starting the 2lbs a week loss

you are a 24 year old male with about 20lbs to lose???? and you want to do that in 10 weeks????

Yah no...

try 1/2lb a week, it may take longer but you will be healthier and happier for it.

Maybe check out the 'Food' forum, and the 'Search' tool.

you are a 24 year old male with about 20lbs to lose???? and you want to do that in 10 weeks????

Yah no...

try 1/2lb a week, it may take longer but you will be healthier and happier for it.

i was doing 1.5 lb a week and it was fine, anything less is boring and takes too long tbh. pretty sure i didn't say anything about doing it in 10 weeks either since i never lost 10lbs in a month anyways but its cool to just be negative online

If losing 2 lbs every week over the course of your entire weight loss was realistic, don't you think we would all be doing that? The recommended amount per week loss is there for a reason, because the slower weight loss and gradual reintroduction of calories gives you more success in maintenance. You could bump it up to 2 lbs so it won't be boring and take so long, but chances are when you've hit your goal and enter maintenance, you're going to end up gaining some if not all of it back.

I think what everyone is trying to say is setting yourself up for such a hard goal is basically setting yourself up to fail. You might lose weight really fast but the chances of you keeping that weight off is basically none.

You need to change your bad habits to keep the weight off and the only thing that gets rid of bad habits is TIME.

I have lost 1kg a week before by eating very small amounts and guess what it lasted all about 2 months before i put the weight back on. That is why this time i have upped the calories and going to exercise properly/slowly. And getting help motivation from the members on here .

im not trying to destroy my muscle mass i'd like to keep it, at all possible, but that option for 2lbs a week is there, whether it works the whole time is up to me right. i didn't meant to make it seem like i'm in a hurry im not about to enter the military or anything, but from what i was reading it sounds like it works, even though i personally don't expect to lose that much weight that quickly. if that was true, i would of been closer to my goal by now, but i wasn't because i was still figuring out nutrition, fitness, and trying gluten free on work days. i've been learning a lot so i don't really expect a magic whistle to do this for me im still figuring things out.

No, it's not up to you whether or not it works. There are piles of threads here from people who have been losing steadily at a certain loss per week, but then have stalled out for weeks and don't understand why they aren't losing anymore when they are doing everything exactly the same. You hit plateaus during weight loss, which is why when you get to certain points as you approach your goal it's recommended to change your goals to continue losing weight. And you will be losing muscle mass if you continue that aggressively with your calorie deficit within 20 lbs of your goal, which will just make you a somewhat smaller but still jiggly version of yourself. RGv2 and cwolfman aren't trying to be rude, they are trying to help you out and keep you from making mistakes that will make your journey even longer and more difficult than it needs to be to achieve the body you want.

im not trying to destroy my muscle mass i'd like to keep it, at all possible, but that option for 2lbs a week is there, whether it works the whole time is up to me right. i didn't meant to make it seem like i'm in a hurry im not about to enter the military or anything, but from what i was reading it sounds like it works, even though i personally don't expect to lose that much weight that quickly. if that was true, i would of been closer to my goal by now, but i wasn't because i was still figuring out nutrition, fitness, and trying gluten free on work days. i've been learning a lot so i don't really expect a magic whistle to do this for me im still figuring things out.

No, it's not up to you whether or not it works. There are piles of threads here from people who have been losing steadily at a certain loss per week, but then have stalled out for weeks and don't understand why they aren't losing anymore when they are doing everything exactly the same. You hit plateaus during weight loss, which is why when you get to certain points as you approach your goal it's recommended to change your goals to continue losing weight. And you will be losing muscle mass if you continue that aggressively with your calorie deficit within 20 lbs of your goal, which will just make you a somewhat smaller but still jiggly version of yourself. RGv2 and cwolfman aren't trying to be rude, they are trying to help you out and keep you from making mistakes that will make your journey even longer and more difficult than it needs to be to achieve the body you want.

it took me a couple weeks to just lose 2lbs and im not sure why...
so because im near my goal i should slow down or else it'll mess me up?

Basically, yes. Decrease your loss per week goal, which will increase your calories, and see what happens. It sounds like you are in a plateau now if you were at a deficit to lose 1.5 lbs per week and it took a few weeks to lose 2 lbs. The weight will come off more slowly, but you should go back to losing again consistently.

The program here is about a lifestyle change, which means a behavioral change, which is why you slowly move up to maintenance calories. If you reduce your loss per week, when you hit maintenance, you'd basically be eating the same diet you were at the end of your weight loss, plus a small snack. If you tried to power through at 2 lb/wk loss, when you hit maintenance you would be eating the same diet you were used to at 2 lb/wk, plus the calorie equivalent of a philly cheesesteak or a pint of Ben and Jerry's to hit your maintenance calories. You can see how having such a large calorie difference in order to hit your maintenance calories could lead to some bad decisions compared to adding in a small 200-300 calorie snack.

Including resistance training will help to burn fat and retain lean muscle mass, meaning when the fat does come off, it will reveal tight muscle underneath. You're actually in a really cool part of the weight loss journey, because you not only get to eat more, but when you see victories, it won't just be a number on the scale or clothes feeling looser. It'll be things like inches dropping on the measuring tape, or taking off your shirt and seeing delts or a six-pack starting to reveal itself, or doing more reps or lifting heavier than before. This is the part where it's not so much about just eating less and dropping the fat, but sculpting the body you want.

Aiming to lose 2 lbs a week is pretty much always considered healthy, except if you're here and within say 40 lbs. of your goal. I've never seen a diet forum so obsessed with slow losses and trying to maintain lean body mass. There is evidence that losing 1 lb/week preserves significantly more LBM than 2 (that's losing, not 'aiming') but there is also a lot of evidence that people who lose weight at a steeper deficit have a much better rate of maintenance, in 5 years.

in 5 years?

An analysis of 27 different weight loss studies, spanning decades and thousands of participants, looked at which dieters had maintained their losses better 5 years after achieving them. The dieters who used deeper deficit diets (e.g., aiming to lose 2 lbs/week instead of 1) had maintained their losses better than those who used less steep deficits to lose. It implied that losing weight faster worked better, in the long run. Which is counterintuitive but I can see reasons why it would be so. They also lost more weight and were under fairly drastic, supervised diets. I think if I had to lose a lot of weight that way it might keep me from regaining because it is probably pretty unpleasant.

But my point is just that there is evidence in favor of both methods-- losing 2 lbs/week as a goal or using a smaller number. You won't be deformed or have stretch marks under either plan.

thanks for the advice and warning i'm going to change my goal back to 1.5, maybe 1 lb, i don't want to end up deformed.

hopefully...it works out. this stuff is still very new to me. glad to have this site

You won't be deformed...you'll just have less muscle mass and a higher % of BF at a lower weight than you otherwise would. If you only ned to lose 20 Lbs, that would indicate to me that you are already at or very near a healthy BF%...with less BF to use as fuel, you're going to burn muscle mass with bigger deficits...and 1,000 calorie per day (7,000 per week) deficit from maintenance is pretty substantial.

I'm at a healthy BF% now, but at the high end for my stats...I've been maintaining that for the better part of 7 months but I'm cutting another 10 Lbs or so to try to get to around 15% BF....I'm presuming that it will take me the better part of 2014 to just lose those 10 Lbs because I will be maintaining a very small deficit and lifting, lifting, lifting and riding my bike some.

At any rate, make sure you're getting adequate protein and doing some resistance work.