Losing weight too fast - advice please??
willowglimmer
Posts: 71
Posted last week about not being able to eat enough cals (healthily) to maintain goal weight. I'm still struggling despite doing what posters suggested. I've lost 7 lbs in a week which as far as my goal goes is great but imworried that I'm losing it too fast and that it will affect my body in not so good ways (burning muscle as someone suggested etc)
Anyway here's a chart I've done of my cals etc please advise :-)
Start weight December 2010 = 217
BMR is 1716 p.d.
Cal goal p.d = 1200
Date. Food. Exercise. Net. Remaining. Weight(lbs)
4/1. +1521. -391. 1130. 70
5/1. +1724. -391. 1333. -133. 216
6/1. +1350. -205. 1145. 55
7/1. +1560. -565. 995. 205
8/1. +1580. -979. 601. 599
9/1. +1344. -719. 625. 575
10/1. +1307. -453. 854. 346
11/1. +1383. -324. 1059. 141. 211
12/1. +1242. -237. 1005. 155. 209
Anyway here's a chart I've done of my cals etc please advise :-)
Start weight December 2010 = 217
BMR is 1716 p.d.
Cal goal p.d = 1200
Date. Food. Exercise. Net. Remaining. Weight(lbs)
4/1. +1521. -391. 1130. 70
5/1. +1724. -391. 1333. -133. 216
6/1. +1350. -205. 1145. 55
7/1. +1560. -565. 995. 205
8/1. +1580. -979. 601. 599
9/1. +1344. -719. 625. 575
10/1. +1307. -453. 854. 346
11/1. +1383. -324. 1059. 141. 211
12/1. +1242. -237. 1005. 155. 209
0
Replies
-
It looks like you've lost 4 lbs? How long did it take the 4 lbs to come off?0
-
No it's 7lbs was 216 on the 5th and 209 today losing 1-2 lbs daily0
-
Many people would argue that you need to eat back your exercise calories so your NET calories is 1200, minimum. If you just started working out and eating better you will lose a lot at first b/c its all water. You could give it a bit more to see if it slows down or try eating more.0
-
Eat more?? Even a big bowl of cereal with milk would add about 300 calories to your daily total... healthy, not bulky, and tasty!0
-
I am eating more lol, but not hungry enough to eat more than that, have a dog and four children living at home so probably burning more than I log as it doesn't give you an option for running around after a pain in the bum toddler!! So can't cut out the exercise bit, dog needs walking. Might try eating supper but generally in bed before ten and don't like to sleep on a full tummy or I wake up feeling sick.. (oh I'm a strange one!)
Think like pp suggested see if it evens out after a week or so, anybody else had a start like this?0 -
Add in some nuts. Those are high calorie and not filling, but really good for you. Two servings a day will give you the extra calories you need. Or some Peanut Butter will work too.0
-
Have 200 cals if nuts a day already should I double that?0
-
Well, would you be willing to make your food diary public so we can see it and maybe make suggestions?0
-
Done :-)0
-
I would say you could probably add another serving of nuts, and maybe add a piece of fruit to lunch?0
-
Ok will do!! :-)0
-
Along my journey I've occasionally lost as many as 8 pounds in a week. I'm usually pretty close to my daily goal and eat back my exercise calories. I'm not doing anything extreme, it just seems to happen from time to time. I wouldn't sweat it too much if I were you. Good luck
0 -
Keep in mind that you aren't just losing water in those first days/weeks... you are also EATING less. This means that there is less food in your digestive track. Less food in your body means less weight.
Also, if you are adding more fiber to your diet, the fiber will be purging a lot of old residual food products from your intestines.
I would suggest keeping your calorie intake above 1200 because you are likely not getting the nutrients you need to stay healthy - even if you are taking a vitamin supplement.
As posted here, nuts are a great high calorie and healthy option. Fresh fruit gives you tons of great nutrients and fiber and yet is light on the stomach digestion. I also like wholegrain breads and you wouldn't believe how fast those calories add up.
I also have a sensitive stomach. But I find two pieces of toast before I go to bed are excellent for getting me through the night - and yet are easy for digestion.
Good luck!0 -
Managed to eat but 69 of my cals. Finished the evening off with a shake ( had some in cupboard) and can honestly say it was too much. I wasn't hungry when I had it and felt awful after.
I really dont think eating when you aren't hungry is a good thing so I won't be doing it again0 -
Honestly, if your not hungry, don't eat. Be happy that your weight is decreasing. There are times I have lost more than expected and other weeks when nothing goes.Managed to eat but 69 of my cals. Finished the evening off with a shake ( had some in cupboard) and can honestly say it was too much. I wasn't hungry when I had it and felt awful after.
I really dont think eating when you aren't hungry is a good thing so I won't be doing it again0 -
I agree I don't think you should eat if you're not hungry and you feel awful afterwards....I think everyone has their own journey. I agree water weight can come off pretty quickly in the beginning. Pay attention to what your body is telling you and as long and you feel healthy and follow the MFP guidelines in general you should be good to go!
Congrats on the weight loss so far :happy:0 -
I would stick to what you are doing. Presuming you are eating a balanced diet then you are consuming more than sufficient food to gain all the nutrients you need. The fact that you then exercise away additional calories is irrelevant to your required 'nutritional' intake. For example, if you get 40mg of phosphorus from eating a banana (100 calories) then if you exercise away that additional 100 calories the phosphorus is not removed from your body! (I spent several years working on the human genome project so I'm not just talking out my *kitten* here ... I do have a slight insight into the workings on the body :-)
I've been on an eating and exercise regime since December too and most days I have a 'net' calorie intake of about 500 calories. That's because I eat around 1300 calories but exercise away 800 (ish!). Within that 1300 I intake all the vitamins and minerals I need to keep healthy. Those vitamins and minerals are not lost by the 800 cals of exercise. I've lost over 11kgs in the last 6 weeks (that's about 24 lbs) and all of it has been body fat (21% down to 15%). Muscle mass has increased, so I'm not removing muscle.
Personally (and this is only my opinion of course) I think eating additional nuts or sugar-rich fruits simply to intake additional calories is hugely counter-productive to your efforts. I think the reason this site (and many other diet programs) suggest consuming 1200 calories is not so much for biological reasons but psychological reasons - to prevent people from going on such a restricted food intake that they give up after a week through boredom. Keeping people at 1200 calories means (on average) that they reduce their food intake enough to actually lose a good amount of weight but eat enough not to get totally frustrated with their new diet. Half the battle of losing weight is will power. A lot of people start talking about 'starvation mode' when on diets but this is a fallacy. If calorie intake is restricted hugely (so 200 or so calories per day) for an extended period (at least a week) then the metabolism will shift to run the body on a much lower energy level. However, the other side effects of this would be incredibly noticeable - violent headaches, stomach cramps, nauseousness, huge fatigue. They wouldn't have any energy to move very far (this is how the body reduces its energy/calorie requirement). I doubt many people in the developed world have ever even approached starvation mode.
My suggestion is to gather your own evidence. Buy a set of scales that show body fat %, muscle mass %, weight and water. Stick to your current regime (no additional unwanted calories!) and take your measurements once a day for a couple of weeks. See what happens to your water, body fat and muscle mass. Based on the figures you've mentioned I think you will find that it is the body fat % that drops and not the muscle mass %. Most scales will display these values so it isn't an expensive thing to do.
The proof, as they say, is in the pudding (that you won't be eating :-)0 -
Thank you for your eloquent description of starvation mode.I would stick to what you are doing. Presuming you are eating a balanced diet then you are consuming more than sufficient food to gain all the nutrients you need. The fact that you then exercise away additional calories is irrelevant to your required 'nutritional' intake. For example, if you get 40mg of phosphorus from eating a banana (100 calories) then if you exercise away that additional 100 calories the phosphorus is not removed from your body! (I spent several years working on the human genome project so I'm not just talking out my *kitten* here ... I do have a slight insight into the workings on the body :-)
I've been on an eating and exercise regime since December too and most days I have a 'net' calorie intake of about 500 calories. That's because I eat around 1300 calories but exercise away 800 (ish!). Within that 1300 I intake all the vitamins and minerals I need to keep healthy. Those vitamins and minerals are not lost by the 800 cals of exercise. I've lost over 11kgs in the last 6 weeks (that's about 24 lbs) and all of it has been body fat (21% down to 15%). Muscle mass has increased, so I'm not removing muscle.
Personally (and this is only my opinion of course) I think eating additional nuts or sugar-rich fruits simply to intake additional calories is hugely counter-productive to your efforts. I think the reason this site (and many other diet programs) suggest consuming 1200 calories is not so much for biological reasons but psychological reasons - to prevent people from going on such a restricted food intake that they give up after a week through boredom. Keeping people at 1200 calories means (on average) that they reduce their food intake enough to actually lose a good amount of weight but eat enough not to get totally frustrated with their new diet. Half the battle of losing weight is will power. A lot of people start talking about 'starvation mode' when on diets but this is a fallacy. If calorie intake is restricted hugely (so 200 or so calories per day) for an extended period (at least a week) then the metabolism will shift to run the body on a much lower energy level. However, the other side effects of this would be incredibly noticeable - violent headaches, stomach cramps, nauseousness, huge fatigue. They wouldn't have any energy to move very far (this is how the body reduces its energy/calorie requirement). I doubt many people in the developed world have ever even approached starvation mode.
My suggestion is to gather your own evidence. Buy a set of scales that show body fat %, muscle mass %, weight and water. Stick to your current regime (no additional unwanted calories!) and take your measurements once a day for a couple of weeks. See what happens to your water, body fat and muscle mass. Based on the figures you've mentioned I think you will find that it is the body fat % that drops and not the muscle mass %. Most scales will display these values so it isn't an expensive thing to do.
The proof, as they say, is in the pudding (that you won't be eating :-)
It is one of my big bugbears (would get on my soapbox) about starvation mode when people come on talking about it.
Yes it is a fallacy, I think people mistake this for their food addiction ( ie still crave salt/fat/sugar). It takes 3 or so weeks to wean off such, but people sneak a "bad snack" that snoozes their addiction. I know from my diet journey of weaning off all the stuff that was making me fat.0 -
Personally (and this is only my opinion of course) I think eating additional nuts or sugar-rich fruits simply to intake additional calories is hugely counter-productive to your efforts. I think the reason this site (and many other diet programs) suggest consuming 1200 calories is not so much for biological reasons but psychological reasons - to prevent people from going on such a restricted food intake that they give up after a week through boredom. Keeping people at 1200 calories means (on average) that they reduce their food intake enough to actually lose a good amount of weight but eat enough not to get totally frustrated with their new diet. Half the battle of losing weight is will power. A lot of people start talking about 'starvation mode' when on diets but this is a fallacy. If calorie intake is restricted hugely (so 200 or so calories per day) for an extended period (at least a week) then the metabolism will shift to run the body on a much lower energy level. However, the other side effects of this would be incredibly noticeable - violent headaches, stomach cramps, nauseousness, huge fatigue. They wouldn't have any energy to move very far (this is how the body reduces its energy/calorie requirement). I doubt many people in the developed world have ever even approached starvation mode.
I should clarify that many people are not saying that you should NET 1200 calories... they (or at least me) are saying that you should CONSUME 1200 calories. You can net whatever you want. But if you don't consume at least 1200 calories a day, I cannot see how you can get the protein and nutrients you need to stay healthy.
You are creating a division in your point that is in regards to those who state that you must net 1200 calories. There is a big difference between that camp of thought and the rest of us who are simply stating that 1200 calories is required to get nutrients.
As well, you should try to get your nutrients via your foods whenever possible and only supplement with vitamins when your diet is lopsided due to allergies or other restrictions beyond your control.0 -
To be very honest with you I would not be worried about loosing too much unless:
1 you are feeling sick or like something is wrong with you.
2 are getting too hungry, what you say it is not the problem.
3 are loosing more muscles/lean mass than fat
It could be that you were bloated and lost a lot of water weight. And also if you are eating less and cleaner there are less food stocked inside of you what equals less weight.
One more thing: I think we need to make this lifestyle change as close to the reality as possible. Are you going to be able to keep eating like that untill you hit your desire weight? Are you going to be able to keep eating good stuff after loosing the weight so you wont gain the weight back? Are we making long term changes or these are only changes to loose weight? I am always questioning myself of these questions. I NEED to change my eating habbits and not only loose weight. So i try to be smart about grocery shopping, cooking and eating b/c these changes are permanent so they need to fit the life I live right now, and tomorrow.0 -
I agree that people need to be smart as to where they get their calories from, as there are "bad" calories (ie from fatty foods).Personally (and this is only my opinion of course) I think eating additional nuts or sugar-rich fruits simply to intake additional calories is hugely counter-productive to your efforts. I think the reason this site (and many other diet programs) suggest consuming 1200 calories is not so much for biological reasons but psychological reasons - to prevent people from going on such a restricted food intake that they give up after a week through boredom. Keeping people at 1200 calories means (on average) that they reduce their food intake enough to actually lose a good amount of weight but eat enough not to get totally frustrated with their new diet. Half the battle of losing weight is will power. A lot of people start talking about 'starvation mode' when on diets but this is a fallacy. If calorie intake is restricted hugely (so 200 or so calories per day) for an extended period (at least a week) then the metabolism will shift to run the body on a much lower energy level. However, the other side effects of this would be incredibly noticeable - violent headaches, stomach cramps, nauseousness, huge fatigue. They wouldn't have any energy to move very far (this is how the body reduces its energy/calorie requirement). I doubt many people in the developed world have ever even approached starvation mode.
I should clarify that many people are not saying that you should NET 1200 calories... they (or at least me) are saying that you should CONSUME 1200 calories. You can net whatever you want. But if you don't consume at least 1200 calories a day, I cannot see how you can get the protein and nutrients you need to stay healthy.
You are creating a division in your point that is in regards to those who state that you must net 1200 calories. There is a big difference between that camp of thought and the rest of us who are simply stating that 1200 calories is required to get nutrients.
As well, you should try to get your nutrients via your foods whenever possible and only supplement with vitamins when your diet is lopsided due to allergies or other restrictions beyond your control.
Eating nutrient rich food, low in fat, refined sugars and salt is the way to go. I though have no problem in a vitamin / mineral supplement and a fish oil capsule on a daily basis (just in case).
I know that I want to get the best "value" for each calorie I consume.0 -
WOW!! I go out for a good night out (alcohol calories burned through dancing!!) and you have given me much food for thought (pun intended!!)
This is a lifestyle change and I'm actually enjoying and tasting food more now than I did before I decided to lose weight. Sometimes I can't believe how much I've eaten yet stayed within my limits. I can actually say I am enjoying the changes I am making.
Input from other people is really helpful and without you I would probably fret myself silly and start eating to compensate!!
Thank you all :-D0 -
Glad it is helping.WOW!! I go out for a good night out (alcohol calories burned through dancing!!) and you have given me much food for thought (pun intended!!)
This is a lifestyle change and I'm actually enjoying and tasting food more now than I did before I decided to lose weight. Sometimes I can't believe how much I've eaten yet stayed within my limits. I can actually say I am enjoying the changes I am making.
Input from other people is really helpful and without you I would probably fret myself silly and start eating to compensate!!
Thank you all :-D
One thing to be careful of (and I sound like a real kill-joy), alcohol gets converted to fat (its just our biology - the body does not have an enzyme pathway to convert it to sugar for immediate use). But the dancing will at least be burning other calories!
I found that alcohol was such a "bad" calorie I just stopped drinking it (and I used to LOVE red wine). I found it made such a difference to my weight loss and how I felt (and it stopped me making bad food choices after a few too many).0 -
Did you just start losing weight? If so, it might just be water weight. Your body won't let you lose weight too quickly. If it thinks it's starving, you'll start holding on to every calorie you eat, thus preventing you from losing weight. I would stay with your same pattern and see how it goes over the next week or two.0
-
I'm not really a drinker as a rule, had five vodka soda and limes with a soda and lime in-between each (I like to be able to laugh at others as they get totally bladdered!!) but had fun dirty dancing with my husband and NO kebab at the end of the night.
I started dieting again in October so not really new to it now, did just finish my period last week so maybe it was hormonal??
I'm not worried now after all these replies, I figure everybody is different so therefore anything goes when it comes to weight loss :-)0 -
Glad it is helping.
One thing to be careful of (and I sound like a real kill-joy), alcohol gets converted to fat (its just our biology - the body does not have an enzyme pathway to convert it to sugar for immediate use). But the dancing will at least be burning other calories!
I found that alcohol was such a "bad" calorie I just stopped drinking it (and I used to LOVE red wine). I found it made such a difference to my weight loss and how I felt (and it stopped me making bad food choices after a few too many).
I actually just started making myself consume red wine. I'm not worried about the alcohol sugar... it burns like anything else. My bigger concern is getting the antioxidants. There have been so many studies to show that red wine and green tea are HUGE in slowing mental decline as you get older.
I'll take the extra calorie hit in exchange for the mental benefits.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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