Mfp setting cal goal at below bmr?

NobodyPutsAmyInTheCorner

There's always one who has to have a say on everything isn't there lol.

Some good advice here OP.

yopeeps025

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

forgtmenot wrote: »

I have it set at 2lbs/week. I have 40lbs total to lose.

Here is a great guideline for setting weekly weight loss goals:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

I see this posted on here a lot, what is the source? What criteria is being used to determine "ideal"?

IDK the original source?

Without knowing the source or criteria used, how do you know it's ideal?

Anyone else know?

IDK if it is ideal. I don't really follow that anyways. My goals those are very different from most people.

I do know what a large deficit + lots of cardio+ weight training= a lot of muscle lost.

forgtmenot

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

forgtmenot wrote: »

I have it set at 2lbs/week. I have 40lbs total to lose.

Here is a great guideline for setting weekly weight loss goals:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

I see this posted on here a lot, what is the source? What criteria is being used to determine "ideal"?

IDK the original source?

Without knowing the source or criteria used, how do you know it's ideal?

Anyone else know?

IDK if it is ideal. I don't really follow that anyways. My goals those are very different from most people.

I do know what a large deficit + lots of cardio+ weight training= a lot of muscle lost.

This is what I'm worried about. While it would be awesome to lose it quickly, I don't want to look like a flabby blob with little muscle by the end of it.

yopeeps025

forgtmenot wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

forgtmenot wrote: »

I have it set at 2lbs/week. I have 40lbs total to lose.

Here is a great guideline for setting weekly weight loss goals:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

I see this posted on here a lot, what is the source? What criteria is being used to determine "ideal"?

IDK the original source?

Without knowing the source or criteria used, how do you know it's ideal?

Anyone else know?

IDK if it is ideal. I don't really follow that anyways. My goals those are very different from most people.

I do know what a large deficit + lots of cardio+ weight training= a lot of muscle lost.

This is what I'm worried about. While it would be awesome to lose it quickly, I don't want to look like a flabby blob with little muscle by the end of it.

That how I felt on left pic. I saw no change and thought everyone was crazy for thinking so. I was a smaller fat version of myself and I just stop everything. I was not counting calories than either so I know I was more likely on some VLCD then.

I got to a point where I was exercise 12 hours a week for at least one whole month. I also know I was really stupid back than during my weight loss so It almost makes sense on why I gain all of it back.

Need2Exerc1se

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

forgtmenot wrote: »

I have it set at 2lbs/week. I have 40lbs total to lose.

Here is a great guideline for setting weekly weight loss goals:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

I see this posted on here a lot, what is the source? What criteria is being used to determine "ideal"?

IDK the original source?

Without knowing the source or criteria used, how do you know it's ideal?

Anyone else know?

IDK if it is ideal. I don't really follow that anyways. My goals those are very different from most people.

I do know what a large deficit + lots of cardio+ weight training= a lot of muscle lost.

Depending on starting weight, muscle loss is almost inevitable. But that is neither here nor there. I was just curious as to the source of this much disseminated info.

yopeeps025

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

forgtmenot wrote: »

I have it set at 2lbs/week. I have 40lbs total to lose.

Here is a great guideline for setting weekly weight loss goals:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

I see this posted on here a lot, what is the source? What criteria is being used to determine "ideal"?

IDK the original source?

Without knowing the source or criteria used, how do you know it's ideal?

Anyone else know?

IDK if it is ideal. I don't really follow that anyways. My goals those are very different from most people.

I do know what a large deficit + lots of cardio+ weight training= a lot of muscle lost.

Depending on starting weight, muscle loss is almost inevitable. But that is neither here nor there. I was just curious as to the source of this much disseminated info.

But a slower weight loss maintains muscle mass than a crash diet right?

segacs

yopeeps025 wrote: »

But a slower weight loss maintains muscle mass than a crash diet right?

A slower weight loss combined with strength training does tend to preserve more muscle mass than a crash diet, yes.

TimothyFish

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

forgtmenot wrote: »

I have it set at 2lbs/week. I have 40lbs total to lose.

Here is a great guideline for setting weekly weight loss goals:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

I see this posted on here a lot, what is the source? What criteria is being used to determine "ideal"?

IDK the original source?

The earliest place I found it was here: https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120302133623AAbeFqH

The next month is the first time it shows up on MFP.

segacs

TimothyFish wrote: »

The earliest place I found it was here: https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120302133623AAbeFqH

The next month is the first time it shows up on MFP.

Yeah, so it's forum myth, basically.

Then again, I wouldn't expect it to stop being quoted anytime soon. After all, none of the other forum myths, like starvation mode, eat more to weigh less, superfoods, or paleo, have died out either.

Need2Exerc1se

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

yopeeps025 wrote: »

forgtmenot wrote: »

I have it set at 2lbs/week. I have 40lbs total to lose.

Here is a great guideline for setting weekly weight loss goals:
If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal, and
If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.

I see this posted on here a lot, what is the source? What criteria is being used to determine "ideal"?

IDK the original source?

Without knowing the source or criteria used, how do you know it's ideal?

Anyone else know?

IDK if it is ideal. I don't really follow that anyways. My goals those are very different from most people.

I do know what a large deficit + lots of cardio+ weight training= a lot of muscle lost.

Depending on starting weight, muscle loss is almost inevitable. But that is neither here nor there. I was just curious as to the source of this much disseminated info.

But a slower weight loss maintains muscle mass than a crash diet right?

Depending on diet, exercise and what you mean by "crash diet", yes, it likely will.

ETA: I wouldn't call 2 lbs per week a "crash diet" though.

segacs

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Depending on diet, exercise and what you mean by "crash diet", yes, it likely will.

ETA: I wouldn't call 2 lbs per week a "crash diet" though.

That depends. My TDEE is ~1800. To achieve 2lbs/week of weight loss, I'd have to eat something like only 800 calories per day, including exercise. That's most definitely a crash diet and is not something I'd ever attempt.

Need2Exerc1se

segacs wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Depending on diet, exercise and what you mean by "crash diet", yes, it likely will.

ETA: I wouldn't call 2 lbs per week a "crash diet" though.

That depends. My TDEE is ~1800. To achieve 2lbs/week of weight loss, I'd have to eat something like only 800 calories per day, including exercise. That's most definitely a crash diet and is not something I'd ever attempt.

Yes, it would depend on the person. That is why I questioned the criteria behind the little chart.

longtimeterp

segacs wrote: »

TimothyFish wrote: »

The earliest place I found it was here: https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120302133623AAbeFqH

The next month is the first time it shows up on MFP.

Yeah, so it's forum myth, basically.

Then again, I wouldn't expect it to stop being quoted anytime soon. After all, none of the other forum myths, like starvation mode, eat more to weigh less, superfoods, or paleo, have died out either.

what are these myths you speak of?