Is 20lbs in two months realistic?

Seeyoubabyweight

I started January 1 weighing 150lbs. I was shocked to step on the scale today and see it at 140lbs.
I've failed so many times in the past that I set a simple goal of 3lbs for the month. To see a 10lb loss is way beyond what I figured.
I'm planning the simple 3lb goal again for February, but deep down I'm hoping to see the big numbers again.
So I'm wondering if it's possible to do again? Knowing that it only have a total of 20lbs left to lose.

janessakalie949

Yes if you work it's very possible

JAT74

How have you been able to lose so much? I started at 147lbs and have list 5lbs in a month and it's been REALLY hard. Working out daily and netting 800-900 calories. Plus most of my loss so far was on the first 2.5 weeks.

I still want to lose 25 more pounds so it sounds like our goals are similar but think my problem is I wasn't eating a huge amount before I started.

Francl27

Nope. It was water weight. When you have 20 pounds to lose you should aim to lose half a pound a week, not more, or it's not healthy at all.

ninerbuff

Not unusual to lose a good amount of weight the first month. Doing it back to back (unless you've got a lot of weight to lose) will be much tougher.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

malibu927

A good chunk of what you lose at first will be water weight, so no. At your size, losing 10 pounds of fat in a month is not healthy.

ana3067

At your weight, no, 20lbs in two months is not that realistic. You lost water weight and likely are also noticing natural fluctuations on top of the fat loss, and you potentially lost some lean body mass. There is no 3lbs/month goal on MFP, so most likely you were eating low enough to promote a more aggressive loss.

SergeantSausage

It's quite possible, no problem, really.

It also has a 100% chance of absolutely miserable suckage if you succeed, and ... I dunno ... about a 92% chance of failure... so if you fail it will be misery first, failure second.

Why do folks make it so hard on themselves when they don't have to?

It's not necessary.

20 pounds in 2 months will carry a heavy toll in misery.

20 pounds in 5 months will not even be noticed by most folks - no hunger, no pain, no misery.

Why choose the wrong option?

williams969

I'll echo what others have said. Another 10 lb month is probably going to be miserable on you, even if you somehow manage to lose at that aggressive pace. I started at a similar place as you, lost 7 or 8 lbs the first month. And a modest 3lbs per month after that. It would be wise to set a modest goal and assume a similar pace.

Don't set yourself up for another yo-yo (as you self-admitted in your profile) by being so aggressive. Why not try for a sane and sustainable, less "punishing" way? You deserve it

Liftng4Lis

The 3-4 pounds is a month is a more realistic goal. The initial month always has that water loss going on.

Steph_135

I wish that were a possibility for me, but it took me 2 years to lose 20 lbs. Haven't lost much weight in the past 2 years, mind you, but those 20 lbs are GONE! No matter how off track I have been, they are gone for good. Lose at your own pace.

Codilee87

Since Jan 1st til today I have lost 14lbs, but the first 10 came off so fast that I know it was just water - the last 4 have been challenging and I fully anticipate the rest to be just as hard (and harder). Doount on losing that much every month.

Seeyoubabyweight

JAT74 wrote: »

How have you been able to lose so much? I started at 147lbs and have list 5lbs in a month and it's been REALLY hard. Working out daily and netting 800-900 calories. Plus most of my loss so far was on the first 2.5 weeks.

I still want to lose 25 more pounds so it sounds like our goals are similar but think my problem is I wasn't eating a huge amount before I started.

I honestly don't know what I've done, for me its all been in my mind set. I'm actually set to lose 1lb/week with a lightly active lifestyle (which is accurate, I have an on the go job) so my count is 1360/day. I admit I'm often under that, but rarely below 1250, occasionally I've been over too. I used to snack and just not log when I went over, or say "I will start again tomorrow, than tomorrow, than tomorrow" so I'd lose 3/4lbs and quit than end up gaining it back again. This time I ignored the scale for the month, my goal was not the weight. My stats were set and my only goal was to log each day and do everything I can not to go over, or if I did, to start the next day new. Since my plan is to get healthy for a trip to Mexico in July I averaged out to allow myself to be happy with a 3lb loss/month. If I stick to it, I'm down 18lbs by our trip and for me that is a simple achievable goal. Before I was always looking long term, I'd say I want 20lbs in 6months, but would find myself thinking "lots of time, take a break".

I needed the reminder not to get my hopes up. I was just shocked and of course a little hopeful that somehow this time it would be easier. I know deep down it was mostly water weight, but well a girl can dream a little right? I am organizing the funds and time to start a bootcamp class next week, so hopefully that will give me a little extra push this month. I'll be okay if some muscle mass bumped my scale a bit too.

I'm not sure about those saying I have to high goals. I am happy to lose 3lb/month, that is quite realistic as far as I see. I'm already only 5lbs from a weight I'd be happy with. The only reason I'm thinking 10 more is a "why not" mindset. Was I excited to lose so much initially, absolutely, however I once again will be happy to start March with a 3lb loss. That was the point to this thread, a reminder that I most likely won't see another big drop.

I am curious, I've read a few times that people who only need to lose 20lbs or less should aim for .5lbs/week. I'm wondering why? I know I did drop roughly 2lbs/week, last month, but as its been pointed out that was mostly water weight and not likely to happen again. However if I am able to manage the 1lb is that okay? I did initially set my count at the .5/week since it was the closest option to my 3lb/month. The intake was so high I was always way under. That's why I swapped things around to the 1lb and lightly active.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

tennisdude2004

For you to lose this you would need to have a calorie deficit of probably over 9000 cals. Now that's either not much food or a hell of a lot of exercise (based on losing it healthily) although I would argue a calorie burn of 9,000 a week over an 8 week period would not be healthy, nor would a reduced calorie intake.

As the posters above mentioned your initial large loss would be water weight. After that a steady .05 - 1g is probably more advisable (again this would take some work).

I would say that if you do find yourself continuing to lose above 2lb a week without putting in a lot of effort in, whilst this may seem what you are after, it is likely you will be losing lean mass as opposed to fat, so be careful.

The main thing is lose it healthily and get sufficient protein and if you can, lean more towards resistance training than cardio (maybe focus on the cardio on rest days). HIIT sprints are good for a calorie burn.

SwankyTomato

I am lucky to lose 2 lbs in a month. That being said I need to lose16bs and my loss is set to .5/week.

I did lose 3lbs last month. I am happy to maintain that at the moment.

JAT74

Sometimes the numbers don't correlate that closely with what's been predicted. I have my calories set to lose 1.5lbs per week and taking into account water weight I probably initially lost 3lb water and then started losing fat at a rate of less than 1lb per week, more like 0.5.

Our bodies are all different, and for some it's easier to lose than others.

The only thing to be mindful of is that if you're losing that quickly without exercise you may be losing muscle. Maybe try adding exercise and eating more to slow down the rate, or even just eating more!

Wiseandcurious

One of the dangers is that you will lose muscle (hate to say it, but you already may have). And losing too much muscle will mean that you end up lighter, but proportionally fatter than you started! And also a bigger lowering of your TDEE than if you had lost mostly fat, so harder to maintain the weight loss afterwards.

And that's all ignoring the stress this rate of weight loss puts on your smaller body than it would on someone twice your size.

Since a lot of this is probably water weight, if you increase your intake a little you may see an initial gain on the scale - just ignore that and let your body settle in a healthier loss rate and you will keep losing, but more healthily and for good!

jameskipcarrington

There are no absolutes in life and this is true here as well. It is absolutely possible to lose ten pounds or more in a month. It's just not easy or simple. Most people throw the following two statements at anyone trying to lose more than 2lbs a week: it's not safe and it's not sustainable.

Whilst there is a degree of truth to both these statements they are not exactly 100% accurate.

The reason it might not be safe is that in order to lose more than 2lbs a week, you will need to be hitting a 1000+ calorie deficit every day which for me would be a limit of 1500 a day. Getting lower than this runs the risk of you not getting enough nutrients, minerals and vitamins and whilst that's no problem in the short term (a few days), will cause problems if you do it on an ongoing basis.

The way I get round this is activity and lots of it. If you are averaging 500-1000 calories a day in extra activity then you have far more scope to limit the calories eaten and still get the nutrients you need. Many people have been skeptical about this but I don't mean you have to be flogging yourself to death in the gym every day. For example, today I have been in the gym pushing weights for half an hour (not power lifting, just high reps low weight), I jogged 3 miles home from work and on the way into work I got off the bus some stops early and walked for half an hour. MFP tells me that was worth 814 calories total. Other days I might swim or go for a very long walk with the kids. Or do a lot of other Non Exercise Activity; trying to keep to 10k steps a day is good and MFP has a step counter I believe. I'm not exhausted and I have had plenty to eat today. On that subject, most of what I'm eating at the moment is either meat, fish vegetables and eggs with some occasional nuts and some protein shakes when I've done a big work out like 6.5 mile run on Sunday, to aid recovery.

My so called water weight does not change as I drink plenty and I work all the major muscle groups to retain my lean mass ( I keep an eye on both). Your muscles are made up of quite a bit of water and when you lose lean mass its this water and some muscle fibre that is lost. If you take steps to avoid this, then what you're losing is not water weight. It's hard but it can be done.

On the subject of sustainability. The speed at which you lose weight has very little to do whether you keep it off, from a point of view of how your body metabolises various fuel sources. If you crash diet/starvation diet, it's highly likely that you are not losing just fat but lean body mass as well (muscle etc). As soon as you start eating half way sensibly the body simply repairs the muscle and other lean mass it may have used, which includes a fair degree of water. If you do it the way I mentioned above, involving some gym work, high protein and eating right then that factor is taken out. There is the factor that starving yourself causes your metabolic rate to slow (how your body uses fuel to keep you alive). Again, if you're eating right, exercising and not skipping food, this shouldn't be an issue.

The other reason is, that it's no good if you go right back to the eating habits that got you overweight in the first place. But no one denies that. Once I finish my 28 Day programme I will ease some carbs back into my diet and ease up on the exercise a bit. If I find I am gaining more than a few pounds I go back on a week of maintainance. If I have more weight to lose, I take a break for a week eating sensibly but up to 2500 a day and light exercise and then start again. In these week breaks, I have not gained any weight and the second 28 days has been as effective as the first.

It's definitely easier to change your diet and exercise lifestyle first to what you plan to make it long term and see the weight come off slowly but that doesn't mean it's the only way.

You will need to so a degree of planning both meal planning, activity planning (which resulted in me buying a small amount of equipment and apps etc) and some discipline but I have been able to do this for 28 day stretches before and lost anywhere between 12 and 20 pounds in that time with no ill effects that I could see. I've done this three times now. My need for this is that I play a lot of sport and when I got a couple of major injuries (broken leg etc) I have put on quite a bit of weight. There's no real reason to do it this way rather than slow and steady, I just like to get back to what I call my fighting weight as quickly as possible. Some people have said to me that it's best to get it over with as soon as possible but it is not a matter of 'over', you need to permanently change the habits that got you overweight in the first place.

A lot of posters have referenced water weight. I think I have covered this if I have understood the term correctly. I don't disagree with anything that's been said and its a thin window but you can lose weight quickly and ensure most if not all is fat if you maintain LBM. If anything my LBM goes up slightly during these 28 day sessions. I imagine people will say it's not possible, but I've done it 3 times now. Also, think of all those Biggest Loser programmes on TV, those guys are losing over a pound a DAY for a six month period or longer, and they are looked after by a team of dieticians and exercise experts so are making sure the LBM is protected and sufficient nutrition is being taken on, and that can't be water weight, it's just not possible.

So in summary, definitely possible to do safely and in a sustainable way BUT it takes 28 days of will power, careful planning, being no stranger to exercise, pushing weights and activity and discipline.

Good luck!

rosebette

The thing is, James..., (don't want to quote your big post) but you are a male, probably with a larger body mass than the OP. She is female and now at 140. We don't know what her stats are, but unless she is petite, she is fairly close to normal weight. She is not like one of the candidates on World's Biggest Loser. She probably saw a good loss the first month due to loss of water weight, rev'd metabolism due to adopting exercise routine, and she is eating at a deficit. As she approaches a weight that is in the healthy range for her body, she's not going to lose at that level. My advice is for her to keep doing what she's doing now, which is a healthy way to lose, and see where she is in a month.

cwolfman13

I lost quite a bit in my first month...most of which was really in the first couple of weeks...it slowed down dramatically after that due to the fact that a lot of my big, early losses were drops in water weight and having less waste in my system from consuming less.

Your goals to lost 3-4 Lbs per month are very realistic...expecting to lose 10 again this month is probably not so realistic unless you're really depriving yourself of calories and substantially under-eating.

These kinds of losses are more sustainable for people who are obese/morbidly obese as they have the fat stores to support large energy deficits...without those fat stores, you're not going to be able to maintain that pace...you also run the risk of losing a greater % of muscle and other lean mass in the process.

astrose00

jameskipcarrington wrote: »

There are no absolutes in life and this is true here as well. It is absolutely possible to lose ten pounds or more in a month. It's just not easy or simple. Most people throw the following two statements at anyone trying to lose more than 2lbs a week: it's not safe and it's not sustainable.

Whilst there is a degree of truth to both these statements they are not exactly 100% accurate.

The reason it might not be safe is that in order to lose more than 2lbs a week, you will need to be hitting a 1000+ calorie deficit every day which for me would be a limit of 1500 a day. Getting lower than this runs the risk of you not getting enough nutrients, minerals and vitamins and whilst that's no problem in the short term (a few days), will cause problems if you do it on an ongoing basis.

The way I get round this is activity and lots of it. If you are averaging 500-1000 calories a day in extra activity then you have far more scope to limit the calories eaten and still get the nutrients you need. Many people have been skeptical about this but I don't mean you have to be flogging yourself to death in the gym every day. For example, today I have been in the gym pushing weights for half an hour (not power lifting, just high reps low weight), I jogged 3 miles home from work and on the way into work I got off the bus some stops early and walked for half an hour. MFP tells me that was worth 814 calories total. Other days I might swim or go for a very long walk with the kids. Or do a lot of other Non Exercise Activity; trying to keep to 10k steps a day is good and MFP has a step counter I believe. I'm not exhausted and I have had plenty to eat today. On that subject, most of what I'm eating at the moment is either meat, fish vegetables and eggs with some occasional nuts and some protein shakes when I've done a big work out like 6.5 mile run on Sunday, to aid recovery.

My so called water weight does not change as I drink plenty and I work all the major muscle groups to retain my lean mass ( I keep an eye on both). Your muscles are made up of quite a bit of water and when you lose lean mass its this water and some muscle fibre that is lost. If you take steps to avoid this, then what you're losing is not water weight. It's hard but it can be done.

On the subject of sustainability. The speed at which you lose weight has very little to do whether you keep it off, from a point of view of how your body metabolises various fuel sources. If you crash diet/starvation diet, it's highly likely that you are not losing just fat but lean body mass as well (muscle etc). As soon as you start eating half way sensibly the body simply repairs the muscle and other lean mass it may have used, which includes a fair degree of water. If you do it the way I mentioned above, involving some gym work, high protein and eating right then that factor is taken out. There is the factor that starving yourself causes your metabolic rate to slow (how your body uses fuel to keep you alive). Again, if you're eating right, exercising and not skipping food, this shouldn't be an issue.

The other reason is, that it's no good if you go right back to the eating habits that got you overweight in the first place. But no one denies that. Once I finish my 28 Day programme I will ease some carbs back into my diet and ease up on the exercise a bit. If I find I am gaining more than a few pounds I go back on a week of maintainance. If I have more weight to lose, I take a break for a week eating sensibly but up to 2500 a day and light exercise and then start again. In these week breaks, I have not gained any weight and the second 28 days has been as effective as the first.

It's definitely easier to change your diet and exercise lifestyle first to what you plan to make it long term and see the weight come off slowly but that doesn't mean it's the only way.

You will need to so a degree of planning both meal planning, activity planning (which resulted in me buying a small amount of equipment and apps etc) and some discipline but I have been able to do this for 28 day stretches before and lost anywhere between 12 and 20 pounds in that time with no ill effects that I could see. I've done this three times now. My need for this is that I play a lot of sport and when I got a couple of major injuries (broken leg etc) I have put on quite a bit of weight. There's no real reason to do it this way rather than slow and steady, I just like to get back to what I call my fighting weight as quickly as possible. Some people have said to me that it's best to get it over with as soon as possible but it is not a matter of 'over', you need to permanently change the habits that got you overweight in the first place.

A lot of posters have referenced water weight. I think I have covered this if I have understood the term correctly. I don't disagree with anything that's been said and its a thin window but you can lose weight quickly and ensure most if not all is fat if you maintain LBM. If anything my LBM goes up slightly during these 28 day sessions. I imagine people will say it's not possible, but I've done it 3 times now. Also, think of all those Biggest Loser programmes on TV, those guys are losing over a pound a DAY for a six month period or longer, and they are looked after by a team of dieticians and exercise experts so are making sure the LBM is protected and sufficient nutrition is being taken on, and that can't be water weight, it's just not possible.

So in summary, definitely possible to do safely and in a sustainable way BUT it takes 28 days of will power, careful planning, being no stranger to exercise, pushing weights and activity and discipline.

Good luck!

I think I agree with all of this.

I see a lot of people say that if you lose fast you will gain it back. That is true for a large %. It is also true that a lot of people who lose slowly also gain it back. You see, most dieters fails (gain back some or all the weight). I spent some time reading articles on the internet about it. To me, it all boils down to the individual. I also don't think that losing 2lbs a week results in misery. It depends on the person. Does it require a lot of planning and counting to make sure my macros are correct and I'm not exceeding my goal? Yes. But so will maintenance. Maintenance is the hardest part, in my opinion and always where I went wrong. And it wasn't because I felt deprived from being on a "diet". It was because I got sloppy and happy with being small and took my foot off the pedal. I don't feel deprived because I am limiting my calories and avoiding high calorie foods. I feel empowered and in control. I'm comforted by the fact that I am in control of my weight and what happens from this day forward. And I'm very aware that the choice I have made (and will make again) will determine whether I keep the weight off or have to do this all over again.

jameskipcarrington

rosebette wrote: »

The thing is, James..., (don't want to quote your big post) but you are a male, probably with a larger body mass than the OP. She is female and now at 140. We don't know what her stats are, but unless she is petite, she is fairly close to normal weight. She is not like one of the candidates on World's Biggest Loser. She probably saw a good loss the first month due to loss of water weight, rev'd metabolism due to adopting exercise routine, and she is eating at a deficit. As she approaches a weight that is in the healthy range for her body, she's not going to lose at that level. My advice is for her to keep doing what she's doing now, which is a healthy way to lose, and see where she is in a month.

I don't disagree. She almost certainly has lost some Lean Body Mass. And the biggest loser example was to demonstrate what is possible at the extremes; forget 10 pounds a month, these guys are shedding 30+ pounds a month. Just because they start big doesn't take from the fact that they are ploughing through those reserves. Biochemically, their bodies are not metabolising fat three times faster than someone who is 20-30 pounds overweight. As you approach an optimum weight, it does slow up as your body metabolises fat stores slightly less like someone getting to the end of a milkshake, but if you are maintaining LBM it shouldn't be significant.

I'm saying that, yes whilst I can burn more calories because I have a bigger physique, even if she burns half that she can still lose upwards of 6-10 pounds a month if she is taking care of LBM. She would lose it for different reasons than the first month but all I'm saying is that it's possible, I'm not recommending it. It works for me, but maybe not everyone. My wife lost 12 pounds the first month a 14 the second after she had our last child once she'd stopped breastfeeding, taking the same approach as me, but a friend of mine tried it and was miserable for 7 days and quit, saying that he just didn't have the time to plan it all.

I guess the only thing I'm saying really is, look after the LBM, take regular exercise and activity and then if you get stellar results, you'll know that it's mostly the spare tyre round the waist that's going and not the tone in your figure.

SoulOfRusalka

It's easier at the beginning. I've lost about 10 pounds since January 10. But I think it's best to just see what happens and not have expectations--that way you can be pleasantly surprised but you never have to be disappointed.