35 pounds in 2 months?
Replies
-
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »
you dont burn more eating certain foods.DeficitDuchess wrote: »Thank you all for sharing your experience and thoughts. As I said I'm aware that losing around 3-4 pounds a week is more than the recommended sustainable average. That said this would only be for 2 months and I have heard a lot of anecdotes of people losing a lot in the beginning, so the rest could average to something closer to 2.5 pounds.
And yes, it would be for health issues that I need to drop weight for regulating various things, thinking about giving birth etc., and also having had multiple knee surgeries not being in pain everyday.
For what it's worth, I eat pretty well and properly, put a lot of weight after several surgeries and steroid treatments pretty fast and been around this weight for 5-6 years. I do see an endocrinologist regularly and believe it or not but the recommendation is to lose it fast due to other factors.
(I must add that I am shocked by the comment suggesting that my question was "abuse." I signed up not too long ago but was traveling all summer and this is my first day back on mfp... so I suppose I won't post again as I was looking for supportive suggestions, and though there were many, I don't get why someone would get so worked up by a question...)
It's against MFP rules to support such quick weight loss (though, under medical supervision is a different case). It should not have been flagged as abuse, however.
Thanks, I actually was unaware that people can ask about losing more than 2 pounds a week... And I appreciate with people telling me it's against the rules, I understand that and the flagging. And my shock was by the suggestion that my question was "abuse."
Some people don't know/remember, what reporting method; to choose.
-- Thanks for the info. Just to be clear, I never asked for or about very low calorie methods, or asked anyone to promote that... I was more wondering about things like eat pineapples and celery cause they make you burn more etc.
Actually you burn more eating protein than carbohydrate and I read the body burns more calories than it takes to digest celery and cabbage... people write about things that make metabolisms faster all the time (e.g. coffee) just wondering about people's experience.0 -
I don't think we have to worry about OP getting malnourished - her "plan" will not last more than a couple of days with all of the misconceptions already floating around.0
-
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »Thank you all for sharing your experience and thoughts. As I said I'm aware that losing around 3-4 pounds a week is more than the recommended sustainable average. That said this would only be for 2 months and I have heard a lot of anecdotes of people losing a lot in the beginning, so the rest could average to something closer to 2.5 pounds.
OMG...The delusion is strong with this one. Seriously...no. Just...no.0 -
Thank you all for sharing your experience and thoughts. As I said I'm aware that losing around 3-4 pounds a week is more than the recommended sustainable average. That said this would only be for 2 months and I have heard a lot of anecdotes of people losing a lot in the beginning, so the rest could average to something closer to 2.5 pounds.
Then, you want to be aiming for 2 pounds/week of fat loss and take any water weight lost as a happy bonus (which is usually where the "lose big at first" comes from - water not fat.)
So, set your settings to aim for 2 pounds/week loss, log all your food accurately (eyeballing 1 cup of lettuce is fine - but anything calorie-dense like the salad dressing or peanut butter gets measured), and eat the number of calories MFP tells you to eat.0 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »Thank you all for sharing your experience and thoughts. As I said I'm aware that losing around 3-4 pounds a week is more than the recommended sustainable average. That said this would only be for 2 months and I have heard a lot of anecdotes of people losing a lot in the beginning, so the rest could average to something closer to 2.5 pounds.
Then, you want to be aiming for 2 pounds/week of fat loss and take any water weight lost as a happy bonus (which is usually where the "lose big at first" comes from - water not fat.)
So, set your settings to aim for 2 pounds/week loss, log all your food accurately (eyeballing 1 cup of lettuce is fine - but anything calorie-dense like the salad dressing or peanut butter gets measured), and eat the number of calories MFP tells you to eat.
Thanks. Exactly this is what I'm trying to figure out. I've never lost a lot of weight and I'm trying to find out what the water weight amounts to in people... 2 pounds a week is about 18 pounds in two months. I thought stretching it to 2.5 pounds a week for a couple of months in the beginning would be no big deal which would make about 22-23 pounds. If people lose about 10-12 pounds of water weight with disciplined dieting that would be around 35pounds... but I don't really know how much water weight one sheds. It seems like water weight is lost in super low carb/atkins diets and I don't think I can really give up fruit to hit ketosis, but less salt intake might cause water loss. I'll search the forums to see that. (Fitday estimates my daily expenditure to be 2700 calories -- this kind of seems high to me but that's what it gives. If I burn an extra 500 with exercise that would be 3200 calories, and 1200 calories isn't necessarily super low calorie. It seems to me too little calories, but it's doable)0 -
I don't think we have to worry about OP getting malnourished - her "plan" will not last more than a couple of days with all of the misconceptions already floating around.
It's not a misconception. It's science. It's called dietary induced thermogenesis: "On average, a person uses about 10% of their daily energy expenditure digesting and absorbing food, but this percentage changes depending on the type of food you eat.
Protein takes the most energy to digest (20-30% of total calories in protein eaten go to digesting it). Next is carbohydrates (5-10%) and then fats (0-3%).
Thus, if you eat 100 calories from protein, your body uses 20-30 of those calories to digest and absorb the protein. You’d be left with a net 70-80 calories. Pure carbohydrate would leave you with a net 90-95 calories, and fat would give you a net 97-100 calories."0 -
0
-
queenliz99 wrote: »
Please explain to me how thermic effect of food works. I would appreciate knowing how it works if what's written all over is wrong.0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »
Please explain to me how thermic effect of food works. I would appreciate knowing how it works if what's written all over is wrong.
This is directly from your link indeed, saying the same thing: "For every 100 calories of carbs/fat replaced with protein, you’d expect to burn about 25 calories more (30 cal for protein vs. 3-6 for carbs/fat). So a doubling of protein from 60 to120 grams/day might increase TEF by 80 calories/day. Triple it to 180 grams/day and TEF could increase by 150 calories. The 20-30% TEF of protein can become even more significant at extreme intakes. However, for the most part, such extreme intakes aren’t practical or used outside of the bodybuilding subculture. In all but the most extreme diets, protein stays fairly static and carbs and fats are shuffled around; the effect is typically minimal in terms of TEF.
Finally, I should mention that some research has found that insulin resistant individuals may have an impaired TEF response to eating, with a rough 50% reduction occurring. This could conceivably become significant. For example, on a 3000 cal/day diet, the estimated TEF would be 300 calories. Cut that in half and you only get a 150 cal/day increase in energy expenditure via TEF. Over a month’s time that would amount to 4,500 calories or about 1.5 lbs difference. I’d assume that correcting the insulin resistance by losing fat, lowering insulin and various other interventions would correct this defect and allow TEF to work normally."0 -
How accurate is your calorie counting?0
-
queenliz99 wrote: »
Please explain to me how thermic effect of food works. I would appreciate knowing how it works if what's written all over is wrong.
This is directly from your link indeed, saying the same thing: "For every 100 calories of carbs/fat replaced with protein, you’d expect to burn about 25 calories more (30 cal for protein vs. 3-6 for carbs/fat). So a doubling of protein from 60 to120 grams/day might increase TEF by 80 calories/day. Triple it to 180 grams/day and TEF could increase by 150 calories. The 20-30% TEF of protein can become even more significant at extreme intakes. However, for the most part, such extreme intakes aren’t practical or used outside of the bodybuilding subculture. In all but the most extreme diets, protein stays fairly static and carbs and fats are shuffled around; the effect is typically minimal in terms of TEF.
Finally, I should mention that some research has found that insulin resistant individuals may have an impaired TEF response to eating, with a rough 50% reduction occurring. This could conceivably become significant. For example, on a 3000 cal/day diet, the estimated TEF would be 300 calories. Cut that in half and you only get a 150 cal/day increase in energy expenditure via TEF. Over a month’s time that would amount to 4,500 calories or about 1.5 lbs difference. I’d assume that correcting the insulin resistance by losing fat, lowering insulin and various other interventions would correct this defect and allow TEF to work normally."
Did you neglect to read this part, or just choose to ignore it?:Since it’s usually impractical to sit and figure out the individual TEFs for each nutrient, the normal estimate used is 10% of total caloric intake. So if you consume 3000 calories per day of a relatively ‘normal’ mixed diet, you can assume that your TEF is about 300 calories per day or so. You also generally find that, with the exception of extreme diets (such as all protein), shuffling macronutrients has a pretty minimal overall impact on metabolic rate via TEF.1 -
queenliz99 wrote: »
Please explain to me how thermic effect of food works. I would appreciate knowing how it works if what's written all over is wrong.
This is directly from your link indeed, saying the same thing: "For every 100 calories of carbs/fat replaced with protein, you’d expect to burn about 25 calories more (30 cal for protein vs. 3-6 for carbs/fat). So a doubling of protein from 60 to120 grams/day might increase TEF by 80 calories/day. Triple it to 180 grams/day and TEF could increase by 150 calories. The 20-30% TEF of protein can become even more significant at extreme intakes. However, for the most part, such extreme intakes aren’t practical or used outside of the bodybuilding subculture. In all but the most extreme diets, protein stays fairly static and carbs and fats are shuffled around; the effect is typically minimal in terms of TEF.
Finally, I should mention that some research has found that insulin resistant individuals may have an impaired TEF response to eating, with a rough 50% reduction occurring. This could conceivably become significant. For example, on a 3000 cal/day diet, the estimated TEF would be 300 calories. Cut that in half and you only get a 150 cal/day increase in energy expenditure via TEF. Over a month’s time that would amount to 4,500 calories or about 1.5 lbs difference. I’d assume that correcting the insulin resistance by losing fat, lowering insulin and various other interventions would correct this defect and allow TEF to work normally."
Did you neglect to read this part, or just choose to ignore it?:Since it’s usually impractical to sit and figure out the individual TEFs for each nutrient, the normal estimate used is 10% of total caloric intake. So if you consume 3000 calories per day of a relatively ‘normal’ mixed diet, you can assume that your TEF is about 300 calories per day or so. You also generally find that, with the exception of extreme diets (such as all protein), shuffling macronutrients has a pretty minimal overall impact on metabolic rate via TEF.
I didn't ignore anything. And I never said this is the magic key to magic weight loss. The quotes and links were just in response to the comment suggesting that it's a "misconception" that certain foods result in more calorie expenditure.0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »How accurate is your calorie counting?
If you are referring to counting as I eat, I'm not yet calorie counting. I started mentally two weeks ago which basically meant eating healthy 80-90 percent of the time (e.g. no pizza dinner, but had a slice a couple of times). Today I got on mfp thinking I'd start logging and posted this question. I only did the calculations on FitDay which is like MFP. For my stats it gave me 2700 calories for day, I think as a little to moderately active individual. I find calorie counting very difficult because I get frustrated if it's not precise. And it's not easy to be precise. I would love to know how people are rigorous with that habit since I know that on days I manage to count calories I certainly eat less.0 -
If you understand TEF, then I'm sure you also understand that there can be no such thing as a food which "burns more calories than it takes to digest" (celery, cabbage and pineapple were the ones you cited earlier). TEF is never over 100% for any food, it's not physically possible. Given that the TEF for carbs is estimated at around 5%, if you ate 10 calories worth of celery, pineapple or cabbage, it would take about 0.5 calories to digest/metabolize it. So the net effect of those 10 calories would be 9.5 calories.0
-
You don't count calories but are calculating the TEF in foods?3
-
If you understand TEF, then I'm sure you also understand that there can be no such thing as a food which "burns more calories than it takes to digest" (celery, cabbage and pineapple were the ones you cited earlier). TEF is never over 100% for any food, it's not physically possible. Given that the TEF for carbs is estimated at around 5%, if you ate 10 calories worth of celery, pineapple or cabbage, it would take about 0.5 calories to digest/metabolize it. So the net effect of those 10 calories would be 9.5 calories.
Thanks for the clarification. You're right. To clarify, that note referred to TCF in reference to protein vs xx. The other examples, celery and cabbage, weren't in reference to TEF but rather them being known as one of those super high fiber almost no calorie foods, as such 10 calories from candy isn't the same as 10 calories of celery.0 -
OP, you do not have my support on this. Your weight loss goals are dangerous and can seriously damage your health.
However, should you choose a slow and safe weight loss goal, I will support you 100%.0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »You don't count calories but are calculating the TEF in foods?
Really having a hard time understanding the hostility. But I'll respond to your question as if it was an actual question.
I said I got on MFP today wanting to start counting and really starting dieting.
I don't count TEF, that conversation emerged from a response to someone's comment saying what I was referring to in regards to TEF was a "misconception." Saying it's not a misconception doesn't mean I count them.
I really came here to ask if people had helpful advice in losing weight. I did calculations at FitDay and MFP first which estimated my daily expenditure at 2700calories. So at 1200 net calories a day, that would mean 3 pounds a week (though as one loses one would spend less possibly). With some extra water weight in the beginning I figured up to 4 pounds a week may be possible. This is the math assuming around 8 pounds of water weight in a 210 pound person. I asked if people had recommendations, also commenting that I knew that more than 2 pounds isn't recommended but still wondering.
I wasn't counting on support, and people can disagree, but I really wasn't expecting the anger and hostility in some of these comments. I'm not here to fight, I was just trying to exchange information. But I'll stop posting since this doesn't seem to be a constructive environment.0 -
-
If you want to lose weight, start counting your calories as accurate as possible. Focusing on the TEF, without counting the calories is majoring in the minors and will leave you spinning your wheels and getting nowhere. The most accurate way to count your calories is through weighing all foods that can be weighed, particularly nutrient dense foods such as oils, peanut butter, etc. Give it several weeks and adjust up or down accordingly.
As for losing 4 lbs/week, I will share my story, using my numbers because I know them. I can lose 2lbs/week when I: consume 1600 calories/day, along with 5-7 hours of swimming per week, plus 8000 steps per day (as per FitBit), kickboxing 2 hours/week, and weight lifting 2 hours/week. For me to lose 4lbs/week, I would have to keep that activity up and drop my calorie intake to 600 calories/day. I am certain I would become very ill, very fast by doing that. I am only a couple years older than you, but shorter, so my daily intake is less than what you would get.
My suggestions: set a reasonable goal, track your calories as accurately as possible, and be happy that in two months from now you will be in a better position than you are now. If you want to continue driving yourself nuts with the minutia, then you could also concern yourself with the inaccuracies of the labeling system (labels are allowed to be off by up to 20%, and still be considered legal), you could try to calculate the amount of food that never is digested after you ingest it (a certain amount of food will pass through the alimentary canal without being digested and therefore you could eat more of those items).
It just seems like you are driving yourself nuts with things that have such a minimal effect while missing the biggest part of the picture. Reconsidering your approach may help you achieve your goals (albeit in a slighter longer time frame).3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »If you want to lose weight, start counting your calories as accurate as possible. Focusing on the TEF, without counting the calories is majoring in the minors and will leave you spinning your wheels and getting nowhere. The most accurate way to count your calories is through weighing all foods that can be weighed, particularly nutrient dense foods such as oils, peanut butter, etc. Give it several weeks and adjust up or down accordingly.
As for losing 4 lbs/week, I will share my story, using my numbers because I know them. I can lose 2lbs/week when I: consume 1600 calories/day, along with 5-7 hours of swimming per week, plus 8000 steps per day (as per FitBit), kickboxing 2 hours/week, and weight lifting 2 hours/week. For me to lose 4lbs/week, I would have to keep that activity up and drop my calorie intake to 600 calories/day. I am certain I would become very ill, very fast by doing that. I am only a couple years older than you, but shorter, so my daily intake is less than what you would get.
My suggestions: set a reasonable goal, track your calories as accurately as possible, and be happy that in two months from now you will be in a better position than you are now. If you want to continue driving yourself nuts with the minutia, then you could also concern yourself with the inaccuracies of the labeling system (labels are allowed to be off by up to 20%, and still be considered legal), you could try to calculate the amount of food that never is digested after you ingest it (a certain amount of food will pass through the alimentary canal without being digested and therefore you could eat more of those items).
It just seems like you are driving yourself nuts with things that have such a minimal effect while missing the biggest part of the picture. Reconsidering your approach may help you achieve your goals (albeit in a slighter longer time frame).
Thank you for your very helpful post. As I explained, I was wondering about the possibility of the weight loss averaging 3-4 pounds a week since in the beginning people report loss of water weight.
Do you also weigh low calorie vegetables like cucumbers and lettuce?0 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »If you want to lose weight, start counting your calories as accurate as possible. Focusing on the TEF, without counting the calories is majoring in the minors and will leave you spinning your wheels and getting nowhere. The most accurate way to count your calories is through weighing all foods that can be weighed, particularly nutrient dense foods such as oils, peanut butter, etc. Give it several weeks and adjust up or down accordingly.
As for losing 4 lbs/week, I will share my story, using my numbers because I know them. I can lose 2lbs/week when I: consume 1600 calories/day, along with 5-7 hours of swimming per week, plus 8000 steps per day (as per FitBit), kickboxing 2 hours/week, and weight lifting 2 hours/week. For me to lose 4lbs/week, I would have to keep that activity up and drop my calorie intake to 600 calories/day. I am certain I would become very ill, very fast by doing that. I am only a couple years older than you, but shorter, so my daily intake is less than what you would get.
My suggestions: set a reasonable goal, track your calories as accurately as possible, and be happy that in two months from now you will be in a better position than you are now. If you want to continue driving yourself nuts with the minutia, then you could also concern yourself with the inaccuracies of the labeling system (labels are allowed to be off by up to 20%, and still be considered legal), you could try to calculate the amount of food that never is digested after you ingest it (a certain amount of food will pass through the alimentary canal without being digested and therefore you could eat more of those items).
It just seems like you are driving yourself nuts with things that have such a minimal effect while missing the biggest part of the picture. Reconsidering your approach may help you achieve your goals (albeit in a slighter longer time frame).
Thank you for your very helpful post. As I explained, I was wondering about the possibility of the weight loss averaging 3-4 pounds a week since in the beginning people report loss of water weight.
Do you also weigh low calorie vegetables like cucumbers and lettuce?
I actually weigh everything. It might sound silly, but it does add up, and because so much of it is guess work anyway, I figure it helps to be more accurate in every way possible. I have found some great ways to save time on weighing though. For a salad: place bowl on the scale, add lettuce, add to diary, tare the scale, add the next ingredient, etc. For cooked meals, I weigh things as I add them to the pan and make sure the entries that I choose are raw ingredients (that is the other issue with logging, is that the database is mostly user entered and there are some very inaccurate entries in it, so be watchful of that).
I really like the recipe builder and enjoy bulk cooking and then freezing things into single serving sizes so that I have quick grab and go meals that I know the calorie count of them. Do some reading in the forums, and you will find there are a lot of great helpful suggestions like this. Particularly at the top of the getting started and general diet forums, each has a thread called "most helpful posts" (or something to that extent). There is a wealth of knowledge available.3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »If you want to lose weight, start counting your calories as accurate as possible. Focusing on the TEF, without counting the calories is majoring in the minors and will leave you spinning your wheels and getting nowhere. The most accurate way to count your calories is through weighing all foods that can be weighed, particularly nutrient dense foods such as oils, peanut butter, etc. Give it several weeks and adjust up or down accordingly.
As for losing 4 lbs/week, I will share my story, using my numbers because I know them. I can lose 2lbs/week when I: consume 1600 calories/day, along with 5-7 hours of swimming per week, plus 8000 steps per day (as per FitBit), kickboxing 2 hours/week, and weight lifting 2 hours/week. For me to lose 4lbs/week, I would have to keep that activity up and drop my calorie intake to 600 calories/day. I am certain I would become very ill, very fast by doing that. I am only a couple years older than you, but shorter, so my daily intake is less than what you would get.
My suggestions: set a reasonable goal, track your calories as accurately as possible, and be happy that in two months from now you will be in a better position than you are now. If you want to continue driving yourself nuts with the minutia, then you could also concern yourself with the inaccuracies of the labeling system (labels are allowed to be off by up to 20%, and still be considered legal), you could try to calculate the amount of food that never is digested after you ingest it (a certain amount of food will pass through the alimentary canal without being digested and therefore you could eat more of those items).
It just seems like you are driving yourself nuts with things that have such a minimal effect while missing the biggest part of the picture. Reconsidering your approach may help you achieve your goals (albeit in a slighter longer time frame).
Thank you for your very helpful post. As I explained, I was wondering about the possibility of the weight loss averaging 3-4 pounds a week since in the beginning people report loss of water weight.
Do you also weigh low calorie vegetables like cucumbers and lettuce?
I actually weigh everything. It might sound silly, but it does add up, and because so much of it is guess work anyway, I figure it helps to be more accurate in every way possible. I have found some great ways to save time on weighing though. For a salad: place bowl on the scale, add lettuce, add to diary, tare the scale, add the next ingredient, etc. For cooked meals, I weigh things as I add them to the pan and make sure the entries that I choose are raw ingredients (that is the other issue with logging, is that the database is mostly user entered and there are some very inaccurate entries in it, so be watchful of that).
I really like the recipe builder and enjoy bulk cooking and then freezing things into single serving sizes so that I have quick grab and go meals that I know the calorie count of them. Do some reading in the forums, and you will find there are a lot of great helpful suggestions like this. Particularly at the top of the getting started and general diet forums, each has a thread called "most helpful posts" (or something to that extent). There is a wealth of knowledge available.
Thanks a lot.0 -
What's the rush?
In an ideal world, we'd click our fingers and *BOOM* the unwanted pounds have disappeared! Sadly, it doesn't work that way and for a maintainable and realistic weight loss, we need to go through the process and take it slow and steady. You'll likely find yourself losing a bit more weight in the first weeks of calorie counting but after that, it is realistic to expect anything from 0-2 pounds. Anything more is aggressive and not really possible without totally exhausting yourself and your body. Ease up on your goal. It isn't about how quick you can lose it.1 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »
you dont burn more eating certain foods.DeficitDuchess wrote: »Thank you all for sharing your experience and thoughts. As I said I'm aware that losing around 3-4 pounds a week is more than the recommended sustainable average. That said this would only be for 2 months and I have heard a lot of anecdotes of people losing a lot in the beginning, so the rest could average to something closer to 2.5 pounds.
And yes, it would be for health issues that I need to drop weight for regulating various things, thinking about giving birth etc., and also having had multiple knee surgeries not being in pain everyday.
For what it's worth, I eat pretty well and properly, put a lot of weight after several surgeries and steroid treatments pretty fast and been around this weight for 5-6 years. I do see an endocrinologist regularly and believe it or not but the recommendation is to lose it fast due to other factors.
(I must add that I am shocked by the comment suggesting that my question was "abuse." I signed up not too long ago but was traveling all summer and this is my first day back on mfp... so I suppose I won't post again as I was looking for supportive suggestions, and though there were many, I don't get why someone would get so worked up by a question...)
It's against MFP rules to support such quick weight loss (though, under medical supervision is a different case). It should not have been flagged as abuse, however.
Thanks, I actually was unaware that people can ask about losing more than 2 pounds a week... And I appreciate with people telling me it's against the rules, I understand that and the flagging. And my shock was by the suggestion that my question was "abuse."
Some people don't know/remember, what reporting method; to choose.
-- Thanks for the info. Just to be clear, I never asked for or about very low calorie methods, or asked anyone to promote that... I was more wondering about things like eat pineapples and celery cause they make you burn more etc.
Actually you burn more eating protein than carbohydrate and I read the body burns more calories than it takes to digest celery and cabbage... people write about things that make metabolisms faster all the time (e.g. coffee) just wondering about people's experience.
This is not accurate.0 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »If you want to lose weight, start counting your calories as accurate as possible. Focusing on the TEF, without counting the calories is majoring in the minors and will leave you spinning your wheels and getting nowhere. The most accurate way to count your calories is through weighing all foods that can be weighed, particularly nutrient dense foods such as oils, peanut butter, etc. Give it several weeks and adjust up or down accordingly.
As for losing 4 lbs/week, I will share my story, using my numbers because I know them. I can lose 2lbs/week when I: consume 1600 calories/day, along with 5-7 hours of swimming per week, plus 8000 steps per day (as per FitBit), kickboxing 2 hours/week, and weight lifting 2 hours/week. For me to lose 4lbs/week, I would have to keep that activity up and drop my calorie intake to 600 calories/day. I am certain I would become very ill, very fast by doing that. I am only a couple years older than you, but shorter, so my daily intake is less than what you would get.
My suggestions: set a reasonable goal, track your calories as accurately as possible, and be happy that in two months from now you will be in a better position than you are now. If you want to continue driving yourself nuts with the minutia, then you could also concern yourself with the inaccuracies of the labeling system (labels are allowed to be off by up to 20%, and still be considered legal), you could try to calculate the amount of food that never is digested after you ingest it (a certain amount of food will pass through the alimentary canal without being digested and therefore you could eat more of those items).
It just seems like you are driving yourself nuts with things that have such a minimal effect while missing the biggest part of the picture. Reconsidering your approach may help you achieve your goals (albeit in a slighter longer time frame).
Thank you for your very helpful post. As I explained, I was wondering about the possibility of the weight loss averaging 3-4 pounds a week since in the beginning people report loss of water weight.
Do you also weigh low calorie vegetables like cucumbers and lettuce?
I weigh low calorie vegetables to eat more of them. For example, previously I'd put 1/4 ounce of lettuce on a sandwich. Now my target is 1 ounce. Previously I'd eat about 70 grams of broccoli. Now my target is 100 g.1 -
Thank you all for sharing your experience and thoughts. As I said I'm aware that losing around 3-4 pounds a week is more than the recommended sustainable average. That said this would only be for 2 months and I have heard a lot of anecdotes of people losing a lot in the beginning, so the rest could average to something closer to 2.5 pounds.
And yes, it would be for health issues that I need to drop weight for regulating various things, thinking about giving birth etc., and also having had multiple knee surgeries not being in pain everyday.
For what it's worth, I eat pretty well and properly, put a lot of weight after several surgeries and steroid treatments pretty fast and been around this weight for 5-6 years. I do see an endocrinologist regularly and believe it or not but the recommendation is to lose it fast due to other factors.
(I must add that I am shocked by the comment suggesting that my question was "abuse." I signed up not too long ago but was traveling all summer and this is my first day back on mfp... so I suppose I won't post again as I was looking for supportive suggestions, and though there were many, I don't get why someone would get so worked up by a question...)
It's against MFP rules to support such quick weight loss (though, under medical supervision is a different case). It should not have been flagged as abuse, however.
Thanks, I actually was unaware that people can ask about losing more than 2 pounds a week... And I appreciate with people telling me it's against the rules, I understand that and the flagging. And my shock was by the suggestion that my question was "abuse."
People misuse the flag system all the time. I have reported your OP as being misflagged using Flag > Report. However, what the flaggers presumably meant to do was report your OP for promoting a VLCD, which is what you would need to do to succeed in your goal of 35 pounds in two months. So, now that I've called moderator attention to your thread, don't be surprised if it gets locked.
If it does get locked, do start another thread about losing weight in a healthy manner, if you are so inclined.0 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »
you dont burn more eating certain foods.DeficitDuchess wrote: »Thank you all for sharing your experience and thoughts. As I said I'm aware that losing around 3-4 pounds a week is more than the recommended sustainable average. That said this would only be for 2 months and I have heard a lot of anecdotes of people losing a lot in the beginning, so the rest could average to something closer to 2.5 pounds.
And yes, it would be for health issues that I need to drop weight for regulating various things, thinking about giving birth etc., and also having had multiple knee surgeries not being in pain everyday.
For what it's worth, I eat pretty well and properly, put a lot of weight after several surgeries and steroid treatments pretty fast and been around this weight for 5-6 years. I do see an endocrinologist regularly and believe it or not but the recommendation is to lose it fast due to other factors.
(I must add that I am shocked by the comment suggesting that my question was "abuse." I signed up not too long ago but was traveling all summer and this is my first day back on mfp... so I suppose I won't post again as I was looking for supportive suggestions, and though there were many, I don't get why someone would get so worked up by a question...)
It's against MFP rules to support such quick weight loss (though, under medical supervision is a different case). It should not have been flagged as abuse, however.
Thanks, I actually was unaware that people can ask about losing more than 2 pounds a week... And I appreciate with people telling me it's against the rules, I understand that and the flagging. And my shock was by the suggestion that my question was "abuse."
Some people don't know/remember, what reporting method; to choose.
-- Thanks for the info. Just to be clear, I never asked for or about very low calorie methods, or asked anyone to promote that... I was more wondering about things like eat pineapples and celery cause they make you burn more etc.
Actually you burn more eating protein than carbohydrate and I read the body burns more calories than it takes to digest celery and cabbage... people write about things that make metabolisms faster all the time (e.g. coffee) just wondering about people's experience.
actually there are no reputable studies proving that pineapple and celery causes you to burn more calories and if it does it will be so minuscule that it wont make a difference,as for things to make metabolism faster you would have to consume large quantities to see any difference .the only proven things to boost metabolism is lean muscle(which still only burns about 6-7 calories per lb) and exercise. theres no scientific proof that foods do this. just a lot of articles that have no scientific or medically proven studies to back them up.if this were the case no one would be overweight,we could just eat and drink these foods and boost our metabolism without exercise.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »If you want to lose weight, start counting your calories as accurate as possible. Focusing on the TEF, without counting the calories is majoring in the minors and will leave you spinning your wheels and getting nowhere. The most accurate way to count your calories is through weighing all foods that can be weighed, particularly nutrient dense foods such as oils, peanut butter, etc. Give it several weeks and adjust up or down accordingly.
As for losing 4 lbs/week, I will share my story, using my numbers because I know them. I can lose 2lbs/week when I: consume 1600 calories/day, along with 5-7 hours of swimming per week, plus 8000 steps per day (as per FitBit), kickboxing 2 hours/week, and weight lifting 2 hours/week. For me to lose 4lbs/week, I would have to keep that activity up and drop my calorie intake to 600 calories/day. I am certain I would become very ill, very fast by doing that. I am only a couple years older than you, but shorter, so my daily intake is less than what you would get.
My suggestions: set a reasonable goal, track your calories as accurately as possible, and be happy that in two months from now you will be in a better position than you are now. If you want to continue driving yourself nuts with the minutia, then you could also concern yourself with the inaccuracies of the labeling system (labels are allowed to be off by up to 20%, and still be considered legal), you could try to calculate the amount of food that never is digested after you ingest it (a certain amount of food will pass through the alimentary canal without being digested and therefore you could eat more of those items).
It just seems like you are driving yourself nuts with things that have such a minimal effect while missing the biggest part of the picture. Reconsidering your approach may help you achieve your goals (albeit in a slighter longer time frame).
Thank you for your very helpful post. As I explained, I was wondering about the possibility of the weight loss averaging 3-4 pounds a week since in the beginning people report loss of water weight.
Do you also weigh low calorie vegetables like cucumbers and lettuce?
I weigh low calorie vegetables to eat more of them. For example, previously I'd put 1/4 ounce of lettuce on a sandwich. Now my target is 1 ounce. Previously I'd eat about 70 grams of broccoli. Now my target is 100 g.
Thank you, that's pretty good advice.0 -
Please no! That is Not good for your body. You are just asking for gallstones and a fatty liver. Don't forget, the body fat does not just disappear, it is burned and processed by your body. A rapid loss like what is mentioned could harm your health.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions