If I burn 2000 calories a day...

newengland11

...and eat 1200, is that a good amount to lose 30lbs in like 6-8 months?

Calliope610

how are you getting that 2000 calories per day figure?

allaboutthefood

You could make yourself sick, you will be burning everything you are eating so you will be given your body nothing.

newengland11

Calliope610 wrote: »

how are you getting that 2000 calories per day figure?

My Fitbit shows I burn 2,000 a day. That's without even exercising though, so with working out its usually around 2,300-2,500.

newengland11

allaboutthefood wrote: »

You could make yourself sick, you will be burning everything you are eating so you will be given your body nothing.

Really? I thought you had to have a deficit. Like 2,000 and eating 1200 is around 800. And of course when I exercise and burn more, I eat some more.

lynn_glenmont

newengland11 wrote: »

allaboutthefood wrote: »

You could make yourself sick, you will be burning everything you are eating so you will be given your body nothing.

Really? I thought you had to have a deficit. Like 2,000 and eating 1200 is around 800. And of course when I exercise and burn more, I eat some more.

An 800-calorie daily deficit might be a bit aggressive if 30 pounds is the total that you have to lose, especially if much of that loss will be after you've already hit a healthy weight. But you could start there and see how it makes you feel. And, yes, an 800-calorie daily deficit would be about 1.5 lbs a week, so it's more than enough to theoretically lose 30 lbs in six months, assuming you can stick with it, and assuming your data on how much you're eating and how many calories you're using are all correct.

Calliope610

Ok, so 2000 calories is your TDEE - total daily energy expenditure. That is all the calories your body consumes. To lose 1lb a week, you need a calorie deficit of 500 cals/day. So 2000-1200 = 800 calorie deficit. You are probably ok with that b/c I'm not such just how accurate your FitBit is. You could probably safely increase your daily intake to 1400 cals if you wanted to. I'm only suggesting this b/c my personal experience with 1200 cals what that it felt too much like "dieting" and having to restrict my favorite foods and less like a lifestyle I could maintain. An extra 200 calories felt like the difference between being on a diet and eating what I liked, just less.

CharlieBeansmomTracey

mfp counts your deficit when you set it to how much weight you want to lose. so eat to that amount it gives you and eat back 50-75% of any exercise calories.the weight you have to lose the less you should try to lose. anything under 25 lbs should be set to .5 lbs a week. as anything higher will be too aggressive. 30 lbs could be set to lose 1pound a month at the most. the slower you lose the weight the better. the 2000 you burn without exercise doesnt count towards your deficit,its what your body burns by being alive and if you are burning that much you could eat a lot more than 1200 calories and still lose weight

robertw486

Yes, no, and maybe.

It really depends on where you are starting. To lose a pound a week you need a deficit of 500 calories per day. Not that hard to do for most people and would fulfill you loss and time goals. As a general rule of thumb set weight loss goals to 1% or less of your body weight per week. So when you start, the loss rate will be higher when veiwed in pounds, and as you thin down the loss rate will be lower when viewed in pounds. As you drop weight, you have less fat reserves for the body to pull energy from, so keeping the percentage in line is smart thinking.

newengland11

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

newengland11 wrote: »

allaboutthefood wrote: »

You could make yourself sick, you will be burning everything you are eating so you will be given your body nothing.

Really? I thought you had to have a deficit. Like 2,000 and eating 1200 is around 800. And of course when I exercise and burn more, I eat some more.

An 800-calorie daily deficit might be a bit aggressive if 30 pounds is the total that you have to lose, especially if much of that loss will be after you've already hit a healthy weight. But you could start there and see how it makes you feel. And, yes, an 800-calorie daily deficit would be about 1.5 lbs a week, so it's more than enough to theoretically lose 30 lbs in six months, assuming you can stick with it, and assuming your data on how much you're eating and how many calories you're using are all correct.

Right now my weight fluctuates between 155lbs-160lbs. According to the BMI calculator (which I know isn't 100%), I'm in the overweight category. So I'm not sure if im at a healthy weight. To be honest, I end up eating less than 1200 as it is on most days because I'm either not hungry or I don't have time. I work overnights so my breakfast, lunch and dinner schedule varies.

newengland11

Calliope610 wrote: »

Ok, so 2000 calories is your TDEE - total daily energy expenditure. That is all the calories your body consumes. To lose 1lb a week, you need a calorie deficit of 500 cals/day. So 2000-1200 = 800 calorie deficit. You are probably ok with that b/c I'm not such just how accurate your FitBit is. You could probably safely increase your daily intake to 1400 cals if you wanted to. I'm only suggesting this b/c my personal experience with 1200 cals what that it felt too much like "dieting" and having to restrict my favorite foods and less like a lifestyle I could maintain. An extra 200 calories felt like the difference between being on a diet and eating what I liked, just less.

I have a lot of trouble even eating 1200 a day. I'm not sure I could get an extra 200 in there. I am very run down feeling a lot of times because of working overnights. I don't get my full 8 hours because my baby wakes up in the mornings.

newengland11

CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »

mfp counts your deficit when you set it to how much weight you want to lose. so eat to that amount it gives you and eat back 50-75% of any exercise calories.the weight you have to lose the less you should try to lose. anything under 25 lbs should be set to .5 lbs a week. as anything higher will be too aggressive. 30 lbs could be set to lose 1pound a month at the most. the slower you lose the weight the better. the 2000 you burn without exercise doesnt count towards your deficit,its what your body burns by being alive and if you are burning that much you could eat a lot more than 1200 calories and still lose weight

Just curious why losing weight slower is better? I'm always trying to lose it fast haha

newengland11

robertw486 wrote: »

Yes, no, and maybe.

It really depends on where you are starting. To lose a pound a week you need a deficit of 500 calories per day. Not that hard to do for most people and would fulfill you loss and time goals. As a general rule of thumb set weight loss goals to 1% or less of your body weight per week. So when you start, the loss rate will be higher when veiwed in pounds, and as you thin down the loss rate will be lower when viewed in pounds. As you drop weight, you have less fat reserves for the body to pull energy from, so keeping the percentage in line is smart thinking.

If I'm 155lbs-160lbs, how much is the 1%?

Sued0nim

newengland11 wrote: »

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

newengland11 wrote: »

allaboutthefood wrote: »

You could make yourself sick, you will be burning everything you are eating so you will be given your body nothing.

Really? I thought you had to have a deficit. Like 2,000 and eating 1200 is around 800. And of course when I exercise and burn more, I eat some more.

An 800-calorie daily deficit might be a bit aggressive if 30 pounds is the total that you have to lose, especially if much of that loss will be after you've already hit a healthy weight. But you could start there and see how it makes you feel. And, yes, an 800-calorie daily deficit would be about 1.5 lbs a week, so it's more than enough to theoretically lose 30 lbs in six months, assuming you can stick with it, and assuming your data on how much you're eating and how many calories you're using are all correct.

Right now my weight fluctuates between 155lbs-160lbs. According to the BMI calculator (which I know isn't 100%), I'm in the overweight category. So I'm not sure if im at a healthy weight. To be honest, I end up eating less than 1200 as it is on most days because I'm either not hungry or I don't have time. I work overnights so my breakfast, lunch and dinner schedule varies.

So your TDEE is between 2000-2300 and you're eating 1200

Yes is the answer

But if weighing logging accurately it's probably too much of a cut to stick to long term

robertw486

newengland11 wrote: »

robertw486 wrote: »

Yes, no, and maybe.

It really depends on where you are starting. To lose a pound a week you need a deficit of 500 calories per day. Not that hard to do for most people and would fulfill you loss and time goals. As a general rule of thumb set weight loss goals to 1% or less of your body weight per week. So when you start, the loss rate will be higher when veiwed in pounds, and as you thin down the loss rate will be lower when viewed in pounds. As you drop weight, you have less fat reserves for the body to pull energy from, so keeping the percentage in line is smart thinking.

If I'm 155lbs-160lbs, how much is the 1%?

Just move the decimal point as you lose weight. Figuring 1% of your body weight is easy math.

At your current weight of 155-160 lbs, 1% is 1.55-1.60 pounds per week. And right about where your current deficit is. As you drop weight, it might be easier to also slow your weight loss. But that's up to you and how well you respond to the longer term deficit.

Francl27

newengland11 wrote: »

Calliope610 wrote: »

Ok, so 2000 calories is your TDEE - total daily energy expenditure. That is all the calories your body consumes. To lose 1lb a week, you need a calorie deficit of 500 cals/day. So 2000-1200 = 800 calorie deficit. You are probably ok with that b/c I'm not such just how accurate your FitBit is. You could probably safely increase your daily intake to 1400 cals if you wanted to. I'm only suggesting this b/c my personal experience with 1200 cals what that it felt too much like "dieting" and having to restrict my favorite foods and less like a lifestyle I could maintain. An extra 200 calories felt like the difference between being on a diet and eating what I liked, just less.

I have a lot of trouble even eating 1200 a day. I'm not sure I could get an extra 200 in there. I am very run down feeling a lot of times because of working overnights. I don't get my full 8 hours because my baby wakes up in the mornings.

You're probably underestimating your food if eating 1200 calories is hard...

zoeysasha37

Are you using a food scale ? If not, pick one up. Walmart sells them for around $13 .
Weigh all your solids and measure your liquids.

If you are truly eating under 1200 ( getting a scale and truly weighing and logging everything will help you be as accurate as possible. When I first started I thought I was eating 1200. I was really eating 1800 because of my inaccurate logging) then you should try to bring your numbers up. 1200 is usually not enough. If you are having trouble reaching that ,I would suggest adding in more calorie dense foods. If all else fails, just eat a few spoons of peanut butter. I can easily add on 500 calories by just having 5 spoons of peanut butter throughout the day. You aren't doing yourself any favors if you really are undereating. You'll end up losing too much muscle mass ( saggy flabby look ,not tight and toned )
Meal timing makes no difference ( I saw you wrote you work nights and eat at various times ) that's fine . it comes down to calories for weight loss. Not meal timing.
If you eat less then you burn, you will lose weight. Cico.

CharlieBeansmomTracey

newengland11 wrote: »

CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »

mfp counts your deficit when you set it to how much weight you want to lose. so eat to that amount it gives you and eat back 50-75% of any exercise calories.the weight you have to lose the less you should try to lose. anything under 25 lbs should be set to .5 lbs a week. as anything higher will be too aggressive. 30 lbs could be set to lose 1pound a month at the most. the slower you lose the weight the better. the 2000 you burn without exercise doesnt count towards your deficit,its what your body burns by being alive and if you are burning that much you could eat a lot more than 1200 calories and still lose weight

Just curious why losing weight slower is better? I'm always trying to lose it fast haha

slower is better because most people tend to keep it off longer. your body and skin can catch up when losing it slow. sure some will still have loose skin but losing it faster seems to result in more loose skin,for a lot of people(I know genetics plays a part too). also when losing weight you lose some lean body mass but, from what Ive read here on MFP and by doing research that the quicker you lose the weight the more lean body mass you lose as well. thats why its recommended to lift weights and eating enough protein to prevent losing too much LBM. weight loss is supposed to be a slow process. most people who lose it fast usually gain it back. also the less you have to lose the slower its going to be, Im sure someone else can explain it a lot better than I can.

CharlieBeansmomTracey

also if you struggle to eat up to 1200 calories,how did you gain weight? and where do you find the energy to burn 800 calories a workout eating so little? doing that you will burn out soon,not to mention its possible to start seeing hair loss and other health issues. from such a drastic regimen if you are eating so little. I agree with what thorsmom said too(she also stated the reason for losing weight too fast by undereating)

scolaris

If you are maintaining 155/160 you are probably eating more than you think... Confirm that your 1200 is really 1200 by using a food scale. (When people say 'oh man I'm not even hungry on 1200 or less' I pretty much assume they are eating more than they think!) And if you are nursing a baby remember you need to eat more for that too!!

CharlieBeansmomTracey

scolaris wrote: »

If you are maintaining 155/160 you are probably eating more than you think... Confirm that your 1200 is really 1200 by using a food scale. (When people say 'oh man I'm not even hungry on 1200 or less' I pretty much assume they are eating more than they think!) And if you are nursing a baby remember you need to eat more for that too!!

+1

lynn_glenmont

robertw486 wrote: »

newengland11 wrote: »

robertw486 wrote: »

Yes, no, and maybe.

It really depends on where you are starting. To lose a pound a week you need a deficit of 500 calories per day. Not that hard to do for most people and would fulfill you loss and time goals. As a general rule of thumb set weight loss goals to 1% or less of your body weight per week. So when you start, the loss rate will be higher when veiwed in pounds, and as you thin down the loss rate will be lower when viewed in pounds. As you drop weight, you have less fat reserves for the body to pull energy from, so keeping the percentage in line is smart thinking.

If I'm 155lbs-160lbs, how much is the 1%?

Just move the decimal point as you lose weight. Figuring 1% of your body weight is easy math.

At your current weight of 155-160 lbs, 1% is 1.55-1.60 pounds per week. And right about where your current deficit is. As you drop weight, it might be easier to also slow your weight loss. But that's up to you and how well you respond to the longer term deficit.

This is why I think that 1% of BW rule of thumb is pretty bad unless you're obese. OP would need 50 lbs of BF, or about 33% of her current BW, for 1.5+ lbs of loss per week to be even borderline muscle-sparing. She doesn't mention her height that I see, and her avatar is just a head-shot, but she does say her BMI puts her in the overweight category, not obese, so 33% BF seems a bit high to me.

robertw486

Everything I've seen indicates that preserving muscle has a lot more to do with workout routine and diet composition vs total deficit. Even data on VLCD diets show greater muscle retention when working out and upping protein levels some.

As for the 1% guideline, I think it's fairly reasonable for all except really lean people. Being that the primary idea while in deficit is to lose fat, you have to account for wanting the fat to oxidize and be used for fuel. Even if the numbers are off, lets assume to the low side of 25% fat. That would be 37+ pounds of fat in a 150 pound person, and the oxidation of the fat alone could provide over 1,100 calories per day. When you add in the actual food consumed, you bump well over stated TDEE.