losing more than 2lbs/wk, any successful stories?
Replies
-
Oh i forgot to mention i was talking vitamins, supplements and protein powder during that time. So at least i didn't end up malnourished or put my body in any danger. I had a friend do the same thing as i did (100 lbs in 6 months) and he did not take vitamins or anything. He ended up with a blood clot, lost his hair and was very malnourished. So everyone take your vitamins and make sure you keep up with your nutrients!1
-
one of the reasons I am asking about losing weight fast is this thread :
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10379804/7-months-in-181-pounds-lost-and-61-pounds-lost/p1
this member lost 180 lbs in 7 months ? Thats about 6.5 lbs/wk !! That's the reason why I just felt that the 2lbs/wk is a myth or inaccurate. When I saw the thread ,I wanted to know if there are any other success stories similar to his. or Maybe he has great genetics !
( And all what I want is 3 lbs/wk not damn 6.5lbs/wk lol)
0 -
but that assumes that I do not do any form of exercise ? right ? what if I eat 2000 calories and burn 700 calories during exercising ?(walking for 4 hours can burn this amount of calories.)
First of all, 4 hours of walking is a LOT of walking. Even at a normal pace, you'd probably be burning closer to 2000 calories if you managed to walk for 4 hours straight. I base this on fitbit data in my own experience. Now, I'm sure you'll find plenty of people who will jump in to say those calorie amounts are overinflated and don't reflect reality, but I've been basing my own progress on Fitbit and MFP's numbers - and the data seems pretty sound *in general*.
If you stick to the CICO model, that 700 calories burned during walking would probably put you at a calorie deficit. The big problem with CICO is that your "earned through exercise" calories are treated as a solid number that gets added to whatever number is your "daily target".
So if MFP tells you that you can chomp down 1750 calories WITHOUT exercise the minute you wake up, and then you do 2 hours of walking like I do, suddenly you can now eat nearly 3,000 calories and still be in a deficit.
This is the part where the numbers don't always add up, and is why you get some people who say "this works perfectly" in one thread, followed by people who say "I never eat more than 25% into my exercise calories" in another thread.
You can't even say that the truth is "somewhere in between" because there's such a huge margin of error.
All that said, CICO is a great start, and if you treat it like a baseline, you'll likely succeed if you follow it with accurate diary entries. Just know that your mileage will vary (sometimes very wildly) based on your level of activity.
As a human being who loves taking in all sources of information, there's just too much information both for and against any particular kind of weight loss to be "believable as fact". That's why I will always say "just lose it any way you can and worry about maintaining it as a completely separate goal".
yeah I know it is a lot, but that's part of my job, so I have to do it.
Your posts are highly informative. Thank you0 -
By any means necessary. Lose it fast. Lose it slow. But just lose it.
When MFP complains that you're eating too few calories, ignore it. Whatever guidelines that say you can only lose X amount of pounds safely per week are likely BS. That said, whatever guidelines that say losing it quickly are probably equally BS (like this one: http://sciencenordic.com/researchers-rapid-weight-loss-best).
So just do it any way you like.
You will find no shortage of people on here that will tell you I'm WRONG WRONG WRONG, as that is the internet of things. But everyone's different, with different tolerances, cravings, physical anomalies and what not.
Exercise, calorie restrictions or both. With beer or without. With carbs or without. Just lose it. Fast or slow, doesn't matter. Worry about maintaining when you get there.
Cool study. Thats what happened to me, after 2 months , I got bored , lost only 4 pounds , and was unmotivated .
Do you know any experience of people losing 3lbs/wk and are still did not destroy their metabolism or their muscles?
I'm confused. If you were aiming at 2 lb/week, how come you only lost 4 lbs in 2 months -- did you lose more and regain?
The general rule of thumb is 1% of weight per week. When I started I had about 100 to lose (I've lost 95 and been maintaining for a while), and at first lost 2-3 per week. As I got lower that wasn't reasonable, however, and I think I lost more muscle mass than necessary (despite eating plenty of protein and doing strength training) because I kept with an aggressive deficit (more like 1.5+ lb per week) when near my healthy weight zone.
To aim for 3 lb/week you need a deficit of 1500 lb/week. At your age and size and with lots of low intensity exercise you might be able to do it, but that's not really the answer to "getting bored"--I think you need to figure that out.0 -
Losing weight fast =Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »There are real downsides to losing it fast. Other than impatience are there downsides to losing it slowly?
If there are, I haven't found *any*, aside from feeling hungry sometimes.
And you know what, it's perfectly ok to feel hungry sometimes.
But sorry - Science both agrees and disagrees with you completely, which makes it impossible for any reasonable person to believe either side as "correct".
As I stated before, muscle loss. There's also fatigue, hair loss, brittle nails, dry skin, hormone imbalances that can mess with women's menstrual cycles, organ malfunctions/shutdown...the list goes on. That is why MFP recommends 1200 calories for women and 1500 calories for men, as under these amounts it is difficult to get adequate nutrition to fuel the body.
Definitely NOT worth it. The only case where 3lbs per week is okay if the person has over 100lbs to lose.
Fast weight loss ALWAYS backfires. OP, if you're feeling 'tired' losing at a rate of 1-2lbs per week, you'll be even more tired losing more.
1 -
First you have to make sure you are figuring out how many calories you are consuming a day. Unless you weigh your food on a food scale and choose accurate entries you won't lose what you expect. That is why you didn't lose the 2 lbs. a week because you were not calculating your calories in accurately. I worked retail and stood and walked 8 hours a day...I didn't see any dramatic change in my weight. I was able to maintain but not lose weight until I started accurately counting my calories. Sure you can aim for 3 lbs (which I wouldn't recommend) but if you aren't sure how many calories you are eating you won't reach that goal and you'll be disappointed and give up once again. Everyone wants the quick fix but whenever I ate too little for extra weight loss I felt terrible. My workouts suffered, I was irritable, I got headaches....then I would overeat because my body started to rebel. If you had been happy with your 4 pounds in a month or 2, think about where you would be right now if you had stuck with it! Every little bit helps! I say really start accurately counting all your food calories and aim for 2 lbs. Also understand that weight fluctuates constantly, high sodium can mask a loss but it's still there. I have lost a pound just after using the restroom.0
-
snowflake930 wrote: »I lost 40 pounds in 8 weeks. 100 pounds by 6-1/2 months, 140 pounds by 1 year, and got to goal @ -160 pounds at 20 months. I have been maintaining around 130-133 for over 2-1/2 years now.
I have been on MFP for over 4 years now, and I have had quarterly check ups with my doctor during the first 2 years and yearly since then. I highly recommend consulting with a health care specialist who specializes in this field.
I think you may want to take a professionals advice before listening to all the nay sayers on a public forum. General guidelines are just that, general. Everyone is different.
Best of luck to you!
Wohooo . 40 lbs in 8 weeks ? that would be a dream lol. so you lost 140 lbs in 1 year? thats about 2.7lbs/wk on average. Did you lose your hair or got your metabolism destroyed?
No, I did not lose my hair, or anything else. The only thing I lost was excess weight. As I stated I was seeing my doctor every 3 months, and I totally recommend that everyone should have their health care professional involved in the process. I stuck with my plan, stayed in my calorie goal (1200), logged everything I ate and drank, and did not have any "cheat days".
The statistics say that no matter how the people lose weight, over 80% gain it back within 5 years, some gain even more than they lost. I do not buy into the "slow and steady" wins the race concept, because there are no guarantees that the weight stays off, no matter how you do it.
0 -
one of the reasons I am asking about losing weight fast is this thread :
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10379804/7-months-in-181-pounds-lost-and-61-pounds-lost/p1
this member lost 180 lbs in 7 months ? Thats about 6.5 lbs/wk !! That's the reason why I just felt that the 2lbs/wk is a myth or inaccurate. When I saw the thread ,I wanted to know if there are any other success stories similar to his. or Maybe he has great genetics !
( And all what I want is 3 lbs/wk not damn 6.5lbs/wk lol)
Just because someone has done it, doesn't make it right. That's downright dangerous. If that person jumped of a cliff, would you do that, too? By the way, that person may run into health problems later on.
No, the 2lbs per week is not a myth sorry. In the past, I've tried to lose weight fast as well.. And BAM, the weight came back on. Why? What I was doing was no-where near sustainable for life. All I got out of it was a bunch of health problems which I am still dealing with years after.0 -
No, bam the weight came back on for you because you, and 80% of the people that lose weight, go back to old habits of eating. Eating more calories than you are burning makes you gain weight, not how quickly you lost before.2
-
I have been doing this for a month and have lost 15 pounds, but I think alot of that was water weight. I have been really strict about weighing my food, and I don't take cheat days like a lot of people do. everyone is different I have talked to people on here that were just as strict and it took them a lot longer to lose. I think it just depends on your body.1
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »
If you are losing more than 1% of your body weight per week, you are most definitely losing muscle mass in the process, more so than if you were losing more slowly...that's a negative in my book.
Also, rapid weight loss would require substantial a substantial calorie deficit and VLCDs ...just go search the threads here of people losing their periods, losing hair, brittle nails, etc that come with VLCDs and malnutrition.
You sound like a pro-ana.
See, it's statements like "IF YOU ARE LOSING MORE THAN 1% OF YOUR BODY WEIGHT PER WEEK, YOU ARE MOST DEFINITELY LOSING MUSCLE MASS" (emphasis mine) that people are going to zero in on here. It's statements like these that people consider credible - even when there's no *infallible* science behind it.
Sorry, too many people have lost a ton of weight quickly (and with acceptable muscle mass losses) *and kept it off* to be statistically insignificant - much to the chagrin of many.
The truth is - no amount of thread-reading can ever definitively say with any degree of certainty whether it's better to lose weight quickly versus slowly. Try as you might to stand behind your statements, there are too many other equally credible statements that work against any "proof" you will find.
As for "pro-ana", I don't know if I deserve that label. I don't know enough about what "pro-ana" means - which is kind of funny when the wikipedia article itself states "Pro-ana organizations differ widely in their stances". So I guess that must mean we're all pro-ana, as long as we can all find a pro-ana organization we can identify with.
Disagree with me all you want, that's what the internet is for. But the answer to the OP's question? Yeah. There are METRIC F***TONS of success stories with losing weight quickly and keeping it off. But there are also plenty of failure stories too. The same can be said of *ANY* method of weight loss/lifestyle changes.
Ask any smoker who started smoking again. Relapses happen, and they aren't ANY less likely if you quit smoking cold turkey versus tapering off.
The only reason people have a harder time with food is the bare fact that we need it to *survive*, as opposed to most other forms of addiction where you don't.
I'm not talking about maintaining the weight after it's off...regardless if it's lost quickly or not, most people put the weight back on. There is plenty of information out there in regards to loss of muscle mass with steep deficits. From a nutrition and health standpoint, it is very difficult to get your requisite nutrition when you're eating under 800 calories per day or less...which is what would pretty much be required of a female trying to lose more than a couple pounds per week.0 -
snowflake930 wrote: »No, bam the weight came back on for you because you, and 80% of the people that lose weight, go back to old habits of eating. Eating more calories than you are burning makes you gain weight, not how quickly you lost before.
I know that, and I agree with you. I was eating too little calories when I was 'losing weight too fast' to the point where I burned out which caused me to eat more calories than my body needed...then I put weight back on. Too little calories/fast weight loss wasn't sustainable for me. However, now that I am eating at a small to moderate calorie deficit, I am not danger of burning out and binging like I was when I was restricting too much.What I was doing was no-where near sustainable for life. All I got out of it was a bunch of health problems which I am still dealing with years after.
0 -
Well....I started on here a couple years back. Lost a bunch of weight - injured myself and now I'm staring back at it solid again. I started really trying again and logging hard core April 1 and as of today - i'm down 19.8 lbs so over 2 lbs a week lost. I also have a goal of losing at minimum 100 lbs. I work out almost daily (alternating walking/running days with body weight and strength exercises). I am also doing my best to make sure my diet is helping my efforts as much as possible (for example - dinner today is taco salad - 3 cups salad mix, 1 bell pepper, 1/2 cup salsa, 6 tbsp 5% sour cream, 1 cup seasoned ground beef and 2 bread sticks)
As for getting bored with it - well hun...i hate to tell you...but if it's not obvious here it is. You didnt gain this weight overnight....so guess what...it's going to take some time to peel it off slowly.
You have to want it my friend - otherwise you will throw the towel in before really giving yourself a chance to see that yes you can efffin do this.
Invest in you luv. Get yourself some measuring cups and a oz/grams scale and start learning how to calorie count and use something like map my fitness to log your workouts. It wont take that long to feel effin amazing & you'll want to keep going and get r done!
3 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »By any means necessary. Lose it fast. Lose it slow. But just lose it.
When MFP complains that you're eating too few calories, ignore it. Whatever guidelines that say you can only lose X amount of pounds safely per week are likely BS. That said, whatever guidelines that say losing it quickly are probably equally BS (like this one: http://sciencenordic.com/researchers-rapid-weight-loss-best).
So just do it any way you like.
You will find no shortage of people on here that will tell you I'm WRONG WRONG WRONG, as that is the internet of things. But everyone's different, with different tolerances, cravings, physical anomalies and what not.
Exercise, calorie restrictions or both. With beer or without. With carbs or without. Just lose it. Fast or slow, doesn't matter. Worry about maintaining when you get there.
Cool study. Thats what happened to me, after 2 months , I got bored , lost only 4 pounds , and was unmotivated .
Do you know any experience of people losing 3lbs/wk and are still did not destroy their metabolism or their muscles?
I'm confused. If you were aiming at 2 lb/week, how come you only lost 4 lbs in 2 months -- did you lose more and regain?
The general rule of thumb is 1% of weight per week. When I started I had about 100 to lose (I've lost 95 and been maintaining for a while), and at first lost 2-3 per week. As I got lower that wasn't reasonable, however, and I think I lost more muscle mass than necessary (despite eating plenty of protein and doing strength training) because I kept with an aggressive deficit (more like 1.5+ lb per week) when near my healthy weight zone.
To aim for 3 lb/week you need a deficit of 1500 lb/week. At your age and size and with lots of low intensity exercise you might be able to do it, but that's not really the answer to "getting bored"--I think you need to figure that out.
MFP gave me to eat 1500 calories. I did. But I did not lose 2lbs/wk. Instead, I was losing 0.5lbs/wk.
Maybe because I did not exercise !
0 -
cerise_noir wrote: »one of the reasons I am asking about losing weight fast is this thread :
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10379804/7-months-in-181-pounds-lost-and-61-pounds-lost/p1
this member lost 180 lbs in 7 months ? Thats about 6.5 lbs/wk !! That's the reason why I just felt that the 2lbs/wk is a myth or inaccurate. When I saw the thread ,I wanted to know if there are any other success stories similar to his. or Maybe he has great genetics !
( And all what I want is 3 lbs/wk not damn 6.5lbs/wk lol)
Just because someone has done it, doesn't make it right. That's downright dangerous. If that person jumped of a cliff, would you do that, too? By the way, that person may run into health problems later on.
No, the 2lbs per week is not a myth sorry. In the past, I've tried to lose weight fast as well.. And BAM, the weight came back on. Why? What I was doing was no-where near sustainable for life. All I got out of it was a bunch of health problems which I am still dealing with years after.
You are right, thank you !0 -
Ok , looks I am not gonna take risk and go super fast. I will follow the 2 lbs/wk rule.
Now my question. If MFP tells me to eat 1500 calories in order to lose 2lbs/wk, but I walk 4hrs/day (part of my job) , shall I add the calories I burn during walking to the 1500 calories ?
For example, if walking for 4 hours burns 1000 calories, shall I now eat 2500 calories ? or 1500 ?
Thank you again guys for your help.0 -
Ok , looks I am not gonna take risk and go super fast. I will follow the 2 lbs/wk rule.
Now my question. If MFP tells me to eat 1500 calories in order to lose 2lbs/wk, but I walk 4hrs/day (part of my job) , shall I add the calories I burn during walking to the 1500 calories ?
For example, if walking for 4 hours burns 1000 calories, shall I now eat 2500 calories ? or 1500 ?
Thank you again guys for your help.
If you're absolutely sure you burned 1000 calories, then yes. Most will only eat back 50-75% of the exercise calories. I just now saw this is for your job. You should not be logging this then, as it is included in your activity level, or you can purchase an activity tracker that will keep track of all the calories you burn throughout the day.
As for losing less than you were set to before, how were you measuring your calorie intake? You have to make sure you log everything as accurately as possible. This includes logging 100% of what goes into your mouth, weighing foods with a food scale and using measuring cups/spoons for liquids, double-checking that the foods you log have accurate calorie and macro counts, and avoiding homemade/generic entries and instead utilizing the recipe builder.0 -
Ok , looks I am not gonna take risk and go super fast. I will follow the 2 lbs/wk rule.
Now my question. If MFP tells me to eat 1500 calories in order to lose 2lbs/wk, but I walk 4hrs/day (part of my job) , shall I add the calories I burn during walking to the 1500 calories ?
For example, if walking for 4 hours burns 1000 calories, shall I now eat 2500 calories ? or 1500 ?
Thank you again guys for your help.
You should take that walking into account when you select your activity level since it's part of your job. I would say start with lightly active and go from there. If you do any exercise outside of that, log it and eat say 50% of the calories back (adjusting up or down based on actual weight loss over a 4-6 week period).
However, make sure your picking accurate entries from the database (there is some stuff in there that is listed as only 1/3 the calories it should be) and weigh all solid foods with a food scale (better accuracy then measuring cups).
1 -
Cool study. Thats what happened to me, after 2 months , I got bored , lost only 4 pounds , and was unmotivated .
Wait a minute, so you were supposed to be at a deficit where you were supposed to lose 2 lbs a week, yet you only lost 1/2 pound a week? So you weren't sticking to the 2 lbs/week plan, what makes you think you can do 3 lbs a week, then?0 -
Ok , looks I am not gonna take risk and go super fast. I will follow the 2 lbs/wk rule.
Now my question. If MFP tells me to eat 1500 calories in order to lose 2lbs/wk, but I walk 4hrs/day (part of my job) , shall I add the calories I burn during walking to the 1500 calories ?
For example, if walking for 4 hours burns 1000 calories, shall I now eat 2500 calories ? or 1500 ?
Thank you again guys for your help.
If you're absolutely sure you burned 1000 calories, then yes. Most will only eat back 50-75% of the exercise calories. I just now saw this is for your job. You should not be logging this then, as it is included in your activity level, or you can purchase an activity tracker that will keep track of all the calories you burn throughout the day.
As for losing less than you were set to before, how were you measuring your calorie intake? You have to make sure you log everything as accurately as possible. This includes logging 100% of what goes into your mouth, weighing foods with a food scale and using measuring cups/spoons for liquids, double-checking that the foods you log have accurate calorie and macro counts, and avoiding homemade/generic entries and instead utilizing the recipe builder.
mmm whats the difference between calories burned during my job and and calories burned when I intend to exercise ? Keeping in mind that I chose " sedentary" as my activity level.0 -
shadow2soul wrote: »Ok , looks I am not gonna take risk and go super fast. I will follow the 2 lbs/wk rule.
Now my question. If MFP tells me to eat 1500 calories in order to lose 2lbs/wk, but I walk 4hrs/day (part of my job) , shall I add the calories I burn during walking to the 1500 calories ?
For example, if walking for 4 hours burns 1000 calories, shall I now eat 2500 calories ? or 1500 ?
Thank you again guys for your help.
You should take that walking into account when you select your activity level since it's part of your job. I would say start with lightly active and go from there. If you do any exercise outside of that, log it and eat say 50% of the calories back (adjusting up or down based on actual weight loss over a 4-6 week period).
However, make sure your picking accurate entries from the database (there is some stuff in there that is listed as only 1/3 the calories it should be) and weigh all solid foods with a food scale (better accuracy then measuring cups).shadow2soul wrote: »Ok , looks I am not gonna take risk and go super fast. I will follow the 2 lbs/wk rule.
Now my question. If MFP tells me to eat 1500 calories in order to lose 2lbs/wk, but I walk 4hrs/day (part of my job) , shall I add the calories I burn during walking to the 1500 calories ?
For example, if walking for 4 hours burns 1000 calories, shall I now eat 2500 calories ? or 1500 ?
Thank you again guys for your help.
You should take that walking into account when you select your activity level since it's part of your job. I would say start with lightly active and go from there. If you do any exercise outside of that, log it and eat say 50% of the calories back (adjusting up or down based on actual weight loss over a 4-6 week period).
However, make sure your picking accurate entries from the database (there is some stuff in there that is listed as only 1/3 the calories it should be) and weigh all solid foods with a food scale (better accuracy then measuring cups).
so net calories = calories that MFP says I need + 50 % of what I burn during exercising ?
Thanks !0 -
By any means necessary. Lose it fast. Lose it slow. But just lose it.
When MFP complains that you're eating too few calories, ignore it. Whatever guidelines that say you can only lose X amount of pounds safely per week are likely BS. That said, whatever guidelines that say losing it quickly are probably equally BS (like this one: http://sciencenordic.com/researchers-rapid-weight-loss-best).
So just do it any way you like.
You will find no shortage of people on here that will tell you I'm WRONG WRONG WRONG, as that is the internet of things. But everyone's different, with different tolerances, cravings, physical anomalies and what not.
Exercise, calorie restrictions or both. With beer or without. With carbs or without. Just lose it. Fast or slow, doesn't matter. Worry about maintaining when you get there.
@karl317 How many calories are you eating per day? How much are you losing per week?0 -
Cool study. Thats what happened to me, after 2 months , I got bored , lost only 4 pounds , and was unmotivated .
Wait a minute, so you were supposed to be at a deficit where you were supposed to lose 2 lbs a week, yet you only lost 1/2 pound a week? So you weren't sticking to the 2 lbs/week plan, what makes you think you can do 3 lbs a week, then?
I did stick. I was thinking that now because I will walk 4hrs/day, then I can create greater calories deficit.0 -
Cool study. Thats what happened to me, after 2 months , I got bored , lost only 4 pounds , and was unmotivated .
Wait a minute, so you were supposed to be at a deficit where you were supposed to lose 2 lbs a week, yet you only lost 1/2 pound a week? So you weren't sticking to the 2 lbs/week plan, what makes you think you can do 3 lbs a week, then?
I did stick. I was thinking that now because I will walk 4hrs/day, then I can create greater calories deficit.
You have answered the question of "were you using a food scale to weigh ALL of your food"?? Were you logging everything you ate and drank accurately and honestly?0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »Cool study. Thats what happened to me, after 2 months , I got bored , lost only 4 pounds , and was unmotivated .
Wait a minute, so you were supposed to be at a deficit where you were supposed to lose 2 lbs a week, yet you only lost 1/2 pound a week? So you weren't sticking to the 2 lbs/week plan, what makes you think you can do 3 lbs a week, then?
I did stick. I was thinking that now because I will walk 4hrs/day, then I can create greater calories deficit.
You have answered the question of "were you using a food scale to weigh ALL of your food"?? Were you logging everything you ate and drank accurately and honestly?
Yes I did. I even used a separate small note book to keep records of what I eat and add some notes and reminders ( I found it more enjoyable than using the app) I intended not eat anything during that period apart from boiled eggs,McDonald burgers, toasted cheese/turkey sandwiches. I chose these because it was easy to calculate calories contained in them.I took 3 nonconsecutive cheat days during the 2 months (2500 calories instead of 1500)0 -
Ok , looks I am not gonna take risk and go super fast. I will follow the 2 lbs/wk rule.
Now my question. If MFP tells me to eat 1500 calories in order to lose 2lbs/wk, but I walk 4hrs/day (part of my job) , shall I add the calories I burn during walking to the 1500 calories ?
For example, if walking for 4 hours burns 1000 calories, shall I now eat 2500 calories ? or 1500 ?
Thank you again guys for your help.
If you're absolutely sure you burned 1000 calories, then yes. Most will only eat back 50-75% of the exercise calories. I just now saw this is for your job. You should not be logging this then, as it is included in your activity level, or you can purchase an activity tracker that will keep track of all the calories you burn throughout the day.
As for losing less than you were set to before, how were you measuring your calorie intake? You have to make sure you log everything as accurately as possible. This includes logging 100% of what goes into your mouth, weighing foods with a food scale and using measuring cups/spoons for liquids, double-checking that the foods you log have accurate calorie and macro counts, and avoiding homemade/generic entries and instead utilizing the recipe builder.
mmm whats the difference between calories burned during my job and and calories burned when I intend to exercise ? Keeping in mind that I chose " sedentary" as my activity level.
Your activity level includes all the calories you burn throughout the day outside of exercise: work, running errands, socializing, watching television, cooking, etc. I get 10-12,000 steps during my job most days, but it's only counted through my Fitbit. If I didn't have the Fitbit, I would set my activity level to Active and not log it, because that's a normal part of my day. But if I took a 2-3 mile walk after work, that I would log.1 -
Why the rush? Doesn't sound smart or healthy to me. One day at a time and one meal at a time. Good luck!1
-
In order to achieve the big deficits you chose a super restrictive no sustainable method of eating to lose weight and got bored and stopped.
And if you had succeeded and gotten to your end weight... what then? How would you have maintained your weight?
Are you ALWAYS going to ONLY eat boiled eggs, burgers and toasted cheese and turkey sandwiches?
Fruits? Vegetables? Legumes? Chocolate? Desserts? Dairy?
Anyway: you will be walking 4 hours a day.
Assuming you don't increase your food, and assuming you're currently not gaining, you are quite likely to lose a good 2lbs a week on the strength of your four extra hours of walking a day.
At least initially.
So don't change a thing about what you eat... just go to work0 -
I've lost about 110lbs, but its been a long, slow process, over about 4 years. The benefit of losing it over that long of a time frame has been that it has truly become a lifestyle change, and I have learned a lot about what I should and shouldn't eat, but still allowing myself to splurge. If you try to lose weight extremely fast, you will put it back on in most cases, you wont learn how to maintain a balanced diet, you will lose muscle, your skin will sag, and you will lose more muscle than most people would like.1
I wish I am stuck at what I reached last time I tried.
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
- 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
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions