Why is Slow Weight Loss Good?
shannie018
Posts: 57 Member
Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
0
Replies
-
Tbh I've lost weight loads times in chunks of 20-70lbs in 27 years
It's better to lose slow as you'll more likely to lose fat than muscle by this I mean v v v low calories = you'll body will eat it's muscle it's hard to stick at you get moody and tired
Fast weightloss everyone loves to have and see it's human nature but I know after many years yoyoing you've got to change your life style or you'll yoyo and that's demoralising
So use a good calorie calculator to work your calories out
Healthyeater.com calorie calculator is good
Have treats
Find an exercise you enjoy
Change your lifestyle
Good luck0 -
I think in general, weight loss that is slower tends to represent lifestyle changes and not crash dieting. Depending on how much you weigh, you could lose more than 2 pounds a week.0
-
Thank you. Right now, I'm just using the 1,200 calorie guideline and logging my food. I've been walking a bit to start to build my body back up. I've just seen it mentioned on here a lot about slow weight loss and wanted to learn about the importance and why it is better. I definitely don't want to lose muscle or damage my body anymore than I already have, so it's good to know that slower weight loss tends to be more from fat than muscle. Thanks again for the knowledge.
0 -
shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
A few reasons:- Less extreme loss rates, combined with proper nutrition and resistance exercise, are more apt to help you preserve existing muscle. When losing weight you'll lose a combination of both fat and lean mass. The goal should be to maximize fat loss and minimize lean loss.
- Lower loss rates are, in general, more sustainable as you are less likely to burn out and quit.
- Slower weight loss gives you time to learn and develop long term health and fitness habits (eating in moderation, being more active, etc.)
- Vanity--extreme deficits can cause hair loss, brittle nails, general exhaustion (and looking exhausted), etc.
FWIW, I don't think that 2 pounds per week is slow weight loss. I think that .25 pounds per week is slow weight loss. Half pound to a pound a week is fantastic fantabulous great as far as a loss rate goes IMO.0 -
shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
Quick weight loss is usually not maintainable and requires unhealthy eating habits in order to achieve.0 -
shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
A few reasons:- Less extreme loss rates, combined with proper nutrition and resistance exercise, are more apt to help you preserve existing muscle. When losing weight you'll lose a combination of both fat and lean mass. The goal should be to maximize fat loss and minimize lean loss.
- Lower loss rates are, in general, more sustainable as you are less likely to burn out and quit.
- Slower weight loss gives you time to learn and develop long term health and fitness habits (eating in moderation, being more active, etc.)
- Vanity--extreme deficits can cause hair loss, brittle nails, general exhaustion (and looking exhausted), etc.
FWIW, I don't think that 2 pounds per week is slow weight loss. I think that .25 pounds per week is slow weight loss. Half pound to a pound a week is fantastic fantabulous great as far as a loss rate goes IMO.
I would add loose/saggy skin under number 4. Of course, this depends on your individual genetic giftings as well as age, but a slower loss tends to allow time for your skin to catch up with your weight loss a little better than it would if you were to suddenly deflate.0 -
ManiacalLaugh wrote: »shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
A few reasons:- Less extreme loss rates, combined with proper nutrition and resistance exercise, are more apt to help you preserve existing muscle. When losing weight you'll lose a combination of both fat and lean mass. The goal should be to maximize fat loss and minimize lean loss.
- Lower loss rates are, in general, more sustainable as you are less likely to burn out and quit.
- Slower weight loss gives you time to learn and develop long term health and fitness habits (eating in moderation, being more active, etc.)
- Vanity--extreme deficits can cause hair loss, brittle nails, general exhaustion (and looking exhausted), etc.
FWIW, I don't think that 2 pounds per week is slow weight loss. I think that .25 pounds per week is slow weight loss. Half pound to a pound a week is fantastic fantabulous great as far as a loss rate goes IMO.
I would add loose/saggy skin under number 4. Of course, this depends on your individual genetic giftings as well as age, but a slower loss tends to allow time for your skin to catch up with your weight loss a little better than it would if you were to suddenly deflate.
Agreed!
(@ManiacalLaugh I am doing a happy dance that you said that slower loss allows skin to catch up with weight loss rather than claiming it prevents loose skin.)0 -
I would like for this to be required reading before anyone can get an MFP account!
0 -
Agree with all above. I'm less likely to "fall off the wagon" and when I do, it's easy to scramble back on quickly. When I restricted too much in the past I would procrastinate restarting because I'd made it such a miserable process.0
-
For one thing, you have to consider what is necessary mathematically to even achieve two pounds per week...that's 1,000 calories per day less than you would require to maintain your weight. Even that for many people doesn't provide for adequate nutrition to be healthy as the calories would be so low...not to mention, your body in general needs a certain amount of calories (energy) just for basic functions...one thing you see a lot of with people crashing their diets to unhealthy levels of nutrients and energy is hair loss, brittle nails, loss of menstrual cycle, etc, etc, etc. Essentially, when you crash your diet your body is going to shut down "non-essential" functions to become more efficient...thus requiring less energy to compensate for the fact that you aren't feeding it.
When you crash your diet, you really jack with your hormones...this can actually be an impediment to burning fat. For example, raised cortisol levels impede the burning of fat...when you crash your diet, you stress your body out and elevate your cortisol levels...you're actually acting in a way that is counterproductive to your goals.
When you substantially underfeed your body, you burn lean mass...you can only oxidize so much fat in a given period of time...after that, you're burning up muscle and other lean mass.
All that said, the heavier you are, the greater deficits you can sustain at least for awhile...but we're talking obese/morbidly obese before I would ever look at going beyond 2 Lbs per week.0 -
Slow is the only way for me. First, I get really hangry really easily. Second, the most I ever needed to lose was 30lbs. With my stats, a 1.5-2lb/week loss would mean eating 1200, and not eating exercise calories, which would make me very hangry and malnourished and giving up.
I probably would still be overweight trying over and over the "fast" way. Instead, I'm still 10lbs from goal (been at this 18 months, I take maintenance breaks, a lot), but 20lbs lighter than if I didn't find my happy plan.0 -
For this mom.... Skin
Second I can't sustain the level of calories that cause rapid loss
0 -
If you restrict your diet too much you are less likely to follow it for a long period of time. You will gain back the weight you lost. It will be much more difficult to maintain your weight loss.0
-
OK. Then I shouldn't hold myself to the show "Fit to Fat to Fit" and think that it would be realistic of me to lose 60 lbs in 4 months. I can cut myself some slack and change my settings to 1 pound a week.0
-
Lol, no, do not try to emulate that show. That was done for TV entertainment purposes. Your weight loss efforts are for your personal health goals. 0
-
^^This^^shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
A few reasons:- Less extreme loss rates, combined with proper nutrition and resistance exercise, are more apt to help you preserve existing muscle. When losing weight you'll lose a combination of both fat and lean mass. The goal should be to maximize fat loss and minimize lean loss.
- Lower loss rates are, in general, more sustainable as you are less likely to burn out and quit.
- Slower weight loss gives you time to learn and develop long term health and fitness habits (eating in moderation, being more active, etc.)
- Vanity--extreme deficits can cause hair loss, brittle nails, general exhaustion (and looking exhausted), etc.
FWIW, I don't think that 2 pounds per week is slow weight loss. I think that .25 pounds per week is slow weight loss. Half pound to a pound a week is fantastic fantabulous great as far as a loss rate goes IMO.0 -
shannie018 wrote: »OK. Then I shouldn't hold myself to the show "Fit to Fat to Fit" and think that it would be realistic of me to lose 60 lbs in 4 months. I can cut myself some slack and change my settings to 1 pound a week.
Yes, this! (And I'd encourage you to cut the loss rate even further as you get closer to your goal weight, but that's a consideration for the future.)
Those (bleep) shows do soooo much damage, giving people the idea that extremely rapid weight loss is normal and desirable. It isn't. It isn't healthy. It isn't sustainable.
I'd encourage you not to set an end date in advance at all. Just set a reasonable loss rate (as you're saying you'll do), be consistent and persistent, and use the time to gradually learn healthy ways of eating that are workable and satisfying for you so you can remain at a healthy weight permanently.
You can do this.0 -
I also blame The Biggest Loser for people's unrealistic ideas of what is a good weekly weight loss. A friend of mine lost some weight through a franchise clinic in Canada called Dr. Bernstein that encourages extreme, fast weight loss. She was in her 20s, in great health when she started. She finally quit because she was losing hair in chunks and experiencing a number of other health issues as a result of the diet.
It can be frustrating to wait for the results of a long-term weight loss plan. For me it helps so much to just think of it as a life change I'm committing to, and not obsess about the scale. You will gradually feel healthier and have more energy, and before you know it your gradual change will have turned into significant weight loss!0 -
shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
A few reasons:- Less extreme loss rates, combined with proper nutrition and resistance exercise, are more apt to help you preserve existing muscle. When losing weight you'll lose a combination of both fat and lean mass. The goal should be to maximize fat loss and minimize lean loss.
- Lower loss rates are, in general, more sustainable as you are less likely to burn out and quit.
- Slower weight loss gives you time to learn and develop long term health and fitness habits (eating in moderation, being more active, etc.)
- Vanity--extreme deficits can cause hair loss, brittle nails, general exhaustion (and looking exhausted), etc.
FWIW, I don't think that 2 pounds per week is slow weight loss. I think that .25 pounds per week is slow weight loss. Half pound to a pound a week is fantastic fantabulous great as far as a loss rate goes IMO.
^^That. If I did a crash diet I'd not only miss my old tasty foods, but I'd miss discovering new tasty foods as well. I've found foods that are more filling, I've played with my macros (and still am), and I added more vegetables that I never would have considered eating before. And I still get to have ice cream.
If I did a quick fix diet, I never would have done any of that. Also, my family would have killed me by now, for the hanger is strong in me.0 -
Your less likely to burn out and fail, going from 3000 to 1500 calories might be too much to handle.
Less likely to see it as a short diet, lose the 20lb and then go right back to eating the way you were before.
Less muscle lost, greater % of fat lost.
Do you think you can start a new lifestyle of healthy eating in 30 days or 12 weeks?0 -
shannie018 wrote: »My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
For me, 1 kg/week (approx. 2 lbs/week) was really fast ... that's the speed at which I lost my first 15 kg.
Then I deliberately slowed the loss to about 0.6 kg/week (1.3 lbs/week) to give myself more freedom in what I could eat and to let my body catch up to the weight loss.
One of the things that happened to me after I'd lost the 15 kg is that my skin went mushy and squishy and wrinkly ... I felt like I was wearing a marshmallow suit. "They" say that it can take anywhere from a few months to a couple years for the skin to tighten up (if it is going to tighten up), so I figured I would slow the loss to give my skin a chance to keep up with the loss. And, happily, it has tightened ... it's much better than it was.
I also wanted to do more exercise and needed to eat more to fuel that. That's a bit of a balancing act.
0 -
Aside from keeping LBM, going slower tends to mean more calories which helps you not to feel as deprived which leads to more successful weight loss.0
-
shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
A few reasons:- Less extreme loss rates, combined with proper nutrition and resistance exercise, are more apt to help you preserve existing muscle. When losing weight you'll lose a combination of both fat and lean mass. The goal should be to maximize fat loss and minimize lean loss.
- Lower loss rates are, in general, more sustainable as you are less likely to burn out and quit.
- Slower weight loss gives you time to learn and develop long term health and fitness habits (eating in moderation, being more active, etc.)
- Vanity--extreme deficits can cause hair loss, brittle nails, general exhaustion (and looking exhausted), etc.
FWIW, I don't think that 2 pounds per week is slow weight loss. I think that .25 pounds per week is slow weight loss. Half pound to a pound a week is fantastic fantabulous great as far as a loss rate goes IMO.
I love the third point! I personally used to be very unfit, I could barely walk a few miles to my university's campus without getting winded. Now I'm planning to run my first 5K this summer, I teach fitness classes at my university, and I'm joining my university's rugby team. If I didn't eat enough calories per week (ie, dropping low enough to lose 2+ lbs a week), I wouldn't be able to keep up with this activity. Losing slowly has allowed me to gain a love for physical activity without getting hangry.0 -
Just throwing this out there. ...
Re skin and losing slowly.
The skin is our largest organ, if we lose slowly and give this organ good nutrition, wouldn't it be reasonable to expect a better performance from it with regards to elasticity and shrinking back.
Age and genetics would obviously be important factors, but wouldn't skin perform better with good nutrition just like out other organs, muscles, brain, hair, and nails do?
It could be less having a slow loss so our skin can catch up, but more a slow loss could provide better nutrition to the skin so it can perform better.
Sorry, absolutely no research in this.
I just think that a logical progression of the 'fast loss is detrimental for a lot of bodily functions' could be applied to the skin.
Cheers, h.0 -
-
A scary but not surprising read @jgnatca.
I've only seen portions of a couple of episodes and they were awful.
Cheers, h.0 -
@middlehaitch when I first undertook this significant weight loss, a couple people brought up the "Biggest Loser", thinking I could relate to those experiences. I firmly believe to be successful at this sort of enterprise requires a great deal of kindness and patience, especially to ourselves. Who can endure months of misery, resolving only to be "happy" once an arbitrary goal is reached?
Bootcamp may be appropriate to convince a troop to respond to orders quickly and without question, but who wants to live in bootcamp forever, with a sergeant yelling in our face?0 -
Great thread and some excellent responses here. I never even thought of the effect of weight loss on my skin before.0
-
shannie018 wrote: »Honestly, I have always been very lucky and have never really had to watch my weight. But these last couple of years, I really let myself go, so I am a bit new to this.
My question is why is slow weight loss considered good? Why should I not try to lose more than 2lbs a week?
Even 2 pounds a week is too fast for some people. The reason is because your body can only burn off a certain amount of fat in a day. The less fat you are carrying, the less you can burn off each day. When you lose a too fast a rate the fat you can burn off will be burned off, but the rest of the calorie deficit needs to be made up. Since your body cannot use fat to make it up, it uses lean tissue (muscles, organs). You don't want that. At least I assume your really goal it not simply weight loss, but fat loss. So losing slower is better.
Generally if a person is not 80 pounds overweight or more, 2 pounds a week is too much. If they have 20 or less pounds to lose, more than half a pound per week would be too much.0 -
I'm slowing way down to the point that I'm barely keeping track because losing fast has hurt my relationship with myself and my mental health. It's not the same for everyone. I lost 100lbs in just over a year, and to date have gained about half back. Losing fast suggests changing all your negative habits at once which for some can be too much and like me, they reach a point where they just can't continue with that extreme plan.
You can try it, why not. But you'd just learn first hand what everyone here says about losing too quickly.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions