Tips/help getting the last few lbs/kilos off?
JAT74
Posts: 1,081 Member
Hi, I´m 46 years old and 5´4¨ / 163cms tall and currently weight 55kgs / 8 stone 10. I´ve lost a lot of weight in the last year (I was 71kgs / 11 stone 1) and my body fat was 39%, though its now down to 25%.
I´m happy with my progress and am easily maintaining my current weight by sticking to an eating plan I´m comfortable with and staying active (walking, cardio and strength training/Yoga at least 5 days a week).
I´m still carrying visible fat I´m not happy with so decided to look at some online calculators to see what my ideal weight should be for my frame size as I have a tiny waist and small wrists/ankles etc. and was shocked to find that it´s 49kgs / 7 stone 10.
I want to get the excess weight of and finally be lean, but I´m not sure how I can manage it unless I go much lower in calories (ie. below 1000 per day) and increase my activity level. I´m already as active as I can be really given that I have a desk job and walk both before and after work, as well as doing workouts on top most days (cardio and strength training).
At a loss as to how I can get the extra weight off. Is a drastic diet change the answer? I eat moderate protein and carbs currently (around 100g per day of each), low fat and fibre at around 20g per day. I also drink 3-4 litres of water per day too.
Any tips appreciated.
I´m happy with my progress and am easily maintaining my current weight by sticking to an eating plan I´m comfortable with and staying active (walking, cardio and strength training/Yoga at least 5 days a week).
I´m still carrying visible fat I´m not happy with so decided to look at some online calculators to see what my ideal weight should be for my frame size as I have a tiny waist and small wrists/ankles etc. and was shocked to find that it´s 49kgs / 7 stone 10.
I want to get the excess weight of and finally be lean, but I´m not sure how I can manage it unless I go much lower in calories (ie. below 1000 per day) and increase my activity level. I´m already as active as I can be really given that I have a desk job and walk both before and after work, as well as doing workouts on top most days (cardio and strength training).
At a loss as to how I can get the extra weight off. Is a drastic diet change the answer? I eat moderate protein and carbs currently (around 100g per day of each), low fat and fibre at around 20g per day. I also drink 3-4 litres of water per day too.
Any tips appreciated.
0
Replies
-
25% bodyfat at 55kg for a woman your height and age is actually fine. Remember that we are supposed to have some fat, more than men on average. Every online calculator out there that I've seen wants all women to be tiny ethereal baby deer, it's bullsh8t. The numbers it gives you aren't even based on any data collected from actual women - it's all extrapolated from norms derived from white men, a hundred years ago.
You might be better served by looking into what's called a "recomp" or body recomposition.4 -
goal06082021 wrote: »25% bodyfat at 55kg for a woman your height and age is actually fine. Remember that we are supposed to have some fat, more than men on average. Every online calculator out there that I've seen wants all women to be tiny ethereal baby deer, it's bullsh8t. The numbers it gives you aren't even based on any data collected from actual women - it's all extrapolated from norms derived from white men, a hundred years ago.
You might be better served by looking into what's called a "recomp" or body recomposition.
I would have agreed with you about the weight but I've taken measurements and I'm tiny framed, and from looking in the mirror I can see that I have plenty of fat still to lose so I don't think that aiming to get 3-4 more kilos off is unreasonable given my size. I have no desire to be 49 kg, just maybe 51 or 52. It does seem like a bit of a difficult thing to do, given that my maintenance calories are not that high due to my size, so to lose I have to eat very little, or do tons of calorie burning activity.
Re. body fat, I know it's now considered 'normal' but for someone as active as me I'd like to be in the 'fit' category, not just normal! Otherwise what's the point of putting in the work if I can't see the results. I want to be lean, not skin and bone of course, but I would like a more defined look.
I'd consider a recomp but I think it would be preferable to get the fat off first before I look at gaining a little muscle.
0 -
What are these frame size measurements you keep referring to? Is the an online tool you used to calculate it?0
-
Wow, you did great already.
I am in the same boat.
Have to lose 5 more lbs for Diet Bet and it is hard to do. 51 years old,
5‘4“/135 lbs. Goal weight is 129 lbs.
I am trying a 1000 kcal deficit/day as my last solution. I know its not the healthiest way but I want to win this bet.
I guess, the only way to reach this low weight is to be patient and really have zero cheat days.2 -
The last few pounds/kilos are the hardest...you can aim for a small rate of loss like 1/2 a lb a week or even a pound a month, so you are only cutting out a small number (a hundred or two) calories a day (which hopefully leaves you enough calories to get adequate nutrition).
Also, for me I find that it helps not to aim for a deficit every day, but will do every other day or every 3rd day at maintenance so I can have a bit of a break from the calorie restriction, purely for my sanity and quality of life.
It's never too early to start strength training, and extra muscle will increase your metabolic needs and give your maintenance calories a bit of a boost. You don't have to eat in a surplus to gain muscle as long as you have excess body fat to metabolize, your body will create the surplus you need, it knows how to do that.
The bone density preservation alone is totally worth the boredom of weight lifting (some people like it, those people are not me) plus, being more muscular is so useful in every day life like moving things around your house or even just shopping...and it looks good, that's a nice bonus.
Congratulations on your progress so far and good luck in your new goals!!!!5 -
Hi there! You can do it, you just have to remember to be incredibly patient, consistent, and as accurate as possible to get there.
No, you don’t have to eat less, but you do have to lower your expectation for how long it will take to get there. Currently, and this is no joke, I am losing at a rate of .28 and I have had to be painstakingly accurate with my food logging (I follow my weight trend on Libra).
Serious question- do you weigh everything with a food scale? I was in a slump for awhile and didn’t use it, which is fine, but if I had I wouldn’t have waisted 7 months trying to lose 5 lbs. I actually took my own advice and when I started using it again, lost the 5 lbs in 2-3 months. Fitness and weight loss both come with the need for consistency so you and I are in the same boat, and we need to treat it as a lifestyle and enjoy the process.
It’s awesome you’re active, that helps increase your calorie goal. And congrats on your weight loss! I’m losing my last 5-7 vanity lbs, and I’m giving myself 3 months. Wish it came off as fast as the first 10.2 -
I am pretty close, but not quite, there.
My advice is pretty boring, but it has worked for me as I approach my goal and it is my plan going forward.
Basically, set your goal in MFP to maintain. Eat less than that (including exercise). Don't expect to lose the weight you have left at 2lbs a month, even. Expect to lose it more like a pound a month. Get patient, do it, and weigh yourself less frequently.
Because yeah you don't want to whittle your calories too far and there's only so much activity you can do.
5 -
But also yes, use a food scale.1
-
Like others have mentioned, my experience has been that weight loss towards the end will be slow and you need to be patient. What’s working for me has been a nice surprise. I was losing steadily until the holidays 2020 and it became harder to get back on track. I was 120.8 on Fed 17 - having gained maybe about three pounds since Thanksgiving.
I remember that date because it was around the start of Lent and decided that I would have no sweet or salty treats - chips, cookies, pastries - even if low sugar etc. I was eating those even while in my daily calories goal but not losing.
In addition to giving those up, a mfp pal challenged me to a 10k step daily goal on Fitbit. I would usually average 3k if I was lucky. Today I weighed 114.8! I didn’t expect that at all.
Not even sure how it all came together - more activity, loss of water weight - less carbs and salt - but that was a welcome surprise!4 -
wunderkindking wrote: »I am pretty close, but not quite, there.
My advice is pretty boring, but it has worked for me as I approach my goal and it is my plan going forward.
Basically, set your goal in MFP to maintain. Eat less than that (including exercise). Don't expect to lose the weight you have left at 2lbs a month, even. Expect to lose it more like a pound a month. Get patient, do it, and weigh yourself less frequently.
Because yeah you don't want to whittle your calories too far and there's only so much activity you can do.
Why do you recommend she weigh herself less? That gives her less data to understand her weight trend and normal fluctuations. And what’s the point of setting her goal to maintain and then eating less than that? Why not set the goal to match the goal she has? Just trying to understand your logic here.2 -
wunderkindking wrote: »I am pretty close, but not quite, there.
My advice is pretty boring, but it has worked for me as I approach my goal and it is my plan going forward.
Basically, set your goal in MFP to maintain. Eat less than that (including exercise). Don't expect to lose the weight you have left at 2lbs a month, even. Expect to lose it more like a pound a month. Get patient, do it, and weigh yourself less frequently.
Because yeah you don't want to whittle your calories too far and there's only so much activity you can do.
Why do you recommend she weigh herself less? That gives her less data to understand her weight trend and normal fluctuations. And what’s the point of setting her goal to maintain and then eating less than that? Why not set the goal to match the goal she has? Just trying to understand your logic here.
Because there is a rate of weight loss in women who have periods at which the only data you can clearly SEE is what is taken at the same point of the month, each month, unless your scale is a lot better than mine.
If you're good with watching your weight go UP because of water retention and hormones or stay stagnant until you are 3 days post period, more power to you.
But the only useful change in my data for me is the period right after my period.
otherwise? Nothing is there that is useful data - not now that I know what's going to happen, anyway. Checking and watching it do nothing or go up just irritates me and it's really NOT useful once the pattern's been established and you know what it is. The loss just isn't going to show up any time soon so tracking my weight do nothing is frustrating.
Also frankly I think weight loss becoming someone's 'hobby', especially close to goal is not a great idea.
So in essence yeah, my advice is 'eat at some level of deficit, check in occasionally, trust the process and DO OTHER THINGS" once you've got the process down and your numbers dialed in. Because slow loss is boring. And can be very, very frustrating for some people.1 -
wunderkindking wrote: »wunderkindking wrote: »I am pretty close, but not quite, there.
My advice is pretty boring, but it has worked for me as I approach my goal and it is my plan going forward.
Basically, set your goal in MFP to maintain. Eat less than that (including exercise). Don't expect to lose the weight you have left at 2lbs a month, even. Expect to lose it more like a pound a month. Get patient, do it, and weigh yourself less frequently.
Because yeah you don't want to whittle your calories too far and there's only so much activity you can do.
Why do you recommend she weigh herself less? That gives her less data to understand her weight trend and normal fluctuations. And what’s the point of setting her goal to maintain and then eating less than that? Why not set the goal to match the goal she has? Just trying to understand your logic here.
Because there is a rate of weight loss in women who have periods at which the only data you can clearly SEE is what is taken at the same point of the month, each month, unless your scale is a lot better than mine.
If you're good with watching your weight go UP because of water retention and hormones or stay stagnant until you are 3 days post period, more power to you.
But the only useful change in my data for me is the period right after my period.
otherwise? Nothing is there that is useful data - not now that I know what's going to happen, anyway. Checking and watching it do nothing or go up just irritates me and it's really NOT useful once the pattern's been established and you know what it is. The loss just isn't going to show up any time soon so tracking my weight do nothing is frustrating.
Also frankly I think weight loss becoming someone's 'hobby', especially close to goal is not a great idea.
So in essence yeah, my advice is 'eat at some level of deficit, check in occasionally, trust the process and DO OTHER THINGS" once you've got the process down and your numbers dialed in. Because slow loss is boring. And can be very, very frustrating for some people.
I’m having a hard time understanding your message and tone but I’m trying my best.
Weighing regularly provides data so you are more informed of the trend, and also how your body responds to hormones, different foods and macros, etc. It is just data. How you choose to absorb that knowledge is entirely individual. If you don’t prefer having that intel that’s fine. Others may feel empowered having a clearer expectation what that trend will look like with each variable that’s introduced.
Also frankly I think weight loss becoming someone's 'hobby', especially close to goal is not a great idea.
We both agree that a small deficit and patience is ideal for the OP and anyone trying to lose their last few lbs. I don’t, however, feel like telling people it’s a hobby because they have different goals than you is necessary though. For example, I had a late term
Miscarriage and gained 15 lbs, can’t fit my clothes. Losing that weight will not only help me NOT have a constant reminder of what I lost, but will prevent me from having to buy a new wardrobe. Unfortunately it took 7 months just to lose 5 lbs because I wasn’t tracking with a food scale, but now that I’m back on track, hopefully I’ll lose the next 7 or so quicker by being more accurate. Better to be mindful of your assumptions and know we are all here for the same reasons, to reach our goals and be our best selves.5 -
Redordeadhead wrote: »What are these frame size measurements you keep referring to? Is the an online tool you used to calculate it?
Yes, I just typed into Google 'ideal weight for height calculator' and weight for 'frame size' etc. And there are lots of online tools. I found one which asked for several measurements like height, age and wrist, waist plus other measurements, body fat % and came up with several results. All the ones I tried said my frame size is small and ideal weight 49kg. If I use a normal online calculator which doesn't ask for measurements, it says 55kg as a general weight for my height (not taking into account build).1 -
Biggiwig69 wrote: »Wow, you did great already.
I am in the same boat.
Have to lose 5 more lbs for Diet Bet and it is hard to do. 51 years old,
5‘4“/135 lbs. Goal weight is 129 lbs.
I am trying a 1000 kcal deficit/day as my last solution. I know its not the healthiest way but I want to win this bet.
I guess, the only way to reach this low weight is to be patient and really have zero cheat days.
Good for you! I didn't ever think I'd get as low as I am now, but it's been a slow process and I'm glad I did it this way. I don't think I could have without cheat days though as I find I get tempted. Knowing I have 1 or 2 days to eat what I like makes the weekdays much easier.1 -
tcunbeliever wrote: »The last few pounds/kilos are the hardest...you can aim for a small rate of loss like 1/2 a lb a week or even a pound a month, so you are only cutting out a small number (a hundred or two) calories a day (which hopefully leaves you enough calories to get adequate nutrition).
Also, for me I find that it helps not to aim for a deficit every day, but will do every other day or every 3rd day at maintenance so I can have a bit of a break from the calorie restriction, purely for my sanity and quality of life.
It's never too early to start strength training, and extra muscle will increase your metabolic needs and give your maintenance calories a bit of a boost. You don't have to eat in a surplus to gain muscle as long as you have excess body fat to metabolize, your body will create the surplus you need, it knows how to do that.
The bone density preservation alone is totally worth the boredom of weight lifting (some people like it, those people are not me) plus, being more muscular is so useful in every day life like moving things around your house or even just shopping...and it looks good, that's a nice bonus.
Congratulations on your progress so far and good luck in your new goals!!!!
Thank you! I already do weight training, but I've been getting bored with it recently so now do a variety of strength training including body weight training, Yoga as well as weights. I've always trained (for the last 20 years) so I know that diet is the main thing which is going to get me too my goal, and also calorie burn from cardio.2 -
wunderkindking wrote: »wunderkindking wrote: »I am pretty close, but not quite, there.
My advice is pretty boring, but it has worked for me as I approach my goal and it is my plan going forward.
Basically, set your goal in MFP to maintain. Eat less than that (including exercise). Don't expect to lose the weight you have left at 2lbs a month, even. Expect to lose it more like a pound a month. Get patient, do it, and weigh yourself less frequently.
Because yeah you don't want to whittle your calories too far and there's only so much activity you can do.
Why do you recommend she weigh herself less? That gives her less data to understand her weight trend and normal fluctuations. And what’s the point of setting her goal to maintain and then eating less than that? Why not set the goal to match the goal she has? Just trying to understand your logic here.
Because there is a rate of weight loss in women who have periods at which the only data you can clearly SEE is what is taken at the same point of the month, each month, unless your scale is a lot better than mine.
If you're good with watching your weight go UP because of water retention and hormones or stay stagnant until you are 3 days post period, more power to you.
But the only useful change in my data for me is the period right after my period.
otherwise? Nothing is there that is useful data - not now that I know what's going to happen, anyway. Checking and watching it do nothing or go up just irritates me and it's really NOT useful once the pattern's been established and you know what it is. The loss just isn't going to show up any time soon so tracking my weight do nothing is frustrating.
Also frankly I think weight loss becoming someone's 'hobby', especially close to goal is not a great idea.
So in essence yeah, my advice is 'eat at some level of deficit, check in occasionally, trust the process and DO OTHER THINGS" once you've got the process down and your numbers dialed in. Because slow loss is boring. And can be very, very frustrating for some people.
I’m having a hard time understanding your message and tone but I’m trying my best.
Weighing regularly provides data so you are more informed of the trend, and also how your body responds to hormones, different foods and macros, etc. It is just data. How you choose to absorb that knowledge is entirely individual. If you don’t prefer having that intel that’s fine. Others may feel empowered having a clearer expectation what that trend will look like with each variable that’s introduced.
Also frankly I think weight loss becoming someone's 'hobby', especially close to goal is not a great idea.
We both agree that a small deficit and patience is ideal for the OP and anyone trying to lose their last few lbs. I don’t, however, feel like telling people it’s a hobby because they have different goals than you is necessary though. For example, I had a late term
Miscarriage and gained 15 lbs, can’t fit my clothes. Losing that weight will not only help me NOT have a constant reminder of what I lost, but will prevent me from having to buy a new wardrobe. Unfortunately it took 7 months just to lose 5 lbs because I wasn’t tracking with a food scale, but now that I’m back on track, hopefully I’ll lose the next 7 or so quicker by being more accurate. Better to be mindful of your assumptions and know we are all here for the same reasons, to reach our goals and be our best selves.
I'm not saying someone doing it differently than me is doing it as a hobby.
I think there are a lot of ways. Fast and hard and move on, slow and steady focused on other things, whatever. I don't care. No skin off my nose. Doesn't even matter to me if you succeed or fail. It's not me. I'm not invested in anyone's success, failure, or method but myself.
I do think if it's a hobby for you something's wrong. You can define what that means yourself, just be aware and on the look out for maybe not doing that.
1 -
I want to get the excess weight of and finally be lean, but I´m not sure how I can manage it unless I go much lower in calories (ie. below 1000 per day) and increase my activity level. I´m already as active as I can be really given that I have a desk job and walk both before and after work, as well as doing workouts on top most days (cardio and strength training).
I'm going to first agree with everyone else's statement that you are already at a healthy weight. But, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with a vanity or stretch goal that surpasses healthy -- assuming you don't go too far and get to underweight. 5'4" and 130 lbs (your current weight) seems pretty good to me but I'm not an expert on women's body types so I'll let others comment on what would be a good target for you.
The part I'm more interested in is your calorie intake because something seems off.
Based on the stats you've posted and 5 days per week doing some sort of exercise, your TDEE should be somewhere between 1800 and 2000 calories per day. Given that, you should be able to lose weight eating WELL above 1000 calories. Unless I've misunderstood/miscalculated, I would be more concerned with where you are currently eating to essentially maintain your weight.
How much are you currently eating on average and how long have you been eating at that level without losing any weight ?
5 -
FitAgainBy55 wrote: »I want to get the excess weight of and finally be lean, but I´m not sure how I can manage it unless I go much lower in calories (ie. below 1000 per day) and increase my activity level. I´m already as active as I can be really given that I have a desk job and walk both before and after work, as well as doing workouts on top most days (cardio and strength training).
I'm going to first agree with everyone else's statement that you are already at a healthy weight. But, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with a vanity or stretch goal that surpasses healthy -- assuming you don't go too far and get to underweight. 5'4" and 130 lbs (your current weight) seems pretty good to me but I'm not an expert on women's body types so I'll let others comment on what would be a good target for you.
The part I'm more interested in is your calorie intake because something seems off.
Based on the stats you've posted and 5 days per week doing some sort of exercise, your TDEE should be somewhere between 1800 and 2000 calories per day. Given that, you should be able to lose weight eating WELL above 1000 calories. Unless I've misunderstood/miscalculated, I would be more concerned with where you are currently eating to essentially maintain your weight.
How much are you currently eating on average and how long have you been eating at that level without losing any weight ?
Thanks, my current weight is actually 121lbs not 130 BTW.
Regarding calorie intake, with exercise, calculators say I burn around the numbers you've stated ie. According to Fitbit, MFP etc. but in reality by body doesn't actually burn that much, or calorie burn numbers ate being overestimated.
My average right now across 7 days is 1400 per day and I'm losing very very slowly.
I have been eating 1000 calories a day weekdays this week and then at weekends I relax my diet and eat around 2000 per day.
I weigh myself on a Saturday morning before I start my first cheat day so I can tell if the numbers are going down each week.
If I don't see movement soon I may have to lower calories on cheat days too. I sit at a desk all day, so my walks, cardio and other workouts amount to around 1 hour and a half to 2 hours per day in total on weekdays and less at weekends.1 -
Definitely recomp instead of trying to lose more weight.
1 -
thisvickyruns wrote: »Definitely recomp instead of trying to lose more weight.
Will look into it. It can be hard trying to figure things out on your own. I am happy with my diet/training right now, I would just like to lose a few more kilos/body fat %. All my larger clothes are gone so not much room to put on size! I did that because in the past it's been too easy to fall off the wagon and go back to old habits and I'm determined not to go there again as things were getting way out of hand.1 -
Thanks, my current weight is actually 121lbs not 130 BTW.
Sorry, somehow I entered the wrong kg to lbs number.Regarding calorie intake, with exercise, calculators say I burn around the numbers you've stated ie. According to Fitbit, MFP etc. but in reality by body doesn't actually burn that much, or calorie burn numbers ate being overestimated.
My average right now across 7 days is 1400 per day and I'm losing very very slowly.
I have been eating 1000 calories a day weekdays this week and then at weekends I relax my diet and eat around 2000 per day.
Now that I fixed my weight conversion for you, your estimated TDEE would be somewhere in the range of 1721 - 1940. At 1400 calories per week you would be losing a little less than .5 lbs per week at the lower estimate. This would be difficult to 'see' on the scale and on your body. You say you are losing very slowly, so the numbers aren't that far off. I think what confused me was your comment about eating fewer than 1000 calories. Now that I know you eat under during the week and over during the weekend, that 1000 calories comment makes more sense. I do that same thing, so there is nothing wrong with that in general, although maybe you could shift your ratio a little.
I think you have done great and are doing great.
There are several options for you:
Continue averaging 1400 calories intake and losing weight slowly
This is the option that many people take and is definitely viable.
Lower your calorie intake
This doesn't seem like a good idea unless you can shift calories around so you aren't having to eat such a low calorie intake during the week. If you do this for too long it's possible that you trigger adaptive thermogenesis which is your body's attempt to reduce your TDEE in an attempt to compensate for persistent low calories. The fact that you calorie cycle each week, however, does mitigate the risk of this possibility. The other concern with this approach is nutrition. You would have to carefully pick what you eat to ensure you are meeting your body's needs. Once again, I personally think this is the worst choice of all the options.
Increase your TDEE with higher intensity workouts
I know you said you are already active and spend as much time as you have available exercising. I'm not recommending you spend more time, I'm suggesting you could increase the intensity of your exercise. It seems like you are looking to transition from an average normal weight body shape to a more fit/athletic body shape. The best way to do this is to train like an athlete. I realize that not everyone has this type of goal and I'm not trying to convince you that this is the only way ... but it is a way to reach your goal. Walking is great but it is probably the most inefficient (calories per hour) exercise. Instead of walking, consider transitioning to jogging. This transition should be slow to avoid injury -- following something like the couch to 5k plan is one option. Up the intensity of your strength training. Body weight exercises at your weight aren't that intense. If/when it's safe (covid) for you and you can afford it, hire a trainer for a few sessions to setup a workout plan for you. Otherwise buy some kettlebells and up your strength training game at home. The full body/compound kettlebell moves are awesome workouts. They build functional strength while burning calories closer to the cardio burn rate than traditional strength training.
Recomp
You could eat closer to maintenance and switch to a higher intensity, lift heavy approach. If you have access to a gym, you could try the strong lifts 5x5 program. I followed a similar program 10 years ago after reaching my goal weight and I saw body transformation but it did take several months to see the progress.
I'm biased on the option that I would chose based on my personal experience but I would chose the 'if you want to look like an athlete, train like an athlete' approach. When I transitioned from fat to fit for the first time 10 years ago, I had no issue losing the last few vanity pounds. My rate of weight loss was consistent even as I transitioned to low body fat (my profile picture). My personal belief is that the reason this was 'easy' for me is because of the intensity of my workouts. I ran a lot and I lifted heavy weights.1 -
FitAgainBy55 wrote: »I want to get the excess weight of and finally be lean, but I´m not sure how I can manage it unless I go much lower in calories (ie. below 1000 per day) and increase my activity level. I´m already as active as I can be really given that I have a desk job and walk both before and after work, as well as doing workouts on top most days (cardio and strength training).
I'm going to first agree with everyone else's statement that you are already at a healthy weight. But, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with a vanity or stretch goal that surpasses healthy -- assuming you don't go too far and get to underweight. 5'4" and 130 lbs (your current weight) seems pretty good to me but I'm not an expert on women's body types so I'll let others comment on what would be a good target for you.
The part I'm more interested in is your calorie intake because something seems off.
Based on the stats you've posted and 5 days per week doing some sort of exercise, your TDEE should be somewhere between 1800 and 2000 calories per day. Given that, you should be able to lose weight eating WELL above 1000 calories. Unless I've misunderstood/miscalculated, I would be more concerned with where you are currently eating to essentially maintain your weight.
How much are you currently eating on average and how long have you been eating at that level without losing any weight ?
Thanks, my current weight is actually 121lbs not 130 BTW.
Regarding calorie intake, with exercise, calculators say I burn around the numbers you've stated ie. According to Fitbit, MFP etc. but in reality by body doesn't actually burn that much, or calorie burn numbers ate being overestimated.
My average right now across 7 days is 1400 per day and I'm losing very very slowly.
I have been eating 1000 calories a day weekdays this week and then at weekends I relax my diet and eat around 2000 per day.
I weigh myself on a Saturday morning before I start my first cheat day so I can tell if the numbers are going down each week.
If I don't see movement soon I may have to lower calories on cheat days too. I sit at a desk all day, so my walks, cardio and other workouts amount to around 1 hour and a half to 2 hours per day in total on weekdays and less at weekends.
It would be good to consider whether you're training your body to expect famine, so it wants to limp along burning the minimum calories. Our bodies are pretty good at adapting to what we train them to do. Undereating, to them, is famine.
I'm not saying there's some crazy "starvation mode" thing where one can't lose weight. I'm saying that if we undereat (for our current size), our bodies will figure out a way to burn slightly less, so we may lose slower than expected. It uses things like subtle fatigue (less fidgeting, more resting, less general enthusiasm for life), slowed hair/nails growth (eventually, that can lead to thinning hair and splitting nails), maybe dropping body temperature just that tiny bit (so we may not notice, or may feel cold more often), etc.
Don't go to 1000 calories. That's not a good idea. Slow loss at this point *is* a good idea.
I'm about your size (123 point something pounds this AM, 5'5", body fat percent probably bottom half of 20s) but way older (65). I eat back all exercise calories, and even if I continued doing so, eating 1000 net calories - if I stuck to it - would put me in the hospital, severely underweight, within a few short months. I admit, I'm mysteriously a good li'l ol' calorie burner, but I'm pretty confident that if you fuel your body in a way that gets it firing on all cylinders, you can lose weight at a sensibly slow rate on way more than 1000 calories. (You might have to gradually work your way up to theoretical maintenance calories, hang there for a bit, then work yourself back down, if you've already got some slowdown (adaptive thermogenesis) in the mix.)
I've been (re-)losing a few vanity pounds in maintenance, after losing from obese to a healthy weight in 2015-16 (after previous *decades* of obesity), and I've been in a healthy weight range since then, just let myself creep up a few pounds within that range. Losing slowly has been pretty painless, but the jeans that were getting tight last Fall are now slipping down, and I'm going to need a belt or a smaller size. There were periods of a month or so where even my weight trending app thought I was gaining/maintaining (let alone what I saw on the scale day to day!), but I knew I was actually still losing fat . . . and eventually that fat loss did show up on the scale. So, I've done the "slow loss down to goal weight" thing a couple of times. Trust me, it can work. Punitively low calories is not the way to go.
Train your body to thrive. Give it reasonable calories, tolerate slow scale progress. Lift some weights (for recomposition), be sure to get adequate protein (ditto), and keep a very small deficit while you do that (to lose fat ultra-slowly in addition to the recomp effect, understanding that the muscle gain won't happen on a too-big calorie deficit that causes fast loss). You'll look better at the end of that process, *and* be healthier, *and* have less body fat. The only downside is that it'll take a little longer.
Hang in there, you can figure out what needs to be done, and do it. Wishing you huge success!3 -
Everyone's given great advice, but the main thing I would say is to be patient. Honestly, it will probably take a least a year to go from average to "fit," perhaps even more if you've lost the weight recently and ironically if you lost a lot of that weight relatively quickly.
I personally would focus more on resistance/progressive overload strength training while aiming for a very gradual loss to get into the "fit" category. I actually just saw an IG post today featuring a client's one-year progress pics of one of my favorite trainers. She clearly looked like she lost some weight and definitely looked fitter,but ironically her actual weight had stayed the same.0 -
FitAgainBy55 wrote: »Thanks, my current weight is actually 121lbs not 130 BTW.
Sorry, somehow I entered the wrong kg to lbs number.Regarding calorie intake, with exercise, calculators say I burn around the numbers you've stated ie. According to Fitbit, MFP etc. but in reality by body doesn't actually burn that much, or calorie burn numbers ate being overestimated.
My average right now across 7 days is 1400 per day and I'm losing very very slowly.
I have been eating 1000 calories a day weekdays this week and then at weekends I relax my diet and eat around 2000 per day.
Now that I fixed my weight conversion for you, your estimated TDEE would be somewhere in the range of 1721 - 1940. At 1400 calories per week you would be losing a little less than .5 lbs per week at the lower estimate. This would be difficult to 'see' on the scale and on your body. You say you are losing very slowly, so the numbers aren't that far off. I think what confused me was your comment about eating fewer than 1000 calories. Now that I know you eat under during the week and over during the weekend, that 1000 calories comment makes more sense. I do that same thing, so there is nothing wrong with that in general, although maybe you could shift your ratio a little.
I think you have done great and are doing great.
There are several options for you:
Continue averaging 1400 calories intake and losing weight slowly
This is the option that many people take and is definitely viable.
Lower your calorie intake
This doesn't seem like a good idea unless you can shift calories around so you aren't having to eat such a low calorie intake during the week. If you do this for too long it's possible that you trigger adaptive thermogenesis which is your body's attempt to reduce your TDEE in an attempt to compensate for persistent low calories. The fact that you calorie cycle each week, however, does mitigate the risk of this possibility. The other concern with this approach is nutrition. You would have to carefully pick what you eat to ensure you are meeting your body's needs. Once again, I personally think this is the worst choice of all the options.
Increase your TDEE with higher intensity workouts
I know you said you are already active and spend as much time as you have available exercising. I'm not recommending you spend more time, I'm suggesting you could increase the intensity of your exercise. It seems like you are looking to transition from an average normal weight body shape to a more fit/athletic body shape. The best way to do this is to train like an athlete. I realize that not everyone has this type of goal and I'm not trying to convince you that this is the only way ... but it is a way to reach your goal. Walking is great but it is probably the most inefficient (calories per hour) exercise. Instead of walking, consider transitioning to jogging. This transition should be slow to avoid injury -- following something like the couch to 5k plan is one option. Up the intensity of your strength training. Body weight exercises at your weight aren't that intense. If/when it's safe (covid) for you and you can afford it, hire a trainer for a few sessions to setup a workout plan for you. Otherwise buy some kettlebells and up your strength training game at home. The full body/compound kettlebell moves are awesome workouts. They build functional strength while burning calories closer to the cardio burn rate than traditional strength training.
Recomp
You could eat closer to maintenance and switch to a higher intensity, lift heavy approach. If you have access to a gym, you could try the strong lifts 5x5 program. I followed a similar program 10 years ago after reaching my goal weight and I saw body transformation but it did take several months to see the progress.
I'm biased on the option that I would chose based on my personal experience but I would chose the 'if you want to look like an athlete, train like an athlete' approach. When I transitioned from fat to fit for the first time 10 years ago, I had no issue losing the last few vanity pounds. My rate of weight loss was consistent even as I transitioned to low body fat (my profile picture). My personal belief is that the reason this was 'easy' for me is because of the intensity of my workouts. I ran a lot and I lifted heavy weights. [/quote
Thanks, what you're saying definitely makes sense!
I'm not going to go lower on calories but I think with my current approach losing 0.5lbs a week is slow but manageable. I known I'll get where I want to be in a few months time and that's great.
I have a gym at home in my garage so access to weights isn't an issue. I was doing weight training at the start of my weight loss last year but stopped for a few months on the advice of my coach who told me that cardio should be my main daily activity for fat loss. I actually started weights again a couple of months ago but was getting bored as I train on my own so switched to doing Web based workouts following a trainer but there are weights an a body weight exercises on the website I use. I've heard of strong lifts 5x5 before so might check it out again. I really like the idea of a recomp I'd it will help with fat loss and give me a fitter look.0 -
FitAgainBy55 wrote: »I want to get the excess weight of and finally be lean, but I´m not sure how I can manage it unless I go much lower in calories (ie. below 1000 per day) and increase my activity level. I´m already as active as I can be really given that I have a desk job and walk both before and after work, as well as doing workouts on top most days (cardio and strength training).
I'm going to first agree with everyone else's statement that you are already at a healthy weight. But, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with a vanity or stretch goal that surpasses healthy -- assuming you don't go too far and get to underweight. 5'4" and 130 lbs (your current weight) seems pretty good to me but I'm not an expert on women's body types so I'll let others comment on what would be a good target for you.
The part I'm more interested in is your calorie intake because something seems off.
Based on the stats you've posted and 5 days per week doing some sort of exercise, your TDEE should be somewhere between 1800 and 2000 calories per day. Given that, you should be able to lose weight eating WELL above 1000 calories. Unless I've misunderstood/miscalculated, I would be more concerned with where you are currently eating to essentially maintain your weight.
How much are you currently eating on average and how long have you been eating at that level without losing any weight ?
Thanks, my current weight is actually 121lbs not 130 BTW.
Regarding calorie intake, with exercise, calculators say I burn around the numbers you've stated ie. According to Fitbit, MFP etc. but in reality by body doesn't actually burn that much, or calorie burn numbers ate being overestimated.
My average right now across 7 days is 1400 per day and I'm losing very very slowly.
I have been eating 1000 calories a day weekdays this week and then at weekends I relax my diet and eat around 2000 per day.
I weigh myself on a Saturday morning before I start my first cheat day so I can tell if the numbers are going down each week.
If I don't see movement soon I may have to lower calories on cheat days too. I sit at a desk all day, so my walks, cardio and other workouts amount to around 1 hour and a half to 2 hours per day in total on weekdays and less at weekends.
It would be good to consider whether you're training your body to expect famine, so it wants to limp along burning the minimum calories. Our bodies are pretty good at adapting to what we train them to do. Undereating, to them, is famine.
I'm not saying there's some crazy "starvation mode" thing where one can't lose weight. I'm saying that if we undereat (for our current size), our bodies will figure out a way to burn slightly less, so we may lose slower than expected. It uses things like subtle fatigue (less fidgeting, more resting, less general enthusiasm for life), slowed hair/nails growth (eventually, that can lead to thinning hair and splitting nails), maybe dropping body temperature just that tiny bit (so we may not notice, or may feel cold more often), etc.
Don't go to 1000 calories. That's not a good idea. Slow loss at this point *is* a good idea.
I'm about your size (123 point something pounds this AM, 5'5", body fat percent probably bottom half of 20s) but way older (65). I eat back all exercise calories, and even if I continued doing so, eating 1000 net calories - if I stuck to it - would put me in the hospital, severely underweight, within a few short months. I admit, I'm mysteriously a good li'l ol' calorie burner, but I'm pretty confident that if you fuel your body in a way that gets it firing on all cylinders, you can lose weight at a sensibly slow rate on way more than 1000 calories. (You might have to gradually work your way up to theoretical maintenance calories, hang there for a bit, then work yourself back down, if you've already got some slowdown (adaptive thermogenesis) in the mix.)
I've been (re-)losing a few vanity pounds in maintenance, after losing from obese to a healthy weight in 2015-16 (after previous *decades* of obesity), and I've been in a healthy weight range since then, just let myself creep up a few pounds within that range. Losing slowly has been pretty painless, but the jeans that were getting tight last Fall are now slipping down, and I'm going to need a belt or a smaller size. There were periods of a month or so where even my weight trending app thought I was gaining/maintaining (let alone what I saw on the scale day to day!), but I knew I was actually still losing fat . . . and eventually that fat loss did show up on the scale. So, I've done the "slow loss down to goal weight" thing a couple of times. Trust me, it can work. Punitively low calories is not the way to go.
Train your body to thrive. Give it reasonable calories, tolerate slow scale progress. Lift some weights (for recomposition), be sure to get adequate protein (ditto), and keep a very small deficit while you do that (to lose fat ultra-slowly in addition to the recomp effect, understanding that the muscle gain won't happen on a too-big calorie deficit that causes fast loss). You'll look better at the end of that process, *and* be healthier, *and* have less body fat. The only downside is that it'll take a little longer.
Hang in there, you can figure out what needs to be done, and do it. Wishing you huge success!
Thanks, I agree with what you've said, though I average 1400 calories so I only have 5 x 1000 calorie days and 2 x 2000 calorie. I find that fits into my lifestyle and stops me feeling deprived or left out at weekends, and jeeps me on track the rest of the time.
I must admit I find weight training a little boring, but I know it's the best way to change my shape. A recomp is probably needed and a little patience! I'll keep at it and I know I'll reach my goal eventually.1 -
Speakeasy76 wrote: »Everyone's given great advice, but the main thing I would say is to be patient. Honestly, it will probably take a least a year to go from average to "fit," perhaps even more if you've lost the weight recently and ironically if you lost a lot of that weight relatively quickly.
I personally would focus more on resistance/progressive overload strength training while aiming for a very gradual loss to get into the "fit" category. I actually just saw an IG post today featuring a client's one-year progress pics of one of my favorite trainers. She clearly looked like she lost some weight and definitely looked fitter,but ironically her actual weight had stayed the same.
I know, in quite an impatient person but having said that, the last year has gone really fast!
I will take on board all the advice which has been really helpful and I'm sure I'll reach my goal.2
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
- 426 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