Losing weight too fast - advice please??

Options
willowglimmer
willowglimmer Posts: 71
in Health and Weight Loss
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
«1

Replies

  • Healthyby30
    Healthyby30 Posts: 1,349 Member
    Options
    It looks like you've lost 4 lbs? How long did it take the 4 lbs to come off?
  • willowglimmer
    willowglimmer Posts: 71
    Options
    No it's 7lbs was 216 on the 5th and 209 today losing 1-2 lbs daily
  • Healthyby30
    Healthyby30 Posts: 1,349 Member
    Options
    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.
  • briblue72
    briblue72 Posts: 672 Member
    Options
    Eat more?? Even a big bowl of cereal with milk would add about 300 calories to your daily total... healthy, not bulky, and tasty!
  • willowglimmer
    willowglimmer Posts: 71
    Options
    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?
  • Healthyby30
    Healthyby30 Posts: 1,349 Member
    Options
    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.
  • willowglimmer
    willowglimmer Posts: 71
    Options
    Have 200 cals if nuts a day already should I double that?
  • Healthyby30
    Healthyby30 Posts: 1,349 Member
    Options
    Well, would you be willing to make your food diary public so we can see it and maybe make suggestions?
  • willowglimmer
    willowglimmer Posts: 71
    Options
    Done :-)
  • Healthyby30
    Healthyby30 Posts: 1,349 Member
    Options
    I would say you could probably add another serving of nuts, and maybe add a piece of fruit to lunch?
  • willowglimmer
    willowglimmer Posts: 71
    Options
    Ok will do!! :-)
  • BrentGetsFit
    BrentGetsFit Posts: 878 Member
    Options
    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 :)
  • guardup
    guardup Posts: 230
    Options
    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!
  • willowglimmer
    willowglimmer Posts: 71
    Options
    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 again
  • kimwig
    kimwig Posts: 164
    Options
    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 again
    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.
  • heyjude78
    heyjude78 Posts: 160
    Options
    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:
  • pdm26
    pdm26 Posts: 3 Member
    Options
    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 :-)
  • kimwig
    kimwig Posts: 164
    Options
    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 :-)
    Thank you for your eloquent description of starvation mode.

    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.
  • guardup
    guardup Posts: 230
    Options
    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.
  • juliana1977
    juliana1977 Posts: 153 Member
    Options
    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.

Categories