Goal each week - lbs to lose ?
keto1777
Posts: 23 Member
Hi guys -
I’m just starting out & would like to lose 65 lbs all together. I understand that the more weight you have to lose, the more you can expect to lose each week...does that mean I should set my goal to lose each week as 2 lbs? What do you suggest as a good goal per week to start?
I’m 40, 5’2” sedentary, so MFP says 1200 calories per day if I want to lose 2 lbs per week, but that seems kind of drastic as a start to go from eating like 3,000 calories a day to 1200. Then again, maybe I just need to suck it up & get used to it haha
Thanks for any advice! :-)
I’m just starting out & would like to lose 65 lbs all together. I understand that the more weight you have to lose, the more you can expect to lose each week...does that mean I should set my goal to lose each week as 2 lbs? What do you suggest as a good goal per week to start?
I’m 40, 5’2” sedentary, so MFP says 1200 calories per day if I want to lose 2 lbs per week, but that seems kind of drastic as a start to go from eating like 3,000 calories a day to 1200. Then again, maybe I just need to suck it up & get used to it haha
Thanks for any advice! :-)
1
Replies
-
It really just depends on you and your ability to stick to a drastic cut or not. It's hard either way, but for some people it's easier for them to take baby-steps, rather than just cold turkey everything. I dropped straight to 1200 and it was rough, but my will to lose weight at a slightly faster rate won out. I have a lot to lose, so 1 pound a week would take me forever, and if I'm going to be miserable on a diet, I'd rather be miserable for the least amount of time possible. But, with having such a low calorie goal, it also makes it so that if I go over a little bit, it's not such a big deal. So if I'm having a bad day/week, I shake it off and keep going.
For the first 6 months or so I was really strict with myself. I only had a cheat day, maybe once a month. The last couple months, it's been almost every week, and I've had some hiccups (Thanksgiving week was really bad), but I also know a lot of it is just this time of the year, so I'm not sweating it too much. When January rolls around I'll buckle back down, but as long as I'm losing still losing weight, it's good.5 -
SephiraAllen wrote: »It really just depends on you and your ability to stick to a drastic cut or not. It's hard either way, but for some people it's easier for them to take baby-steps, rather than just cold turkey everything. I dropped straight to 1200 and it was rough, but my will to lose weight at a slightly faster rate won out. I have a lot to lose, so 1 pound a week would take me forever, and if I'm going to be miserable on a diet, I'd rather be miserable for the least amount of time possible. But, with having such a low calorie goal, it also makes it so that if I go over a little bit, it's not such a big deal. So if I'm having a bad day/week, I shake it off and keep going.
For the first 6 months or so I was really strict with myself. I only had a cheat day, maybe once a month. The last couple months, it's been almost every week, and I've had some hiccups (Thanksgiving week was really bad), but I also know a lot of it is just this time of the year, so I'm not sweating it too much. When January rolls around I'll buckle back down, but as long as I'm losing still losing weight, it's good.
You sound a lot like me! I’m thinking if I set it at a 1/2 lb per week it’ll take forever! Have you stalled at all? Thats another thing I worry about..that if I start at 1200, i’ll stall & have to cut back even more to keep losing ?1 -
Yeah, you can lose faster when you have more to lose, but that doesn't mean you have to. Like @SephiraAllen said, it's all about finding something you can live with. I started in January with 73 pounds to lose and have settled into about 3-4 pounds a month with a rough two year goal overall - I am also 5'2" but I'm twitchy and walk a lot so I can lose on a bit higher than most women my size. I get wanting to get it over with, but I genuinely am not miserable or feel like I'm "on a diet", which makes keeping it going a lot easier. Play around and figure out what works for you. I found it much easier to start slow and ramp up, but everyone is different. There's no right answer other than healthy and sustainable.6
-
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Yeah, you can lose faster when you have more to lose, but that doesn't mean you have to. Like @SephiraAllen said, it's all about finding something you can live with. I started in January with 73 pounds to lose and have settled into about 3-4 pounds a month with a rough two year goal overall - I am also 5'2" but I'm twitchy and walk a lot so I can lose on a bit higher than most women my size. I get wanting to get it over with, but I genuinely am not miserable or feel like I'm "on a diet", which makes keeping it going a lot easier. Play around and figure out what works for you. I found it much easier to start slow and ramp up, but everyone is different. There's no right answer other than healthy and sustainable.
Awesome, thank you!!! Congrats on your weight loss so far! :-)1 -
I would target 2 pounds a week. That's about what I had to lose and that's what I targeted. 65 pounds at .5 pounds/week would take 2 years and that's assuming you never cheat or miscount.
Maybe after you get down to 30-40 to lose, switch to 1 pound a week, and under 10-20 switch to .5 pounds/week. This will probably happen naturally without you changing the diet. It really depends on you, I've seen people successfully lose 2 pounds/week all the way to goal and look great - while keeping most their muscle mass. It usually requires extreme exercise and lifting while dieting though.
I went from eating ~5000 a day for years to eating ~1200. No issues here, was better for me to cold turkey it and throw out all the junk food in a single day. Sucks for like 2 weeks, then I got use to it.SephiraAllen wrote: »It really just depends on you and your ability to stick to a drastic cut or not. It's hard either way, but for some people it's easier for them to take baby-steps, rather than just cold turkey everything. I dropped straight to 1200 and it was rough, but my will to lose weight at a slightly faster rate won out. I have a lot to lose, so 1 pound a week would take me forever, and if I'm going to be miserable on a diet, I'd rather be miserable for the least amount of time possible. But, with having such a low calorie goal, it also makes it so that if I go over a little bit, it's not such a big deal. So if I'm having a bad day/week, I shake it off and keep going.
For the first 6 months or so I was really strict with myself. I only had a cheat day, maybe once a month. The last couple months, it's been almost every week, and I've had some hiccups (Thanksgiving week was really bad), but I also know a lot of it is just this time of the year, so I'm not sweating it too much. When January rolls around I'll buckle back down, but as long as I'm losing still losing weight, it's good.
You sound a lot like me! I’m thinking if I set it at a 1/2 lb per week it’ll take forever! Have you stalled at all? Thats another thing I worry about..that if I start at 1200, i’ll stall & have to cut back even more to keep losing ?
Just so you know starvation mode is a myth, you'll start losing a lot of muscle along with your fat if you don't eat enough (minimum for females is 1200). You may plateau for a month or two, but that can happen on any diet, you just keep doing what you are doing and it'll pass if you are counting calories correctly.
You should never cut below 1200 calories/day as a female. Your weight loss will naturally slow down as you get closer to your goal.2 -
SephiraAllen wrote: »It really just depends on you and your ability to stick to a drastic cut or not. It's hard either way, but for some people it's easier for them to take baby-steps, rather than just cold turkey everything. I dropped straight to 1200 and it was rough, but my will to lose weight at a slightly faster rate won out. I have a lot to lose, so 1 pound a week would take me forever, and if I'm going to be miserable on a diet, I'd rather be miserable for the least amount of time possible. But, with having such a low calorie goal, it also makes it so that if I go over a little bit, it's not such a big deal. So if I'm having a bad day/week, I shake it off and keep going.
For the first 6 months or so I was really strict with myself. I only had a cheat day, maybe once a month. The last couple months, it's been almost every week, and I've had some hiccups (Thanksgiving week was really bad), but I also know a lot of it is just this time of the year, so I'm not sweating it too much. When January rolls around I'll buckle back down, but as long as I'm losing still losing weight, it's good.
You sound a lot like me! I’m thinking if I set it at a 1/2 lb per week it’ll take forever! Have you stalled at all? Thats another thing I worry about..that if I start at 1200, i’ll stall & have to cut back even more to keep losing ?
I've been at this since April and, as of this week, I'll be down 100 pounds. Every 2-3 months there seems to be a period of time that I either gain a few pounds or, at the very least, stop losing, but usually (if the gain wasn't due to me having a bad week), I purposefully take a few days off and then things seem to start heading in the right direction again when I get back on track.
So far, that's what's worked for me. And really, I'm not super miserable because I really do eat what I want to - just sometimes, that means only eating a small bite of whatever it is, or if I really need to eat something crazy, finding a way to fit it in. If all else fails - cheat day, but not too many or it defeats the purpose.
(also - Halo Top Birthday Cake ice cream - 280 calories for the whole pint and 20g of protein. I eat way more of it than I should, but it keeps me from making bigger mistakes. LOL)
3 -
I would target 2 pounds a week. That's about what I had to lose and that's what I targeted. 65 pounds at .5 pounds/week would take 2 years and that's assuming you never cheat or miscount.
Maybe after you get down to 30-40 to lose, switch to 1 pound a week, and under 10-20 switch to .5 pounds/week. This will probably happen naturally without you changing the diet. It really depends on you, I've seen people successfully lose 2 pounds/week all the way to goal and look great - while keeping most their muscle mass. It usually requires extreme exercise and lifting while dieting though.
I went from eating ~5000 a day for years to eating ~1200. No issues here, was better for me to cold turkey it and throw out all the junk food in a single day. Sucks for like 2 weeks, then I got use to it.SephiraAllen wrote: »It really just depends on you and your ability to stick to a drastic cut or not. It's hard either way, but for some people it's easier for them to take baby-steps, rather than just cold turkey everything. I dropped straight to 1200 and it was rough, but my will to lose weight at a slightly faster rate won out. I have a lot to lose, so 1 pound a week would take me forever, and if I'm going to be miserable on a diet, I'd rather be miserable for the least amount of time possible. But, with having such a low calorie goal, it also makes it so that if I go over a little bit, it's not such a big deal. So if I'm having a bad day/week, I shake it off and keep going.
For the first 6 months or so I was really strict with myself. I only had a cheat day, maybe once a month. The last couple months, it's been almost every week, and I've had some hiccups (Thanksgiving week was really bad), but I also know a lot of it is just this time of the year, so I'm not sweating it too much. When January rolls around I'll buckle back down, but as long as I'm losing still losing weight, it's good.
You sound a lot like me! I’m thinking if I set it at a 1/2 lb per week it’ll take forever! Have you stalled at all? Thats another thing I worry about..that if I start at 1200, i’ll stall & have to cut back even more to keep losing ?
Just so you know starvation mode is a myth, you'll start losing a lot of muscle along with your fat if you don't eat enough (minimum for females is 1200). You may plateau for a month or two, but that can happen on any diet, you just keep doing what you are doing and it'll pass if you are counting calories correctly.
You should never cut below 1200 calories/day as a female. Your weight loss will naturally slow down as you get closer to your goal.
Such awesome advice, thank you so much! It all makes total sense! Good to know you also went from eating lots of calories a day to just 1200 & that if I just stick it out, it gets easier as I go :-)1 -
SephiraAllen wrote: »SephiraAllen wrote: »It really just depends on you and your ability to stick to a drastic cut or not. It's hard either way, but for some people it's easier for them to take baby-steps, rather than just cold turkey everything. I dropped straight to 1200 and it was rough, but my will to lose weight at a slightly faster rate won out. I have a lot to lose, so 1 pound a week would take me forever, and if I'm going to be miserable on a diet, I'd rather be miserable for the least amount of time possible. But, with having such a low calorie goal, it also makes it so that if I go over a little bit, it's not such a big deal. So if I'm having a bad day/week, I shake it off and keep going.
For the first 6 months or so I was really strict with myself. I only had a cheat day, maybe once a month. The last couple months, it's been almost every week, and I've had some hiccups (Thanksgiving week was really bad), but I also know a lot of it is just this time of the year, so I'm not sweating it too much. When January rolls around I'll buckle back down, but as long as I'm losing still losing weight, it's good.
You sound a lot like me! I’m thinking if I set it at a 1/2 lb per week it’ll take forever! Have you stalled at all? Thats another thing I worry about..that if I start at 1200, i’ll stall & have to cut back even more to keep losing ?
I've been at this since April and, as of this week, I'll be down 100 pounds. Every 2-3 months there seems to be a period of time that I either gain a few pounds or, at the very least, stop losing, but usually (if the gain wasn't due to me having a bad week), I purposefully take a few days off and then things seem to start heading in the right direction again when I get back on track.
So far, that's what's worked for me. And really, I'm not super miserable because I really do eat what I want to - just sometimes, that means only eating a small bite of whatever it is, or if I really need to eat something crazy, finding a way to fit it in. If all else fails - cheat day, but not too many or it defeats the purpose.
(also - Halo Top Birthday Cake ice cream - 280 calories for the whole pint and 20g of protein. I eat way more of it than I should, but it keeps me from making bigger mistakes. LOL)
Wow, 100 lbs already?!! Congrats!!!! That is so motivating to me! Thanks for the Halo Top tip, I will def be trying that out! Do you drink diet coke? I love it & I’ve found in the past that it helps fill me up...guess its the carbonation lol1 -
Thanks!!SephiraAllen wrote: »SephiraAllen wrote: »It really just depends on you and your ability to stick to a drastic cut or not. It's hard either way, but for some people it's easier for them to take baby-steps, rather than just cold turkey everything. I dropped straight to 1200 and it was rough, but my will to lose weight at a slightly faster rate won out. I have a lot to lose, so 1 pound a week would take me forever, and if I'm going to be miserable on a diet, I'd rather be miserable for the least amount of time possible. But, with having such a low calorie goal, it also makes it so that if I go over a little bit, it's not such a big deal. So if I'm having a bad day/week, I shake it off and keep going.
For the first 6 months or so I was really strict with myself. I only had a cheat day, maybe once a month. The last couple months, it's been almost every week, and I've had some hiccups (Thanksgiving week was really bad), but I also know a lot of it is just this time of the year, so I'm not sweating it too much. When January rolls around I'll buckle back down, but as long as I'm losing still losing weight, it's good.
You sound a lot like me! I’m thinking if I set it at a 1/2 lb per week it’ll take forever! Have you stalled at all? Thats another thing I worry about..that if I start at 1200, i’ll stall & have to cut back even more to keep losing ?
I've been at this since April and, as of this week, I'll be down 100 pounds. Every 2-3 months there seems to be a period of time that I either gain a few pounds or, at the very least, stop losing, but usually (if the gain wasn't due to me having a bad week), I purposefully take a few days off and then things seem to start heading in the right direction again when I get back on track.
So far, that's what's worked for me. And really, I'm not super miserable because I really do eat what I want to - just sometimes, that means only eating a small bite of whatever it is, or if I really need to eat something crazy, finding a way to fit it in. If all else fails - cheat day, but not too many or it defeats the purpose.
(also - Halo Top Birthday Cake ice cream - 280 calories for the whole pint and 20g of protein. I eat way more of it than I should, but it keeps me from making bigger mistakes. LOL)
Wow, 100 lbs already?!! Congrats!!!! That is so motivating to me! Thanks for the Halo Top tip, I will def be trying that out! Do you drink diet coke? I love it & I’ve found in the past that it helps fill me up...guess its the carbonation lol
Soda was the first thing I quit, even before I started cutting the calories full-time. I'm not a fan of "diet" sodas, so I've been doing the water thing for over a year and most of the time it doesn't really bother me that much. If I'm really craving something else, I might take a small sip, but most of the time it's not worth drinking a whole regular one and losing calories I could be eating.1 -
Hi guys -
I’m just starting out & would like to lose 65 lbs all together. I understand that the more weight you have to lose, the more you can expect to lose each week...does that mean I should set my goal to lose each week as 2 lbs? What do you suggest as a good goal per week to start?
I’m 40, 5’2” sedentary, so MFP says 1200 calories per day if I want to lose 2 lbs per week, but that seems kind of drastic as a start to go from eating like 3,000 calories a day to 1200. Then again, maybe I just need to suck it up & get used to it haha
Thanks for any advice! :-)
1200 cals is the bare minimum mfp will give you, and 2 lbs is the most aggressive goal mfp will allow. While it's certainly possible for you to lose 2 lbs at first, sometimes putting the pedal to the medal can be too stressful and lead to hitting the wall. Also, most people who can swing with 2 lbs per week for awhile are more average height and have more cals to work with to hit that goal.
My unprofessional 2 cents would be to start with 1 lb and see how it goes. You can always crank it up a little if you feel like you're going easy peasy. I think taking a year to lose 65 lbs is perfectly reasonable and realistic, and gives your body a little more time to adjust to the weight loss. Also, if you go at a less breakneck pace, it might be easier to figure out how to eat for the rest of your life to maintain your healthy weight when you get there, not just how to diet.
Obviously it's up to you, you know what your lifestyle and will power is like. Whatever you decide, good luck!9 -
The recommended healthy guidelines are based on the amount left to lose.
50+= 2 lbs per week
30-50= 1.5 lb per week
20-30=1 lb per werk
0-20=0.5 lb per week
This is the maximum you should lose per week. It's perfectly OK to lose slower. It's not OK to lose faster even if you think you can. Your energy, sleep, hair, skin, nails, and cycle can suffer from losing too fast.
I lost 150. The first 50 took 6 months. The next 50 took about 8 months. The last 50 took a year or more. Maintaining successfully for about 14 months now.
Hope this helps.15 -
1200 is doable, you may find your body feels hungry at first, make sure you drink plenty of water, it helps hydrate and also often hunger is thirst. At 1200 you’ll see quite a quick difference to start with, but then it will slow. Combine with exercise to encourage weight loss & also to give you more calories to eat. It will feel tough to start with, 1200 for me is now a good base on non-exercise days. Good luck!!2
-
MegaMooseEsq wrote: »Yeah, you can lose faster when you have more to lose, but that doesn't mean you have to. Like @SephiraAllen said, it's all about finding something you can live with. I started in January with 73 pounds to lose and have settled into about 3-4 pounds a month with a rough two year goal overall - I am also 5'2" but I'm twitchy and walk a lot so I can lose on a bit higher than most women my size. I get wanting to get it over with, but I genuinely am not miserable or feel like I'm "on a diet", which makes keeping it going a lot easier. Play around and figure out what works for you. I found it much easier to start slow and ramp up, but everyone is different. There's no right answer other than healthy and sustainable.
Awesome, thank you!!! Congrats on your weight loss so far! :-)
Thank you - I’ve lost just about 40 pounds this year and feeling good about the last 30 and change for next year. I know that two years eating at a defecit seems overwhelming, but the thing to remember is this: if your goal is to lose weight and maintain that lower weight, you will have to be eating less than you did at your heavier weight for the rest of your life. You will *never* be able to go back to your old eating habits, or else you will go back to your old weight. I think many people underestimate how hard it can be transitioning from a very restrictive diet to a diet that is less restrictive but still probably quite different from how they were eating before. That’s the benefit of losing weight slowly - the way I am eating right now is almost exactly the way I will have to eat to maintain at my goal weight. I will drop my calories a bit as my loss slows, but I don’t plan on ever going more than a couple hundred under my target maintenance calories. I don’t see this as something to white-knuckle through, but building a set of habits which hopefully will serve me well for the rest of my life.6 -
Personally, I would go for 1 pound a week to start. I find that 1300 isn't enough food to keep me from feeling like it's not enough, so I would never want less. Why not start at a deficit set for 1 pound/week, and try to increase your activity level enough to be considered at least lightly active. You can always readjust later to increase your deficit, but don't make it to hard to start. Remember this is a longterm change to your way of eating, not a short term 'diet'.5
-
If the number goes down I met my goal. Weight loss is a long term thing, feel like I'm succeeding as long as my weight is trending down.3
-
I think initially starting out at 2 lbs a week would be okay. but be prepared to slow your loss down as you progress.
I've lost over a 100 lbs and I'm going on 3 years. I was never in a rush to do it though. In the beginning losing 2 lbs a week was easy. Now I'm cruising around .5 lbs a week.
The time is going to pass anyways. Focus on making a life change that is sustainable. In my mind 3-4 years to lose 130 lbs to my goal weight is nothing compared to the time and now fulfillment I'll have for the rest of my life by learning to maintain my goal weight.
My dad ALWAYS has told me "life is a marathon not a sprint" and when I was younger it was highly obnoxious and annoying because I wanted to get to my goals and get them as fast as possible, regardless of what the goal was or what it was for. And now I realize he's right.... I'd rather take my time and achieve things more slowly and do it the healthy and right way than just hurry up and get there and have learned nothing along the way.7 -
You guys are so thoughtful, thank you so much for taking the time to reply! I love hearing others experience & your advice is very encouraging & helpful to me! :-)
MegaMooseEsq, you are so right about maintaining this for the rest of my life & not going back to my old eating habits!! That is exactly what I need to hear & to remember! I have always been on some kind of diet just to lose it, then always go back to eating bad, then go back to dieting to lose again. It helps knowing if I want to be healthy & feel good, I WILL have to watch for the rest of my life & that there actually isn’t anything wrong with that! :-)
I am so excited now that I actually know what the heck to do & to just stick to it! That its ok to not feel overly stuffed...I’m not going to “starve” or lower my metabolism! I will have to drink my water & I will get used to it! I will learn what an actual portion is & that my poor little body doesn’t need 5,000 calories a day!! I can’t wait to start feeling amazing! :-)3 -
You say that if you set it at 1/2 lbs a week, it would take you forever. Maybe, but it would also be excellent practice for maintenance. If you have 65 lbs to lose, once you've lost them, your calorie expenditure will go down by a couple of hundreds of calories (given same activity level) because you'd be smaller and a smaller body would use fewer calories. So if you were set to lose 1/2 lbs per week now, your allowed daily number of calories would be quite similar to your maintenance calories once you've lost the weight. Which means it's a really good idea to get acquainted with eating that amount of calories, and letting it become your new normal.
I'm also saying that because it's what helped me - I lost 50 lbs slowly, over a year and a half, starting with 1 lb per week for first half a year or so, and then switching to 1/2 lbs per week, and then easing into maintenance. I've now maintained 137-138 lbs for the last seven months or so.
Edited to add - just noticed that MegaMoose wrote something quite similar a few posts above - yay for slow and steady weight loss!3 -
The recommended healthy guidelines are based on the amount left to lose.
50+= 2 lbs per week
30-50= 1.5 lb per week
20-30=1 lb per werk
0-20=0.5 lb per week
This is the maximum you should lose per week. It's perfectly OK to lose slower. It's not OK to lose faster even if you think you can. Your energy, sleep, hair, skin, nails, and cycle can suffer from losing too fast.
I lost 150. The first 50 took 6 months. The next 50 took about 8 months. The last 50 took a year or more. Maintaining successfully for about 14 months now.
Hope this helps.
Good rules of thumb, right there. Another is not to exceed 1% of body weight as average weekly weight loss, unless morbidly obese or under a medically-supervised regimen. That is, 1% or the rules lorrpb suggested, whichever loss rate is smaller. Even slower than that is always OK, especially if it makes the process more sustainable.
It's important to stay strong and healthy while losing, build good habits, and have the energy to enjoy life!5 -
OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.3 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)0 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
I hate those type of competitions because weight loss is not a race, and they turn it into one. Most people who lose weight with the mindset "fast as possible" gain it back (and way more) in the next few years. I did the same back in 2012, and it seems you also did. Ditch that mindset completely this time, while 1200 calories seems like very little now, it's not much less than you'll need to eat for the rest of your life to maintain a healthy weight. I am showing it's only about 1450-1500 calories a day to maintain 125 pounds as a 5'2" female.
Due to your height, I would say definitely target 1200 calories. 1200 calories a day for a female is fine whether you are 150 pounds or 250 pounds as long as it's a balanced diet. MFP will not go below 1200 calories for a female, so when you select 2 pounds, what does is say you are expected to lose? If I select 2 pounds it shows me "1500 calories" and says I will lose 1.7/pounds a week because MFP won't go below 1500 for males. My guess is 1200 calories won't get you 2 pounds/week, so you'll need to eat 1200 calories a day and exercise if you want to lose faster.3 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
Crash diets can be quite hard on the body and many, many people regain afterwards. Leaving aside the stuff I talked about earlier about the benefits of taking things easy, the 1200 number is just about meeting minimal nutritional needs. Theoretically, most women (men is 1500) could eat 1200 calories a day and get enough nutrition not to see severe nutritional side effects, and most of them would lose weight at different rates largely depending on their size when they started. That said, defaulting to the minimum healthy number of calories is basically a "crash diet" unless you are starting off pretty small, and completely unnecessary for most overweight or obese people to lose weight.
All you need to do to lose weight is eat less than the amount of calories maintaining your current weight. And yes, that number does decrease as you lose weight, because it takes less energy to move less weight around. As for why it would be possible to eat more now and lose even though your weight has changed, I think you're probably just underestimating the number of calories your body needs to sustain at 185 pounds. Yes, it's more than it was at 144 and less than at 210, but it's still more than 1200 - almost certainly several hundred more at least even taking into account your height and gender. And yes, the number does tend to go down as we age, but again, probably not as much as most people think. I think that 1200 number has just gotten lodged into many women's heads at what you are supposed to eat when losing weight.2 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
How much you lose is based on how much of a deficit you are eating at. Let's say your maintenance calories right now and sedentary are 2000 cals (I'm just spit-balling a round number).
To lose half a lb per week, you need a 250 calorie deficit, or 1750 cals.
To lose 1 lb per week, you need a 500 calorie deficit, or 1500 cals.
To lose 2 lbs per week, you need a 1000 calorie deficit, or 1000 cals. But that is below the MFP minimum, so they will set your target at 1200 cals per day and you will lose a bit less than 2 lbs per week.
The MFP goal assumes no exercise. If you exercise, you should log it and eat back at least some of those calories.0 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
I hate those type of competitions because weight loss is not a race, and they turn it into one. Most people who lose weight with the mindset "fast as possible" gain it back (and way more) in the next few years. I did the same back in 2012, and it seems you also did. Ditch that mindset completely this time, while 1200 calories seems like very little now, you'll probably end up only being able to eat ~1600 calories a day just to maintain weight when you are smaller. You will never be able to go back to eating the way you have been, and you likely won't be able to eat much more after switching from dieting to maintaining.
1200 calories a day for a female is fine whether you are 150 pounds or 250 pounds. As long as it's a balanced diet of 1200 calories. MFP will not go below 1200 calories for a female. When you select 2 pounds, what does is say you are expected to lose? If I select 2 pounds it shows me "1500" and says I will lose 1.7/pounds a week because MFP won't go below 1500 for males. My guess is 1200 calories won't get you 2 pounds/week because you are only 5'2", you'll need to eat 1200 calories a day and exercise if you want to lose faster.
I'm sorry, but the bolded is simply not true, in fact it's a dangerous myth that leads far too many women to undereat and crash and burn. There are plenty of women for whom 1200 calories is no where near enough energy to be supplying their body with.6 -
I saw a really helpful range on the forums the other day but couldn't find it just now. 2lbs/week is for people who have 75-100+ lbs to lose, as a rule of thumb, according to that. 50-75 was like 1.5, 25-50 is 1lb/wk, 10-25 was like 0.75 and 0.5lb/wk was for 10 pounds or less to lose.
I'd just shoot for a weight in your range and see how you feel. If you feel like you could eat less, increase the goal. If you need to eat more, increase your calories.0 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
I hate those type of competitions because weight loss is not a race, and they turn it into one. Most people who lose weight with the mindset "fast as possible" gain it back (and way more) in the next few years. I did the same back in 2012, and it seems you also did. Ditch that mindset completely this time, while 1200 calories seems like very little now, you'll probably end up only being able to eat ~1600 calories a day just to maintain weight when you are smaller. You will never be able to go back to eating the way you have been, and you likely won't be able to eat much more after switching from dieting to maintaining.
1200 calories a day for a female is fine whether you are 150 pounds or 250 pounds. As long as it's a balanced diet of 1200 calories. MFP will not go below 1200 calories for a female. When you select 2 pounds, what does is say you are expected to lose? If I select 2 pounds it shows me "1500" and says I will lose 1.7/pounds a week because MFP won't go below 1500 for males. My guess is 1200 calories won't get you 2 pounds/week because you are only 5'2", you'll need to eat 1200 calories a day and exercise if you want to lose faster.
I'm sorry, but the bolded is simply not true, in fact it's a dangerous myth that leads far too many women to undereat and crash and burn. There are plenty of women for whom 1200 calories is no where near enough energy to be supplying their body with.
Sorry I meant only 150-250 pounds, not 250+. My mother has lost 40 pounds off 1200 calories/day, and she started at 5'3" 245 pounds (incredibly high 43 BMI) plus she's in her 60s. No downsides so far, doctor said her health and blood pressure problems have improved dramatically. I switched to 1200 calories a day (as a 6'1" 260 pound male) for a couple months and felt like a million bucks when exercising/lifting, but 3.4 pounds/week loss was alarmingly fast so I now try to eat closer to the male minimium of 1500.
Malnutrition usually takes much longer to develop than half a year of "minimum calorie" dieting. I'm one of those people that believe being fatter for longer is less healthy than just eating 1200-1500 calories/day and losing it faster. I think the OP is fine eating 1200 a day until she reaches her goal, given her height, her maintenance at 125 pounds will only be about 1500 calories.0 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
I hate those type of competitions because weight loss is not a race, and they turn it into one. Most people who lose weight with the mindset "fast as possible" gain it back (and way more) in the next few years. I did the same back in 2012, and it seems you also did. Ditch that mindset completely this time, while 1200 calories seems like very little now, you'll probably end up only being able to eat ~1600 calories a day just to maintain weight when you are smaller. You will never be able to go back to eating the way you have been, and you likely won't be able to eat much more after switching from dieting to maintaining.
1200 calories a day for a female is fine whether you are 150 pounds or 250 pounds. As long as it's a balanced diet of 1200 calories. MFP will not go below 1200 calories for a female. When you select 2 pounds, what does is say you are expected to lose? If I select 2 pounds it shows me "1500" and says I will lose 1.7/pounds a week because MFP won't go below 1500 for males. My guess is 1200 calories won't get you 2 pounds/week because you are only 5'2", you'll need to eat 1200 calories a day and exercise if you want to lose faster.
I'm sorry, but the bolded is simply not true, in fact it's a dangerous myth that leads far too many women to undereat and crash and burn. There are plenty of women for whom 1200 calories is no where near enough energy to be supplying their body with.
Sorry I meant only 150-250 pounds, not 250+. My mother has lost 40 pounds off 1200 calories/day, and she started at 5'3" 245 pounds (incredibly high 43 BMI) plus she's in her 60s. No downsides so far, doctor said her health and blood pressure problems have improved dramatically. I switched to 1200 calories a day (as a 6'2" 260 pound male) for a couple months and felt like a million bucks when exercising/lifting, but 3.4 pounds/week loss was alarmingly fast so I now try to eat closer to the male minimium of 1500.
Malnutrition usually takes much longer to develop than half a year of "unsafe" dieting. I'm one of those people that believe being fatter for longer is less healthy than just eating 1200 calories/day and losing it faster. I think the OP is fine eating 1200 a day until she reaches her goal, given her height, her maintenance at 125 pounds will only be about 1500 calories.
That depends a lot on activity. A reasonable active average sized woman would be hurting herself eating 1200 cals. There are plenty of women here, tall and short, young and old, who maintain on over 2000 cals. Unless a person is morbidly obese, there is no reason to stress out the body by eating ata huge deficit. Just because your mom in her 60's has been able to eat at 1200 cals without repercussions doesn't mean that all women who are under 250 lbs can do so, and suggesting they can is irresponsible.
And 1500 is only her maintenance at sedentary, I'd assume. I'm 5'4", 125 lbs and lightly active, and I maintain at 1800 cals. A younger woman living a more active lifestyle at 5'3" 125 lbs could easily maintain at 2000 cals or more. You can't generalize numbers like that.2 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
I hate those type of competitions because weight loss is not a race, and they turn it into one. Most people who lose weight with the mindset "fast as possible" gain it back (and way more) in the next few years. I did the same back in 2012, and it seems you also did. Ditch that mindset completely this time, while 1200 calories seems like very little now, you'll probably end up only being able to eat ~1600 calories a day just to maintain weight when you are smaller. You will never be able to go back to eating the way you have been, and you likely won't be able to eat much more after switching from dieting to maintaining.
1200 calories a day for a female is fine whether you are 150 pounds or 250 pounds. As long as it's a balanced diet of 1200 calories. MFP will not go below 1200 calories for a female. When you select 2 pounds, what does is say you are expected to lose? If I select 2 pounds it shows me "1500" and says I will lose 1.7/pounds a week because MFP won't go below 1500 for males. My guess is 1200 calories won't get you 2 pounds/week because you are only 5'2", you'll need to eat 1200 calories a day and exercise if you want to lose faster.
I'm sorry, but the bolded is simply not true, in fact it's a dangerous myth that leads far too many women to undereat and crash and burn. There are plenty of women for whom 1200 calories is no where near enough energy to be supplying their body with.
Sorry I meant 150-250 pounds, not 300+. My mother has lost 40 pounds off 1200 calories/day, and she started at 5'3" 245 pounds (incredibly high 43 BMI) plus she's in her 60s. No downsides so far, doctor said her health and blood pressure problems have improved dramatically. I switched to 1200 calories a day (as a 6'2" 260 pound male) for a couple months and felt like a million bucks, but 3.4 pounds/week loss was alarmingly fast so I now try to eat closer to the male minimium of 1500.
I think the OP is fine eating 1200 a day until she reaches her goal, given her height, her maintenance will only be about 1500 calories.
Bzzt, not true for all, as you earlier said it was.
I started weight loss at age 59, 5'5", 183 pounds, sedentary other than intentional exercise. When I first joined MFP, it gave me 1200 and I believed it. I even ate back nearly 100% of exercise on top of the 1200. Bad plan: Got fatigued & weak. Took weeks to fully recover. I lost most of 50+ pounds in less than a year at 1400-1600 net calories, to a healthy weight in the 120s.
Do some women need to eat 1200 calories to lose? Sure.
Should even more of them eat 1200, and will they stay strong and healthy if they do? That depends on lot of factors, many of which experienced, knowledgeable women are discussing here now.
Can all women lose safely on 1200? *Baby feline*, no4 -
lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
I hate those type of competitions because weight loss is not a race, and they turn it into one. Most people who lose weight with the mindset "fast as possible" gain it back (and way more) in the next few years. I did the same back in 2012, and it seems you also did. Ditch that mindset completely this time, while 1200 calories seems like very little now, you'll probably end up only being able to eat ~1600 calories a day just to maintain weight when you are smaller. You will never be able to go back to eating the way you have been, and you likely won't be able to eat much more after switching from dieting to maintaining.
1200 calories a day for a female is fine whether you are 150 pounds or 250 pounds. As long as it's a balanced diet of 1200 calories. MFP will not go below 1200 calories for a female. When you select 2 pounds, what does is say you are expected to lose? If I select 2 pounds it shows me "1500" and says I will lose 1.7/pounds a week because MFP won't go below 1500 for males. My guess is 1200 calories won't get you 2 pounds/week because you are only 5'2", you'll need to eat 1200 calories a day and exercise if you want to lose faster.
I'm sorry, but the bolded is simply not true, in fact it's a dangerous myth that leads far too many women to undereat and crash and burn. There are plenty of women for whom 1200 calories is no where near enough energy to be supplying their body with.
Sorry I meant only 150-250 pounds, not 250+. My mother has lost 40 pounds off 1200 calories/day, and she started at 5'3" 245 pounds (incredibly high 43 BMI) plus she's in her 60s. No downsides so far, doctor said her health and blood pressure problems have improved dramatically. I switched to 1200 calories a day (as a 6'2" 260 pound male) for a couple months and felt like a million bucks when exercising/lifting, but 3.4 pounds/week loss was alarmingly fast so I now try to eat closer to the male minimium of 1500.
Malnutrition usually takes much longer to develop than half a year of "unsafe" dieting. I'm one of those people that believe being fatter for longer is less healthy than just eating 1200 calories/day and losing it faster. I think the OP is fine eating 1200 a day until she reaches her goal, given her height, her maintenance at 125 pounds will only be about 1500 calories.
That depends a lot on activity. A reasonable active average sized woman would be hurting herself eating 1200 cals. There are plenty of women here, tall and short, young and old, who maintain on over 2000 cals. Unless a person is morbidly obese, there is no reason to stress out the body by eating ata huge deficit. Just because your mom in her 60's has been able to eat at 1200 cals without repercussions doesn't mean that all women who are under 250 lbs can do so, and suggesting they can is irresponsible.
And 1500 is only her maintenance at sedentary, I'd assume. I'm 5'4", 125 lbs and lightly active, and I maintain at 1800 cals. A younger woman living a more active lifestyle at 5'3" 125 lbs could easily maintain at 2000 cals or more. You can't generalize numbers like that.
She didn't mention her lifestyle or any exercise so I assumed sedentary lifestyle since it's common with people that need to lose 50+ pounds. Most people don't live "active" lifestyles, so it's hard to assume they are active especially when they need to lose weight. I was talking about no exercise/sedentary lifestyles at <250 pounds, sorry I should have clarified that. I agree if you are actually active, 1200 calories/day probably isn't enough.lucerorojo wrote: »OP, how much do you currently weigh? You might be better to heed the 1% of body weight.
I am 5'4'', a couple of inches taller than you. I have 68 pounds left to lose, I have lost 32. I started at the end of June, at 237, and I'm now 204. For the first 28 lbs. I was at 2 lbs. per week and it was doable--I did eat at maintenance for 3 weeks in September since I was on vacation for two weeks then. Otherwise the loss has been steady. HOWEVER, you need to realize that as you lose, you have less fat for the body to burn, so your calorie needs decrease. For me that meant to lose 2 lbs. I started at around 1400 calories I think, and by the time I hit 25 lbs. loss I was at 1200 calories. 1200 is the lowest MFP will go for women. I could not eat at 1200 calories. I walk at least 1.5 hours, 4 days a week, and also do zumba or swim 2-4 times per week. I could not sustain this exercise on 1200 calories even eating back all my exercise calories. For the 4 days I was at 1200 calories I felt fatigued and hungry. I have a demanding job (teacher) so I have to feel good during the day dealing with people. If you have a desk job and just sit there and don't really need to interact maybe 1200 can work if you feel hungry and low energy.
I went on a mini refeed to 1 lb. per week, which upped my calories to 1660. I stayed there for 2 weeks and felt good--I also cut back on exercise those two weeks. I then moved back down to 1.5 lb. and didn't like it--about 1320-50 calories per day. I manually changed it 1500 calories and I think this is where I"ll stay for a while. It will have me lose a tiny bit more than 1 lb. per week.
The reason why I couldn't deal with 1660 calories for more than 2 weeks is I felt like I was dipping back into old habits of eating sweets to reach my calorie goal. I decided that it was too big of a jump from 1200-1660 at this point and that I would rather go up in smaller increments while I'm still losing.
So, based on my experience, and you may be different, my recommendation would be to do 1.0 per week or 1.5 lb. per week at most. 65 lbs. might seem like a lot to you and it will make you look different, but if you currently weight between 160-180 (just guessing) then 2 lbs. per week is more than 1% of your body weight and could be a struggle.
I currently weigh 185 lbs (some days 187 lbs). I did a Biggest Loser competition at work 6 years ago when I weighed 144 lbs. For the competition, I started eating 1200 calories (I wasn’t using MFP, that was just a number my husband told me to hit), a day with no exercise & in 10 weeks got down to 124 lbs & won lol. I looked good at that weight & thats what I’d like to get back to. It was difficult sticking to 1200 & I started eating whatever I wanted again, never thinking I’d get as big as I am now. I should have just realized to maintain that weight, it WOULD be a continuous effort. I was at my heaviest 2 yrs ago when pregnant with my third child at 210 lbs.
Guess I am comparing my body now to back then when I did that competition & wondering why I would still be “ok” to start now at 185 lbs & only eat 1200 calories to lose when I am so much heavier? I would think my calorie needs would be a lot greater now? But maybe not because I am older? And maybe I am just so used to stuffing myself that I am not used to actually eating for my needs. Guess I am confused because if I set my goal as 2 lbs per week to start, it allows me 1200, but if I set it to 1/2 lb per week (which is what I should do closer to goal??), I would eat more and still lose?? But I thought my calorie needs are lower the lower I weigh? I’m sorry guys if I’m rambling! Haha just talking out loud here ;-)
I hate those type of competitions because weight loss is not a race, and they turn it into one. Most people who lose weight with the mindset "fast as possible" gain it back (and way more) in the next few years. I did the same back in 2012, and it seems you also did. Ditch that mindset completely this time, while 1200 calories seems like very little now, you'll probably end up only being able to eat ~1600 calories a day just to maintain weight when you are smaller. You will never be able to go back to eating the way you have been, and you likely won't be able to eat much more after switching from dieting to maintaining.
1200 calories a day for a female is fine whether you are 150 pounds or 250 pounds. As long as it's a balanced diet of 1200 calories. MFP will not go below 1200 calories for a female. When you select 2 pounds, what does is say you are expected to lose? If I select 2 pounds it shows me "1500" and says I will lose 1.7/pounds a week because MFP won't go below 1500 for males. My guess is 1200 calories won't get you 2 pounds/week because you are only 5'2", you'll need to eat 1200 calories a day and exercise if you want to lose faster.
I'm sorry, but the bolded is simply not true, in fact it's a dangerous myth that leads far too many women to undereat and crash and burn. There are plenty of women for whom 1200 calories is no where near enough energy to be supplying their body with.
Sorry I meant 150-250 pounds, not 300+. My mother has lost 40 pounds off 1200 calories/day, and she started at 5'3" 245 pounds (incredibly high 43 BMI) plus she's in her 60s. No downsides so far, doctor said her health and blood pressure problems have improved dramatically. I switched to 1200 calories a day (as a 6'2" 260 pound male) for a couple months and felt like a million bucks, but 3.4 pounds/week loss was alarmingly fast so I now try to eat closer to the male minimium of 1500.
I think the OP is fine eating 1200 a day until she reaches her goal, given her height, her maintenance will only be about 1500 calories.
Bzzt, not true for all, as you earlier said it was.
I started weight loss at age 59, 5'5", 183 pounds, sedentary other than intentional exercise. When I first joined MFP, it gave me 1200 and I believed it. I even ate back nearly 100% of exercise on top of the 1200. Bad plan: Got fatigued & weak. Took weeks to fully recover. I lost most of 50+ pounds in less than a year at 1400-1600 net calories, to a healthy weight in the 120s.
Do some women need to eat 1200 calories to lose? Sure.
Should even more of them eat 1200, and will they stay strong and healthy if they do? That depends on lot of factors, many of which experienced, knowledgeable women are discussing here now.
Can all women lose safely on 1200? *Baby feline*, no
You set MFP to sedentary but you were exercising? That doesn't make MFP's 1200 calorie recommendation wrong, that means you set the profile wrong. Simply adding what the machine says and eating it back + 1200 calories doesn't factor in the extra calories burnt throughout the day that some exercises cause (especially things like HIIT). If you exercise, you should at least be on lightly active profile.
There's also the fact that everyone is very different, especially when we are talking 30 or 60 years old. Most sedentary females should be fine on 1200 calories/day. If you are extremely big, exercise, or feel weak on that many calories then probably not a good idea to eat the bare minimum.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions