Slow Dieting vs Fast?

Options
mygoalsss
mygoalsss Posts: 15 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Which approach to dieting do you prefer? I have about 10-12 pounds of fat i’d like to drop so im going slow.

Replies

  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    Options
    It's not just about what you prefer, but about what's effective, or even possible. If you have a lot to lose, you can lose faster (as in amount per week) than you can if you have less to lose (percentage can be nearly identical). If you have a lot to lose, losing weight becomes more important, but you'll also have to implement greater changes to habits, attitudes and environment; still, you can lose fast just by simple interventions. If you have less to lose, your goal is closer, but you might be less motivated, and weightloss will be slow no matter how strict and accurate you are.
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    Options
    mygoalsss wrote: »
    Which approach to dieting do you prefer? I have about 10-12 pounds of fat i’d like to drop so im going slow.

    You are doing it right.

  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    Options
    Fast. Slow is probably better for me based on where I'm at, but I don't have the patience or motivation to grind out .5lb/week for a year.
  • mygoalsss
    mygoalsss Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    Also for future replies what I consider slow is .7-1 lbs a week and fast being 1.5-2 lbs a week
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    edited November 2017
    Options
    mygoalsss wrote: »
    Also for future replies what I consider slow is .7-1 lbs a week and fast being 1.5-2 lbs a week

    That said, with only 10-12 pounds to lose .5 is the right amount of slow for myself. My focus is being able to sustain a calorie deficit and make moving to maintenance my priority.
  • ladyhusker39
    ladyhusker39 Posts: 1,406 Member
    Options
    That depends do you want to lose fast and greatly increase the odds of gaining it back so you have to do it again?

    Or would you rather lose slowly and greatly increase the odds of keeping it off because you've learned how to maintain the lower weight?

    It's a matter of focusing on weight loss vs weight maintenance.

    It's my experience most people prefer to focus on loss and ignore maintenance usually telling themselves they'll worry about maintaining when they get there.
  • rheddmobile
    rheddmobile Posts: 6,840 Member
    Options
    The rule of thumb is no more than 1% of bodyweight per week. That's a maximum, and it doesn't apply in all situations, but it gives you a good idea. So a 350 lb morbidly obese person can stand to lose more than 2 lbs a week, and a slim 125 lb person wanting to lose a few vanity pounds should not be trying to lose faster than 1 and a quarter pounds.

    In practice, speaking for myself, it's been more than 2 lbs when I was morbidly obese, about 2 lbs when I was obese, about 1.5 when I was overweight, and about 1 since hitting the top of normal weight.
  • MegaMooseEsq
    MegaMooseEsq Posts: 3,118 Member
    Options
    I think whatever you find sustainable and helps to set you up for maintaining is the right pace. I’ve lost 38 pounds this year at a fairly steady pace. It’s more than some, less than others (certainly slow under your definition) but the thing that has stayed with me is that I’m changing the way I interact with food, hopefully long-term. As I see it, the fast or slow question shouldn’t be about losing weight the first time, but about whether you can keep it off.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Options
    Both. I would get closer than 10-12 before slowing down. But 12 calories from goal, the most I could lose without going below recommended minimum (1500 cals/day) is slightly under a pound. I will take it down another notch to .5 pounds/week at 3 pounds to go. That means I will be eating at very near maintenance for over 6 weeks; plenty of time to adjust to it as my new normal. Why over 6 weeks? Because my goal is what will become my upper limit; I have to keep losing at that point. My goal is to stay under a BMI of 25. I am not picking an arbitrary number and range, either of which I could decide to increase. I am picking the bar I have to stay below based on BMI. Unless I grow taller, that's a fixed number. At the weight where I am barely under, I might drop the rate of loss under .5.
  • Beaudom91
    Beaudom91 Posts: 54 Member
    edited November 2017
    Options
    I think it depends on what you are trying to achieve. If you're trying to change a lifetime or years of bad habits and want to maximise your chances of keeping the weight off long term then slow is generally better. If you've spent your life at a healthy weight and are losing weight after a short term weight gain, and are already in the habit of living healthy as your norm then I think you can get away with faster dieting.

    I've always been the lower end of a normal weight, but after a rough pregnancy that I was put on bed rest for I gained weight, not huge amounts, but enough to make me uncomfortable within myself. I'm not concerned about losing the Weight too fast and gaining it all back because this is my normal lifestyle that I have maintained since I was a teen and having never been overweight in my life.

    Having said all that nobody should ever be trying to avhieve unhealthly low calorie intakes, as long as you are eating enough to maintain your health and fuel your body, the rest is personal preference.

    Now watch me get a whole bunch of "woos" for this
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    Options
    mygoalsss wrote: »
    Which approach to dieting do you prefer? I have about 10-12 pounds of fat i’d like to drop so im going slow.

    Fast weight loss increases lean muscle loss....no thanks. A lower body fat % makes people healthy, not just a number on the scale.
  • FlowerPower8579
    FlowerPower8579 Posts: 25 Member
    Options
    I would say slow and steady. (Personally) But be prepared to use all of your persistence and patience. Keep up the great work!
  • RachelElser
    RachelElser Posts: 1,049 Member
    Options
    Fast, to me, just means you went on a 'diet' and as soon as you go back to eating like 'normal' you'll gain it all back. So I'd say, slow lifestyle changes that will stick.
  • batorkin
    batorkin Posts: 281 Member
    edited November 2017
    Options
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    Fast. Slow is probably better for me based on where I'm at, but I don't have the patience or motivation to grind out .5lb/week for a year.

    Same. I always find it ironic when I see someone who was obese for over a decade claiming "it's not healthy to lose weight fast!", "you must eat at least X amount of calories a day!". Sadly, it happens a lot around here. Fact of the matter is.... Being obese for a decade did far more damage to my body than eating 1200 calories/day (as a male) for a few months.

    I know I should eat 1500 a day as a minimum but If I am not super hungry, and not noticing any negative effects in my exercises/lifting, then slowing down seems counter productive. With that said, losing fast is probably not a good idea if you aren't lifting and exercising regularly, you'll lose a lot of muscle.

  • mygoalsss
    mygoalsss Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    .

Categories