I'm mearly a beggar...
Replies
-
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »I appreciate the sentiment. But how do you know I won't lose 20 pounds in a month? Now that I'm doing it right. I was doing it wrong the first two times. But now I'm doing it the right way.
Also even if it's water weight that would just be clams. Why because at least my muscles will be more visible and defined. I'll look even leaner than before. Plus I'm superficial the numbers on the scale matter to me.
Just because of math. 3500 x 20 = 70,000 calories. You'd need to have more than a 2300 calorie defecit each day.
0 -
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »The people on the biggest loser lose weight rapidly because they're overweight. So I don't know why some people have a problem with me trying to lose 20 pounds in a month. It's not like I'm trying to lose 25-35. That's ridiculous. But maybe it's possible. Who knows? Everyone's body reacts differently.
Are you trying to lose FAT, or FAT FREE MASS?
I believe the theoretical limit of fat oxidation is calculated to be around 31Cal per lb of free fat per day http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15615615.
This is not the desirable rate, neither is it the least side effects rate, or the best for long term loss rate. It is the theoretical limit.
So, assuming you can reach the theoretical limit of fat loss and you have 75lbs of available fat in your 180lb body, for sure you can lose 20lbs of fat during the next 30 days.
Then there is advise that has been concocted by people who have spent some time thinking about this *kitten*.
Men: <15% and Women: <24% <0.5-1.5 lb per week, or; 0.25-0.75% of bodyweight per week.
Men: 16-25% and Women: 25-34% 1-2 lb per week, or; 0.75-1.5% of bodyweight per week.
Men: 26+% Women: 35+% 1.5-3.5 lb per week, or; 1.0-1.5% of bodyweight per week.
Some other *kitten* I've read further modifies that for me and makes me think that 0.7% to 1% makes more sense than 1.5%.
But hey: it is your body and as you keep saying you are superficial and you don't care if you lose muscle instead of fat and you're not trolling either! (all things that you have said about you, not me)
0 -
I'm not using an excuse. It's fact. Overweight people lose weight faster than someone who's a healthy weight it's true.
Just like men lose weight faster than women.
I'm not abusing my body. I was before. Yes. But I won't any longer. There is nothing wrong with 2 hours of cardio. So long as I don't have any underlying health issues that would affect the longevity of my work outs. But as I said earlier I have high Cholesterol. So all I see is a win win situation here. My blood pressure went down because of my work outs. Even though I don't have a blood pressure problem.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »I'm not using an excuse. It's fact. Overweight people lose weight faster than someone who's a healthy weight it's true.
Just like men lose weight faster than women.
I'm not abusing my body. I was before. Yes. But I won't any longer. There is nothing wrong with 2 hours of cardio. So long as I don't have any underlying health issues that would affect the longevity of my work outs. But as I said earlier I have high Cholesterol. So all I see is a win win situation here. My blood pressure went down because of my work outs. Even though I don't have a blood pressure problem.
Per the numbers above you'd need more like four hours a day of cardio everyday for a month. That sound sustainable to you? I do three hour sessions sometimes, and people do long runs and run half marathons, marathons and do iron men. You're not the only person to ever exercise. Just need to be very safe about it
0 -
Can I be honest. I'm trying to lose fat. But as long as the scale moves I'll be very happy. I'm going to actually read that link because that's pretty interesting. If I can even lose 3.5 a week. That would be choice!0
-
Hm I'll see. I'll keep it at two which is sustainable to me. Didn't claim I was the only one to ever exercise. Also I alternate between strength training and cardio. Cardio alone would kill my muscle.
So far I've been safe. Concerning exercise. Not my eating habits I will admit. Thanks for the concern.0 -
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »The people on the biggest loser lose weight rapidly because they're overweight. So I don't know why some people have a problem with me trying to lose 20 pounds in a month. It's not like I'm trying to lose 25-35. That's ridiculous. But maybe it's possible. Who knows? Everyone's body reacts differently.
Are you trying to lose FAT, or FAT FREE MASS?
I believe the theoretical limit of fat oxidation is calculated to be around 31Cal per lb of free fat per day http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15615615.
This is not the desirable rate, neither is it the least side effects rate, or the best for long term loss rate. It is the theoretical limit.
So, assuming you can reach the theoretical limit of fat loss and you have 75lbs of available fat in your 180lb body, for sure you can lose 20lbs of fat during the next 30 days.
Then there is advise that has been concocted by people who have spent some time thinking about this *kitten*.
Men: <15% and Women: <24% <0.5-1.5 lb per week, or; 0.25-0.75% of bodyweight per week.
Men: 16-25% and Women: 25-34% 1-2 lb per week, or; 0.75-1.5% of bodyweight per week.
Men: 26+% Women: 35+% 1.5-3.5 lb per week, or; 1.0-1.5% of bodyweight per week.
Some other *kitten* I've read further modifies that for me and makes me think that 0.7% to 1% makes more sense than 1.5%.
But hey: it is your body and as you keep saying you are superficial and you don't care if you lose muscle instead of fat and you're not trolling either! (all things that you have said about you, not me)
Yep - its the 31 cals per lb of fat - IIRC correctly Lyle McDonald came up with it based on the study, but every time I look for it I get distracted by something else before I find it.
Issue is, while the deficit may be ok at 75lb of fat mass - it works out to be approx. 2,300 - there are a bunch of issues with setting a deficit at this, including:
- its a hypothetical - why risk maxing it out
- as soon as you lose weight, you are over the max. After say 10lb fat loss, you have 65lbs - that works out to be approx. 2,000 - thats 300 calories of energy being fed by muscle (and I cannot recall the equivalent of the 3,500 per lb for muscle to convert it) - that's basically why there is a 'sliding scale'
- as its a hypothetical, it assumes you are not doing other things to cause muscle being used for energy outside 'normal' situations, such as extreme cardio (you need protein for repair and low calories have a significant risk of not getting enough), plus your body using your protein for energy in any event.
I am not saying that the 31 cals per lb is 'the' number - but why risk it. There are many studies that show that the size of the deficit (and someone's leanness) impacts LBM retention - which is basically saying the same thing - your body can only utilize a certain amount of fat a day
.0 -
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »I'm not using an excuse. It's fact. Overweight people lose weight faster than someone who's a healthy weight it's true.
Just like men lose weight faster than women.
I'm not abusing my body. I was before. Yes. But I won't any longer. There is nothing wrong with 2 hours of cardio. So long as I don't have any underlying health issues that would affect the longevity of my work outs. But as I said earlier I have high Cholesterol. So all I see is a win win situation here. My blood pressure went down because of my work outs. Even though I don't have a blood pressure problem.
If you're 180 at 5'5" and you've already been losing, you're not going to lose 20lbs of fat in the next month. It has nothing to do with "working hard". It's just not going to happen. You don't have THAT much to lose that you can be comparing yourself to morbidly obese people who start diets and lose 20-30lbs the first month.
You'll be successful when you stop trying to find the fastest way possible but instead learn the sustainable way. 12 pounds in two months is a great loss. Listen to Sara's advice and you will reach your goals. Also, I wouldn't ignore MrM because you could learn a lot from him.
0 -
OP, one of the reasons that people are concerned with rapid weight loss (rightly so), is that, among other things, you run a greater risk of LBM loss the greater the deficit it. When someone is very heavy, that risk is low and in any event, the health benefits often outweigh the downside. For people who do not have huge amounts to lose, as is your case, then the risk of being heavier than desires is just so much lower and the trade off is not worth it - losing muscle mass means that you are not losing all fat, you are less likely to be happy with your body composition when at goal and will actually have to eat less to maintain. The leaner you are the greater the risk of LBM loss in any event.
There are a lot of other reasons (adherence, nutrient sufficiency for hormone balance and health etc), but that is one of them.
This is why everyone keeps telling you 20lbs in a month is unrealistic and a bad idea.
0 -
Im surprised some people are supporting her in this idea of losing 20lb in a month (I was cautious about 10 a month). She is clearly confident she knows more about this than other people or anyone who might point things out to her for her own good. Im not sure how people got to 1800?
My very rough calculations would have her at 1970 calories for maintainence, which would be a c200 deficit assuming it was acccurate.
Calories required to forego or burn to lose 20lbs
= 20x3,500= 70,000
30x200= contribution from moderating eating = 6000
Assuming the numbers were accurate and her body played ball, that leaves 64,000 calories to burn.
That would be an accurate burn of calories at 2133 per day, no rest.
To burn 2133 would probably take 4-7hrs depending on how much rest you needed. I doubt there is anyone on MFP that could keep those sorts of burns up for 30 days straight. Its not going to be achieved with 2hrs cardio because the OP is not going to achieve a rate of 1066 cals per hour.
The numbers dont add up im afraid OP. Try anyway its your body and your life, but am afraid you just arent getting the fundamentals of how weight loss and more importantly safe sustainable weight loss works. Call us mean or negative, but we are trying to ppoint out safe practice and what will work or wont work. Your health is more important than if you can be slim when term ends.0 -
Im surprised some people are supporting her in this idea of losing 20lb in a month (I was cautious about 10 a month). She is clearly confident she knows more about this than other people or anyone who might point things out to her for her own good. Im not sure how people got to 1800?
My very rough calculations would have her at 1970 calories for maintainence, which would be a c200 deficit assuming it was acccurate.
Calories required to forego or burn to lose 20lbs
= 20x3,500= 70,000
30x200= contribution from moderating eating = 6000
Assuming the numbers were accurate and her body played ball, that leaves 64,000 calories to burn.
That would be an accurate burn of calories at 2133 per day, no rest.
To burn 2133 would probably take 4-7hrs depending on how much rest you needed. I doubt there is anyone on MFP that could keep those sorts of burns up for 30 days straight. Its not going to be achieved with 2hrs cardio because the OP is not going to achieve a rate of 1066 cals per hour.
The numbers dont add up im afraid OP. Try anyway its your body and your life, but am afraid you just arent getting the fundamentals of how weight loss and more importantly safe sustainable weight loss works. Call us mean or negative, but we are trying to ppoint out safe practice and what will work or wont work. Your health is more important than if you can be slim when term ends.
Who is supporting her in losing 20lb a month (other than the rude guy)?
I came up with the 1,800 as a suggestion. It's a reasonable caloric intake for someone of her size and the level of measuring accuracy imo.0 -
Yeah, I'm sorry, but that 20 lbs is not going to happen.
At your height at current weight, even though you are overweight, you don't have the fat stores to constitute that kind of weight loss.
The reality is that this isn't the Biggest Loser. The contestants on that show are 3-500 lbs. They're SEVERELY Obese. You are not. You are simply overweight. And that means you are going to lose way less.
Have you tried using this?
https://www.fitwatch.com/calculator/weight-loss-target-date
It can give you a *slightly* better idea of a timeline, though it's not spot on... because weight loss isn't linear. I put you info in there and even with a 1000 calorie deficit and being very active, it puts a 20 lbs loss to be the end of June at the earliest. So yea... totally not 1 month.0 -
Im surprised some people are supporting her in this idea of losing 20lb in a month (I was cautious about 10 a month). She is clearly confident she knows more about this than other people or anyone who might point things out to her for her own good. Im not sure how people got to 1800?
My very rough calculations would have her at 1970 calories for maintainence, which would be a c200 deficit assuming it was acccurate.
Calories required to forego or burn to lose 20lbs
= 20x3,500= 70,000
30x200= contribution from moderating eating = 6000
Assuming the numbers were accurate and her body played ball, that leaves 64,000 calories to burn.
That would be an accurate burn of calories at 2133 per day, no rest.
To burn 2133 would probably take 4-7hrs depending on how much rest you needed. I doubt there is anyone on MFP that could keep those sorts of burns up for 30 days straight. Its not going to be achieved with 2hrs cardio because the OP is not going to achieve a rate of 1066 cals per hour.
The numbers dont add up im afraid OP. Try anyway its your body and your life, but am afraid you just arent getting the fundamentals of how weight loss and more importantly safe sustainable weight loss works. Call us mean or negative, but we are trying to ppoint out safe practice and what will work or wont work. Your health is more important than if you can be slim when term ends.
I believe OP put her activity level as "very active" which gave her around 1,800.
But yeah, 20 pounds per month is not realistic. I'm currently 321lbs (down from 364), and I'm currently losing at a 10lb per month rate. I can't imagine someone half my size trying to double that rate, not while staying healthy.0 -
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »Lmao! This wasn't a troll post... It was a genuine question.
Some people here man.. Need to chill out. Seriously. I took people's advice. I changed my calorie intake and I'm going to take it easy on my cheat days. That's what I took from this post. Losing 20 pounds in a month is and isn't unhealthy. It's doable. Especially if you work hard. The problem was I was technically starving myself. I ate to little and exercised to much which is why I didn't lose any weight just inches. But now I'll eat more. Simple. Plus I'm already classified as obese. I'm already overweight. People my size can lose weight faster. That's why I'm aiming for 20 pounds. If I was 120 aiming for 100 Then.. Yeah. That would be unhealthy. Because according to the BMI (which is arguably inaccurate...maybe) that goal would lead me to become grossly underweight. I'm supposed to be either 150-130's. According to the BMI. I think some here have genuine concern for my health. Which I greatly appreciate. And some are are just angry they don't have the tenacity I have to work out hard and aspire to achieve high.
Stephanie,
No. People don't need to chill out. We are being truthful. I see a lot of genuine concern in this thread.
No, losing 20 pounds in a month is in no way healthy, and it's not doable. In fact, it sounds to me like you have some disordered thinking around weight loss.
No. Nobody is angry about your "tenacity I have to work out hard and aspire to achieve high".
0 -
I am not saying that the 31 cals per lb is 'the' number - but why risk it. There are many studies that show that the size of the deficit (and someone's leanness) impacts LBM retention - which is basically saying the same thing - your body can only utilize a certain amount of fat a day
I am certainly NOT advocating the 31Cals per lb number. I am advocating 0.7% to 1% of bodyweight per week MAX. (Just to be clear here since I brought up the 31Cals as a theoretical maximum the OP had no hope reaching)
Lyle's post is quoted in this thread: http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=11223 (I didn't feel like paying to read the original research paper, so I did go by his commentary)
0 -
I agree some people are showing genuine concern while others are projecting their own insecurities on me. Here's a picture in case anyone wants to know how I look like now.0
-
-
I am not saying that the 31 cals per lb is 'the' number - but why risk it. There are many studies that show that the size of the deficit (and someone's leanness) impacts LBM retention - which is basically saying the same thing - your body can only utilize a certain amount of fat a day
I am certainly NOT advocating the 31Cals per lb number. I am advocating 0.7% to 1% of bodyweight per week MAX. (Just to be clear here since I brought up the 31Cals as a theoretical maximum the OP had no hope reaching)
Lyle's post is quoted in this thread: http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=11223 (I didn't feel like paying to read the original research paper, so I did go by his commentary)
I was not saying you were advocating it. I was pointing it out in case some saw that number on jumped on it (as I have seen happen).
I was actually agreeing with you and adding some color.
Thank you for the link
ETA:
*sigh* I reread my comment...I seem to be having a habit of adding discussion to someone's post and it looking like I am disagreeing recently, when in fact I am agreeing. I need to keep an eye on that.0 -
0 -
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »Can I be honest. I'm trying to lose fat. But as long as the scale moves I'll be very happy. I'm going to actually read that link because that's pretty interesting. If I can even lose 3.5 a week. That would be choice!
No, no, no......0 -
Hey. Try CyberTone's post in this link, please. It may help
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10065561/on-my-phone-the-mfp-app-doesnt-show-my-whole-weight-i-lost
Awesome Thanks JaneiR36! Just fixed it
0 -
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »I agree some people are showing genuine concern while others are projecting their own insecurities on me. Here's a picture in case anyone wants to know how I look like now.
Again, no. Please stop, look, and listen. The people who are giving you advice that your goal is not healthy are spot on.
ETA: And, if that's you in the picture, you don't look like you weigh 180 pounds.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Again. I did listen. I did learn. Stop making assumptions. You don't know what my body is capable of.
If I try and fail then you'll know I can't do it. Fine.
But when I succeed you can't tell me anything after that.
I haven't even tried yet. lol.
I got great advice which I'm using. 0 -
Much safer and longer lasting results toostephaniechukwu31 wrote: »If I was at a healthy weight. Then my expectations and goals would be unreasonable. But again I'm overweight.
But regardless of overweight, there will be a number that is too much for you. Is it 5, 6, 7, 10, 12 lbs a week? Do you know what it is? Being overweight is no reason to completely abuse your body - it's the only one you've got. Regardless of past indiscretions, you still have to proceed carefully. Basically you want to avoid injuries, exhaustion and all the other stuff you've been told about on the thread. Those could have nasty, long term ramifications that would totally diminish any hasty and misguided short term goals
But I do agree eating 1800 cals is a step in the right direction
0 -
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »Again. I did listen. I did learn. Stop making assumptions. You don't know what my body is capable of.
If I try and fail then you'll know I can't do it. Fine.
But when I succeed you can't tell me anything after that.
I haven't even tried yet. lol.
I got great advice which I'm using.
Stephanie, based on your responses, I am making no assumptions.
The point is: you have no business trying to lose 20 pounds in a month. Nobody does, unless they are extremely overweight and losing quickly outweigh the risks of staying obese, and they are under a doctor's care.
What advice are you using?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
stephaniechukwu31 wrote: »Again. I did listen. I did learn. Stop making assumptions. You don't know what my body is capable of.
If I try and fail then you'll know I can't do it. Fine.
But when I succeed you can't tell me anything after that.
I haven't even tried yet. lol.
I got great advice which I'm using.
Why would you even want to set yourself up for failure?
And, if you really were listening, you'd listen to the dozen or so people who have all chimed in and said the EXACT SAME THING... which is that 20 lbs, at your height and weight, is just not healthy nor probable.0 -
Tried to look it up a while back; but, didn't come up with a clear answer. I believe that in the end I decided that the catabolization of muscle yielded about 1000 calories per lb for my purposes. But I don't have sources.[and I cannot recall the equivalent of the 3,500 per lb for muscle to convert it
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions