lowering the deficit

Protranser

Hi errbody,

I've been reading a lot of the posts on these forums, and have a few questions I'm hoping to get some feedback/answers on.

As I near goal weight, I understand it's recommended that my deficit lowers to 250 cal/day, and I should stick to that deficit until goal weight/maintenance. Some posts suggest reviewing more than 4 weeks worth of data to determine if one is properly adhering to their deficit/is accurate with their logging.

1. If i'm only going to be losing .5 a week until maintenance, and my weight can fluctuate between 3~5 lbs a week, how will I know if I've truly lost the .5 or not per week? My guess is, over a month I'll have to see if my lowest weights logged for the first week of a month is 2 lbs higher than the lowest weights logged for the last week of a month, but perhaps I'm wrong about this.
2. If my accuracy has been horrendous for the 96 total pounds I've already lost (within the realm of possibility, but an unlikely possibility) then I have to make an assumption based on whether my weight hasn't decreased or increased for a month. My weight can fluctuate daily, though, as I've noticed over time... so how will I know if I've truly gained or truly lost when I'm at such a small deficit?
3. Working on the assumption that 15 lbs to goal is when to change the deficit, should I make sure an entire weeks worth of weigh ins are all within 15 lbs of goal before I change my deficit? Or should I just do it after my first 15 lbs to goal weigh in?
   

Bleh. I had other questions but they're blank in my mind now. I'll ask them when they come up. Thanks in advance for all replies.

bpetrosky

I'll try to answer your questions:

1. It's true that as your weight loss slows down to the .5 lb/wk rate, the 'noise' of your day-to-day fluctuations can mask your progress temporarily. That's why people suggest looking at the progress over a few weeks. Daily weighing and using a smoothing chart (Excel or Trendweight) can help smooth out the noise.
2. This is the same question as #1, really. The narrower your deficit, the tighter your logging needs to be. Again, looking at the trend on the scale over time can show your progress. It can help to take other measurements as well.
3. If you used the wizard in MFP to set your calorie target, I understand it should update automatically. If not, run the wizard or set your calorie target when you feel you are comfortable. There's no set rule when you must change it.

ahoy_m8

Good questions. Many people use a 7-day trailing average for weight to dampen the noise. For women, a 28-day trailing average is even better. Others use trend lines. Your idea in #1 will work, too, but a trend line or rolling average will give a clearer view along the way. As you note in #2, accuracy becomes increasingly vital as you near your goal. Smaller deficits have less margin for error. I don't think it matters for #3. I saw a post earlier today recommending .5lb/wk at 25lb to go. Some people want a break from the deficit and eat at goal weight maintenance. Takes longer but eliminates the transition to maintenance. Great job so far!

Protranser

Thanks @bpetrosky I didn't run the wizard, so I'll manually set the new deficit once I hit my 15 lb mark.

bpetrosky

Protranser wrote: »

Thanks @bpetrosky I didn't run the wizard, so I'll manually set the new deficit once I hit my 15 lb mark.

Sounds like a plan. Good luck!

Protranser

ahoy_m8 wrote: »

Good questions. Many people use a 7-day trailing average for weight to dampen the noise. For women, a 28-day trailing average is even better. Others use trend lines. Your idea in #1 will work, too, but a trend line or rolling average will give a clearer view along the way. As you note in #2, accuracy becomes increasingly vital as you near your goal. Smaller deficits have less margin for error. I don't think it matters for #3. I saw a post earlier today recommending .5lb/wk at 25lb to go. Some people want a break from the deficit and eat at goal weight maintenance. Takes longer but eliminates the transition to maintenance. Great job so far!

Thanks for this info, @ahoy_m8 I'm considering lowering my deficit and dropping some cardio to make up for the lowered deficit. Rather than walking 8 miles on work days, I'll do around 4. That should give me 250 calories or thereabouts. I was also considering sticking to 8 miles of walking on work days even at a 250 deficit, but I'll have to see how manageable my weight is when I remove 50% of my exercise to lower my CO.

ahoy_m8

You are a pro at this point, so you know better than most that it all takes a little experimenting to find what works best for you. I do 4mi cardio daily, and I estimate that at 300kcal regardless of speed (some days sprint intervals, other days run or brisk walk, but the burn rate difference is negligible). I would guess a man would burn more.

lorrpb

I weigh frequently (several times per week) and track each new low, because of the fluctuations. I will continue to do that as my deficit goal decreases.

I assume, although you do not say this, that your rate of loss has already declined, so just keep following the same plan. Clearly your logging accuracy must be pretty good to have lost 96 pounds! Congrats and good luck with the rest of your journey!

Consider that the same questions will apply as you transition into maintenance--with the fluctuations, how will you know if you are maintaining or gaining? The same answers will apply, so you will want to figure out what works best for you.

arb037

As far as changing your deficit for "goal weight". That really depends on body composition. ie bf% to determine if your loss rate needs to decrease.
At any rate, you should look in your area for something like a BodPod testing. I found one near me that i pay $10/ mo and can go in once a month and get measured. It gives LBM and BF%. Also had RMR tested but thats a diff test.
With this you can see for sure what is going on in terms of fat loss or muscle loss.

Protranser

Thanks for the great suggestions everyone.

My loss hasn't slowed down at all, but from what I've been reading (theoretical 22 cals per lb of body fat per day can be oxidized maximum) then all the weight i'm losing is probably not just fat weight. If my scale is properly reporting my BF% then I should have about 30 lbs of fat. That means I would only be able to burn 660 cals of fat per day, and any additional burning is coming from LBM. I don't want to lose any more LBM than I need to, so I think lowering my deficit now is probably a wise decision, since I can burn more than 660 extra cals a day from 8 miles of walking on top of my RMR.

Is that how it works? Even while typing it out, I feel like I'm missing something...

arb037

I think you have it figured out pretty well, although I would be interested to read any literature stating the 22 cals theory. I've read on Lyle McDonald's site that it is 31.4 calories per lbs of fat. Either way you sound like you have a grasp on it and will do fine. gl

WBB55

What an amazing job you've done. What's your current actual rate of loss? Personally, that's what I'd use to help me determine my -250 calorie target. Let's say right now you're eating 1500 and averaging 1.5 lbs per week over the last 6 weeks or so. Math would tell us that changing nothing else but switching to 2000 per day will result in losing .5 per week on average.

Obviously in my example you'd need to lower the daily target by 50 calories or so for each 5-ish lbs you lose after that.

Protranser

WBB55 wrote: »

What an amazing job you've done. What's your current actual rate of loss? Personally, that's what I'd use to help me determine my -250 calorie target. Let's say right now you're eating 1500 and averaging 1.5 lbs per week over the last 6 weeks or so. Math would tell us that changing nothing else but switching to 2000 per day will result in losing .5 per week on average.

Obviously in my example you'd need to lower the daily target by 50 calories or so for each 5-ish lbs you lose after that.

Thank you for your reply, @WBB55 . On my walk today, i spent some time thinking about my actual rate of loss. I think I'm losing 2 lbs a week for the past two months, rather than the 1 lb a week i thought i'd be losing. Last month i lost a about a pound a week until the fourth week, where i lost 1 lb and then another 3 or 4 later that week. I have seen this happen before though, and thought my losses would slow over the next month. But no, it happened again this month, 1 lb a week and then a suddenly larger drop on the fourth week.

I probably need to re examine my logging. I genuinely believed i was doing it right, but now I'm concerned i could be sabotaging myself.

While its nice to be near my original goal weight, I'm worried what price I'll have to pay for having lost so much so quickly.

jemhh

arb037 wrote: »

I think you have it figured out pretty well, although I would be interested to read any literature stating the 22 cals theory. I've read on Lyle McDonald's site that it is 31.4 calories per lbs of fat. Either way you sound like you have a grasp on it and will do fine. gl

I have only seen 31 calories as well but would be interested in reading about 22 calories. I'm sticking with 1 lb/wk for now. I don't necessarily agree with the .5 lb/week goal per 25 lbs guideline that is often used.

Protranser

jemhh wrote: »

arb037 wrote: »

I think you have it figured out pretty well, although I would be interested to read any literature stating the 22 cals theory. I've read on Lyle McDonald's site that it is 31.4 calories per lbs of fat. Either way you sound like you have a grasp on it and will do fine. gl

I have only seen 31 calories as well but would be interested in reading about 22 calories. I'm sticking with 1 lb/wk for now. I don't necessarily agree with the .5 lb/week goal per 25 lbs guideline that is often used.

I've not read any of the literature for either 31 or 22 cals, I've just been going by posts on these forums... perhaps a search will come up with a helpful result, but I'm quite lazy

arb037

Protranser wrote: »

jemhh wrote: »

arb037 wrote: »

I think you have it figured out pretty well, although I would be interested to read any literature stating the 22 cals theory. I've read on Lyle McDonald's site that it is 31.4 calories per lbs of fat. Either way you sound like you have a grasp on it and will do fine. gl

I have only seen 31 calories as well but would be interested in reading about 22 calories. I'm sticking with 1 lb/wk for now. I don't necessarily agree with the .5 lb/week goal per 25 lbs guideline that is often used.

I've not read any of the literature for either 31 or 22 cals, I've just been going by posts on these forums... perhaps a search will come up with a helpful result, but I'm quite lazy

This is the 31 cal research im talking about, if anyone has anything for the 22 I would love to read it.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15615615/

jemhh

arb037 wrote: »

Protranser wrote: »

jemhh wrote: »

arb037 wrote: »

I think you have it figured out pretty well, although I would be interested to read any literature stating the 22 cals theory. I've read on Lyle McDonald's site that it is 31.4 calories per lbs of fat. Either way you sound like you have a grasp on it and will do fine. gl

I have only seen 31 calories as well but would be interested in reading about 22 calories. I'm sticking with 1 lb/wk for now. I don't necessarily agree with the .5 lb/week goal per 25 lbs guideline that is often used.

I've not read any of the literature for either 31 or 22 cals, I've just been going by posts on these forums... perhaps a search will come up with a helpful result, but I'm quite lazy

This is the 31 cal research im talking about, if anyone has anything for the 22 I would love to read it.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15615615/

And if you want a long rambling breakdown here is one:

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/archive/index.php?t-11223.html

WBB55

Protranser wrote: »

WBB55 wrote: »

What an amazing job you've done. What's your current actual rate of loss? Personally, that's what I'd use to help me determine my -250 calorie target. Let's say right now you're eating 1500 and averaging 1.5 lbs per week over the last 6 weeks or so. Math would tell us that changing nothing else but switching to 2000 per day will result in losing .5 per week on average.

Obviously in my example you'd need to lower the daily target by 50 calories or so for each 5-ish lbs you lose after that.

Thank you for your reply, @WBB55 . On my walk today, i spent some time thinking about my actual rate of loss. I think I'm losing 2 lbs a week for the past two months, rather than the 1 lb a week i thought i'd be losing. Last month i lost a about a pound a week until the fourth week, where i lost 1 lb and then another 3 or 4 later that week. I have seen this happen before though, and thought my losses would slow over the next month. But no, it happened again this month, 1 lb a week and then a suddenly larger drop on the fourth week.

I probably need to re examine my logging. I genuinely believed i was doing it right, but now I'm concerned i could be sabotaging myself.

While its nice to be near my original goal weight, I'm worried what price I'll have to pay for having lost so much so quickly.

So if you've been losing 2 lbs per week lately, adding 600-750 calories per day (or decreasing the amount of cardio you do) will slow down the weightloss, but it shouldn't stop it altogether. Personally, if you've been a bit shaky with your logging, I'd tighten that up first and maybe add 500 calories for a while and see what your rate of loss is after 4-6 weeks.