Is losing weight slowly really worth it
Replies
-
I'm a slow loser and I was able to take the weight off and keep it off. I'm over 5 years at maintenance with no sign of stopping. What's the rush? You have the rest of your life to spend getting and staying healthy!
It seems to me that dropping weight quickly usually takes drastic measures, and I'm not sure how someone maintains that loss if they haven't learned or practiced maintenance behaviors along the way. I'm sure some fast losers figure it out, but that's not the norm from what I've seen.
At a slower rate, you would naturally be learning those behaviors. Once at goal, you just keep doing what you've been doing, with minor adjustment. With extreme weight loss measures, you really can't keep doing the same thing forever. So it must be much, much harder to transition to long-term maintenance for them.3 -
I remember a study (can't recall where I read it) where deficits were compared, and smaller deficits gave you more bang for your dieting buck, in the sense that despite losing overall more weight when the deficit was larger, it produced less loss per calorie restricted, if that makes sense.3
-
I don't deal with hunger very well. Even at a rate of 1 lb / week (270 lbs starting) I had to fight hunger/feelings of deprivation (500 cal/day deficit). I am now 166 and STILL fighting hunger (0.5 lbs/week). There is absolutely no way I could've succeeded with an additional deficit over this.
For me, slow was the ONLY way to go.7 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Slower is good for compliance, lean mass preservation and overall health generally speaking.
Please can you provide any evidence for the above. I would say the opposite;
-Many people find it easier to comply to a 4-6 week diet than a 4-6 month diet
- Lean mass can be preserved during a faster more agressive cut
- Many people would be healthier if they were carrying 10-20lbs less fat
4 -
Is making money slowly a good or a bad thing should you stop making money0
-
trigden1991 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Slower is good for compliance, lean mass preservation and overall health generally speaking.
Please can you provide any evidence for the above. I would say the opposite;
-Many people find it easier to comply to a 4-6 week diet than a 4-6 month diet
- Lean mass can be preserved during a faster more agressive cut
- Many people would be healthier if they were carrying 10-20lbs less fat
Pretty much this. If one is losing that much LBM, they need to take a hard look at their protein intake and sources. I'm also still pretty convinced that all of this "zomg I lost muscle" stuff comes from people believing that they are less fat than they really are.
Welcome to the internet, where every man is either 30% bodyfat or 15% or less.2 -
I've been losing at a pound a week for about 16 weeks. This is the only time I've ever lost consistently for more than 8 weeks. So many times I've gone extreme and then rebounded, regained all lost plus more. I feel so good now. I am living my life, but the weight is continuing to go. My rate of loss is slowing... I only have about 6 more to lose... but I'm not feeling impatient. It actually took very little time to get here, in the grand scheme. If I had gone even more slowly, I'd still be well on my way, but I've found a way to exercise every day which makes the 1 lb per week average more doable.
I find myself actually thinking I'm glad that maintenance will require this same kind of attention, because I feel so much better than when I ate chaotically and exercised in spurts. I look forward to keeping up some version of this lifestyle indefinitely. I've never, ever thought that about a "diet"!3 -
Absolutely, every year I weigh less than the last, taken forever but I continue to go in right direction, with setbacks along the way. I feel stronger, I look better, Giving up is not an option.5
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Slower is good for compliance, lean mass preservation and overall health generally speaking.
Please can you provide any evidence for the above. I would say the opposite;
-Many people find it easier to comply to a 4-6 week diet than a 4-6 month diet
- Lean mass can be preserved during a faster more agressive cut
- Many people would be healthier if they were carrying 10-20lbs less fat
Pretty much this. If one is losing that much LBM, they need to take a hard look at their protein intake and sources. I'm also still pretty convinced that all of this "zomg I lost muscle" stuff comes from people believing that they are less fat than they really are.
Welcome to the internet, where every man is either 30% bodyfat or 15% or less.
Exactly. From reading Lyle's research, unless you are clueless with nurtition, it is surprisingly hard to lose muscle. Everyone is just fatter than they originally think.4 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Slower is good for compliance, lean mass preservation and overall health generally speaking.
Please can you provide any evidence for the above. I would say the opposite;
-Many people find it easier to comply to a 4-6 week diet than a 4-6 month diet
- Lean mass can be preserved during a faster more agressive cut
- Many people would be healthier if they were carrying 10-20lbs less fat
Pretty much this. If one is losing that much LBM, they need to take a hard look at their protein intake and sources. I'm also still pretty convinced that all of this "zomg I lost muscle" stuff comes from people believing that they are less fat than they really are.
Welcome to the internet, where every man is either 30% bodyfat or 15% or less.
Exactly. From reading Lyle's research, unless you are clueless with nurtition, it is surprisingly hard to lose muscle. Everyone is just fatter than they originally think.
Yeap. I'm also pretty sure that most of the misconception comes from antiquited studies of VLCDs where almost all of the calories came from carbohydrates. This is, of course, an incredibly stupid way to try and do it.1 -
I see it as a change of lifestyle, rather than a diet ... have lost 20K in the first year, and been in maintenance mode for a year now. I only weigh once every quarter, and my weight remains extremely steady1
-
I guess when I think of compliance I'm thinking of the numerous daily threads and experience of seeing friends restrict too hard in order to lose quickly. They then can't keep it up and as above, rebound and then some as they compensate for over-restriction. And whilst you can reasonably safely restrict hard for 4-6 weeks, most people have a lot more weight to lose than going balls to wall for that short a time will achieve.
Those here who appear to be most successful are those who have a sensible deficit (and this of course varies depending on TDEE) and just get on with living and changing habits over the long term.
Of course this is anecdotal and I don't profess to know if this is total fact. Just my own personal and personally observed opinion.
As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.3 -
shredcamps wrote: »Is making money slowly a good or a bad thing should you stop making money
AS long as your rate of spending is not faster than your rate of earning ; it does not matter how fast you earn the money. Earning it faster is not a guarantee that you will be any happier and in fact those who earn it more slowly often are happier in general.5 -
I've always heard slow and steady wins the race. As of today I have lost 20 pounds over three months, but I don't feel like I am dieting. I cut out fast food and heavy lunches and just started to watch my calories. What I am doing feels real and sustainable.4
-
If you want the weight to stay off, then you need healthy habits. I've kept the weight off now for about 3 years, based on 3 simple habit changes: daily exercise, portion control at lunch and only occasional, limited snacking after dinner (maybe I've slipped a little on that last one). That's hardly a "lifestyle change" is it? It's both easy and pleasurable.
The problem with losing weight fast is that you are not developing the healthy habits that will keep you there once you stop dieting. This is not excuse-making, it's future-building. This is for the rest of your life, so why rush?3 -
I believe to win you have to play the long game. Think about you a year from now. Would you choose being 52 pounds lighter at 1lb/week or the same weight you are right now? The year will come and go. Where would you like to be?3
-
I started out losing faster, around 1.5 to 2 lbs. per week. It was too hard for me to keep up the deficit needed to keep losing that fast and I quit tracking for about 3 months and gained some weight back. I realized I just needed a smaller deficit so I started tracking again. Now I'm losing on average just under a pound each week. I honestly don't feel like I'm even restricting my calories. It's taken me 18 months (including that break where I gained) to lose almost 40 lbs. Now that I only have about 20 lbs. until I'm in the normal BMI range I'll probably bring my calories up some and lose the rest even slower and I'm completely fine with that. I'm learning how to eat so that maybe, one day, I won't have to track everything.3
-
I've got my "pound a week" goal programmed into MFP, but my *real* calorie goal is always "what is maintenance for an ultimate target weight?" Because if I can get used to eating at what would eventually be maintenance, then I can have a better chance of maintaining. It might make things slower in the long run, but i figure that slowly trending down is a lot better than the slow trend up that got me here.5
-
VintageFeline wrote: »As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.
I believe that the fat metabolism limit is a myth and more governed by how much of a deficit a person can create.
Muscle sparing diets aren't a specific thing. Anyone trying to lose weight should be looking to retain muscle mass. Eating adequate protein and undertaking resistance training to stimulate the muscle is key.2 -
VintageFeline wrote: »I guess when I think of compliance I'm thinking of the numerous daily threads and experience of seeing friends restrict too hard in order to lose quickly. They then can't keep it up and as above, rebound and then some as they compensate for over-restriction. And whilst you can reasonably safely restrict hard for 4-6 weeks, most people have a lot more weight to lose than going balls to wall for that short a time will achieve.
Those here who appear to be most successful are those who have a sensible deficit (and this of course varies depending on TDEE) and just get on with living and changing habits over the long term.
Of course this is anecdotal and I don't profess to know if this is total fact. Just my own personal and personally observed opinion.
As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.
They do require resistance training, yes, and a VERY specific macro breakdown (about 90% protein, and just enough fats to get in the essentials). There are actually different protocols for people are different bodyfat levels (1 for sub-15, 2 for 16-30, 3 for 31 and above). Each is structured a bit differently to keep hormones from tanking and provide the LBM sparing effect. Trust me, if they work to peel bodybuilders from 10% to 8% in two weeks, they work just fine for taking...ehhh...the average American back to human shaped just fine. There's also built in cheat meals for the uber-fatties so they don't lose their minds entirely in the process.
Is it hard? For most, though I'm actually finding my C2 run hilariously easy. Does it get results for those who can hack it, and the properly follow the procedures for going back to maintenance and taking short term diet breaks? Most definitely.
It's a matter of preference though. I prefer extreme short term pain, to long drawn out annoyance. The faster my fat is gone, the faster I can get back to real lifting, instead of this three day per week *kitten*.0 -
Rate of loss is only one factor in losing weight so I don't think it makes sense to look at it from a "which way is better" perspective. A bigger person can healthily sustain a larger deficit than can a smaller person. Males can healthily sustain larger deficits than females. People who prioritize athletic performance may choose a smaller deficit than people who prioritize low scale weight. There is no one correct answer to this question.3
-
I think it depends on your situation I'm sticking to a 2000 calorie a day roughly. Which my nutritionist said it's what I should aim for and I have lost 55 pounds in 60 days but that's because I started at 370 pounds so I had a lot to lose but if you're starting at a more reasonable weight then you should have a lower amount to lose4
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I guess when I think of compliance I'm thinking of the numerous daily threads and experience of seeing friends restrict too hard in order to lose quickly. They then can't keep it up and as above, rebound and then some as they compensate for over-restriction. And whilst you can reasonably safely restrict hard for 4-6 weeks, most people have a lot more weight to lose than going balls to wall for that short a time will achieve.
Those here who appear to be most successful are those who have a sensible deficit (and this of course varies depending on TDEE) and just get on with living and changing habits over the long term.
Of course this is anecdotal and I don't profess to know if this is total fact. Just my own personal and personally observed opinion.
As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.
They do require resistance training, yes, and a VERY specific macro breakdown (about 90% protein, and just enough fats to get in the essentials). There are actually different protocols for people are different bodyfat levels (1 for sub-15, 2 for 16-30, 3 for 31 and above). Each is structured a bit differently to keep hormones from tanking and provide the LBM sparing effect. Trust me, if they work to peel bodybuilders from 10% to 8% in two weeks, they work just fine for taking...ehhh...the average American back to human shaped just fine. There's also built in cheat meals for the uber-fatties so they don't lose their minds entirely in the process.
Is it hard? For most, though I'm actually finding my C2 run hilariously easy. Does it get results for those who can hack it, and the properly follow the procedures for going back to maintenance and taking short term diet breaks? Most definitely.
It's a matter of preference though. I prefer extreme short term pain, to long drawn out annoyance. The faster my fat is gone, the faster I can get back to real lifting, instead of this three day per week *kitten*.
90% protein? What do you do for the other 10%? No carb only 10% fat?0 -
The success rate is absolutely dismal for long term maintenance adherence, and it doesn't seem to matter how people went about losing the weight before they transitioned-fast/slow/backwards/forward/standing on their head etc etc
Personally-I lost around 50lbs in a 6 month window, which breaks down to around 2lbs a week. That's faster than some would advocate but I had no issues with my weight loss phase, drastically improved all my health markers and I've been maintaining the loss for a few years now with a bmi in the 21-22 range. 1 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I guess when I think of compliance I'm thinking of the numerous daily threads and experience of seeing friends restrict too hard in order to lose quickly. They then can't keep it up and as above, rebound and then some as they compensate for over-restriction. And whilst you can reasonably safely restrict hard for 4-6 weeks, most people have a lot more weight to lose than going balls to wall for that short a time will achieve.
Those here who appear to be most successful are those who have a sensible deficit (and this of course varies depending on TDEE) and just get on with living and changing habits over the long term.
Of course this is anecdotal and I don't profess to know if this is total fact. Just my own personal and personally observed opinion.
As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.
They do require resistance training, yes, and a VERY specific macro breakdown (about 90% protein, and just enough fats to get in the essentials). There are actually different protocols for people are different bodyfat levels (1 for sub-15, 2 for 16-30, 3 for 31 and above). Each is structured a bit differently to keep hormones from tanking and provide the LBM sparing effect. Trust me, if they work to peel bodybuilders from 10% to 8% in two weeks, they work just fine for taking...ehhh...the average American back to human shaped just fine. There's also built in cheat meals for the uber-fatties so they don't lose their minds entirely in the process.
Is it hard? For most, though I'm actually finding my C2 run hilariously easy. Does it get results for those who can hack it, and the properly follow the procedures for going back to maintenance and taking short term diet breaks? Most definitely.
It's a matter of preference though. I prefer extreme short term pain, to long drawn out annoyance. The faster my fat is gone, the faster I can get back to real lifting, instead of this three day per week *kitten*.
90% protein? What do you do for the other 10%? No carb only 10% fat?
That's pretty much how it works. Like I said, it's not meant to be long term sustainable. It's a short term fat ripping/muscle sparing process, after which you move to a more balanced maintenance for a couple of weeks and reevaluate.
There is allowance for both carbs and fat per meal, but I personally don't use them. They just impede rapid progress.0 -
That's how I handle it too. I calculate the maintenance calories for my goal weight and then try to avoid going over that. I am working slowly to my goal weight. It will probably take me a really long time, but it is rather painless. Once I get to goal I'll be used to eating the correct calories to support TDEE.I've got my "pound a week" goal programmed into MFP, but my *real* calorie goal is always "what is maintenance for an ultimate target weight?" Because if I can get used to eating at what would eventually be maintenance, then I can have a better chance of maintaining. It might make things slower in the long run, but i figure that slowly trending down is a lot better than the slow trend up that got me here.
2 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I guess when I think of compliance I'm thinking of the numerous daily threads and experience of seeing friends restrict too hard in order to lose quickly. They then can't keep it up and as above, rebound and then some as they compensate for over-restriction. And whilst you can reasonably safely restrict hard for 4-6 weeks, most people have a lot more weight to lose than going balls to wall for that short a time will achieve.
Those here who appear to be most successful are those who have a sensible deficit (and this of course varies depending on TDEE) and just get on with living and changing habits over the long term.
Of course this is anecdotal and I don't profess to know if this is total fact. Just my own personal and personally observed opinion.
As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.
They do require resistance training, yes, and a VERY specific macro breakdown (about 90% protein, and just enough fats to get in the essentials). There are actually different protocols for people are different bodyfat levels (1 for sub-15, 2 for 16-30, 3 for 31 and above). Each is structured a bit differently to keep hormones from tanking and provide the LBM sparing effect. Trust me, if they work to peel bodybuilders from 10% to 8% in two weeks, they work just fine for taking...ehhh...the average American back to human shaped just fine. There's also built in cheat meals for the uber-fatties so they don't lose their minds entirely in the process.
Is it hard? For most, though I'm actually finding my C2 run hilariously easy. Does it get results for those who can hack it, and the properly follow the procedures for going back to maintenance and taking short term diet breaks? Most definitely.
It's a matter of preference though. I prefer extreme short term pain, to long drawn out annoyance. The faster my fat is gone, the faster I can get back to real lifting, instead of this three day per week *kitten*.
90% protein? What do you do for the other 10%? No carb only 10% fat?
That's pretty much how it works. Like I said, it's not meant to be long term sustainable. It's a short term fat ripping/muscle sparing process, after which you move to a more balanced maintenance for a couple of weeks and reevaluate.
There is allowance for both carbs and fat per meal, but I personally don't use them. They just impede rapid progress.
Right. I'm not in that catagory so it doesn't apply to me. You are talking about bodybuilders preparing for contests.0 -
Slower means that you're typically consuming enough calories that you can sustain it for the long haul.
Faster means fewer calories. Your body fights you with hunger and frustration, and, personally, I fall off the wagon more often.2 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I guess when I think of compliance I'm thinking of the numerous daily threads and experience of seeing friends restrict too hard in order to lose quickly. They then can't keep it up and as above, rebound and then some as they compensate for over-restriction. And whilst you can reasonably safely restrict hard for 4-6 weeks, most people have a lot more weight to lose than going balls to wall for that short a time will achieve.
Those here who appear to be most successful are those who have a sensible deficit (and this of course varies depending on TDEE) and just get on with living and changing habits over the long term.
Of course this is anecdotal and I don't profess to know if this is total fact. Just my own personal and personally observed opinion.
As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.
They do require resistance training, yes, and a VERY specific macro breakdown (about 90% protein, and just enough fats to get in the essentials). There are actually different protocols for people are different bodyfat levels (1 for sub-15, 2 for 16-30, 3 for 31 and above). Each is structured a bit differently to keep hormones from tanking and provide the LBM sparing effect. Trust me, if they work to peel bodybuilders from 10% to 8% in two weeks, they work just fine for taking...ehhh...the average American back to human shaped just fine. There's also built in cheat meals for the uber-fatties so they don't lose their minds entirely in the process.
Is it hard? For most, though I'm actually finding my C2 run hilariously easy. Does it get results for those who can hack it, and the properly follow the procedures for going back to maintenance and taking short term diet breaks? Most definitely.
It's a matter of preference though. I prefer extreme short term pain, to long drawn out annoyance. The faster my fat is gone, the faster I can get back to real lifting, instead of this three day per week *kitten*.
90% protein? What do you do for the other 10%? No carb only 10% fat?
That's pretty much how it works. Like I said, it's not meant to be long term sustainable. It's a short term fat ripping/muscle sparing process, after which you move to a more balanced maintenance for a couple of weeks and reevaluate.
There is allowance for both carbs and fat per meal, but I personally don't use them. They just impede rapid progress.
Right. I'm not in that catagory so it doesn't apply to me. You are talking about bodybuilders preparing for contests.
No he is talking about a Protein Sparing Modified Fast which has been proven to be very effective for people at every stage of the weight loss "journey" from morbidly obese people to contest ready bodybuilders.1 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I guess when I think of compliance I'm thinking of the numerous daily threads and experience of seeing friends restrict too hard in order to lose quickly. They then can't keep it up and as above, rebound and then some as they compensate for over-restriction. And whilst you can reasonably safely restrict hard for 4-6 weeks, most people have a lot more weight to lose than going balls to wall for that short a time will achieve.
Those here who appear to be most successful are those who have a sensible deficit (and this of course varies depending on TDEE) and just get on with living and changing habits over the long term.
Of course this is anecdotal and I don't profess to know if this is total fact. Just my own personal and personally observed opinion.
As to the muscle loss but isn't it correct that the body can only metabolise so much stored fat in a day? And the muscle sparing diets require quite specific training methods and diet? not for the faint of heart or, I would have thought, for those with a lot to lose? I could be wrong though. Always learning.
They do require resistance training, yes, and a VERY specific macro breakdown (about 90% protein, and just enough fats to get in the essentials). There are actually different protocols for people are different bodyfat levels (1 for sub-15, 2 for 16-30, 3 for 31 and above). Each is structured a bit differently to keep hormones from tanking and provide the LBM sparing effect. Trust me, if they work to peel bodybuilders from 10% to 8% in two weeks, they work just fine for taking...ehhh...the average American back to human shaped just fine. There's also built in cheat meals for the uber-fatties so they don't lose their minds entirely in the process.
Is it hard? For most, though I'm actually finding my C2 run hilariously easy. Does it get results for those who can hack it, and the properly follow the procedures for going back to maintenance and taking short term diet breaks? Most definitely.
It's a matter of preference though. I prefer extreme short term pain, to long drawn out annoyance. The faster my fat is gone, the faster I can get back to real lifting, instead of this three day per week *kitten*.
90% protein? What do you do for the other 10%? No carb only 10% fat?
That's pretty much how it works. Like I said, it's not meant to be long term sustainable. It's a short term fat ripping/muscle sparing process, after which you move to a more balanced maintenance for a couple of weeks and reevaluate.
There is allowance for both carbs and fat per meal, but I personally don't use them. They just impede rapid progress.
Right. I'm not in that catagory so it doesn't apply to me. You are talking about bodybuilders preparing for contests.
No he is talking about a Protein Sparing Modified Fast which has been proven to be very effective for people at every stage of the weight loss "journey" from morbidly obese people to contest ready bodybuilders.
This. I actually started my current run at 177 lbs., and about 18% bodyfat. Hardly a bodybuilder in contest prep, but hey, dem abs, they've started to pop after two weeks.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions