Where does “slow down as you approach your target weight” come from?
Replies
-
Quite often here, posters advise others to halve their weekly weight loss target when they get within 10 pounds of their ultimate goal weight.
What is the source of this advice?
Does it have any scientific basis?
What happens if you don’t follow this advice?
I think we can say that the source of this advice is: good sense.
Not everything has had scientific papers written about it.
People don't have to follow this advice. They can find out themselves if it is really good sense or not.
I've been following this thread. It's been interesting because there is no scientific backing. It's just common sense. Remember that? People used to follow it.
A big thank you to the posters that took their time to explain why it's a good idea.3 -
Retroguy2000 wrote: »Those last two posts seem... aggressive? OP was clearly asking if there was data behind the "slow down at 10 pounds" advice, which I took to mean is it actually 10 pounds, or 9, or 11, does it vary based on the individual and the weight, etc. He already explicitly said he wasn't arguing for the opposite position:
"I am not arguing with the logic. Nor am I proposing rapid loss near goal or any other alternative approach. I am merely asking about the origin of this advice."
Thank you, @Retroguy2000. Those are precisely the questions I am asking.
Here is some background.
I was looking at another discussion in the MFP Community section in which a newcomer who was having difficulty getting started asked for some guidance.
In response, a person who was more of a veteran told him something to the effect of: Set a goal weight, input your stats into MFP to determine your caloric requirements for a safe deficit and be serious about logging. So far, so good.
Then the person providing advice told the newcomer that they should reduce their caloric deficit by half when they get within 10 pounds of their goal weight (apparently, no matter their goal weight ends up being).
I remember seeing this advice in other discussions in the MFP community section, and I wondered where it and its values came from.
Like everyone here, I follow a routine to improve and maintain fitness. Like everyone here, I am constantly running across new information that I evaluate, and then either incorporate into my routine or ignore. Since I had seen this 10-pound/cut-by-half advice more than once on MFP, I started wondering where it came from so I could decide whether to adopt it or ignore it.
As of this time, no one has found any study or data that validates the 10-pound/cut-by-half advice or its values. This, of course, does not mean the advice is wrong and it does not mean that something to support the advice will not be discovered in the future. However, it does indicate that the 10-pound/cut-by-half advice is conjecture at this point.
Once again, I emphasize that I am not promoting rapid weight loss or anything else, for that matter. It is hard to understand why some of the contributors here want to go off on tangents and argue against positions I have never taken and do not hold.
That veteran was quite possibly me. I try to give people what I believe to be practical advice based on a combination of personal experience, anecdata from others posting here, and such research evidence as I can find with my amateur research powers.
In this case, it's mainstream medical advice that fast loss has health risks. How fast "fast loss" is - that's a more ill-defined concept.
In my reading, the paper I linked suggests that some health consequences vary with the rate of loss, and with size of available fat stores. The specific underlying data relates to extreme conditions, and extreme consequences. It seems reasonable to me, though not "scientifically proven", that other well-known risks of fast loss may also vary with size of available fat stores. (Yes, that's "conjecture".)
I admit to being somewhat conservative about health risk in the context of weight loss, for myself, and for others - especially when I have no knowledge of an OP's health history. So, the surmise in the paragraph just above includes some of that conservative tendency.
Upthread, I summarized some of my practical personal reasons for recommending slowed loss when down to very little left to lose, at the end of a substantial-length calorie restriction that's resulted in substantial weight loss.
I intend to keep giving the same advice mentioned here. It's exactly what I did myself. It worked well for me. In a practical daily context, I don't think it's reasonable to only give advice that's totally based in clear science. It would be nice if that were possible, but I think it isn't. (NB I do think it's generally bad practice to fly in the face of experts' consensus.)
I hope you, OP, will give new people advice based on your experience and research. Doubtless it will disagree with my advice sometimes, but I think that hearing a diversity of opinions (with rationale) is a helpful part of an internet forum.
Ultimately, it's their call what they decide to do.1 -
Iv'e seen that advice on here over the years. Just opinions of those who think that losing small amounts towards the end .. gently ..softly .. lands you into maitenance..
I say get there faster. why slow down? I get what you wonder about. I think that is just the advice of some on here and it comes off like it is expert medical advice and it isn't.1 -
scarlett_k wrote: »Hah. I asked a similar question before and gave up with my eyes rolling in the back of my head. The answer is that it's made up. There isn't anything but anecdata and a load of people on here repeating it so often it becomes "true" to back it up.
Thank you for the comment, Scarlett. Glad to know it was not just me!
0 -
sollyn23l2 wrote: »
I didn't actually tell you my thoughts. I was referring to your conclusion that there is no convincing evidence that you can't or shouldn't lose the last 10 pounds at the same rate as the rest of your weight. And my thoughts are you're right, but that it doesn't really matter either way.
My apologies for being too curt in my previous reply.
0 -
cmriverside wrote: »LOL.
@Edintokyo - are you new to internet forums? People will argue to the death over minutiae! It's what internet forums are!
Welcome to myfitnesspal Community, where you don't have to be right...unless you try posting in "Debate" with some contentious topic, then you better have lots o' links to valid research to back that up!
Hah… Duly noted!0 -
elisa123gal wrote: »Iv'e seen that advice on here over the years. Just opinions of those who think that losing small amounts towards the end .. gently ..softly .. lands you into maitenance..
I say get there faster. why slow down? I get what you wonder about. I think that is just the advice of some on here and it comes off like it is expert medical advice and it isn't.
Thank you for your comment, Elisa. It’s good to hear that I am not the only one who wondered about this issue.
0 -
Where does your scientific support for large deficits all the way to goal come from?
He didnt say he had any scientific support for doing that or even that he intended to do that or supported that position.
OP I'm sure the 10 pounds is an estimation or approximation - but all guidelines have to have an approximate figure to be meaningful - so it is no good just saying "when you get closer to goal" without a guide of approximately how much closer we are talking.
1 -
paperpudding wrote: »OP I'm sure the 10 pounds is an estimation or approximation - but all guidelines have to have an approximate figure to be meaningful - so it is no good just saying "when you get closer to goal" without a guide of approximately how much closer we are talking.
Yes. Maybe, “gradually reduce your deficit as you approach your goal weight”?
BTW, @paperpudding, your profile pic looks scrumptious!
0 -
maybe - but people like things defined - otherwise how gradually and how much to reduce are subjective - so, reduce pace to 1/2 pound per week when you only have 10 pounds left to lose is more specific advice - although the specifics are approximates it give clearer advice.0
-
elisa123gal wrote: »Iv'e seen that advice on here over the years. Just opinions of those who think that losing small amounts towards the end .. gently ..softly .. lands you into maitenance..
I say get there faster. why slow down? I get what you wonder about. I think that is just the advice of some on here and it comes off like it is expert medical advice and it isn't.
I think transitioning into maitenance is one reason - other reason being that one needs reasonable nutrition and calorie level to fuel activity - so keeping at the same calorie deficit when one is smaller and has less to lose - which is the person who had lots to lose when they get close to goal as well as person who had less to lose in first place, doesnt give enough calories to do that properly at the smaller size.
0 -
paperpudding wrote: »elisa123gal wrote: »the person who had lots to lose when they get close to goal as well as person who had less to lose in first place, doesnt give enough calories to do that properly at the smaller size.
I have wondered about that… Does the MFP algorithm make any adjustments to its recommendations as you lose weight?0 -
Screwed up that last post…paperpudding wrote: »keeping at the same calorie deficit when one is smaller and has less to lose - which is the person who had lots to lose when they get close to goal as well as person who had less to lose in first place, doesnt give enough calories to do that properly at the smaller size.
I have wondered about that… Does the MFP algorithm make any adjustments to its recommendations as you lose weight?
0 -
Screwed up that last post…paperpudding wrote: »keeping at the same calorie deficit when one is smaller and has less to lose - which is the person who had lots to lose when they get close to goal as well as person who had less to lose in first place, doesnt give enough calories to do that properly at the smaller size.
I have wondered about that… Does the MFP algorithm make any adjustments to its recommendations as you lose weight?
MFP doesn't recommend anything as far as I know. People just select their desired weight-loss, enter their personal data and get a calorie goal.
The only 'protection' that is built in: MFP will never give a calorie goal below 1200 for women and 1500 for men.0 -
Screwed up that last post…paperpudding wrote: »keeping at the same calorie deficit when one is smaller and has less to lose - which is the person who had lots to lose when they get close to goal as well as person who had less to lose in first place, doesnt give enough calories to do that properly at the smaller size.
I have wondered about that… Does the MFP algorithm make any adjustments to its recommendations as you lose weight?
The only adjustment it makes is modifying the amount of calories you need to eat as you lose weight to lose the amount of weight you want to lose per week. MFP doesn't dictate anything to the user beyond that it won't automatically set your calories to go below 1200 calories if you're a woman and 1500 if you're a man. It's all user directed. If I tell MFP I want to set a daily calorie goal of 500 calories, I can do that0 -
Thanks for the comments.
I understand what you are both saying, but where do the values (10 pounds, half) come from?
Is there some specific scientific basis for this advice? Or are “10” and “half” merely nice sounding, easily relatable numbers to support an opinion?
I'm not familiar with recommendations for those specific values (10 pounds, half.) What I do see often is the recommendation that weight loss not exceed 0.5 - 1% per week. It was recommended so often that another poster created this graphic:
Within the last year or so, we had a discussion about this in Debate, but I don't have the patience to attempt to dig it up. Specifically, it was me asking the creator of the graphic about the basis for it, and her responding.2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Thanks for the comments.
I understand what you are both saying, but where do the values (10 pounds, half) come from?
Is there some specific scientific basis for this advice? Or are “10” and “half” merely nice sounding, easily relatable numbers to support an opinion?
I'm not familiar with recommendations for those specific values (10 pounds, half.) What I do see often is the recommendation that weight loss not exceed 0.5 - 1% per week. It was recommended so often that another poster created this graphic:
Within the last year or so, we had a discussion about this in Debate, but I don't have the patience to attempt to dig it up. Specifically, it was me asking the creator of the graphic about the basis for it, and her responding.
I'm sure I've said something along those lines sometimes, just to be non-vague: Slow down as you approach goal, dropping to half a pound a week when within 10 pounds or so of goal, or words to that effect.
But I don't think (?) I've ever presented it as gospel, hard science, etc. .
It's just . . . advice.
Like anyone else's advice here.
It's worth every penny anyone ever pays for it, and less.
If anyone comes to an Internet forum like this, asks a question, and thinks they're getting "expert medical advice" from random other users, they're very much mistaken.
2 -
sollyn23l2 wrote: »
Does it really matter what anyone else thinks? You've come to your own conclusion, which is fine. I think people got riled up at the way you communicated the conclusion you've come to. Of course you can lose weight as fast as your body will do it. Does that mean it's a good idea? Not really. The people who give that advice have a lot of experience with weight loss in a variety of ways. And their overarching message is "hey, going too fast, especially when trying to lose the last few pounds, probably isn't a great idea." You personally can choose to try and lose weight as fast or slow as you are able.
No, it does not really matter to me what anyone else thinks. Apparently, however, what I think mattered enough to you to let me know your thoughts on the subject.
Once again… I do not practice nor do I advocate for high-speed weight loss. I merely asked a question about the origins of a specific piece of advice being put forth here. I have come to no conclusion about whether the advice is right or wrong.
This discussion seems more appropriate to the debate section. Maybe you could flag your original post and ask the moderators to move it.
1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Thanks for the comments.
I understand what you are both saying, but where do the values (10 pounds, half) come from?
Is there some specific scientific basis for this advice? Or are “10” and “half” merely nice sounding, easily relatable numbers to support an opinion?
I'm not familiar with recommendations for those specific values (10 pounds, half.) What I do see often is the recommendation that weight loss not exceed 0.5 - 1% per week. It was recommended so often that another poster created this graphic:
Within the last year or so, we had a discussion about this in Debate, but I don't have the patience to attempt to dig it up. Specifically, it was me asking the creator of the graphic about the basis for it, and her responding.
Thank you for taking the time to track this down.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »sollyn23l2 wrote: »
Does it really matter what anyone else thinks? You've come to your own conclusion, which is fine. I think people got riled up at the way you communicated the conclusion you've come to. Of course you can lose weight as fast as your body will do it. Does that mean it's a good idea? Not really. The people who give that advice have a lot of experience with weight loss in a variety of ways. And their overarching message is "hey, going too fast, especially when trying to lose the last few pounds, probably isn't a great idea." You personally can choose to try and lose weight as fast or slow as you are able.
No, it does not really matter to me what anyone else thinks. Apparently, however, what I think mattered enough to you to let me know your thoughts on the subject.
Once again… I do not practice nor do I advocate for high-speed weight loss. I merely asked a question about the origins of a specific piece of advice being put forth here. I have come to no conclusion about whether the advice is right or wrong.
This discussion seems more appropriate to the debate section. Maybe you could flag your original post and ask the moderators to move it.
Do what you like. I simply asked a question. It is rather telling that it turned into a debate.1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »
If anyone comes to an Internet forum like this, asks a question, and thinks they're getting "expert medical advice" from random other users, they're very much mistaken.
Oh.... Have we really crossed the Rubicon of Fatuous Snarks?
Do posters here have no responsibility regarding the veracity of the notions they peddle?
Are the people who turn to them for advice mere fools for trusting them?
No one in this "discussion" has asked for "expert medical advice" level information. The basic question has always been, ""Where did you get your numbers?"
Since this "discussion" has strayed so far from the original questions, lets review the queries that have brought us here and seriously consider what we have learned so far.
Quite often here, posters advise others to halve their weekly weight loss target when they get within 10 pounds of their ultimate goal weight.
What is the source of this advice?
Thin air.
Does it have any scientific basis?
No.
What happens if you don’t follow this advice?
Nothing.
With that, I leave you to your snarking. Please don't forget to turn off the lights when you leave.0 -
Did it again....If anyone comes to an Internet forum like this, asks a question, and thinks they're getting "expert medical advice" from random other users, they're very much mistaken.
Oh.... Have we really crossed the Rubicon of Fatuous Snarks?
Do posters here have no responsibility regarding the veracity of the notions they peddle?
Are the people who turn to them for advice mere fools for trusting them?
No one in this "discussion" has asked for "expert medical advice" level information. The basic question has always been, ""Where did you get your numbers?"
Since this "discussion" has strayed so far from the original questions, lets review the queries that have brought us here and seriously consider what we have learned so far.
Quite often here, posters advise others to halve their weekly weight loss target when they get within 10 pounds of their ultimate goal weight.
What is the source of this advice?
Thin air.
Does it have any scientific basis?
No.
What happens if you don’t follow this advice?
Nothing.
With that, I leave you to your snarking. Please don't forget to turn off the lights when you leave.1 -
Did it again....If anyone comes to an Internet forum like this, asks a question, and thinks they're getting "expert medical advice" from random other users, they're very much mistaken.
Oh.... Have we really crossed the Rubicon of Fatuous Snarks?
Do posters here have no responsibility regarding the veracity of the notions they peddle?
Are the people who turn to them for advice mere fools for trusting them?
No one in this "discussion" has asked for "expert medical advice" level information. The basic question has always been, ""Where did you get your numbers?"
Since this "discussion" has strayed so far from the original questions, lets review the queries that have brought us here and seriously consider what we have learned so far.
Quite often here, posters advise others to halve their weekly weight loss target when they get within 10 pounds of their ultimate goal weight.
What is the source of this advice?
Thin air.
Does it have any scientific basis?
No.
What happens if you don’t follow this advice?
Nothing.
With that, I leave you to your snarking. Please don't forget to turn off the lights when you leave.
My comment about "expert medical advice" was apropos of a previous post on the thread (not from you, and not explicitly quoted by me) that suggested some were coming off as providing expert medical advice here. Expert medical advice is not the currency of this or similar internet forums. That should be well understood, as a general caveat emptor issue.
I have no quarrel with you asking the questions you have. I've tried to answer honestly and completely.
As I've said, I give advice based on my personal experience, and such limited research as I'm aware of as an amateur. I encourage everyone to do that, including advice from very different perspectives from mine, and to debate the advice in a civil way, as you have mostly done here in this thread. I think that's valuable.
Scientific consensus is important, something not to swim upstream against, but also not the only basis from which one may get useful advice.
5 -
Did it again....If anyone comes to an Internet forum like this, asks a question, and thinks they're getting "expert medical advice" from random other users, they're very much mistaken.
Oh.... Have we really crossed the Rubicon of Fatuous Snarks?
Do posters here have no responsibility regarding the veracity of the notions they peddle?
Are the people who turn to them for advice mere fools for trusting them?
No one in this "discussion" has asked for "expert medical advice" level information. The basic question has always been, ""Where did you get your numbers?"
Since this "discussion" has strayed so far from the original questions, lets review the queries that have brought us here and seriously consider what we have learned so far.
Quite often here, posters advise others to halve their weekly weight loss target when they get within 10 pounds of their ultimate goal weight.
What is the source of this advice?
Thin air.
Does it have any scientific basis?
No.
What happens if you don’t follow this advice?
Nothing.
With that, I leave you to your snarking. Please don't forget to turn off the lights when you leave.
I'm not sure who you think was being snarky - although this post of yours seems rather so.
No it isnt advice from thin air - it is logical advice based on real life experiences and situations
and I would say what happens is if you stray too far from this general advice is not nothing- ie if you keep a large deficit and try to lose 2lb per week when you only have a little to lose or left to lose - is you are likely to be under fuelling yourself and rebound just before or after the finish line.
Maybe not - but more likely IMO
4 -
And now we know why my aggressive responses.... weren't.5
-
snowflake954 wrote: »Quite often here, posters advise others to halve their weekly weight loss target when they get within 10 pounds of their ultimate goal weight.
What is the source of this advice?
Does it have any scientific basis?
What happens if you don’t follow this advice?
I think we can say that the source of this advice is: good sense.
Not everything has had scientific papers written about it.
People don't have to follow this advice. They can find out themselves if it is really good sense or not.
I've been following this thread. It's been interesting because there is no scientific backing. It's just common sense. Remember that? People used to follow it.
A big thank you to the posters that took their time to explain why it's a good idea.
I answered your questions upthread. I guess I don't understand what the problem is exactly.1 -
No it isnt advice from thin air - it is logical advice based on real life experiences and situations
Actually Ann I already gave the op a pretty relevant answer as to what happens when people apply a ~50% of TDEE deficit all the way to a low goal. One that was derived by an actual scientific experiment and published in two hardcover volumes.
Whether he chooses to chase it down and then apply logic to the observations of the experiment and see what this may suggest to his own use case and situation that is entirely up to him! 🤷♂️😘1 -
Just to clarify - Ann didn't write that sentence you quoted.
I did.3 -
So, question. If I wanted to lose 16 lbs and per the OP’s question about not slowing down weight loss, it would take me 8 weeks at 600-800 calories a day. What would happen to me in this 8 weeks? Would I pass out at some point? Experience low blood sugar? Would my memory be affected or general coordination? How about my health, would I start to become malnourished on those calories for so long? Would my hair become brittle? Would my skin color start to change even just slightly? If the answer is yes to any of these questions, then perhaps there is a medical reason for slowing weight loss down when getting closer to goal. If I told my doctor what I did and how it affected me, what would they say and why? And with that experience and the doctor’s recommendation would I then say, “can you please provide your sources otherwise it’s just hearsay”?
OP, is this what you’re asking? I’m genuinely confused why this is even a question. This isn’t just advice from this community, this would be medical advice. Also not being snarky here, but curious if you would now tell others, especially young women, that slowing down in the end doesn’t matter when it could hurt them 🥺3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions