Lost 25 lbs in 3 weeks now nothing on 4th week
Replies
-
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
No, it's not one size fits all. For example, you're not large enough to safely lose as fast as you've been losing. You are of course free to take whatever course (with related risks) you wish, but my recommendation would be to look at how much weight you have left to lose, to be at a healthy weight, and lose at the rate recommended for that.
If you have 75 pounds to lose, and are still over 200, it's probably reasonably low risk to set your goal at 2 pounds a week, then monitor to stay very close to that, while also eating back exercise calories. You've been losing much, much faster than that so far, even if we discount the first week's big drop from water weight and average digestive system contents. Then, as your weight drops, it would be sensible (IMO) to decrease your loss rate, according to how close you are to a healthy weight goal.
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?Mfp sedentary is an activity factor of 1.25. lightly active 1.4. active 1.6; very active 1.8 for 24 hours.
Sleeping is actually a less than 1 MET activity. Off the top of my head I think it is .95 because it approaches BMR as opposed to rmr.
Heavy equipment operator sits on his *kitten*, but he is wearing boots, dressed with hard hat on, alert, functioning, dealing with vibration, twisting and turning.
MET value is 2.0 for heavy equipment operator. More than driving for example. And more then standing in line quietly.
I don't know if I would go all the way to very active; but sedentary you're not.
A lb is worth about 3500 Cal. Add your lost lbs to what you've eaten and divide by days.
You get TDEE.
I will assume that will be too high a number due to logging errors and initial water weight loss.
So instead of cutting 15% from that number, cut 20%
Eat it. Move/exercise more. Figure out the balance between healthy food and fun food that you can keep to for the next five years.
You don't drop weight and forget about it and magically maintain.
Figure out the long term.
(What did you do when the guys wanted to go for pizza and beers or to watch a game? Is that going to be your answer during the next five years?)
No way. Every equipment operator I know that's been doing it for more than 10 years if over weight. No way im considered active.
Activity, sadly, is a pretty small contributor to weight management regardless, for people with normal lives (i.e., not the rare person doing hours of athletic training daily). Your colleagues are overweight because they eat more calories than they expend.
I was obese for a dozen years while training routinely and quite intensely most days, and competing as an athlete (not an elite athlete, but a masters athlete "in the pack" in terms of results). My training was worth maybe 500 calories a day, which is a Big Mac or a couple of Snickers bars. It's totally easy to eat that much extra, and then some. I stayed obese for well over a decade that way.
I don't know about your workplace, but it's kind of common in workplace culture these days for guys to hit the fast food places for lunch (and supersize), sometimes be drinking soda or sugar-y coffee during the work day, go out for a beer and wings after work, and that sort of thing. That's fun, but those are all ways to drive calories pretty high, without feeling satiated.
I guarantee that an "active" lifestyle (in MFP terms) is compatible with getting and staying overweight and even obese. (Of course, many people who are overweight or obese are not active, in part because it gets easier to avoid moving as much as we get fatter, then more out of shape, so still fatter, in a negative down-spiral of health.)
So, if you think "active" is the wrong MFP setting for your job, what does MFP give you for a calorie goal for "lightly active"? (It varies with body size, but the differences between settings tend to be in that Snickers bar kind of territory, for many people - not huge.)4 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
3 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Oh, I noticed.
That's why I keep asking.
OP, truly, I just want to see you stay healthy and strong while you lose weight. I'm a weird ol' internet auntie that way. :flowerforyou:10 -
Mfp sedentary is an activity factor of 1.25. lightly active 1.4. active 1.6; very active 1.8 for 24 hours.
Sleeping is actually a less than 1 MET activity. Off the top of my head I think it is .95 because it approaches BMR as opposed to rmr.
Heavy equipment operator sits on his *kitten*, but he is wearing boots, dressed with hard hat on, alert, functioning, dealing with vibration, twisting and turning.
MET value is 2.0 for heavy equipment operator. More than driving for example. And more then standing in line quietly.
I don't know if I would go all the way to very active; but sedentary you're not.
A lb is worth about 3500 Cal. Add your lost lbs to what you've eaten and divide by days.
You get TDEE.
I will assume that will be too high a number due to logging errors and initial water weight loss.
So instead of cutting 15% from that number, cut 20%
Eat it. Move/exercise more. Figure out the balance between healthy food and fun food that you can keep to for the next five years.
You don't drop weight and forget about it and magically maintain.
Figure out the long term.
(What did you do when the guys wanted to go for pizza and beers or to watch a game? Is that going to be your answer during the next five years?)
No way. Every equipment operator I know that's been doing it for more than 10 years if over weight. No way im considered active.
If they eat anything like the way the machine operators I know eat (and again, quite a few, from working on major road construction projects), then yeah. They're eating a ton of high calorie food - meat pies, hot chips, fried chicken, at both breaks during the day. Then a couple of beers, or more, in the evening, more on weekends. Ever hear the saying 'you can't outrun a bad diet'?7 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Oh, I noticed. That's why I keep asking.
OP, truly, I just want to see you stay healthy and strong while you lose weight. I'm a weird ol' internet auntie that way. :flowerforyou:
Plus, risking serious fatigue, potential dizzy spells, etc, when you're operating heavy machinery is more than a bit of a health and safety issue.
Cory, please trust us when we say that the path you are on is not a healthy or sensible one. You need to increase your calorie intake.9 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Not so, I am not reluctant at all. I just started playing with the different settings last night and as I stated before i work for 12-14 hours a day. Got 2 kids and a wife at home and life to live as well. Most of my time on here amounts to enough to weight and log my food and take a look at this thread while I take a crap. Take it easy I'm not just letting what you guys tell me go in one ear and out the other. Week end is here I'll report some stuff back10 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Ok so here is what MFP tells me at 3 different activity levels and 1, 1.5, and 2 lbs a week.
Not very active
1lbs per week-1940
1.5lbs per week-1690
2lbs per week-1500
Lightly active
1lbs per week-2240
1.5lbs per week-1990
2lbs per week-1740
Active
1lbs per week-2630
1.5lbs per week-2380
2lbs per week-2130
0 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Ok so here is what MFP tells me at 3 different activity levels and 1, 1.5, and 2 lbs a week.
Not very active
1lbs per week-1940
1.5lbs per week-1690
2lbs per week-1500
Lightly active
1lbs per week-2240
1.5lbs per week-1990
2lbs per week-1740
Active
1lbs per week-2630
1.5lbs per week-2380
2lbs per week-2130
Excellent. So, that's a pretty good indication that you're not sedentary, since you say you've lost quite a lot more than 2 pounds a week at 1500, though I'm not sure how much exercise was in there.
Let's throw out your first week entirely (15 pounds of your 25) for discussion purposes, though likely some of that was fat, too. It's been 3 more weeks, during which you've lost 10 pounds, so about 3.3 pounds a week; and you say you were eating 1500.
Since we don't know your exercise, we can only estimate TDEE, your calories overall including exercise. But if you logged exercise, you can include that in the estimating process to get an idea which level really is closest to right for you.
You lost 3.3 pounds per week, which is an 11,500 calorie deficit weekly (3500 x 3.3), so a 1,650 calorie daily deficit. The implication (under this whole semi-shaky set of assumptions I've specified) would be that your TDEE for maintenance at your current weight is in the vicinity of 3,150 calories.
If you've done no exercise at all, that looks a lot like the active setting, 2 pounds a week, would be closest. (3150 calorie maintenance - 1000 calories daily to lose 2 pounds a week = 2150).
If you've done exercise, you need to adjust the calculations according to those calorie estimates, and you can more or less back your way into a reasonable starting activity level.
Then, do the "monitor for 4-6 weeks" thing, and see if your loss rate is as expected. Does that make sense?10 -
And aiming for a 1.5lb per week loss (appropriate for you, for another 10 or so lbs), add another 250 cal to that 2150, which equals 2400.3
-
Based on the numbers you present and on the rate of loss you've described so far.
And under the assumption that your activity and exercise during the previous weeks was representative of the future. And that your current 1500 Calories were logged the same way as you will be logging your 2400 Calories... I would go for Active and 1.5lbs and aim to eat about 2400 Cal a day.
You know what else is nice about a number in the 2200-2700 range? Most males of average height, normal weight, and average non sedentary activity probably end up eating somewhere in that range to maintain.
Do you know of a better time to practice and perfect your long term eating other than during weight loss where the worse case scenario if you screw up is maybe losing a little bit less that week?
Also plug your weight changes in a weight trend application. It helps and gives you a better gauge as to whether, on average, you're meeting your goals.
As a guy, unless you start an intense exercise program or something, you should be able to make adjustment decisions with just a few weeks of data 2-4 instead of 4-6 which are sometimes needed for the ladies so that they can go through a complete hormonal cycle and its associated water retention.2 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Ok so here is what MFP tells me at 3 different activity levels and 1, 1.5, and 2 lbs a week.
Not very active
1lbs per week-1940
1.5lbs per week-1690
2lbs per week-1500
Lightly active
1lbs per week-2240
1.5lbs per week-1990
2lbs per week-1740
Active
1lbs per week-2630
1.5lbs per week-2380
2lbs per week-2130
Excellent. So, that's a pretty good indication that you're not sedentary, since you say you've lost quite a lot more than 2 pounds a week at 1500, though I'm not sure how much exercise was in there.
Let's throw out your first week entirely (15 pounds of your 25) for discussion purposes, though likely some of that was fat, too. It's been 3 more weeks, during which you've lost 10 pounds, so about 3.3 pounds a week; and you say you were eating 1500.
Since we don't know your exercise, we can only estimate TDEE, your calories overall including exercise. But if you logged exercise, you can include that in the estimating process to get an idea which level really is closest to right for you.
You lost 3.3 pounds per week, which is an 11,500 calorie deficit weekly (3500 x 3.3), so a 1,650 calorie daily deficit. The implication (under this whole semi-shaky set of assumptions I've specified) would be that your TDEE for maintenance at your current weight is in the vicinity of 3,150 calories.
If you've done no exercise at all, that looks a lot like the active setting, 2 pounds a week, would be closest. (3150 calorie maintenance - 1000 calories daily to lose 2 pounds a week = 2150).
If you've done exercise, you need to adjust the calculations according to those calorie estimates, and you can more or less back your way into a reasonable starting activity level.
Then, do the "monitor for 4-6 weeks" thing, and see if your loss rate is as expected. Does that make sense?
Thank you for your time. Yes that makes sense to me. I've done no intentional exercise at all so far. When it gets nice out again, that will change. I will try the setting for 2130 calories a day and see what happens. I've upped the intake some Since reading all you's guys replies. Yesterday I upped it to 1990 calorie intake and I felt like I was eating all the time and still came up short. Since I started this thread, I've actually dropped 2 more pounds. Go figure right but I'm glad I asked these questions anyway. The whole purpose of doing all this is to be more healthy so I can be around for my family. I also quit chewing tobacco at the same time I started this.12 -
Based on the numbers you present and on the rate of loss you've described so far.
And under the assumption that your activity and exercise during the previous weeks was representative of the future. And that your current 1500 Calories were logged the same way as you will be logging your 2400 Calories... I would go for Active and 1.5lbs and aim to eat about 2400 Cal a day.
.
Yeah tha is that's what I'm going to shoot for. At least to give it a try. I hav nothing to loose by trying
3 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Oh, I noticed. That's why I keep asking.
OP, truly, I just want to see you stay healthy and strong while you lose weight. I'm a weird ol' internet auntie that way. :flowerforyou:
Cory, please trust us when we say that the path you are on is not a healthy or sensible one. You need to increase your calorie intake.
I do believe you guys/gals. Thank you5 -
According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
If you set MFP for 2 pounds a week, what calorie goal does it give you?
Several have asked what MFP gives him for various scenarios, but he seems very reluctant to share.
Ok so here is what MFP tells me at 3 different activity levels and 1, 1.5, and 2 lbs a week.
Not very active
1lbs per week-1940
1.5lbs per week-1690
2lbs per week-1500
Lightly active
1lbs per week-2240
1.5lbs per week-1990
2lbs per week-1740
Active
1lbs per week-2630
1.5lbs per week-2380
2lbs per week-2130
Excellent. So, that's a pretty good indication that you're not sedentary, since you say you've lost quite a lot more than 2 pounds a week at 1500, though I'm not sure how much exercise was in there.
Let's throw out your first week entirely (15 pounds of your 25) for discussion purposes, though likely some of that was fat, too. It's been 3 more weeks, during which you've lost 10 pounds, so about 3.3 pounds a week; and you say you were eating 1500.
Since we don't know your exercise, we can only estimate TDEE, your calories overall including exercise. But if you logged exercise, you can include that in the estimating process to get an idea which level really is closest to right for you.
You lost 3.3 pounds per week, which is an 11,500 calorie deficit weekly (3500 x 3.3), so a 1,650 calorie daily deficit. The implication (under this whole semi-shaky set of assumptions I've specified) would be that your TDEE for maintenance at your current weight is in the vicinity of 3,150 calories.
If you've done no exercise at all, that looks a lot like the active setting, 2 pounds a week, would be closest. (3150 calorie maintenance - 1000 calories daily to lose 2 pounds a week = 2150).
If you've done exercise, you need to adjust the calculations according to those calorie estimates, and you can more or less back your way into a reasonable starting activity level.
Then, do the "monitor for 4-6 weeks" thing, and see if your loss rate is as expected. Does that make sense?
Thank you for your time. Yes that makes sense to me. I've done no intentional exercise at all so far. When it gets nice out again, that will change. I will try the setting for 2130 calories a day and see what happens. I've upped the intake some Since reading all you's guys replies. Yesterday I upped it to 1990 calorie intake and I felt like I was eating all the time and still came up short. Since I started this thread, I've actually dropped 2 more pounds. Go figure right but I'm glad I asked these questions anyway. The whole purpose of doing all this is to be more healthy so I can be around for my family. I also quit chewing tobacco at the same time I started this.
BTW, you'll see that I bought into 2 pounds a week for you, and some others here are saying 1.5 or maybe even some saying 1 (can't remember). In saying this, I was relying on the post where you said this:According to what "Google" and many articles says a safe and healthy weight for me is about 160. That would be 90 pounds I needed to lose. I was shooting for 200 and go from there. 175 would be about right for me . So that's 75 lbs from where I started. So by that chart above I should be shooting for 2lbs a week with 1000 calories deficit.
I don't any of this is a one size fits all recipe. Everyone is different
On that basis, I think it's probably OK for you to actually lose 2 pounds a week for a short while. I do think you should seriously consider the advice of those who suggest a slower loss rate, especially if you find your compliance mysteriously slipping as weeks roll on. I definitely think you need to pay attention to even the slightest feeling of otherwise unexplained fatigue or weakness, and up your intake if that happens.
And I 100% think you should eat more when you hit around 200-210 pounds. It doesn't matter what weight you started at, when you consider what may be a sensibly moderate loss rate. It matters what weight you're at while doing that losing.
As you get lighter, your TDEE will go down (lighter body burns fewer calories). That will probably not slow things to the level of balancing health risk with loss rate (consult the chart posted above), so you will probably have to eat a little more in order to lose slowly at around that point.
Pay attention, as you go along, and adjust as needed to be sensibly moderate: That's my advice.5 -
I've got another question on how MFP sets up your macros by their default ...
50% carbs
30% fat
20% protein
I was thinking a little higher on the protein and a little less on the carbs would be better. Is that wrong? I was eating 45% carbs and 25% fat and 30% protein since I started. Good or bad?1 -
No problem at all. How you get to feel more satiated and energetic and your own preferences trump any macro splits set in stone.
I generally aim to eat about 0.8 to 1g of protein per lb of weight that I would be at BMI 24.9 (top of normal range) as I think it gives me adequate leeway between taking in sufficient protein to meet any performance and deficit needs and overdoing things.
Whether I am +/- 10 or 30g one day matters less to me than the average day in and day out.2 -
Absolutely fine to change up your macros
Don't drop fat too much lower (RDA is 20-35%), as you need it for absorption of fat soluble vitamins and other functions. Fat and protein should be treated as minimums, then let carbs fall where they may.
Re the feeling like you were eating all the time to get to the higher calorie intake, you've presumably gone pretty gung ho on eliminating higher calorie foods in order to hit the 1500. Time to reintroduce some - avocados, nuts and nut butters, oil for cooking and dressings, fattier cuts of meat, full fat dairy. And it's perfectly fine to fit some treat foods in too. Another thing you can do is look at your calorie allowance over the week, instead of daily. So eating a bit lower on week days, and higher on weekends when you're more likely to be socialising, pizza night with the kids, etc 3 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Absolutely fine to change up your macros Don't drop fat too much lower (RDA is 20-35%), as you need it for absorption of fat soluble vitamins and other functions. Fat and protein should be treated as minimums, then let carbs fall where they may.
Re the feeling like you were eating all the time to get to the higher calorie intake, you've presumably gone pretty gung ho on eliminating higher calorie foods in order to hit the 1500. Time to reintroduce some - avocados, nuts and nut butters, oil for cooking and dressings, fattier cuts of meat, full fat dairy. And it's perfectly fine to fit some treat foods in too. Another thing you can do is look at your calorie allowance over the week, instead of daily. So eating a bit lower on week days, and higher on weekends when you're more likely to be socialising, pizza night with the kids, etc
Is there a way to post photos in the forum? Or share my daily diary some how?0 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Absolutely fine to change up your macros Don't drop fat too much lower (RDA is 20-35%), as you need it for absorption of fat soluble vitamins and other functions. Fat and protein should be treated as minimums, then let carbs fall where they may.
Re the feeling like you were eating all the time to get to the higher calorie intake, you've presumably gone pretty gung ho on eliminating higher calorie foods in order to hit the 1500. Time to reintroduce some - avocados, nuts and nut butters, oil for cooking and dressings, fattier cuts of meat, full fat dairy. And it's perfectly fine to fit some treat foods in too. Another thing you can do is look at your calorie allowance over the week, instead of daily. So eating a bit lower on week days, and higher on weekends when you're more likely to be socialising, pizza night with the kids, etc
Is there a way to post photos in the forum? Or share my daily diary some how?
Yes to both
For diary, from your Homepage go to Settings, then Diary Settings, and select 'public' under sharing.
To add photos, there's a line of symbols above the reply box, the one that's I think supposed to be mountains and the sun is for photos.1 -
Just fluctuations probably. I've only lost .4lb this week after losing 17 in the last 3 weeks.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 385 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 895 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions