How long to lose 40#?
Options
Replies
-
I’d just like to tiptoe in to point out……when you are losing a considerable amount of weight, the weight comes off faster in the beginning.
As you lose more and come closer to goal, the rate of loss slows down.
All the burning excitement you felt with the first fifty lost is laser focused on the next, and slowing loss will feel excruciatingly slow and frustrating.
Just hang in there, appreciate what you’ve already lost (great job BTW!) and know that in six months or a year, you’ll look back and say “well that wasn’t as awful as I thought”.
Time passes, and with continued mindfulness, so does weight.7 -
that is why you need to lower calories as you lose weight.springlering62 wrote: »I’d just like to tiptoe in to point out……when you are losing a considerable amount of weight, the weight comes off faster in the beginning.
As you lose more and come closer to goal, the rate of loss slows down.
All the burning excitement you felt with the first fifty lost is laser focused on the next, and slowing loss will feel excruciatingly slow and frustrating.
Just hang in there, appreciate what you’ve already lost (great job BTW!) and know that in six months or a year, you’ll look back and say “well that wasn’t as awful as I thought”.
Time passes, and with continued mindfulness, so does weight.
1 -
tomcustombuilder wrote: »
that is why you need to lower calories as you lose weight.springlering62 wrote: »I’d just like to tiptoe in to point out……when you are losing a considerable amount of weight, the weight comes off faster in the beginning.
As you lose more and come closer to goal, the rate of loss slows down.
All the burning excitement you felt with the first fifty lost is laser focused on the next, and slowing loss will feel excruciatingly slow and frustrating.
Just hang in there, appreciate what you’ve already lost (great job BTW!) and know that in six months or a year, you’ll look back and say “well that wasn’t as awful as I thought”.
Time passes, and with continued mindfulness, so does weight.
Your rate of loss will still be lower, though. When you’re losing a large amount of weight, as I did and OP is trying to do, you can’t keep up that rate of loss.
The first fifty pounds were a snap. I was losing 10 a month for the first five or six months and then it slowed, slowed, and slowed some more.
Loses will slow down. Mathematically, there’s only so much you can cut, not to mention the potential harm if you try to keep banging the pounds off.
It’s disingenuous to keep stating “cut calories” as the perfect solution, and it’s also a bit insulting implying that someone is failing because they can’t or won’t commit to exponentially larger cuts.
Yes, you do need to eat less as you lose weight and have less to lose. You don’t need as many calories to fuel the smaller body. But even that’s not always 100% true. I actually ate more the smaller I got. At one point I was up to about 3500 a day.
That could almost be construed as the dark mirror image of your plan. I exercised more and more to be able to eat that, to the point I pretty much had a problem.
I’m at a pretty happy median now of less exercise and averaging about 26-2800/day.
Excess in either direction is a dumbass move.7 -
I said to lower calories. No need to keep up the same rate of loss however at some point your original calorie amount may become your new maintenance and without lowering a bit you won’t lose any more unless you’re activity has increased, whether through NEAT or otherwise.springlering62 wrote: »tomcustombuilder wrote: »
that is why you need to lower calories as you lose weight.springlering62 wrote: »I’d just like to tiptoe in to point out……when you are losing a considerable amount of weight, the weight comes off faster in the beginning.
As you lose more and come closer to goal, the rate of loss slows down.
All the burning excitement you felt with the first fifty lost is laser focused on the next, and slowing loss will feel excruciatingly slow and frustrating.
Just hang in there, appreciate what you’ve already lost (great job BTW!) and know that in six months or a year, you’ll look back and say “well that wasn’t as awful as I thought”.
Time passes, and with continued mindfulness, so does weight.
Your rate of loss will still be lower, though. When you’re losing a large amount of weight, as I did and OP is trying to do, you can’t keep up that rate of loss.
The first fifty pounds were a snap. I was losing 10 a month for the first five or six months and then it slowed, slowed, and slowed some more.
Loses will slow down. Mathematically, there’s only so much you can cut, not to mention the potential harm if you try to keep banging the pounds off.
It’s disingenuous to keep stating “cut calories” as the perfect solution, and it’s also a bit insulting implying that someone is failing because they can’t or won’t commit to exponentially larger cuts.
Yes, you do need to eat less as you lose weight and have less to lose. You don’t need as many calories to fuel the smaller body. But even that’s not always 100% true. I actually ate more the smaller I got. At one point I was up to about 3500 a day.
That could almost be construed as the dark mirror image of your plan. I exercised more and more to be able to eat that, to the point I pretty much had a problem.
I’m at a pretty happy median now of less exercise and averaging about 26-2800/day.
Excess in either direction is a dumbass move.
1 -
tomcustombuilder wrote: »
I said to lower calories. No need to keep up the same rate of loss however at some point your original calorie amount may become your new maintenance and without lowering a bit you won’t lose any more unless you’re activity has increased, whether through NEAT or otherwise.springlering62 wrote: »tomcustombuilder wrote: »
that is why you need to lower calories as you lose weight.springlering62 wrote: »I’d just like to tiptoe in to point out……when you are losing a considerable amount of weight, the weight comes off faster in the beginning.
As you lose more and come closer to goal, the rate of loss slows down.
All the burning excitement you felt with the first fifty lost is laser focused on the next, and slowing loss will feel excruciatingly slow and frustrating.
Just hang in there, appreciate what you’ve already lost (great job BTW!) and know that in six months or a year, you’ll look back and say “well that wasn’t as awful as I thought”.
Time passes, and with continued mindfulness, so does weight.
Your rate of loss will still be lower, though. When you’re losing a large amount of weight, as I did and OP is trying to do, you can’t keep up that rate of loss.
The first fifty pounds were a snap. I was losing 10 a month for the first five or six months and then it slowed, slowed, and slowed some more.
Loses will slow down. Mathematically, there’s only so much you can cut, not to mention the potential harm if you try to keep banging the pounds off.
It’s disingenuous to keep stating “cut calories” as the perfect solution, and it’s also a bit insulting implying that someone is failing because they can’t or won’t commit to exponentially larger cuts.
Yes, you do need to eat less as you lose weight and have less to lose. You don’t need as many calories to fuel the smaller body. But even that’s not always 100% true. I actually ate more the smaller I got. At one point I was up to about 3500 a day.
That could almost be construed as the dark mirror image of your plan. I exercised more and more to be able to eat that, to the point I pretty much had a problem.
I’m at a pretty happy median now of less exercise and averaging about 26-2800/day.
Excess in either direction is a dumbass move.
Thanks for clarifying.2 -
As long as you aren't eating over maintenance *for your goal weight*, you'll still lose. It might be slow to very slow, but you'll lose it.2
-
You can't put a time frame on the process. Keep at it and you'll get there. Changes are happening even when you don't see it1
-
The op's effective caloric deficit has been of the order of 729 Cal a day for 8 months. An approximately 37% to 38% deficit at her apparent TDEE.
A more than 35% deficit. For the past eight months.
The answer is not to go faster and with a larger deficit in order to get it over and done with faster.
Because weight management is not done at goal.
The op (who probably can't even find the thread and is not saying much) really needs to consider that the only reason she is now looking for "how long to goal" is because she is starting to feel that what she is doing is unsustainable.
Which it IS.
Because she has been at a 35%+ deficit for 8 months!
And she wants to be done with it.
Not because she is not benefiting.
But because she's crossing the line into making it more hard than it has to be for herself.
She ought to be looking at long term compliance and sustainability. She ought to be looking for that golden medium.
Which is much more likely to be found at a 25% or even 20% deficit as compared to her current 35%+ or an even higher deficit as was suggested.
And she probably should be using a weight trend app instead of expecting to see continuous scale drops.
And she better be exploring ways of eating, moving, and existing that she believes she may be able to use in order to continue to manage her weight for at least the next 5 years.
Which will be much harder to do if she is primarily concerned about how fast the next 40lbs will go.
Worry about how you will make long term diet and movement and lifestyle adjustments and changes... ones you feel you might be able to keep on making for multiple years. Ones that put you on a path heading in the right direction
Because some amount of permanent changes that will not allow you to easily revert do need to be made and need to stick around for the long term
So there is no end date.
Just weight management.
Which requires your default to not be a white knuckled existence. Just a good enough groove.
She does not need to lower calories.
She does need to re examine expectations, recognize achievements made and start experimenting with adjustments.
Her backcalculated Calories and rate of loss seem to indicate a slightly to lightly active TDEE level using sailrabbit TDEE
Not saying that's what she is. But that's the level that roughly reflects her rate of loss based on her logging. She's best able to re estimate this herself using her more exact full numbers
Has she had any practice eating longer term at the ~1650 Cal end goal weight maintenance Calories this would predict?
I would propose that treating the end goal maintenance prediction as current maintenance and accepting that anything below that is a target deficit with time being irrelevant would be THE way to go.
It's been eight months. That's just the cover charge. The ticket to the arena.
Let's start talking about how she will get to eight years while never weighing more than she does today.9
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 987 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions