Loss per week goals

aimos87

Hi what is everyone setting their loss per week in their goals at? Is it like 1kg + per week or only half etc? Are you achieving these goals each week if you are strict with your tracking?

kommodevaran

Those are several separate issues.

A calorie deficit of 3500 equals 1 pound of fatty tissue. If you have that deficit, for real, you will lose that amount of fat in a week. But bodies consist of and contain other things than fat, some of which are present in varying amounts from day to day, and those things have weight. And you have to be accurate when logging, picking genuine database entries (or creating your own) and weighing everything, in order to know how many calories you're taking in.

The optimal weightloss rate is often stated as up to 1% of your body weight per week. You can end up nearer the high end if you're obese, set a good calorie target, exercise, and log honestly and consistently. Each of these factors make you end up lower: a lower weight, trying to force weightloss through undereating/deprivation/overexercising, sloppy logging, cheating.

If I remember correctly, I don't think I ever reflected too much on what I should set my weightloss rate to, but went by how many calories I felt I needed at that point. At any rate(!), I lost at the predicted rate, 50 pounds, from slightly obese to smack in the middle normal BMI, in a little over a year.

kimny72

aimos87 wrote: »

Hi what is everyone setting their loss per week in their goals at? Is it like 1kg + per week or only half etc? Are you achieving these goals each week if you are strict with your tracking?

Unless you have a lot of weight to lose, 1 kg per week is very aggressive and not realistic.

For most people, 1 lb per week is a better choice.

Even if you are perfect every day, you will not lose weight in a consistent straight line. There is other stuff in your body than fat, and the weight of that other stuff fluctuating is measured on the scale as well.

1BlueAurora

I set my goals when I first started at 2 pounds per week. I met the weekly goal but it was way too aggressive, and I lost some muscle mass on my arms! So I reset my weekly goal at 1.0 pound per week, which was much better. I don't always reach that goal, but the next week I might lose 1.2 or 1.5 pounds, so it really all evens out. You really need to be patient and don't punish yourself when you don't meet your goal. If you're consistently logging your food as accurately as possible, you will reach your ultimate goal.

seska422

After some initial experimentation, I went at it from the other direction. I figured out a calorie goal that put me at a deficit and was a comfortable way of eating for me. I ate that calorie goal for a couple of years and my rate of loss got slower as I got smaller. I never lost as quickly as I could theoretically for my weight but it's a marathon, not a sprint. A deficit over time resulted in weight loss over time.

I measured my success from my day-to-day compliance with my calorie goal. As long as my weight was on an overall downward trend, I was doing what I needed to do.

cmriverside

I think what seska422 says is really smart.

Just because "lose two pounds/1kg per week" is a choice, doesn't mean it will work well for you.

I couldn't stick with the 1200 goal I got with "lose two" but I could stick with the 1400 + Exercise calories. So that's pretty much what I did, too.

ladybug4233

My goal has been 1 pound a week and has averaged out to 1.5 a week. I get 1210 calories a day but have anywhere from 500-650 exercise calories that I eat most of. This works for me right now. When I am down about 8 more pounds I plan to try for .5 a week for the last 5. Good luck!

AnvilHead

kommodevaran wrote: »

...If I remember correctly, I don't think I ever reflected too much on what I should set my weightloss rate to, but went by how many calories I felt I needed at that point. At any rate(!), I lost at the predicted rate, 50 pounds, from slightly obese to smack in the middle normal BMI, in a little over a year...

seska422 wrote: »

After some initial experimentation, I went at it from the other direction. I figured out a calorie goal that put me at a deficit and was a comfortable way of eating for me. I ate that calorie goal for a couple of years and my rate of loss got slower as I got smaller. I never lost as quickly as I could theoretically for my weight but it's a marathon, not a sprint. A deficit over time resulted in weight loss over time.

I measured my success from my day-to-day compliance with my calorie goal. As long as my weight was on an overall downward trend, I was doing what I needed to do.

^ IMO, these are well thought-out approaches which have much more likelihood of being sustainable/successful than choosing an overly aggressive weight loss goal and trying to white knuckle your way through a big deficit. Crash diets often result in exactly that - a big crash. The biggest components of long-term success when losing weight are consistency and patience/perseverance.

gearhead426hemi

There are a lot of factors that you will need to take into account. How much weight do you have to lose? Some who has a goal 50 lbs will see more dramatic weight loss initially than someone who is trying to lose 10 lbs. Both people will see plateaus or weight loss drop as their body changes to their new lifestyle or diet. Typically from a healthy perspective 2 pounds a week is a good goal. The initial weight loss is typically water weight for the first week or two.