Am I loosing weight the right way?

aliyanshaikh

Hello everyone My name is Aliyan. Hope everyone is doing fine.
I wanted to know if I am doing right or wrong while losing my weight. I decided to lose some kilos in February (last month) because when I checked my BMI it was 30.2 which is Obese Class 1. (In Feb I was 85 kg and height is 5'6".
My goal is to reach 70kgs (24.9 BMI).
So I started walking 5km every morning (maintaining 10,000 steps a day) and I also reduced my calorie intake.
So I intake 1200~ calories daily + burn 300-500 calories doing the walk. I have a sedentary lifestyle btw.
So after 20 days of this routine, when I checked my weight it is 2kg less. Is it bad to lose that much? Because my BMR is 1803 on MFP Calculator + by multiplying it to 1.2 (for sedentary lifestyle), it becomes 2163.

So by this, I am 1500 calorie defecit. Is it bad for me?

janejellyroll

If you're walking 10,000 steps a day, why are you eating like a sedentary person?

aliyanshaikh

Also in my MFP dashboard, I have set my weight goal to 70kg, and I have entered all my details right there, so the goal it gave me is 1500 calories for losing 1kg per week. Since I take 1200 calories in food, and 500 calories are burnt in exercising. The remaining calories are 800. Does it mean I have to eat 800 calories more to lose weight 1kg per week? or if I eat 800 calories more to make the remaining calories 0, then will my weight be idle?

aliyanshaikh

janejellyroll wrote: »

If you're walking 10,000 steps a day, why are you eating like a sedentary person?

I don't eat much anymore... before February I am guessing my calorie intake was around 1800~ and I did no exercise, staying at home 24/7. That's why I am confused if I was taking 1800~ why my weight is so much because 2163~ calories is my BMR so I should be losing weight without doing anything.

cwolfman13

With 10,000 steps per day, you aren't sedentary...yet you're eating like an old, small, sedentary female. MFP gives you 1500...why the heck are you eating 1200 and then not accounting for exercise...so lets say you eat 1200 calories and burn 500 (that may be a bit high)...that leaves you with 700 net calories consumed...essentially, that's the same thing as just eating 700 calories per day with no exercise. Intuitively...does that sound healthy?

goal06082021

You're losing too fast. Eat more - aim to NET 1500 calories per day, including eating back your exercise calories. If you burn 300 calories walking, your GROSS intake should be 1800 for the day (1800 cal eaten - 300 cal burned exercising = net 1500).

aliyanshaikh

cwolfman13 wrote: »

With 10,000 steps per day, you aren't sedentary...yet you're eating like an old, small, sedentary female. MFP gives you 1500...why the heck are you eating 1200 and then not accounting for exercise...so lets say you eat 1200 calories and burn 500 (that may be a bit high)...that leaves you with 700 net calories consumed...essentially, that's the same thing as just eating 700 calories per day with no exercise. Intuitively...does that sound healthy?

That's what I was confused in.. So I should be eating 800 calories more to make it 1500 calories a day. and I will still be losing 1 kg per week.. right?

aliyanshaikh

goal06082021 wrote: »

You're losing too fast. Eat more - aim to NET 1500 calories per day, including eating back your exercise calories. If you burn 300 calories walking, your GROSS intake should be 1800 for the day (1800 cal eaten - 300 cal burned exercising = net 1500).

That's helpful and easy to understand for a layman like me.

DanaDark

Short period of time. Do not adjust anything.

Many people see a sudden shift in weight when starting to lose fat. The reason is usually due to less water retention. Less food in you, less water needed to process it and water weighs a lot.

The reverse can happen as well. Eat more over a weekend and it could seem like you gained a ton of weight.

aliyanshaikh

DanaDark wrote: »

Short period of time. Do not adjust anything.

Many people see a sudden shift in weight when starting to lose fat. The reason is usually due to less water retention. Less food in you, less water needed to process it and water weighs a lot.

The reverse can happen as well. Eat more over a weekend and it could seem like you gained a ton of weight.

So as per my post, my net calories is 700 a day. You're saying I should not change it? Am I right? But as others suggested anything more than 1000 calorie deficit is not good. In my case the calorie defecit 1500~ so isn't it bad?

DanaDark

aliyanshaikh wrote: »

DanaDark wrote: »

Short period of time. Do not adjust anything.

Many people see a sudden shift in weight when starting to lose fat. The reason is usually due to less water retention. Less food in you, less water needed to process it and water weighs a lot.

The reverse can happen as well. Eat more over a weekend and it could seem like you gained a ton of weight.

So as per my post, my net calories is 700 a day. You're saying I should not change it? Am I right? But as others suggested anything more than 1000 calorie deficit is not good. In my case the calorie defecit 1500~ so isn't it bad?

I said it is too short of a period of time since you've started this routine to make any determination.

Also, given your numbers, your deficit is not 1,500. You stated you lost 2kg in 20 days. 1 kg of fat is 7,700 calories. So, 2kg of fat is 15,400 calories. Divide that by 20 days and you have a roughly 770 calorie deficit a day which is reasonable but slightly on the higher end. If your deficit was 1,500 a day, that'd be 30,000 over 20 days and be 3.9kg.

However, this assumes that everything you've lost is fat. And I guarantee you that is not that case. You've also lost water weight.

AnnPT77

I agree with what others have said (that you should eat more than you are, assuming your logging is accurate, until you have a month or more of personal data to make a sensible adjustment).

I'd add this: At 85 kg (187 pounds), even losing 1kg a week on average is not a good idea. It's unnecessarily aggressive, which creates increased health risk, IMO. (I say that as someone who started out near your size, 5'5" and 83kg (183lb), ate too little by accident for a while, and learned some of the reasons why fast loss is a bad idea.)

Losing any meaningful amount of weight is a project of weeks to months, longer for some with truly lots to lose. The process needs to be healthy and sustainable. In that light, 0.5-1% (maximum) of your current weight per week would be a more reasonable loss rate. By that formula, you'd be better off going for half a kg or slower weekly weight loss.

aliyanshaikh

Thanks everyone for your kind advice 😊

dolorsit

AnnPT77 wrote: »

I'd add this: At 85 kg (187 pounds), even losing 1kg a week on average is not a good idea. It's unnecessarily aggressive, which creates increased health risk, IMO. (I say that as someone who started out near your size, 5'5" and 83kg (183lb), ate too little by accident for a while, and learned some of the reasons why fast loss is a bad idea.)

May I ask what you learnt exactly? I'm asking because by all accounts I'm losing weight a little too aggressively and still a not quite sure what the risks are. How quickly were you losing, and what were the effects?

rheddmobile

dolorsit wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

I'd add this: At 85 kg (187 pounds), even losing 1kg a week on average is not a good idea. It's unnecessarily aggressive, which creates increased health risk, IMO. (I say that as someone who started out near your size, 5'5" and 83kg (183lb), ate too little by accident for a while, and learned some of the reasons why fast loss is a bad idea.)

May I ask what you learnt exactly? I'm asking because by all accounts I'm losing weight a little too aggressively and still a not quite sure what the risks are. How quickly were you losing, and what were the effects?

As someone who started out losing too quickly (about 3.5 lbs a week), I ended up losing most of my hair six months later. You won’t see hair loss immediately, only when the new hairs would naturally be coming in.

The other thing is that too fast weight loss and you lose a higher percentage of muscle - and your heart is a muscle.

“A little too aggressively” depending on what you mean by that sounds probably fine - a lot of people have a honeymoon period when they first start a diet, when they lose water weight, plus weight from a smaller amount of food in the intestines. It tends to even out after a few weeks.

A safe rate of loss is generally considered to be about 1% of your bodyweight per week. That doesn’t mean that is what you should be aiming for, it’s just a generally considered safe upper limit.

Machka9

aliyanshaikh wrote: »

So after 20 days of this routine, when I checked my weight it is 2kg less. Is it bad to lose that much?

2 kg in 20 days isn't particularly fast.

When I was on a mission to lose weight, I was losing 1 kg/week for the first 15 weeks, and then slowed to lose 10 kg in the next 20 weeks. I think 2 kg in 20 days is just fine.

dolorsit

On average, I've lost 1.2 kg/week over 9 weeks. Mostly through exercise rather than calorie restriction: about 5 hours a week of running and hilly cycling.

AnnPT77

dolorsit wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

I'd add this: At 85 kg (187 pounds), even losing 1kg a week on average is not a good idea. It's unnecessarily aggressive, which creates increased health risk, IMO. (I say that as someone who started out near your size, 5'5" and 83kg (183lb), ate too little by accident for a while, and learned some of the reasons why fast loss is a bad idea.)

May I ask what you learnt exactly? I'm asking because by all accounts I'm losing weight a little too aggressively and still a not quite sure what the risks are. How quickly were you losing, and what were the effects?

I got weak and fatigued, took multiple weeks to recover, later thinning hair, and figure I was lucky it wasn't worse. Close to 2 pounds a week, when that was > 1% of bodyweight.

There can be muscle loss, gallbladder problems (mine was already gone), more. Not worth it, why unnecessarily take risks?

AnnPT77

BrackNelson wrote: »

goal06082021 wrote: »

You're losing too fast. Eat more - aim to NET 1500 calories per day, including eating back your exercise calories. If you burn 300 calories walking, your GROSS intake should be 1800 for the day (1800 cal eaten - 300 cal burned exercising = net 1500).

But according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the average adult man uses 2,000 to 3,000 calories per day. So what would you say in this context?

The guy at 2000 probably is small enough that a pound a week loss is a good maximum target (and I say that as a woman who maintains at a bit over 2000).

But it really doesn't matter what the average man does, in any specific individual's case: It matters how fast that particular man is losing, what his actual deficit is . . . recognizing that down-regulation via fatigue is a possibility at too-low calories, as a possible complicating factor in figuring that out.

Losing too slowly may be frustrating, but losing too fast can increase health risks.

neazim

Reducing your calories to less than you need will kick in your "thrifty gene" which means that your body will think it is in famine, and then when you eat a little more than you should it will go right to fat, it is your bodies way of saving for the next "famine." This is a mistake many people make when they diet. So you should never restrict your diet too much. Especially if you are also exercising.

ccrdragon

neazim wrote: »

Reducing your calories to less than you need will kick in your "thrifty gene" which means that your body will think it is in famine, and then when you eat a little more than you should it will go right to fat, it is your bodies way of saving for the next "famine." This is a mistake many people make when they diet. So you should never restrict your diet too much. Especially if you are also exercising.

This never happens - it is a myth that just won't go away.