50 lbs in a year realistic?

jemhh

You can do it!

I started at the beginning of January of this year and hit 50 pounds in late October/early November. It is definitely doable

fitfabforties

I did it.....I was 172lb in January 2012 and by February/March 2013 I was 120lb....I'm back up to 135lb right now....but that's another story....sighhh....trying to get that off again.....totally doable though.....:)

Strikingly_Jackie

absolutely doable... I am down 96 since February and I couldn't move for most of the month of November... be consistent!

TheRealNoodlette

Definitely do-able. I've lost over 60 lbs since March. I started at 209. My friends cannot keep commenting on my appearance. I feel awesome! You can do it!

Erikhulse

Considering I lost 180 pounds in a year, I'd say 50 is doable...

Smoofalz

You can definitely do that. I've gone down 55 pounds since June. (so like 6 months). So wanting to lose 50 in a year sounds really reasonable. Yes, you might not see the weight fall off as fast as you get closer to your goal, but even with that I think you should make it in a year if you are sticking to your calorie goals.

katherine_startrek_fan

Most say that once you get to within 40 pounds of goal, you should drop down to 1 pound per week, and at twenty 20 pounds to goal, you should switch your weekly goal down to 1/2 pound per week.

With all of the posts for people struggling to lose the last ten or twenty pounds, I wouldn't necessarily bank on losing all 50 pounds by the goal you set.

I'm not saying you can't do it, but would just say to take the weight loss as it comes. You're already successful in my book, and you shouldn't put too much pressure to lose weight by a made up end date.

michsax14

It's definitely doable if you are committed!

beamer0821

sure! i did it in 6 months. i really wasn't even "killing" myself. i ate around 13-1500 calories. i was starting 255 fyi. so if losing 50lbs gets you down to goal weight you might struggle more? i think the closer you get to goal weight the hard it might be for some people?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

dale530

I've lost 107 pounds since February 2nd. 50# in a year is very doable. Good luck!!!

Lalalindaloo

TallyToes wrote: »

So yeah, 50lbs feasible or is it probably not gonna happen?

I've been going since late April, just hit 51 lbs. Totally do-able! I started about 20 lbs lighter than you, but am also 5'2". You can do it!

***edited to add: hit the strength training extra hard! I wish I had done so earlier.

caitconquersweight

Yep. I've lost 55 pounds this year. Of course it depends on where you were when you started. I was 255 in January, I'm now hovering around 200. I haven't been 100% strict, either. I'm doing this as a lifestyle change, NOT a diet. So I still go out to eat, have cheat days, eat junk food, whatever.

KHalseth

Very realistic. It is the lower side of the recommended speed of one to two lbs a week but no more than that.

heybales

TallyToes wrote: »

bulbadoof wrote: »

Don't eat back -all- your exercise calories. The consensus is that MFP tends to generously overestimate. Eat back 50-70% of them, to account for errors.

I actually hardly eat back any of my exercise calories at the moment. I like to leave as much room as possible for any calories I might have missed or didn't calculate right. MFP currently has me set at 1520 calories a day, which I'm usually under but occasionally meet or eat a bit over, with anywhere from 200 to 500 calories burned from exercise added in. (I actually tend to underestimate my calorie burn on purpose just in case)

Be aware then that you are making your deficit bigger, potentially must bigger with all your assumptions that inaccuracy leads to calories on the wrong side of the equation.

And bigger is not better for long term sustained success.
Your Exact distance and time mean you can log very accurate calorie burns, and really should eat them back to keep the deficit reasonable.

Were you really losing over 2 lbs weekly just recently then on first 50 lbs, because with already doing that, you should have been.
If you were not, you likely already freaked your body out a bit and it's adapted already. Not good.

And already eating 1520 with whatever level of long exercise you do.
Have you played out the end game?
What will be your required eating level and exercise level to keep losing, since you burn less when you weigh less?
And how sucky will your maintenance level be?

You might for fun change your MFP setting of current weight to goal weight, and see what it suggests your maintenance would be for not losing weight.
And realize that is for non-exercise days. If you are already eating close to that with lots of exercise merely to lose - that's going to be one unhappy maintenance because you'll have to eat even less then recommended.

Just saying, you got the logging down real well, so if weight loss prior wasn't over 2 lbs weekly by decent amount, it's started already.

pinkshoelaces

heybales wrote: »

TallyToes wrote: »

bulbadoof wrote: »

Don't eat back -all- your exercise calories. The consensus is that MFP tends to generously overestimate. Eat back 50-70% of them, to account for errors.

I actually hardly eat back any of my exercise calories at the moment. I like to leave as much room as possible for any calories I might have missed or didn't calculate right. MFP currently has me set at 1520 calories a day, which I'm usually under but occasionally meet or eat a bit over, with anywhere from 200 to 500 calories burned from exercise added in. (I actually tend to underestimate my calorie burn on purpose just in case)

Be aware then that you are making your deficit bigger, potentially must bigger with all your assumptions that inaccuracy leads to calories on the wrong side of the equation.

And bigger is not better for long term sustained success.
Your Exact distance and time mean you can log very accurate calorie burns, and really should eat them back to keep the deficit reasonable.

Were you really losing over 2 lbs weekly just recently then on first 50 lbs, because with already doing that, you should have been.
If you were not, you likely already freaked your body out a bit and it's adapted already. Not good.

And already eating 1520 with whatever level of long exercise you do.
Have you played out the end game?
What will be your required eating level and exercise level to keep losing, since you burn less when you weigh less?
And how sucky will your maintenance level be?

You might for fun change your MFP setting of current weight to goal weight, and see what it suggests your maintenance would be for not losing weight.
And realize that is for non-exercise days. If you are already eating close to that with lots of exercise merely to lose - that's going to be one unhappy maintenance because you'll have to eat even less then recommended.

Just saying, you got the logging down real well, so if weight loss prior wasn't over 2 lbs weekly by decent amount, it's started already.

Even though I weigh all of my food, I always assume that even that's not entirely accurate, especially with foods like pizza or lasagna where it's comprised of more than one ingredient. I just like to leave a little room for error in those cases. I doubt my deficit is extremely large even when taking that into account because as I said I can eat up to 200 calories more than MFP has recommended.

With my first 50lbs, I had lost probably around 5lbs a week for a good while. It's slowed a bit now, because I'm lighter and I'm also eating a bit more than I was when I first started. I generally never feel like I'm starving or miserable so I don't feel it necessary to eat back any of my exercise calories.

pinkshoelaces

MrM27 wrote: »

First time in a while I've seen someone set a goal that is realistic.

I'm glad it's at least not a totally aggressive goal. I was afraid I might have been far too optimistic haha.

Kalikel

You can lose fifty pounds in a year. Don't slack off early thinking you have extra time, though. The more you lose, the harder it gets! It doesn't fly off at 170 the same way it did at 220. It can be done, though.