Healthy Rate of Loss

Options
2»

Replies

  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,931 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    Duck_Puddle wrote: »
    Back in the days of Anvilhead and others, there were links and discussions of studies that showed a max of how much fat can actually be burned in a day. These values ranged from 11-26 calories per pound of body fat (the higher number from the starvation study).

    The .5-1% max loss rate, combined with the max amount of fat one can even actually burn, combined with the lowest intake where one can still get enough vitamins/minerals to be “healthy” and you’re probably going to end up pretty close to the generic ranges that are commonly given.

    However-if you have to make weight for something, don’t care if you keep your muscle, are willing to sacrifice some health to get to goal, or have some other unique situation, or are usually tall (or some other unique physical characteristic), you can lose faster.

    I think this is the kind of study you are referring to:
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15615615/

    As you get leaner, a large deficit puts you in danger of exceeding the amount of body fat you can access and utilize in a day. Then...lean mass gets sacrificed.

    Thanks! So... it looks like about 70 cals/kgd (290 kj/kgd) which is ... hm. Nope I can't be right. Must be just fat mass ... lol I gotta read this better. Otherwise thats 4000 calories decifit a day and that makes no sense. ...

    I think i cannot do math while watching the Wiggles...

    Ok say its fat mass. And I'm 25% (a total guess). If im 61 ish kg. Then I have about 15.3 kg fat. So at 69 kcal/kgd I can lose from mostly fat up to 1000 cals a day.

    Which... still seems rather high since I dont intend to lose more than 1 lb a week for sure... because. Food. Happiness.

    I feel like i must be interpreting it wrong.
    Because even if I assume 15% fat... thats still 638 calories today. I wonder if those assumed percents include water or something. Or is it still saying you lose ffm too. Brain not working at the moment.

    Now that i had your link I found this following post that I'm going to read!

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/916230/study-suggests-you-can-run-larger-deficit-than-we-think

    Either way i have a headache today so I am eating maintence today lol. Maybe I will increase a bit till I get exercising... i just really didn't want to buy a whole new wardrobe before I go back to work at the end of July. Petty I know.

    Suggest you read the whole thread, and the out-links, not just the top post.

    Yeah i read it all and basically... is said thats just a maximum for obese people... so it wouldnt really apply to me.

    I'm just so curious where comes from and what the theoretical overall muscle difference in muscle loss would be if i continue eating 1500 a day vs 1700 a day with the same activity level... which basically consists of pushing 70 lb strollers on flat ground, carrying 55 lbs of kids up and down the stairs a million times a day, and diving at children as they are about to dive off the couch.

    It's a confusing thread (including some posts by confused people). I don't think that what I bolded is true of the study cited in the OP of that thread. I think what heybales said is corrected: Based on Minnesota starvation experiment. But still wouldn't necessarily apply to you in any practical way, for other reasons he mentioned.

    In particular, in the thread you linked, I think there was confusion in the comments between the OP study, and a later study that was linked about obese people in extreme deficits who were strength training. (That one doesn't really apply to you either. ;) ).

    I still don't think there's a study that will answer your exact question. Repeating myself: Bets, and bet hedging.

    @heybales: Interesting calculator. I understand that the same limitations still apply. ;)

    Whoops missed a post in my haste to reply lol.

    @AnnPT77 @PAV8888 @heybales And everyone else so far, thanks for your insights!

    @ahoy_m8 I agree on sleep. My pregnancies and kiddos totally threw off my sleep rhythms. That combined with a lifelong inability to fall asleep very quickly (something my mom, brother, sister, and son all have issues with too, maybe its genetic, but I also think we tend to be the more stressed out people in the family) is definitely a factor in wanting to get things sorted out there. There were times in my life when I did have it ironed out and I felt so great during those times, and felt generally more energetic, less steessed and less over-hungry. Its not a fast fix though.
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,931 Member
    edited June 2020
    Options
    @Duck_Puddle
    Thanks for looking for a thread for me!

    @heybales I tried your linked calculator. Like mfp it gives me 1850 cals to maintain but by spreadsheeting thru the years I find its more like 2100. I guess I am more active than I think. I always choose lightly active since I'm a stay at home mom (though starting July its back to my desk job). But even at my desk job I seemed to maintain on more like 2000. I'm still looking thru the rest of it to see what it says.
  • Someonerandom1
    Someonerandom1 Posts: 13 Member
    Options
    I have almost the exact same stats and goals as you. Started at 165 last year and currently 134.5. I’m shooting for .5lb a week because I want to start practicing for maintenance. Plus I don’t have a deadline or anything like that. I lost like 1lb/month for March and April. Then I suddenly lost 4.5lbs in May so I bumped up my calories a bit this past week. I was at 1600 plus exercise calories and now I’m shooting for 1700 plus exercise calories. I usually gross 1900-2000 calories a day and always hit a minimum of 100-125g of protein.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,389 Member
    Options
    I regained some weight when I was very unhappy, and my thyroid meds were too low and I was feeling extra tired and it was easier to buy snacks than not to. I decided to lose at a rate of 0.5lbs per week and it was nearly spot on (0.26kg/week). Yeah, it took a while, but I also had a day every week or two where I had a pack of crisps or liquorice. I would not have managed a bigger deficit anyway. It just fitted my lifestyle perfectly, and retransitioning back to maintenance was easy.

Categories