressive and routinely scum to temptation and have cheat days because of the restrictions?
Are those the only 2 options? What about cutting really aggressive for a short period of time, then leveling off into a more balanced/sustainable diet?
Do most people actually do this successfully, though? This sounds a lot like the yo-yo dieting my mom did back in the 90s. Making slow changes that one can sustain seems like a better bet to me, but to each their own.
I guess it depends on your point of view. From mine it is harder, because it basically feels like pulling off a bandaid slowly vs yanking it off quickly. That and slow results can be discouraging.0 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
I think that on the surface, that sounds like an easy plan, but how many of us make a simple change like that and find themselves thinner at the end of the year without trying anything else. Most of us will make other, not-so-great changes as well that completely counter-act the slight deficit ("oh look, a frozen yogurt shop opened up nearby!" or "mom's gotten into baking, now I always have cookies at home!").
Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
Like I mentioned above (sorry for the multi-posts, I'm feeling lazy), I did set a 2 year goal, and it doesn't feel like a prison sentence at all. It feels like I'm eating a reasonable amount of food, setting (and reaching!) achievable goals, and like I have control over my body for the first time in years. A pound a week for 8 months is 32 pounds. I'm a little under that (28-29ish down) and it feels great. I would absolutely recommend taking the extended plan to anyone hoping to make permanent, lasting change.
Wow, that's really great that you've gotten to that point... that you're comfortable in your groove and seeing steady, sustainable progress. And I do mean that sincerely... no sarcasm or passive-aggressiveness. I'd love to get there one day myself, but mentally I'm not in that place.
It was the only way that made sense to me, to be honest, and it has been going much more smoothly than I expected. I decided to trust CICO and the data over time backed it up (it helped that I spent several months logging before going into a deficit so I really trusted the numbers). But I don't feel like I'm all that unique here - the reason people give the advice to aim for 1 pound lost a week is because it works and it's sustainable. If the biggest failure point for weight-loss is compliance, then it seems fairly clear to me that sustainability is key. I get that many people struggle when they don't see quick results, so maybe that's what some people need for sustainability, but that doesn't mean it's necessary for everyone, or even the majority of people.MegaMooseEsq wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
That assumes that someone is happily eating at maintenance with no work/effort/thinking what so ever. That's not the case for most of us. For most of it, it takes work to maintain. So to work harder, just to lose 10lbs over the course of the year? No thanks. I'd rather bust my *kitten* for 3 months and be more or less done with it.
So you bust your butt for three months, what then? Isn't that why people end up yo-yo-ing? I'm really confused why my silly comment is getting so much push-back. Yeah, maintenance takes work, maintaining a small deficit takes work, maintaining a large deficit takes work. I just don't see how it's arguable that maintaining a small deficit is actually harder than maintaining a large one.deannalfisher wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
is it better to set weight loss to 1lb a week and consistently lose weight without falling off the proverbial horse, or be more aggressive and routinely scum to temptation and have cheat days because of the restrictions?
Are those the only 2 options? What about cutting really aggressive for a short period of time, then leveling off into a more balanced/sustainable diet?
Do most people actually do this successfully, though? This sounds a lot like the yo-yo dieting my mom did back in the 90s. Making slow changes that one can sustain seems like a better bet to me, but to each their own.
I guess it depends on your point of view. From mine it is harder, because it basically feels like pulling off a bandaid slowly vs yanking it off quickly. That and slow results can be discouraging.
I get that, I really do. But there's only so fast people can lose weight without risking their health, so why not cultivate a little patience? Unlike rapid weight loss, there are no physical ill-effects from pulling a band-aid off quickly, and losing weight slowly doesn't have to mean extending the pain (other than impatience it genuinely doesn't feel much like pain at all).0 -
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
I think that on the surface, that sounds like an easy plan, but how many of us make a simple change like that and find themselves thinner at the end of the year without trying anything else. Most of us will make other, not-so-great changes as well that completely counter-act the slight deficit ("oh look, a frozen yogurt shop opened up nearby!" or "mom's gotten into baking, now I always have cookies at home!").
Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
Like I mentioned above (sorry for the multi-posts, I'm feeling lazy), I did set a 2 year goal, and it doesn't feel like a prison sentence at all. It feels like I'm eating a reasonable amount of food, setting (and reaching!) achievable goals, and like I have control over my body for the first time in years. A pound a week for 8 months is 32 pounds. I'm a little under that (28-29ish down) and it feels great. I would absolutely recommend taking the extended plan to anyone hoping to make permanent, lasting change.
Wow, that's really great that you've gotten to that point... that you're comfortable in your groove and seeing steady, sustainable progress. And I do mean that sincerely... no sarcasm or passive-aggressiveness. I'd love to get there one day myself, but mentally I'm not in that place.
It was the only way that made sense to me, to be honest, and it has been going much more smoothly than I expected. I decided to trust CICO and the data over time backed it up (it helped that I spent several months logging before going into a deficit so I really trusted the numbers). But I don't feel like I'm all that unique here - the reason people give the advice to aim for 1 pound lost a week is because it works and it's sustainable. If the biggest failure point for weight-loss is compliance, then it seems fairly clear to me that sustainability is key. I get that many people struggle when they don't see quick results, so maybe that's what some people need for sustainability, but that doesn't mean it's necessary for everyone, or even the majority of people.MegaMooseEsq wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
That assumes that someone is happily eating at maintenance with no work/effort/thinking what so ever. That's not the case for most of us. For most of it, it takes work to maintain. So to work harder, just to lose 10lbs over the course of the year? No thanks. I'd rather bust my *kitten* for 3 months and be more or less done with it.
So you bust your butt for three months, what then? Isn't that why people end up yo-yo-ing? I'm really confused why my silly comment is getting so much push-back. Yeah, maintenance takes work, maintaining a small deficit takes work, maintaining a large deficit takes work. I just don't see how it's arguable that maintaining a small deficit is actually harder than maintaining a large one.deannalfisher wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
is it better to set weight loss to 1lb a week and consistently lose weight without falling off the proverbial horse, or be more aggressive and routinely scum to temptation and have cheat days because of the restrictions?
Are those the only 2 options? What about cutting really aggressive for a short period of time, then leveling off into a more balanced/sustainable diet?
Do most people actually do this successfully, though? This sounds a lot like the yo-yo dieting my mom did back in the 90s. Making slow changes that one can sustain seems like a better bet to me, but to each their own.
I guess it depends on your point of view. From mine it is harder, because it basically feels like pulling off a bandaid slowly vs yanking it off quickly. That and slow results can be discouraging.
I get that, I really do. But there's only so fast people can lose weight without risking their health, so why not cultivate patience? Yanking a bandaid off quickly doesn't risk malnutrition, after all, and losing weight slowly doesn't have to mean extending the pain (other than impatience it genuinely doesn't feel like pain at all).
I would agree with that, and I do think that 1lb/week is probably the sweet spot for most. It's fast enough to see progress which helps with both reassurance and motivation, but moderate enough to be reasonably sustainable for most people.
My original question wasn't directed at any one person, even if I did quote a previous reply... but asking more generally - If someone was working hard (whatever that means to them), and the result was .2lbs/week or just over 10lbs/year, how many people would find that encouraging and worthy of the effort they were giving? Personally, it wouldn't for me. But that's me. Give me 1lb a week and I'm all in.0 -
I've been losing about a half a pound every 10 days. It is not nearly as satisfying as when I was doing a more aggressive deficit in terms of scale data but entirely easier for me, since my maintenance level is most people's 500 calorie daily deficit level. Ya do what you gotta do.1
-
I workout 5 times a week, I eat healthy, I am a bit confused in between tracking macros and tracking just calories... I'm not sure which of the two to focus on. Second, I do not eat back my exercise points...I used to be 174, I hit my goal weight of 134 and maintained it for 5 years, now I am at 145. I would like to get back down to 135, I wear a size 8 in pants, and I have been stuck in the 140's for two years now. I can't seem to get back down to the 130's....Thats my story... I am attaching a picture of myself at my highest weight...and one as of right now
1 -
The last 10-15lbs are usually the hardest. Do you switch up your workouts? Give 100% and see if your heart rate is at a higher level?
As far as the macros vs calories are concerned, I have my goals to where they fit into both. I enter foods in before I eat them to see what the calories/macros will look like and keep trying until I find something that fits.
Best of Luck! It sounds like you are close, don't give up now!1 -
3 -
I completely understand what your going through. I have been stalled out for a few months now and I have been at this for 2 years. I have changed up several different things several different times to no avail. Keep pushing forward and trying and don't give up!0
-
Focus on counting your calorie intake. Your macros, though important are secondary for weight loss. Don't neglect nutrition though.
You may want to review your logging practices. Double check the entries you are using, and weigh everything, no generic inputs like, dab of oil, orange, slice of bread- these are things I did when my loss was going well, but would start weighing again as soon as I thought I was having problems.
Also, check you have the correct calorie goal for your weight now, and because you have so little to lose, .5 lbs a week would be an appropriate rate of loss.
As a side note, MFP is set up so you eat your exercise calories back. You may find it helpful long term to try and do this then if you need to take an exercise break you can knowing what your base, non exercise, calories are.
Cheers, h.2 -
I have heard that sometimes is good to take a few weeks off working out. Bring your calorie intake down to match. Just walk and do gentle stuff like yoga, then when you start training harder again your body is jolted into action again. Anyone else have this experience? I did it last year before my wedding. Stopped training, switched to mostly vegetarian and raw foods for a few weeks and lost another 2-3% body fat.2
-
Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
As someone who lost about 20lb in a year and also gained a few lbs of muscle I think it should be encouraging. Slow progress is still progress and the changes I made in my fitness have made my body look a lot different. Not only that I feel better and heft stronger every week.2 -
gabriellejayde wrote: »MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Oh one other thing let's say you lose 0.2 lbs a week. That is still more than 10 lbs a year.
Time is on your side.
I wonder if that's encouraging to most people... Making effort every single day for 10lbs per year? I'm not trying to be snarky, it's a legit question. If someone told me that, if they said, "Hey, do the best you can and you can reasonably expect to lose 10-15lbs over the course of a year" I'd probably just accept that I'm going to be fat forever. That is nto a good return on investment for me.
I suspect that the deficit needed to lose 0.2 lbs a week would be pretty dang easy - we're not talking an hour of cardio and a 1000 deficit a day. More like swapping the afternoon soda for an ice tea.
I think that on the surface, that sounds like an easy plan, but how many of us make a simple change like that and find themselves thinner at the end of the year without trying anything else. Most of us will make other, not-so-great changes as well that completely counter-act the slight deficit ("oh look, a frozen yogurt shop opened up nearby!" or "mom's gotten into baking, now I always have cookies at home!").
Whenever I see someone come here and talk about how hard it is to stick to their calorie goals, someone will always tell them to reduce their weightloss goal to 1lb per week. That is fine if you don't have much to lose, but for the person who needs to lose a lot, having it take 2 years seems like a prison sentence.
It's not a sentence, it's reality. It took me 2.5 years to lose 150 lbs. Was it a long time? Yes! Did I sometimes feel sorry for myself? Yes! So what did I do? I read the success stories of people who took 3 or 4 years to lose even more. Then I felt glad I didn't have more to lose. Why do we think that weight loss should happen FAST?1 -
I workout 5 times a week, I eat healthy, I am a bit confused in between tracking macros and tracking just calories... I'm not sure which of the two to focus on. Second, I do not eat back my exercise points...I used to be 174, I hit my goal weight of 134 and maintained it for 5 years, now I am at 145. I would like to get back down to 135, I wear a size 8 in pants, and I have been stuck in the 140's for two years now. I can't seem to get back down to the 130's....Thats my story... I am attaching a picture of myself at my highest weight...and one as of right now
It's just calories. You can "eat healthy" and workout and still gain weight if you are eating too many calories. Sounds like you need to tighten up your logging and diet to see results. Weigh and log everything that goes into your mouth.
1 -
I workout 5 times a week, I eat healthy, I am a bit confused in between tracking macros and tracking just calories... I'm not sure which of the two to focus on. Second, I do not eat back my exercise points...I used to be 174, I hit my goal weight of 134 and maintained it for 5 years, now I am at 145. I would like to get back down to 135, I wear a size 8 in pants, and I have been stuck in the 140's for two years now. I can't seem to get back down to the 130's....Thats my story... I am attaching a picture of myself at my highest weight...
Focus on calories and use a food scale for every solid and semi-solid food possible. The last 10 is super hard because it's vanity lbs and you just kind of have to have faith in the process. Hang in there!2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 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
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions