Has any body kept a 2 lb a week weight loss until their goal weight?

Losingthedamnweight

I know it's usually better to lower your deficit as you approach goal weight, just wondering for the sake of curiosity if anybody kept the 2lb a week (1000 cal deficit) all the way til goal weight

DeguelloTex

I kept 2+ for about a year, but the deficit was just too much once I got to a reasonable body fat percentage. I was too hungry all the time and, frankly, it was right on the edge of how much fat my body could theoretically metabolize in a day to cover the deficit. And I'm a much larger guy than average.

MommyL2015

For me, that's pretty impossible. If I keep my calories at 1200 daily, and do enough exercise to burn 500 calories, I might be able to lose 3/4 pound a week. I'm female, short, older and about 5 pounds from my goal. My loss started getting smaller once I got to about 20 pounds from my goal. The less you weigh, the more you have to work at taking it off.

At this point, though, I'm satisfied enough that even if I only lose .2 or .3 pounds a week, it'll be fine.

yesimpson

I never tried to maintain a 1000cal a day deficit (largest was 500 per day, but that didn't last long) but as I got closer to goal I decreased it to as little as 100 cal deficit a day, for a couple of reasons:

- I was exercising a lot, and although I was eating back exercise calories, I wanted to make progress, get fitter, and keep hold of the muscle I had, and a big deficit makes me feel tired.
- I love food. I wasn't prepared to give up treats, drinks, and social meals out, which I felt I would have to do to maintain a sizable deficit.
- I wanted to transition smoothly into maintenance so it didn't feel like a shock.

abatonfan

Nope. At the weight I maintain at, I would need to net 500 calories a day to lose 2 pounds a week.

ultrahoon

Nope, I started on 2 per week, but when I got down to about 20lb to go, I was insanely hungry and tired all the time.

callsitlikeiseeit

I've lost 75 since January and have about 30ish to go. 2 lb/ week was average for the first 6 months but as you lose weight, its harder to maintain that deficit (and often unrealistic). now im closer to a half pound per week and sometimes not even that (and occasionally more lol)

nvmomketo

When I keep a (supposed) 500 -700 calorie deficit at 1500 cal (5'8" sedentary woman) I lost 2-3 lbs per week. I stopped my deficit for a few weeks, and now that I am back at it I am losing 1-2 lbs per week and I am just 10lbs above goal (140).

kimny72

For the majority, it wouldn't be possible to keep a 1,000 calorie deficit once they got close to goal weight, they would have to eat an unhealthy small amount.

Francl27

I never even picked the 2 lb a week setting. My best loss rate was 1.5 pound a week and it was plenty IMO.

rankinsect

Even if you can do it, it's probably not wise.

The lower your body weight, the worse the ratio of fat loss to muscle loss becomes for a given rate of weight loss. To keep that ratio good (i.e. lose a minimum amount of muscle), going slower as you near your goal is a very good idea.

If you do end up at normal weight but overfat (i.e. a healthy BMI but a bad BF %) it's actually much slower to rebuild the lost muscle than to lose the fat at a better rate to begin with.

Lynzdee18

I have lost 49 pounds in four months. Looking at my progress chart, the first month about 25 went, but now I am about 8 per month. I planned another 10 pounds, but it seems impossible. At this point, I'm starving if I try to restrict enough to lose 2 pounds a week - I am lucky to drop .5 in 10 days. My husband tells me as I continue cardio and weightlifting, I have to eat more to build muscle which will increase my weight but also decrease the fat I have left. Aargh! It might be time for me to reassess my goals weight. I don't think I can reasonably drop another 10 pounds.

jdleanna

I'd have to be netting 900 calories daily to keep up 2 pounds a week (lightly active 43 y.o. woman, 5'2.5", cw 122 ish ). I lost weight quickly at first but slowed it down after the first 15 pounds. Also went on a maintenance-calorie break for a couple weeks. I just went back on a calorie deficit yesterday for a half pound per week loss. Trying to make sure I keep as much muscle as possible- want to be fit and strong, not merely skinny. A large deficit wouldn't accomplish my goal.

scolaris

rankinsect wrote: »

Even if you can do it, it's probably not wise.

The lower your body weight, the worse the ratio of fat loss to muscle loss becomes for a given rate of weight loss. To keep that ratio good (i.e. lose a minimum amount of muscle), going slower as you near your goal is a very good idea.

If you do end up at normal weight but overfat (i.e. a healthy BMI but a bad BF %) it's actually much slower to rebuild the lost muscle than to lose the fat at a better rate to begin with.

This!! I started out losing one pound a week, then as I added activities & upped my protein the weight loss accelerated to two. I'm on mini-maintenance right now because of a road trip & thanksgiving. When I start again I'm going to try to get back to just one pound a week. My skin feels snugger when I go more slowly. I don't have any hanging skin, but after a month or so of two pounds per week I can stretch out empty arm skin much more than usual. Don't want to encourage too much of that!!

GetThatRunnersHigh

Disclaimer: This was my experience and something I absolutely do not recommend.

SW: 181
CW: 125
Age: 24
Gender: F
Height: 5'2"

I started at 181 pounds. Dropped down to 130 in 24 weeks, so ~2 pounds per week. The weight came off fast in the beginning, but once I went lower than 140 I was netting about 800 calories per day to maintain the 7000 weekly deficit. Yes, the weight came off quickly, but it took the past 8 months to rebuild my strength, muscle, and fix my vitamin/iron deficiency. I was light-headed everyday and resorted to munching on 5 almonds before workouts so I didn't pass out from hypoglycemia. In hindsight, I should have taken a year to do this instead rather than putting my body through the stress and my mind through the emotional turmoil.