When to switch from 2lb's/wk to 1lb/wk?

segacs wrote: »

If you hit your goal faster but achieve it through loss of muscle mass instead of fat, and then gain it all back because you've crash-dieted, then that's not what you want.

1000 calorie deficits are really only appropriate for people with a TDEE of 4000 and up (for whom it would represent <25% of TDEE). That's really only someone who is very big and very obese. That's not you.

With only 10-20 lbs to lose, you should aim for 0.5lbs/week. And start working on weight training now. Yesterday. Last month. No need to wait.

So now I'm confused. I'm set to lose 2lbs/wk. I'm still about 95lbs overweight, my tdee is around 2700. Should I be going at this less agressively?

c_ross624 wrote: »

segacs wrote: »

If you hit your goal faster but achieve it through loss of muscle mass instead of fat, and then gain it all back because you've crash-dieted, then that's not what you want.

1000 calorie deficits are really only appropriate for people with a TDEE of 4000 and up (for whom it would represent <25% of TDEE). That's really only someone who is very big and very obese. That's not you.

With only 10-20 lbs to lose, you should aim for 0.5lbs/week. And start working on weight training now. Yesterday. Last month. No need to wait.

So now I'm confused. I'm set to lose 2lbs/wk. I'm still about 95lbs overweight, my tdee is around 2700. Should I be going at this less agressively?

No, I have no idea where they got the 4000 number. With almost 100 lbs to lose, you can be at -2lbs a week until about 50lbs remaining then switch to 1.5. With 25-30lbs remaining switch to 1lb a week, and with 10lbs switch to .5lb. That's about the recommended amounts to maximize fat loss, and not lose muscle mass.

jeepinshawn wrote: »

brightsideofpink wrote: »

I'd say you're past time. 85 lbs in 165 days exceeds every rate of recommended loss that I'm familiar with. With less than 20 lbs to lose, and with a goal of maintaining muscle mass, I'd recommend 0.5 lb/week. To answer your other question, I switched to 1 lb/week when I got to a goal of under 40 lbs.

Thanks, I appreciate any input. I kind of want to just grind it out, if I stay the course at 1000cal deficit I may hit my goal faster. On the other hand despite strict logging and control I only lost .6lbs last week and it should have been at least 2lbs...So with some of my aches and pains and the lack of success I'm concerned maybe I should try 1lb a week. I just don't know it is all uncharted territory for me, I weighed 40 more pounds then this in high school...

If this was the only week you didn't hit a 2 pound loss, you are an anomaly Most people do not have linear weight loss.

Yes, you are past time to go down to a 1 pound per week goal and I'd actually recommend 0.5 lb/week as well.

They got the number from the fact that deficits of UP to 20% of TDEE is what is usually recommended for a sustainable, least lean mass lost weight loss. OK, let's up that to 25% to be aggressive. So, 1000 Cal => TDEE 4000.

There are several potential points of confusion here.

TDEE is TDEE. It includes exercise. Your % off comes off the combined NEAT plus Exercise amount of calories you burn.

The problem the OP has run into is that he is doing 1000Cal off of his Non Exercise activity calories (NEAT); PLUS adding his exercise calories to his deficit.

So his actual deficit is much much larger than 1000Cal a day. Which explains the rapid weight loss.

Not sure what the hurry was, or what the benefit was to achieve an almost normal weight without having internalized the life changes you will need to make to sustain it; but there you have it. You're almost there now!

Slow down and re-evaluate.

As for C_ROSS, your deficit is above 35%. What is your BMR? I would suggest you may want to NET at least your BMR calories every day. Having said that... I wouldn't be overly worried about it while still obese; but, would reconsider when overweight.

In general I advocate 10% (lower end of normal zone) to 25% deficits off TDEE (obese) as long as net remains above BMR.

Again these are cuts off TDEE. Not NEAT plus I won't eat my exercise calories back to make the deficit larger.

PAV8888 wrote: »

They got the number from the fact that deficits of UP to 20% of TDEE is what is usually recommended for a sustainable, least lean mass lost weight loss. OK, let's up that to 25% to be aggressive. So, 1000 Cal => TDEE 4000.

There are several potential points of confusion here.

TDEE is TDEE. It includes exercise. Your % off comes off the combined NEAT plus Exercise amount of calories you burn.

The problem the OP has run into is that he is doing 1000Cal off of his Non Exercise activity calories (NEAT); PLUS adding his exercise calories to his deficit.

So his actual deficit is much much larger than 1000Cal a day. Which explains the rapid weight loss.

Not sure what the hurry was, or what the benefit was to achieve an almost normal weight without having internalized the life changes you will need to make to sustain it; but there you have it. You're almost there now!

Slow down and re-evaluate.

As for C_ROSS, your deficit is above 35%. What is your BMR? I would suggest you may want to NET at least your BMR calories every day. Having said that... I wouldn't be overly worried about it while still obese; but, would reconsider when overweight.

In general I advocate 10% (lower end of normal zone) to 25% deficits off TDEE (obese) as long as net remains above BMR.

Again these are cuts off TDEE. Not NEAT plus I won't eat my exercise calories back to make the deficit larger.

My BMR is somewhere around 1900. So thats what you recommend I should be eating?

>>They got the number from the fact that deficits of UP to 20% of TDEE is what is usually recommended for a sustainable, least lean mass lost weight loss. OK, let's up that to 25% to be aggressive. So, 1000 Cal => TDEE 4000.<<

I've read tons of threads here and not seen this before. This actually means that hardly anyone should lose 2#/ wk, even those with 100# or more to lose ???

Interesting article (even discusses more aggressive goals than what I advocate): http://www.burnthefatinnercircle.com/members/What-is-the-ideal-calorie-deficit.cfm
and here:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/setting-the-deficit-small-moderate-or-large.html/

BMR is amount of calories your body and organs consume at rest. Unless you are maintaining your deficit for a very short period of time it strikes me as a great idea to make sure your body is receiving at least that amount of nourishment on a regular basis.

Deficits that provide less than BMR tend to be larger cuts off TDEE.

A few reasons as to why larger cuts off TDEE may not be a great idea can be seen here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3943438/

Yes, I am aware that most MFPers with 100+lbs to lose are not athletes and can actually tolerate slightly larger deficits. But the points made are good ones to keep in mind and a lot of MFPers have gone through multiple bouts of "dieting" in the past, including diets with large cuts that have resulted in loss of lean mass.

In brief: yes, OP, you've been too agressive.

Next person: if 1900 is your BMR it is a good idea to net at least that unless you're only going to be doing this for a week or two or three

And third person:-) 2lb a week deficits ARE too aggressive for most people.

(sorry hard to look back on the phone).

I have a great study for you based on n=1 From December 2 (224.7lbs) to May 7 (191.3lbs) I dialled in a 750 MFP deficit and ate back almost all of my Fitbit calories. For the 156 days my average deficit on paper was 24.76% of TDEE, or 799 Calories per day. Consecutive DXA scans imply the actual deficit was 715 Calories a day. Oh, shucks

By increasing the deficit to 1000 Cal a day I might have lost an extra 10lbs in that time frame. You know what? I will take 33lbs with less stress over 43lbs with more stress ANY time.