What was your initial weight loss pace? (Anonymous poll)

Rsrs35

I chose 2lbs p/w. This has obviously significantly reduced my calories so for the days I work out I’m wondering do I eat those calories or bank them (considering I’m already eating almost 600kcals less per day).

AnnPT77

Not sure how to answer this. I didn't click any of those.

No matter what I chose at first, other than half a pound a week, MFP was giving me 1200 calories as my base goal. At that time, I was still overweight enough that I could safely lose more than half a pound a week. On top of that, I'm one of the (seemingly few, as I'd expect) for whom MFP's base calorie estimate is wildly far off from reality . . . I require more calories - quite a few more - for any given loss rate than MFP estimates. (I'm maintaining now, at around 25-30% more calories than MFP thinks would maintain my weight, given my true non-exercise activity level, height, weight, age, etc. MFP's estimate is roughly 500 calories low, before exercise.)

So, I did lose at 2 pounds a week at first, when that really wasn't a safe or sensible rate. I corrected quickly, but still hit a wall, got weak/fatigued, and took several weeks to get back to normal.

So, the estimate is just a starting point, to follow for 4-6 weeks until one has enough personal logging data to make an individualized estimate.

My point in posting is this: I think people should ideally select a sensible loss rate, in the realm of 0.5%-1% of current weight per week maximum, with a bias toward the slower end of that, but especially so if one's overall life is stressful (stress is cumulative, and calorie deficit is a physical stress), or if one has less than maybe 25-50 pounds to lose. Some people, who are severely obese and under close medical supervision for nutritional issues or other health complications, may be able to safely lose faster.

In addition to that, some will find that for them, that loss rate will be unsustainable in some way - hunger/cravings, nutrition, stress, health conditions, exercise performance, who knows what. It's absolutely fine to lose slower than any maximum rate, unless one is so severely obese that body weight itself is creating significant health risks. (Those people would be the candidates for close medical supervision.)

Yes, some few people will discover MFP overestimates their calorie needs. (Most are likely to find its estimates to be close.) Since losing very fast increases health risks, that 4-6 week period of losing slower than estimated will be frustrating . . . but safe, unless weight itself is a health risk for that individual.

Losing any meaningful amount of weight is a long term proposition: Weeks, months, maybe years.
Absent complicated cases, a slower but sustainable loss rate can take some (many?) people to goal weight faster in practice than an aggressive rate goal that potentially causes deprivation-triggered overeating, maybe extended breaks, or giving up entirely.

Further, using sustainable methods, eating foods one enjoys, doing activities that are ideally fun but at least tolerable - at least in the later stages of loss - is IMO a way to reach goal weight and maintenance with a new set of eating/activity habits that are sustainable long term through inevitable life stressors, almost on autopilot.

I don't think it's possible for most people to sustain white-knuckled will power long enough to stay at a healthy weight forever with unenjoyable/difficult habits, though some few can do that, sure. (Those who can't aren't "bad" or "weak". They just haven't yet found a plan that suits them personally.)

When I first lost weight (2015-16), I lost on average a pound a week. In practice, it was faster than that at first (when I had more to lose), and intentionally quite slow near the end, when I was working on the last few pounds, and thinking about a gradual off-ramp into maintenance. Other than that accidental "lost too fast" thing at the beginning, it was maybe a pound and half a week or a bit more (close to 1% of body weight) at the start, then tapering down to more like half a pound a week near goal.

More recently, starting in October of 2019, I decided to lose 10-15 vanity pounds, all well within the normal BMI range, intentionally super-slowly. It took well over a year, and looking backwards was around a pound a month or a bit more on average - so like a quarter pound a week. It was almost crazy-slow, but pretty much painless. Sometimes along the way, it was invisible, even to my weight trending app. For me, at that point, that was a really good overall approach: I wasn't enthusiastic about a calorie deficit to lose faster; there was no health urgency to lose fast; and I was working from my clothes fitting reasonably but being a bit snug (but not needing replacement), aiming toward making them a little loose - no big deal.

IMO, personalization is key, sustainability is important, figuring out good habits that will work to maintain weight is a useful part of the process. There's IMO a too-fast level (also a bit individual) that increases health risks, but (unless weight itself is a major health risk) there really isn't a too-slow level except based on personal preference.

I think people should figure out what works best for them personally, not worry about how others do it (or worse yet, mentally competing with others on loss rate, feeling like a failure if they're slower - ugh).

TL;DR: Losing too fast increases health risks, and the definition of "too fast" varies with many circumstances. Losing too slowly can be frustrating, but is risky for only a relatively small fraction of the population (who should be working closely with their doctor). The sweet spot in between is an individual decision.

callsitlikeiseeit

i mean.... when I started back in 2014, I was 387 pounds. 2 pounds a week was perfectly achievable and doable.

8 years later and around 160ish depending on the day, with 30 pounds to go.... I'll get there when i get there. Its set at .... 1 pound a week I think? if im under my maintenance calories (which is not much as im very short and in my mid 40s), I'm good with that. Some weeks I lose a half pound, some weeks more than a pound, and as a woman, hormonal fluctuations and water retention can significantly impact the number on the scale at any given time and I can not lose or show a gain. I'm in no hurry. It's not a race and my doctor is always happy with my progress.

As far as setting your own deficit level, Ann said everything perfectly.

Xellercin

I never really "chose" anything. When I was obese I lost quicker, and then when I was closer to a healthy weight, I lost slower, around 2lbs/mo, which I was happy with because the diet was so comfortable and sustainable and the weight loss so easy. My focus was reaching an ideal healthy lifestyle, not an arbitrary weight goal.

westrich20940

Initially when I had no idea what I was doing I chose 2lbs/week....which now I believe is one of the biggest mistakes that everyone makes when starting to use MFP. It will give you 1200 cals/day if you are a woman. And for *MOST* women...that is simply not enough calories.

So..once I realize that that made me feel horrible (lol) I changed it to not using MFP at all to calculate my calorie goal so then I didn't even choose a weight loss option. I used a TDEE calculator and then subtracted a minimal/moderate amount from that that would still keep me above my BMR. So in reality I probably cut my calories by ~200/day most of the time or at most 300/day.

I used 'sedentary' as my activity level when calculating my TDEE (which isn't really the way it's supposed to work, but I was also using MFP to log my workouts/calories burned so for me personally, this made the math in my head easier). So -- I ate back at least 50% (often 100% of my calories) from my workouts, because often, I was quite a bit more hungry on those days (obviously).

I lost ~25ish pounds from Jan. - Aug. Then due to some estimate errors, I continued to lose more weight unintentionally and got down another 8 or so lbs before gaining that back because I didn't like how skinny I looked. I will also point out I am not 'cut' or anything like that. I definitely still have jiggly bits all over as a very small/petite person.

Lietchi

Rsrs35 wrote: »

I chose 2lbs p/w. This has obviously significantly reduced my calories so for the days I work out I’m wondering do I eat those calories or bank them (considering I’m already eating almost 600kcals less per day).

600 calories less than what ? Maintenance? If so, then 2lbs per week is too aggressive for you and you reached MFP's minimum calories (1200 for women, 1500 for men) to ensure adequate nutrition. A rate of 2lbs per week is a deficit of 1000 calories per day.

If you don't eat back your exercise calories, you are increasing your deficit (because your MFP activity level is not meant to include exercise). Whether that is a good idea, will depend on your circumstances. (@AnnPT77 explains it more eloquently than me)

My own journey: I started out at a BMI of 34 and I chose a rate of 0.5lbs per week. In reality I lost a bit quicker: my fitness tracker slightly underestimates how many calories I burn and I also didn't fully eat my calorie allotment (including exercise) in the beginning (honeymoon phase 😉) so it was more like 1lb a week at the start and gradually decreased after that - the lighter and more active I became, the smaller the calorie deficit I could manage.

At that rate, I found weight loss painless honestly, no major cravings or any feeling of depriving myself.

cwolfman13

I had 40 Lbs to lose and chose 1 Lb per week. Some weeks I lost more, some weeks I lost less. I always ate back an estimate of my exercise calories. I used the database for weight lifting and 80% of what my HRM said for cardiovascular exercise.

Rsrs35

Guys, thanks so much for all this info. All of you have given me so much food for thought, I really knew in the pit of my stomach that 2lb was too much per week, and yes - I naturally too get more hungry after a workout as couldn’t imagine eating 1200kcals only on days I’m burning 300-500kcals.

I’ve decided to keep it at 1200 and eat my workout calories - just for 3 weeks to see how that pans out.

I’m also Intermittent fasting / not OTT! I can’t do super long, but I do believe it helps with my sleep and energy levels.

Thank you ALL so much for the input. So grateful to have this community. ))))))

Beverly2Hansen

I did 2lbs per week and exercised a ton. I ate back my exercise and for 1 year hated my life. It turned out MFP over estimated my exercise calories and I needed to double check food labels with calorie count listed here for accuracy. So what I decided to do was manually add a calorie goal 1500ish I'm 5'5" F 150lbs ballpark if I exercise 1-2 hours per day even power walking I'll lose 2lbs per week this way. My issue is I get to 140 lose my drive and eat until I'm 160is and restart the process. The point is there's a lot of ways to use MFP to successfully lose a weekly amount. I'm more likely to lose a higher amount if I drink more water too. Also I'll keep losing roughly the same amount per week until I hit my 130lbs goal if I can stay motivated I just struggle with keeping it up.🙂 hope that helps

AnnPT77

Beverly2Hansen wrote: »

I did 2lbs per week and exercised a ton. I ate back my exercise and for 1 year hated my life. It turned out MFP over estimated my exercise calories and I needed to double check food labels with calorie count listed here for accuracy. So what I decided to do was manually add a calorie goal 1500ish I'm 5'5" F 150lbs ballpark if I exercise 1-2 hours per day even power walking I'll lose 2lbs per week this way. My issue is I get to 140 lose my drive and eat until I'm 160is and restart the process. The point is there's a lot of ways to use MFP to successfully lose a weekly amount. I'm more likely to lose a higher amount if I drink more water too. Also I'll keep losing roughly the same amount per week until I hit my 130lbs goal if I can stay motivated I just struggle with keeping it up.🙂 hope that helps

And that sort of thing is why several of on the thread are encouraging the OP to lose at a steady, moderate rate, and try to make eating and exercise enjoyable or at least tolerable along the way.

Most of the people who are making those suggestions have actually done what they're suggesting (sometimes not on their first weight loss merry-go-round ride, but they wised up and used the slow and steady method on a subsequent round). Many of those who are commenting have stayed in a healthy weight range for quite some time since losing to goal weight, too.

False starts and backtracks, let alone significant regain - if any of those happen - burn up calendar time without actually leading to goal weight. Slow loss can actually be faster than that type of cycle.

Furthermore, a tolerable, methodical approach can help a person find sustainable habits they can use long term, to stay at a healthy weight reasonably happily, without repeat cycles of extreme diet/exercise misery or white-knuckled self-denial through "motivation" and "will power".

Personally, I define "success" as reaching a healthy weight and staying at a healthy weight for a long time, ideally permanently . . . not as losing the maximum number of pounds per week that I can through extreme and unpleasant practices.

JessiBelleW

I have close to 60lbs to lose and so even with mfp set to lose a lb a week whenever I go back to it initially I lose more. Just fyi to lose a lb or so a week I can still eat close to 2000kcals. But that’s great I don’t WANT to be stuck eating 1200 forever! And I want to keep as much muscle mass as possible as I lose 😊

CassondraKennedy

AnnPT77 wrote: »

False starts and backtracks, let alone significant regain - if any of those happen - burn up calendar time without actually leading to goal weight. Slow loss can actually be faster than that type of cycle.

This.

I started at 183, 5’3”. I lost extremely fast at first, using MFP’s “2lb/week” amount of 1200 calories (actual loss was about 3lb/week at first). But I was miserable. I dreaded it and I couldn’t wait to be “done.” I lost 55lb in 2017. And then gained it back by 2019.

If I could reach back in time and tell my 2017 self something, it would be exactly what @AnnPT77 said above. Slow loss would have saved me a lot of time in the long run. Patience and sustainability are essential to long term success.