Is it possible to lose a pound a day?

shanitomorrow

If you try this be careful that you don't injure yourself... I would worry that suddenly working out 4 hours a day would be too much. So experiment if you must, but please listen to your body. To lose a lb a day just doesn't seem worth the risk of injury. Your body needs to work up to that kind of workout - these shows on TV that show this kind of extreme workouts are loaded with physical therapist and recuperation equipment. They are not the everyday people at home doing this on their own. BE CAREFUL!

Good point, thank you.

tinatwin1971

If you manage to fit in 4 hours of exercise a day, could you please send me your time machine when you've finished with it.

Get up at 6am, leave for work at 7am - get home at 6:30pm or 7pm. Do household chores, cook a healthy from scratch not out of a packet meal, clear that up sit down watch the news, go to bed at 10pm, so that I can do it all over again the next day. :laugh:

Samstan101

To burn 3500 cals through exercise alone I would need to run at least 1 marathon a day (I burned 1250 doing a little over 13miles yesterday - 5'6" 179lb 41 y-o female). Unless you are extremely fit then burning 3500cals a day through exercise for even 2 days in a row would be very difficult.

psuLemon

I'm thinking about an experiment and trying to understand how the body works.

To maintain my current weight requires, say, 1,900 calories, so to lose weight at a steady, sustainable rate, consume, say, 1,400 calories each day. But the loss is not simply from fat tissue, is it? It's from muscle and fat alike?

So the idea of exercise - aerobic and strength building - is to build muscle a) to replace what's lost through eating less and b) to change the ratio of muscle to fat which implies increasing the muscle mass and c) to increase muscle mass to increase metabolic rate.

Does muscle mass increase simply by using it more, as in being more active? Or does increasing muscle mass imply strength or resistance training/activity?

Would you need more energy (more calories) for more exercise, say four times as much exercise than the starting place of 1,400 calories? Does the metabolism go into starvation mode in response to greater activity, as well as in response to less (too little) food?

I believe metabolism uses immediate energy from consumed calories, as well as stored energy from body tissue, is there a threshold or ratio, is it possible to calculate, assuming an increased rate of activity.

And last question, would you lose a pound a day, or, as fat is replaced with muscle, would weight loss be less, although body shape would change.

Or thinking about it another way: How long does it take to build muscle?

Regarding the bold, you cannot replace muscle with fat. You can't even lose fat and gain muscle that the same time. Generally, these are two different metabolic states (catabolic vs anabolic). For the most part, you weight training to continue to maintain your lean body mass, but even in the best of conditions, the average person loses lean body mass, no matter how much protein they eat and weight training they do, especially the more lean they are.

Also, typically when one states that you weight train to build muscle, it actually means you weight train to get stronger. If you really want to build new muscle, you would have to eat in a surplus and do a progressive weight training program.


Also, at some point, you will have to consider body efficiencies in burning calories and metabolic adaptation/thermogenesis because you would be essentially starving your body of nutrients trying to burn 3500 calories a day.

Dofflin

Good advice here

I just checked your profile and you are only a couple of years older than me. From your question, it would seem that you are stuck in the dieting mindset of the 60s and 70s. I know this all too well.

Here is my suggestion to you. Start listening to the young, smart people on here and educate yourself on the science behind weight loss and health. I, like you, was always looking for quick fixes. 2.5 years ago, I finally got serious and started doing this the right way for the last time.

Like me, you are getting to the place where you need to take this dead seriously and get busy doing things right. Read the following links. Educate yourself before your health becomes the impetus - forcing you to do what you can't seem to do now.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1175494-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819925-the-basics-don-t-complicate-it

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/ihad/view/the-path-of-success-631437

Best of luck. :flowerforyou:

shanitomorrow

Good advice here

I just checked your profile and you are only a couple of years older than me. From your question, it would seem that you are stuck in the dieting mindset of the 60s and 70s. I know this all too well.

Here is my suggestion to you. Start listening to the young, smart people on here and educate yourself on the science behind weight loss and health. I, like you, was always looking for quick fixes. 2.5 years ago, I finally got serious and started doing this the right way for the last time.

Like me, you are getting to the place where you need to take this dead seriously and get busy doing things right. Read the following links. Educate yourself before your health becomes the impetus - forcing you to do what you can't seem to do now.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1175494-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819925-the-basics-don-t-complicate-it

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/ihad/view/the-path-of-success-631437

Best of luck. :flowerforyou:

Thank you, but you're missing the point of the conversation.

shanitomorrow

I'm thinking about an experiment and trying to understand how the body works.

To maintain my current weight requires, say, 1,900 calories, so to lose weight at a steady, sustainable rate, consume, say, 1,400 calories each day. But the loss is not simply from fat tissue, is it? It's from muscle and fat alike?

So the idea of exercise - aerobic and strength building - is to build muscle a) to replace what's lost through eating less and b) to change the ratio of muscle to fat which implies increasing the muscle mass and c) to increase muscle mass to increase metabolic rate.

Does muscle mass increase simply by using it more, as in being more active? Or does increasing muscle mass imply strength or resistance training/activity?

Would you need more energy (more calories) for more exercise, say four times as much exercise than the starting place of 1,400 calories? Does the metabolism go into starvation mode in response to greater activity, as well as in response to less (too little) food?

I believe metabolism uses immediate energy from consumed calories, as well as stored energy from body tissue, is there a threshold or ratio, is it possible to calculate, assuming an increased rate of activity.

And last question, would you lose a pound a day, or, as fat is replaced with muscle, would weight loss be less, although body shape would change.

Or thinking about it another way: How long does it take to build muscle?

Regarding the bold, you cannot replace muscle with fat. You can't even lose fat and gain muscle that the same time. Generally, these are two different metabolic states (catabolic vs anabolic). For the most part, you weight training to continue to maintain your lean body mass, but even in the best of conditions, the average person loses lean body mass, no matter how much protein they eat and weight training they do, especially the more lean they are.

Also, typically when one states that you weight train to build muscle, it actually means you weight train to get stronger. If you really want to build new muscle, you would have to eat in a surplus and do a progressive weight training program.


Also, at some point, you will have to consider body efficiencies in burning calories and metabolic adaptation/thermogenesis because you would be essentially starving your body of nutrients trying to burn 3500 calories a day.

Great information, thanks.

shanitomorrow

If you manage to fit in 4 hours of exercise a day, could you please send me your time machine when you've finished with it.

Get up at 6am, leave for work at 7am - get home at 6:30pm or 7pm. Do household chores, cook a healthy from scratch not out of a packet meal, clear that up sit down watch the news, go to bed at 10pm, so that I can do it all over again the next day. :laugh:

Hehe, I know what you mean. It's only because I'm on holiday that I even have time to think of such an idea, never mind doing it. I was curious to find out whether it was possible, in the sense of, not can I do it, but would it have the desired effect. It seems, metabolically, that even we had the time etc and attempted it, it isn't possible.

MelvinOAnderson

For long term weight reduction, it is not proposed to lose more than 1-2 pounds for every week, except in case you're looking to your weight reduction or shed some additional pounds before an enormous occasion, it is conceivable to lose a pound a day.Despite the fact that its actually conceivable to practice enough to burn 3,500 calories - basically, a whole pound of fat.

shanitomorrow

For long term weight reduction, it is not proposed to lose more than 1-2 pounds for every week, except in case you're looking to your weight reduction or shed some additional pounds before an enormous occasion, it is conceivable to lose a pound a day.Despite the fact that its actually conceivable to practice enough to burn 3,500 calories - basically, a whole pound of fat.

Thanks, Melvin.

joseph113085

what is the fitness tips ? that can loss weight easier

Shropshire1959

what is the fitness tips ? that can loss weight easier

There IS no easy way...... Eat less and mover more... them's the facts.

yopeeps025

Also 4 hours of exercise a day?

So, 4 hours a day to burn one pound at 3500 cals per pound (approx) = nearly 4 hours at 875 cals/hrs or exercise EVERY DAY ... Not gonna happen...... NEXT PLAN

Do pro athletes burn that much in four hours? It takes a elite fitness to burn something like that. I pretty sure OP might burn half of that in four hours.

Tanie98

No, just be patient you will see results in no time

ThomRhodes

I'd pass on that idea, just exercise regularly and eat healthy. Drink water and water only - even tea is unneeded calories!

shanitomorrow

I'd pass on that idea, just exercise regularly and eat healthy. Drink water and water only - even tea is unneeded calories!

Water, now that's a good one. My sister rates drinking lots of water as helpful for all sorts of things including helping to lose weight (given the other essentials of eating less and moving more). Thanks, ThomRhodes

shanitomorrow

No, just be patient you will see results in no time

Thank you, Tanie, that is a lovely response.

psuLemon

I'd pass on that idea, just exercise regularly and eat healthy. Drink water and water only - even tea is unneeded calories!

There is no reason to only drink water. While I would agree that you shouldn't drink a lot of calories, you can still have them as part of a good diet.

Many of us also frequently have diet soda's, unsweetened teas and/or coffee as part of a regular diet. I frequently mix milk with my protein shakes. But in the end, it's about context. Should a person have 3 20oz sodas every day... no. But will having some milk, OJ or another beverage hurt your progress, nope.

SEAFOODMAN

not a race, and if you try you will burn out and give it all back. I know my first 6mo I avg 6 to 7lbs a week, but I was a big boy!

KatieSvelte

I could GAIN a pound a day.. LOL

I think thats more DO-able then losing a lb a day.

I think if you lost a LB a day it may just be water weight.

yopeeps025

I could. Gain a pound a day that is. LOL

I think thats more DO-able then losing a lb a day.

I do not think my stomach has room to gain a pound a day now.

amusedmonkey

I'm thinking about an experiment and trying to understand how the body works.

To maintain my current weight requires, say, 1,900 calories, so to lose weight at a steady, sustainable rate, consume, say, 1,400 calories each day. But the loss is not simply from fat tissue, is it? It's from muscle and fat alike?

At different rates, but basically yes. Fat, muscle and other tissue.

So the idea of exercise - aerobic and strength building - is to build muscle a) to replace what's lost through eating less and b) to change the ratio of muscle to fat which implies increasing the muscle mass and c) to increase muscle mass to increase metabolic rate.

Unless you are morbidly obese or a first timer when it comes to strength, eating at a close to maintenance rate (including exercise calories) gaining muscle can be very very slow, IF it happens. Strength alone is not enough, you will also have to fuel with enough protein preserve muscle mass, and yes muscle mass does increase your metabolic rate but it's a far smaller increase than you would expect.

Does muscle mass increase simply by using it more, as in being more active? Or does increasing muscle mass imply strength or resistance training/activity?

There are quite a few theories about how muscle grows but one of the circulating ones is that you need to train your muscle close to fatigue to damage the fibers, making muscle sells grow in size to protect themselves from further damage. That's why if you want to increase muscle you will need to work hard on resistance training and keep increasing the challenge level as you progress.

Would you need more energy (more calories) for more exercise, say four times as much exercise than the starting place of 1,400 calories? Does the metabolism go into starvation mode in response to greater activity, as well as in response to less (too little) food?

It will not go into starvation mode but you WILL need extra calories to fuel exercise. You may feel hungry, stressed, drained, tired and a few other things. You will also need more carbs for energy, and more protein and fat for muscles and hormones to play nice.

I believe metabolism uses immediate energy from consumed calories, as well as stored energy from body tissue, is there a threshold or ratio, is it possible to calculate, assuming an increased rate of activity.

I believe I've read something about that earlier, can't remember where but there is a limit to how much fat you can store/release.

And last question, would you lose a pound a day, or, as fat is replaced with muscle, would weight loss be less, although body shape would change.

If you lose a pound a day, nothing will be "replaced" with muscle. In fact, your muscle mass will decrease drastically no matter how much you train, because when you over-train, you can even make things worse by triggering a process of Rhabdomyolysis which can be quite dangerous (and which involves breaking down muscles), not to mention how it could wreck havoc in your hormones, nutrient balance, electrolytes, ability to heal and increased stress on nearly all your systems and unavoidably causing injuries which may take you months to recover from.

joedlfowler

Just chiming in. I joined this site in July 2013, a little over a month before I was scheduled to go skydiving. I exceeded the weight limit by about 26lbs. I set a goal for myself of 30lbs in 30 days, and was able to do it. Here are a few of my thoughts (not an expert)

1: I weighed 276lbs to start, so I had some extra meat to lose. I think the larger you are the quicker you can melt it, to an extent, because everything you do requires more energy than a smaller person

2: I went pretty extreme. My job had me walking almost 20km a day on weekends, about 12km a day during the week. This was my entire cardio plan. I didn't do anything exercise wise outside of it.

3: I practiced intermittent fasting. I would consume all my calories between 10am and 6pm everyday, never outside of those hours.

4: I went from approximately a glass of water a day to 2.5L of ice water.

5: My daily caloric in take was between 1200 and 1500. All good calories, no drinking calories.

6: The first 3 days sucked. Then it was easy.

7: Many people told me it wasn't healthy, specifically those who only say me once a week, and could 'see' the weight coming off. I never felt bad during the cut, outside of the first 3 days. I took a multivitamin everyday to ensure I wasn't missing something.

8: I put the weight back on (10lbs of it). Not entirely unintentionally. You see, as a 276lb guy who walked for work so much, I wasn't in terrible shape. The weight cut was for a specific goal, once I did my jump, I lifted a bunch of limitations off myself.

9: I've decided I'm going to drop to 230lb from the 259lbs I am sitting as I write this, and will do it the same way, but because I no longer walk as much, will have to encorporate more intentional exercise. Plus I won't cut as quick. I'm saying 30 lbs in 60 days will probably do it.


Again, I was told by many people it wasn't healthy to cut, my doctor had no issue, as he had told me to lose wright before. Pushing 300lbs is apparently a health risk haha.

So, pound a day. Possible? Yes, if you are way to big to start, you are pretty active, and can hold to a restrictive eating schedule.

Ask your doctor, and do more research.

Shropshire1959

2: I went pretty extreme. My job had me walking almost 20km a day on weekends, about 12km a day during the week. This was my entire cardio plan. I didn't do anything exercise wise outside of it.

Well done ... but wow that's one hell of a paper round :-)

amusedmonkey

Again, I was told by many people it wasn't healthy to cut, my doctor had no issue, as he had told me to lose wright before. Pushing 300lbs is apparently a health risk haha.

So, pound a day. Possible? Yes, if you are way to big to start, you are pretty active, and can hold to a restrictive eating schedule.

Ask your doctor, and do more research.

I second this. I started by losing 4-5 pounds a week. Not quite 1 pound a day but it's still substantial. I had to and I could because I was 300+. My doctor wanted me to drop out of super obese category (45+ BMI) as soon as possible. It was weighing the risks of staying longer at 300+ or losing too fast and my doctor chose to have me lose fast. Once I left super obesity zone I was advised to slow down my loss considerably.

annaskiski

Hi Shan,

I'm from Leicester, MA! Big hello from across the pond!

I looked at your food/exercise diary. I'm wondering if you're overestimating your calories burned during exercise.

You've listed about 830 calories from swimming for an hour. Now I know that this is probably what's listed in the MFP calculator, but I'm guessing that this is for some pretty rigorous swimming with no breaks. If you could really swim/burn this many calories in an hour, I doubt that you would be overweight.

I guess the point that people are trying to make is that the average person cannot burn this many calories in a day, every day, for a week even. I would suspect any calorie counters that tell you that you are......

AllieLosingIt

I'm a big girl and I've been losing at a rate of 1 pound per day (starting weight July 31st of 336.2, weight on 8/17 was 318.4) doing no more than 40-60 minutes of walking and eating between 1500-2000 calories per day.

The bigger you are, the easier it is to drop weight fast with minimal effort. The closer you are to goal, the more you should be focusing on long-term results rather than a quick fix so that it's something sustainable and you don't end up gaining it all back.

Mikkimeow

Yes, but why would you want to?

Jacwhite22

For a limited time, obviously

I was just wondering, if I ate my daily calorie allowance, and built in four hours exercise/activity each day, on top of the usual shopping, cooking, cleaning, running around activity, would you lose more?

Or would you just be ravenous?

Without losing a good bit of lean mass...... Effectively lowering your BMR? No.

sparacka

Though this seems highly unlikely for most of us in reality, I'll address one issue of whether or not it's plausible...
If someone were to begin a workout routine that included 4-6 hours of cardio / day, his muscles would likely have a freak-out and retain a considerable amount of water in order to repair themselves. So even if the 3500 calories were burned, a weight gain might result due to the extra water.