Message Boards » General Diet and Weight Loss Help

TOPIC: Is losing 20lbs in 6 weeks possible?

« Prev 1
« Prev 1
 
Ic_disabled_photos
Topic has been inactive for 30 days or more and images have been disabled.
Display All Images
December 20, 2011 2:28 PM
I really want to lose 20lbs more by January 31st! I eat 1,200 calories a day and walk anywhere from 45-120 minutes a day with my dog. Is my goal achievable with how little I exersice? I'm so out of shape, it's sad lol. I can bike pretty far but running is very hard for me. I'm also going to start playing tennis 2x a week with my husband. Has anyone else achieved a goal like this?
  13476468
December 20, 2011 2:34 PM
You could but you'd have to starve yourself and that's not healthy.

Keep doing what you're doing. Your body will shed it when it's time. You're much more likely to keep it off then.
  9648316
December 20, 2011 2:48 PM
I think it's possible...will it take a ton of hard work and discipline? Yes.
Personally, I don't pay any attention to the "starvation mode" myths floating around. Drives me nuts if we are being completely honest ;-P In all reality, I am a 5'3", 19 year old woman who leads a VERY inactive lifestyle. I sit at a desk from 9-5, do school work (sitting some more) from 5-9. I workout 5-6 times a week for 30 minutes over my lunch break, and burn roughly 260 calories in doing so. Other than that, my body really doesn’t NEED 1200 calories as suggested on this site. I believe that everyone’s body functions differently. To generalize by saying that you absolutely positively need to consume 1200 calories a day in order to “healthily” lose weight comes across as very controversial to me. Obviously a 400 lb woman is going to need more calories to optimally function/day versus a 5'3" 128ish lb me. You also have to budget in what type of activities you are doing throughout the day and how many calories you need in order to do them, etc. I eat when I am hungry, but choose lower calorie, healthier options so my total calories tend to be lower. I’m not starving, I am not fatigued; I am actually the opposite. Long story short, I don’t buy the 1200 calorie deal or starvation mode! We were all created differently!
I believe you are on my friends list now that I think about it...I could take a look at your diary if you want and see if there is anything I see that could help you cut unnecessary calories?
I’ve been at this for about 2 ½ weeks and have already lost 8 pounds. I think if you put your mind to it, you can do anything!
  13325250
December 20, 2011 2:51 PM
I lost 22 lbs in 5 weeks...so yeah its possible. You really have to know your body though and have the perfect exercise/calorie combo. Too much of one or the other can throw you off.
Edited by lovekck On December 20, 2011 2:52 PM
  9075915
December 20, 2011 2:52 PM
Sure, if you starve yourself and include in your scale victory lean body mass.
This is just ABSURD!

Chances are you'll gain it all back, so why not work smart and lose 1lb per week and think long term?
December 20, 2011 2:55 PM
QUOTE:

I think it's possible...will it take a ton of hard work and discipline? Yes.
Personally, I don't pay any attention to the "starvation mode" myths floating around. Drives me nuts if we are being completely honest ;-P In all reality, I am a 5'3", 19 year old woman who leads a VERY inactive lifestyle. I sit at a desk from 9-5, do school work (sitting some more) from 5-9. I workout 5-6 times a week for 30 minutes over my lunch break, and burn roughly 260 calories in doing so. Other than that, my body really doesn’t NEED 1200 calories as suggested on this site. I believe that everyone’s body functions differently. To generalize by saying that you absolutely positively need to consume 1200 calories a day in order to “healthily” lose weight comes across as very controversial to me. Obviously a 400 lb woman is going to need more calories to optimally function/day versus a 5'3" 128ish lb me. You also have to budget in what type of activities you are doing throughout the day and how many calories you need in order to do them, etc. I eat when I am hungry, but choose lower calorie, healthier options so my total calories tend to be lower. I’m not starving, I am not fatigued; I am actually the opposite. Long story short, I don’t buy the 1200 calorie deal or starvation mode! We were all created differently!
I believe you are on my friends list now that I think about it...I could take a look at your diary if you want and see if there is anything I see that could help you cut unnecessary calories?
I’ve been at this for about 2 ½ weeks and have already lost 8 pounds. I think if you put your mind to it, you can do anything!


Have you actually read up on it? There is loads of scientific evidence floating around out there that starvation mode is a very real and a very scary thing. Starvation mode isn't a "belief", it's a scientific fact. There's a big difference between the two.

To respond to the original poster, my big question is why? Why is it so important to lose that amount of weight by that specific time. Weight loss is supposed to be a lifestyle change. It's not a sprint, it's a marathon you run your whole life. What good is it to lose that weight that quickly if the way you do it is unsustainable? Focus on making steady progress to get to your goal weight. You're much more likely to stay at your goal weight than if you set arbitrary goals.
  2766532
December 20, 2011 2:57 PM
how did you manage to lose 22 lbs in 5 weeks...i would love to know the secret
December 20, 2011 2:59 PM
i wanted to loose 10 lbs in 2 months and it's far from happening :( i may get 5 off but that will be it, max! I also have been doing 45 min cardio 5 days a week and 30ds 7 days a week and i still have a long way to go to get the other 5-6 lbs off! it has already been 2 months for me and also at 1200 cals a day and i always eat my exercise calories too...
December 20, 2011 3:00 PM
I've lost 30 lbs. in 8 weeks, so yes it's possible, but I started at 227, so I had quite a few lbs. on you. I eat on average about 1200, but I also average about 3-4 hours of exercise a day. It's not sustainable long-term and probably not realistic for most people. I'm just lucky enough that I currently have a lot of extra spare time so I work out like it's my job. I ran a little math using the calculator that I've been using to calculate where my net intakes should be and in order to lose 20 lbs. in 6 weeks for someone your size, you'd have to be netting a very low amount. My suggestion would be to re-evaluate your goals and give yourself a little leeway there. It's too easy to end up feeling down in the dumps if you set unrealistic goals and then don't reach them. Given your current weight and exercise amounts, 2 lbs. a week might be a bit more realistic. Best of luck to you.
  640981
December 20, 2011 3:03 PM
Can you lose 20 lbs of WEIGHT in six weeks? You can, but a big chunk of that 20 lbs will be water weight and muscle. Can you lose 20 lbs of FAT in six weeks? No, it is scientifically impossible. Keep in mind each pound of fat is equal to around 3500 calories. So to lose 20 lbs of fat, you will need to produce a deficit of at least 3500 x 20 = 70,000 calories. Divide that over 6 weeks, would be a daily deficit of 2,000 calories. Basically if you ate 1200 calories, you would need to burn 3200 calories per day to achieve 20 lbs of fat loss. My figures are approximations but you get the idea. You could starve yourself and lose a bunch of water weight, some fat, and a good amount of lean body mass, leaving yourself depleted, flabbier, and yes, slightly thinner. You are better off shooting for 10lbs of fat loss over six weeks.
December 20, 2011 3:04 PM
I retract my previous statement. Upon further investigation, there is too much stupid in this thread for me.

I wish I could delete my post to extract myself.
Edited by YukonJoy On December 20, 2011 3:05 PM
December 20, 2011 3:07 PM
I have found that activity goals are better than actual lb goals. If you only lose, say 10 pounds, would you consider that success? You would be better off than you are now. So, what if you wrote down goals for how many calories you are going to eat, how many times you are going to exercise, water you are going to drink etc., and see how you go. I think by having such a high goal in a short time frame you risk being discouraged.

GG
  902129
December 20, 2011 3:07 PM
Yes, it is possible but I dont think you want that type of weight loss. Plus you may hae exessive skin and I dont think you want that also.
December 20, 2011 3:07 PM
QUOTE:

Have you actually read up on it? There is loads of scientific evidence floating around out there that starvation mode is a very real and a very scary thing. Starvation mode isn't a "belief", it's a scientific fact. There's a big difference between the two.

To respond to the original poster, my big question is why? Why is it so important to lose that amount of weight by that specific time. Weight loss is supposed to be a lifestyle change. It's not a sprint, it's a marathon you run your whole life. What good is it to lose that weight that quickly if the way you do it is unsustainable? Focus on making steady progress to get to your goal weight. You're much more likely to stay at your goal weight than if you set arbitrary goals.

Starvation mode takes more than skipping a few meals or cutting a few hundred calories to initiate...
Your body isn't going to spiral out of control from eating less for a matter of a month and a half. Starvation mode, yes, is very real. There was a huge study done on it post WWII, if you would like to go as far as bringing out the books. Those people's caloric intakes were basically cut into fourths, and, in addition, they were forced to exercise a certain amount per day - using up a vast majority of the very few calories they were allowed. Obviously starvation mode does exist in such a drastic situation, but I think it's a bit much to say that cutting your calories from 1000 to 700/day will cause your body to go into starvation mode.
I'm not fully convinced you actually read my entire post? What about for someone who sits around all day? Is it really necessary for them to consume 1200 calories when all they are doing is sitting on their ass all day long? Fat = unused energy. If we are consuming 1200+ calories a day and our body is still storing some of these calories as fat, obviously they weren't needed calories now were they? I'd recommend you look into doing some research before waving the starvation stick in someones face. It has been blown substantially out of proportion.
  13325250
December 20, 2011 3:08 PM
I lost 30 in about six weeks so yeah it's possible. Just make sure you aren't starving yourself. The big thing for me was to watch my salt and water intake.
  5711799
December 20, 2011 3:12 PM
QUOTE:
Other than that, my body really doesn’t NEED 1200 calories as suggested on this site


Can you produce the scientific evidence for that please? 1200 is the base minimum that every reputable doctor and peer reviewed study states is the minimum amount our bodies need to function.

QUOTE:
To generalize by saying that you absolutely positively need to consume 1200 calories a day in order to “healthily” lose weight comes across as very controversial to me. Obviously a 400 lb woman is going to need more calories to optimally function/day versus a 5'3" 128ish lb me


I'd like to see the people who state that 1200 is the only amount you can eat to lose weight. Without being corrected of course.

One of the things that shocked me when I first started was the people telling others to eat more to lose weight. Very few people here will tell people to eat less. Why? Because its not healthy!

I'm a 250lbs women who is on 1600 cals and still losing. If I was 140lbs (and still wanting to lose of course) I'd prob then be on 1200.
  9648316
December 20, 2011 3:12 PM
Oops!
Edited by Lozze On December 20, 2011 3:13 PM
  9648316
December 20, 2011 3:14 PM
I lost 24 lbs in 4 weeks when I started but I was technically 90 lbs overweight and I wasn't eating nearly enough. I was much happier once I relaxed and started eating more and losing at a healther pace. From what I can tell from your picture you don't really look like you have that much weight to lose and in my experience that makes it harder to lose quickly. I doubt you could do it safely but good luck with whatever you choose to do.
  9342433
December 20, 2011 3:15 PM
And might I also suggest we all forget everything we see on "The Biggest Loser"
Edited by BobbyClerici On December 20, 2011 3:32 PM
December 20, 2011 3:22 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

Have you actually read up on it? There is loads of scientific evidence floating around out there that starvation mode is a very real and a very scary thing. Starvation mode isn't a "belief", it's a scientific fact. There's a big difference between the two.

To respond to the original poster, my big question is why? Why is it so important to lose that amount of weight by that specific time. Weight loss is supposed to be a lifestyle change. It's not a sprint, it's a marathon you run your whole life. What good is it to lose that weight that quickly if the way you do it is unsustainable? Focus on making steady progress to get to your goal weight. You're much more likely to stay at your goal weight than if you set arbitrary goals.

Starvation mode takes more than skipping a few meals or cutting a few hundred calories to initiate...
Your body isn't going to spiral out of control from eating less for a matter of a month and a half. Starvation mode, yes, is very real. There was a huge study done on it post WWII, if you would like to go as far as bringing out the books. Those people's caloric intakes were basically cut into fourths, and, in addition, they were forced to exercise a certain amount per day - using up a vast majority of the very few calories they were allowed. Obviously starvation mode does exist in such a drastic situation, but I think it's a bit much to say that cutting your calories from 1000 to 700/day will cause your body to go into starvation mode.
I'm not fully convinced you actually read my entire post? What about for someone who sits around all day? Is it really necessary for them to consume 1200 calories when all they are doing is sitting on their ass all day long? Fat = unused energy. If we are consuming 1200+ calories a day and our body is still storing some of these calories as fat, obviously they weren't needed calories now were they? I'd recommend you look into doing some research before waving the starvation stick in someones face. It has been blown substantially out of proportion.


I would just like to say that on my rest days, my life is very inactive. I have a 9-5 desk job and I like to read when I get home, etc. Recently, I wore my chest-strap heart rate monitor to work because I was curious about just how many calories I used while sitting at my job/home on an inactive day. In the 12 hours that I wore it, my body burned around 1500 calories. That does not include the calories I burned during my 7 hours of sleep or the extra 5 hours of my day that I did not record. I'm not saying everyone burns the same, I am saying that in a very inactive day, it is still possible for a person to burn more than 1200 calories all day. You can't just assume that your body is using less than that since you lead a sedentary lifestyle.

Also, our bodies are very sensitive. Even if you don't want to call it "starvation mode", if you give it even 200 calories less than it wants, it will hold onto fat for dear life. You have to FUEL your body for it to be comfortable to BURN fat... and you don't want to burn muscle.
Edited by agleckle On December 20, 2011 3:33 PM
December 20, 2011 3:24 PM
Why the heck not.. Depends on how you go about it!!!
  3923333
December 20, 2011 3:27 PM
The thing to understand is there is such a thing as too much exercise, or I suppose gradually decreasing in effect as the more you do.

an hour to two a few to 5 days a week is plenty. Anymore and your likely to see overtrain than progress.

Diet is extremely important. 1200 is good, but horrid on an exercise regimen if they are all microwavables. Whole foods, healthy foods non processed foods. And youll likely come close.
  5849205
December 20, 2011 3:35 PM
If you eat healthy and increase your exercise from more than walking, it may be possible....you need to add cardio and strength training to get thr results you want in that short period of time...
December 20, 2011 3:37 PM
This could be a bad idea. Two pounds a week is all you can safely lose. Back in 1988, I lost a lot of weight quickly on MediFast at my (now ex) wife's suggestion ... they had to closely monitor my liver function to make sure I wasn't doing any damage. That alone should tell you something. The fact that I lost a lot of lean body mass along with the fat, and ended up putting it all on quickly ought to also tell you something. You want to lose over three pounds a week ... that's pushing it.

http://www.dietitian.com/overweig.html
Edited by vingogly On December 20, 2011 3:38 PM
  11525043
December 20, 2011 3:37 PM
1% to 1 1/2 % of your body wight is responsible, but without hitting the gym hard your asking for disappointment.. So at 178 that is [1.78 to 2.63] so if you have a body wight of 250lb [2.5lb to 3.75lb] as for the 1200 calorie rule it's a good idea. So that means you have to increase you calorie deficit with exercises. in short Do the math.

Reply

Message Boards » General Diet and Weight Loss Help

Posts by members, moderators and admins should not be considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy.