Noobie - would this work?

candiceh3

I am new here and new to dieting. I have two goals:

1 - get down to the weight I was when I got married (72 kgs / 158.4 lbs) and I am currently 80 kgs / 176 kgs. So I have to lose 8 kgs / 17.6 lbs. This is a BMI of 25.

2 - get down to a healthy goal of 65 kgs / 143 lbs, which is a loss of 15 kgs / 33 lbs in total. This is a BMI of 22.5.

So, to get to my first goal (1) I need to create a deficit of 61,600 calories. At a daily deficit of 1100 calories per day (1 kg / week or 2.2 lbs / week), that's 56 days.

Daily expenditure = 1950 + exercise (600) less calories at rest during exercise (50) = 2500. That is an hour on the cross trainer every day. So if I consume 1400 calories / day, I should be spot on?

refinedredbird

Okay, I got confused somewhere in your post. The first goal you have is to lose 17 lbs. That in the grand scheme of things is not a lot to lose and really 2.2 lbs a weeks is a pretty extreme deficit for a small amount of weight. The minimum you should be eating per day should not be less than 1,200 calories + exercise calories. It would be better to find your basal metabolic rate (which there are online calculators for) and not eat less than that. Mine, for example is 1598 per day, which I try to stay above. Then pick a deficit in the 10% range, maybe 15%, but more than that is pretty extreme. Plus, you have to realize that there will not be an exact magic day you will lose the weight and the scale doesn't tell you everything.

If you are building muscle, the scale won't account for that even if you are losing inches and your clothes are looser. For example, when I was overseas in Africa I did not eat much because I was in a third world country in a small village. Life was very tough for me for 2 years and I was not eating like I did in the U.S. I got down to 155lbs (which is small for me) and I was still a size 14 in pants. (I am very pear-shaped). I was always sick and tired and hungry. When I got to the U.S. all my weight plus more was back since I could now freely eat all the yummy food I had been craving. I got up to 238+ lbs, size 18-20 pants. A year later I am now 168 lbs and a size 12! Why do I wear a size 12 at 168 now when I wore size 14 at 155lbs in Africa? Because I am building muscle and losing inches, not starving myself. The scale doesn't show that.

Scale successes and scale goals are great and I am sure you will reach them, but do not get discouraged if it does not read what you want by the end of the 56th day. I really recommend taking body measurements, set some non-scale goals as well and eat enough (lots of protein included) so that your body can function properly.

KristinNicole82

In theory yes it will work but in reality, no it won't. Eventually you are going to hit a a spot where your body will get used to what you are doing and you will have to change up diet and exercise. Your calories sound very low and you might not want to go as drastic as 1100 per day, that is not much and you dont want your body to go into starvation mode because you wont lose weight.

SideSteel

I think you're going about setting your intake incorrectly.

You would be much better off figuring out what your maintenance needs are based on your current weight, and set your intake to a percentage of that. (80% being a pretty darn good starting place).

Please see here:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets

4legsRbetterthan2

Your math is correct but keep in mind what Kristen said - as nice as it would be we are not computers its not alwasy completely cut and dry.

auddii

I agree with the other posters; this is likely far too aggressive. There is no reason to try and rush the loss. I'd aim to lose one pound a week, so try for 500 calorie a day deficit (although the 3500 is just an approximate anyways). Large deficits can sometimes hinder weight loss:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html

angelic843

Calorie math is great, but remember our bodies don't work like math...they work like biology. There are many chemical processes going on so I agree with other responses, focus on steady progression downward...

If you set a mathematical goal based on your deficit and fall short you are likely to get frustrated...set modest goals and see what happens! :-)

candiceh3

Thank you . I'll reset the goal to a 500 cal deficit per day and then on average I should lose a pound a week.

QuilterInVA

Don't expect to lose a pound a week. At your current weight, weight loss will be slow. It's is never a good idea to set a goal to lose x pounds a week or x pounds by a certain date. You need time to learn new ways of eating and habits if you are to maintain the loss. It's far better to set a goal based on learning a new habit such as I'll have protein with every meal and snack or I'll exercise 45 minutes every day.

NRSPAM

In theory, yes, it should work, but it probably won't. Our bodies don't work like that. You might be able to get away with that for the short term, but not long term. You might lose 5-10lb's initially, as your body gets used to the change, but after that it will probably quit, and you will need to increase calories, and lose more slowly. Sorry OP.

wild_wild_life

Thank you . I'll reset the goal to a 500 cal deficit per day and then on average I should lose a pound a week.

Good decision. It sounds like you are going about this in a smart way. I have seen this recommended as a guide to how much weight to try to lose per week -- as you can see, the closer you get to goal, the slower weight loss you can expect.

75+ to lose = 2lbs 
50-75 to lose = 1.5-2lbs 
25-50 to lose = 1-1.5lbs 
15-25 to lose = 1lbs 
0-15 to lose = 0.5lbs 

A slower loss with a moderate deficit will be best in the long run in regards to sustainability, minimizing muscle loss and minimizing metabolic adaptation to a calorie deficit.