Is my goal realistic?

desnyder210
desnyder210 Posts: 23 Member
edited November 22 in Health and Weight Loss
So today I weighed in at 177.6. I've lost 4.4 lbs since I started 25 days ago. Is that a decent amount to lose in that period of time?

Also, We are going on vacation this February and I'd like to be 145 by then. Is this goal realistic? I'd like to look good in a swimsuit for the trip.

Replies

  • alicebhsia
    alicebhsia Posts: 178 Member
    i'd think you could possibly look good in a swimsuit at the weight you are. i think looking good in a swimsuit has more to do with muscle fitness than overall fat. i guess how the fat is distributed matters too, but still. you can be plump and still look sexy/pretty in a swimsuit. in any case your goal does sound like it will take some strict calorie intake watching and lots of exercise but is possible. i've lost twenty pounds in a month before, but my calories were very low and i worked out a lot and pretty intensely.
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    Yep, at your weight, 1 lb a week is a good rate of loss. You're slightly above that, but people often see a bigger loss initially due to water weight loss.

    145 by Feb is probably over ambitious. Just concentrate on eating healthily at a sensible deficit (500 cals a day). I highly recommend doing some form of resistance training, even bodyweight, as it will help you to retain more muscle mass as you lose.
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    sgtx81 wrote: »
    I've heard intermittent fasting helps cut weight faster though I don't know from experience. I'm not sure how it could make much difference without changing your caloric intake, but maybe it's worth a try.

    No, it doesn't. It's just another method of creating a calorie deficit. At the same calorie intake, no method is superior over any other in terms of weight loss.
  • cbelc2
    cbelc2 Posts: 762 Member
    How tall are you?
  • desnyder210
    desnyder210 Posts: 23 Member
    I'm a shortie about 5'1" :)
  • fancynancysavvy
    fancynancysavvy Posts: 1 Member
    i'm 4'11 and 120 lbs. i want to be 107 lbs in 9 weeks. is this goal realistic?
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    fancynancysavvy wrote: »
    i'm 4'11 and 120 lbs. i want to be 107 lbs in 9 weeks. is this goal realistic?

    No.
  • dwilliamca
    dwilliamca Posts: 325 Member
    How many pounds per week did you choose when you set your profile? Looks like you are losing about a pound and a half a week, but that will probably slow down some as you reach your goal. Two pounds a week requires a 1000 calorie per day deficit, which is challenging, but still safe. I previously lost 30 lbs. in 3 1/2 months so it is possible, and currently am losing at that same rate. Good luck.
  • rickiimarieee
    rickiimarieee Posts: 2,212 Member
    sgtx81 wrote: »
    I've heard intermittent fasting helps cut weight faster though I don't know from experience. I'm not sure how it could make much difference without changing your caloric intake, but maybe it's worth a try.

    No fasting just helps you keep within your calorie budget easier by only having a certain period of time to intake calories. Calorie deficit=weight loss
  • bribucks
    bribucks Posts: 431 Member
    If you’re only 5’1” then chances are, you aren’t given too many calories to begin with. Trying to lose 2 lbs/week (1000cal deficit per day, to reach 145 by February) is probably not realistic for you then. Unfortunately us shorties usually have to opt for a slower rate of loss because we don’t get to eat that many calories, plain and simple.

    How many calories has MFP “assigned” you and how many are you eating?
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    sgtx81 wrote: »
    I've heard intermittent fasting helps cut weight faster though I don't know from experience. I'm not sure how it could make much difference without changing your caloric intake, but maybe it's worth a try.

    Not true.

    Faster weight loss = larger calorie deficit period . Intermittent fasting is meal timing......with the usual deficit.
    dembly wrote: »
    sgtx81 wrote: »
    I've heard intermittent fasting helps cut weight faster though I don't know from experience. I'm not sure how it could make much difference without changing your caloric intake, but maybe it's worth a try.

    You mean the 5:2? Yes - that is about resetting hormones and ensuring your body doesnt get into a "starvation mode" - that is, it may be more sustainable and with less plateaus (for some people). It works well for my mother, I am more of the "all or nothing" type.. so it is better for me to avoid chips, not have them tomorrow instead of today.. so it might work for people!

    Again - no. 5:2 is not about resetting hormones. The advertising may "say" differently, but there's no evidence, just anecdotal examples by people selling something. Starvation mode doesn't work this way.

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/49-intermittent-fasting

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/100058-5-2-fasting

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/761810/the-starvation-mode-myth-again/p1
  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,626 Member
    desnyder210 wrote: »
    So today I weighed in at 177.6. I've lost 4.4 lbs since I started 25 days ago. Is that a decent amount to lose in that period of time?

    Also, We are going on vacation this February and I'd like to be 145 by then. Is this goal realistic? I'd like to look good in a swimsuit for the trip.

    you might be able to buy a suit one size smaller and be ok. i wouldnt go down any more than that.

    besides, swimsuits by nature are pretty forgiving between sizes. if it were me, id buy something in my current size. if by some chance it fits HORRIBLY closer to your vacation, buy another one.
  • rickiimarieee
    rickiimarieee Posts: 2,212 Member
    There is no such thing as starvation mode.
  • leggup
    leggup Posts: 2,942 Member
    edited October 2017
    4.4 lbs lost in (about) 4 weeks. Do the math. That's 1.1 lb/week lost. It is 15 weeks until Feb 1. That means, if you maintain the exact loss rate you have right now, you can lose an additional 16.5 lbs by Feb 1, putting you at 161.1 lbs. However, weight loss is not consistent week-to-week. Maybe some weeks you lose a little more, some a little less. I think it's reasonable to think you could be 157-165 lbs by your trip. I'd assume higher because most people gain the most weight between Oct-Dec.

    At your current rate (let's round down to 1 lb/week to account for it slowing as you get closer to your goal), you could lose 32.6 lbs in 32.6 weeks, which is June 4, 2018.
  • shaunshaikh
    shaunshaikh Posts: 616 Member
    Man, this thread got filled with a lot of WOO's in a short period of time. @leggup has the right answer, and that rate of loss is appropriate.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,278 Member
    Make a distinction between whether a weight loss goal is realistic, vs. whether it's healthy or sensible.

    For most people, it's sensible and likely to be healthy to lose no more than about 1% of your body weight weekly (less as you get within 25 pounds or so from goal).

    Faster loss is risky, i.e. risks good health and good appearance (because hair loss, muscle loss, sallow complexion, listless and fatigued manner rather than energetic vivacity - those things don't make a person attractive).

    Almost any weight loss goal can be realistic: Y'know, pretty much stop eating, force yourself to exercise as hard as you can manage in every spare moment . . . weight will drop right off, assuming you can keep it up. Won't be cute, though. ;)

    I'm assuming you wanted the healthy answer, though, so shoot for a max of 1% weekly, and slower is fine if it's more sustainable. Worked for me while losing 1/3 of my body weight in less than a year.

    I don't mean to be harsh: Granny just wants you to stay strong and healthy! :)


  • tracymegan
    tracymegan Posts: 391 Member
    This is why there are NSV...it doesn't always show on a scale. I saw a recent photo of someone who was the exact same weight but the difference in body composition was incredible. One they were flabby and looked "fluffy", the other they were ripped and muscular. Remember the scale is just a number.
  • desnyder210
    desnyder210 Posts: 23 Member

    brianneangell08 wrote: »
    If you’re only 5’1” then chances are, you aren’t given too many calories to begin with. Trying to lose 2 lbs/week (1000cal deficit per day, to reach 145 by February) is probably not realistic for you then. Unfortunately us shorties usually have to opt for a slower rate of loss because we don’t get to eat that many calories, plain and simple.

    How many calories has MFP “assigned” you and how many are you eating?

    I get 1,510 a day to eat. I usually have 0-200 calories leftover at the end of the day. Which is usually fine for me and I'm not starving at any point in the day.

  • desnyder210
    desnyder210 Posts: 23 Member

    tracymegan wrote: »
    This is why there are NSV...it doesn't always show on a scale. I saw a recent photo of someone who was the exact same weight but the difference in body composition was incredible. One they were flabby and looked "fluffy", the other they were ripped and muscular. Remember the scale is just a number.

    You are right, it is just a number.
  • desnyder210
    desnyder210 Posts: 23 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Make a distinction between whether a weight loss goal is realistic, vs. whether it's healthy or sensible.

    For most people, it's sensible and likely to be healthy to lose no more than about 1% of your body weight weekly (less as you get within 25 pounds or so from goal).

    Faster loss is risky, i.e. risks good health and good appearance (because hair loss, muscle loss, sallow complexion, listless and fatigued manner rather than energetic vivacity - those things don't make a person attractive).

    Almost any weight loss goal can be realistic: Y'know, pretty much stop eating, force yourself to exercise as hard as you can manage in every spare moment . . . weight will drop right off, assuming you can keep it up. Won't be cute, though. ;)

    I'm assuming you wanted the healthy answer, though, so shoot for a max of 1% weekly, and slower is fine if it's more sustainable. Worked for me while losing 1/3 of my body weight in less than a year.

    I don't mean to be harsh: Granny just wants you to stay strong and healthy! :)


    Thanks for looking out for me
This discussion has been closed.

Categories