100 lb. Club - Starting Again
03-11-2010, 09:07 AM
After loosing around 45 pounds last year, I had fallen off the wagon and ended up gaining all my weight back, plus some extra. I have decided to come back and get on track once again.
When I started my diet at 245lbs I wanted to loose around 3 pounds a week, so I was eating around 1,300 calories a day. As I got down to around 200lbs those calories dropped to around 900 per day and I found myself really struggling to not go over those calories. Only half way to my goal I ended up giving up on my diet.
I want to start my diet again, and I know I can do it, but I'm afraid once I get down to where I was before the same thing will happen to me and I will end up giving up again. :(
Does anyone have any suggestions on what I can do to cope with the low amount of calories I will be facing? Any words of advice or comments are greatly appreciated.
Thank you :)
03-11-2010, 09:17 AM
I don’t know if it’s okay if I post on this board, but your post title caught my attention…I’ve been struggling to stay on the wagon lately too and really want to recommit myself and find that motivation I had at the beginning of my journey.
I could be wrong, but 900 calories sounds really low…for anyone. I would suggest you maybe start out eating more than 1300 (1600?) and then as you cut them back, you don’t have to go quite so low. I know I couldn’t really function on 900 calories…that’s just kind of what I was thinking when I read your post!
03-11-2010, 09:21 AM
Yeah, aiming for a healthy loss of 2 pounds a week would give you an extra 500 calories a day. Better to lose slowly with a plan you can actually stick with, than a fast lost that makes you give up. Besides, 900 calories is really, really, really low. I don't think you should go under 1200, ever.
03-11-2010, 09:23 AM
I must agree with pp that 900 is just too low. It's not sustainable. The best plan of attack is one that you can live with for the long haul.
03-11-2010, 09:41 AM
I agree -- 900 was too low, and as you found out, not sustainable.
Don't go that low to create a calorie deficit. Eat to support your weight loss and if you want to bump up the burn, consider bumping up the exercise instead.
03-11-2010, 10:04 AM
Think about it as you are changing your life forever. If you just think of it as a diet, something you will eventually stop doing then the weight will come back. 900 is way to low doll. Baby steps. Slow and steady wins the race.
03-11-2010, 10:05 AM
I don't know what to suggest for your calorie intake, though I agree 900 is pushing it. I don't know how you'd get all your nutrients in at that level. I'd suggest a higher calorie intake, but make sure that every calorie is a healthy one. Lots of green and lots of fruit.
I think you can lose at a pretty good pace that way, not too fast, not too slow.
03-11-2010, 10:10 AM
You need to ask yourself if you want this weight off quickly or do you want it off PERMANENTLY? The 900 calories may certainly get if off quicker, but as you have well found out - it wasn't by any means PERMANENT.
Eat more nutritious calories. Stay on plan - indefinitely - like forever - no stopping - just continuing - and the weight will come off (in whatever time frame). The weight will come off and STAY off - and that is the ultimate goal.
Rethink your plan. Devise and customize a plan that you can stick with and more importantly are WILLING to stick with.
Does anyone have any suggestions on what I can do to cope with the low amount of calories I will be facing?
Yup. Don't aim for a low amount of calories, then you won't have to cope with it. ;)
Pick a number to start with - say 1500 1600 calories - make them really COUNT by making them filling, satiating and voluminous - no junk - no empty calories - so that you WON'T be/get hungry. It's a heckuva lot easier to stay on plan when you're satisfied and not hungry.
Each and every excess pound on you is a pound that can be lost. Each and every one. You have the ability to lose the weight and keep it off. Make no mistake of it. Now go out there and set yourself up for success with a good, solid, sensible, reasonable plan. :)
03-11-2010, 10:13 AM
Just echoing what other people have said in that you should probably be eating more calories. If you focus are really filling high fiber foods like lots of veggies and whole grains, you can feel very satisfied while staying within your calorie range. Ideally, you should shoot to lose 1-2 a week by food alone and you can lose more if you increase your activity level at the same time.
03-11-2010, 11:18 AM
Thank you all for your wonderful advice and support :)
I will aim for the calories to loose two pounds a week this time around. I had no idea it would be that big of a difference between the 3lbs/week and the 2lbs/week. At the weight I am now, the 3lbs/week is 1,300 calories and the 2lbs/week is 1,700. The 1,700 is definitely more manageable for me
03-11-2010, 11:24 AM
don't forget that you can add in activity to speed up the loss. You definitely cannot exercise your way thin if you aren't eating right, but if you burn an additional 250 calories a day on top of a good eating plan, that's another 1/2 pound loss a week, with many, many other benefits from exercise.
03-11-2010, 11:40 AM
I agree....if you start way low in calories - you'll end up having to eat so little that it won't be anything you can do long term. There are many places on line that can give you an idea of where to start with calories. They will calculate using the information you give them. Often - different sights will differ in the amount of calories to eat. But, it's an option if you want to check.
When I was that weight I ate approximately 1600 calories a day.
The rate at which you lose is not as important as being able to 'live' with your healthy food plan.
03-11-2010, 11:43 AM
Lots of talk here about SPECIFIC numbers and how doing so and so will get you so and so much of a weight loss.
But the truth is - it. just. doesn't. work. that. way. Weight loss is not linear. It does not occur in even intervals throughout your weight loss journey. I did the same precise thing 4 weeks in a row and got 4 completely different "results".
Yes, a 3500 calorie DEFICIT SHOULD produce a one pound loss - but it doesn't ALWAYS do that.
I also say that for us folks that are starting out higher, the numbers really change. We have to disregard a lot of the numbers game. For me, the most important number is the calorie allotment. I STICK to that and the weight loss will occur - in whatever time frame. Of course being open to tweaking it as we go along. The calories I'm ingesting, the calorie budget, that number - that's the one that I can most closely control. Not the calories I'm burning, and not the numbers that I will be losing. The CALORIES I'M INGESTING.
03-11-2010, 01:34 PM
Yeap to everything Robin has said :yes:
Welcome btw to 3fc!
03-11-2010, 01:44 PM
BTW Tanee, love the new profile pic! You are gorgeous! (no, I'm not hitting on a married woman) ;)
03-11-2010, 01:46 PM
The bare minimum required to meet essential nutrient intake is 1200 through natural food alone. obviously sythesised nutrient intake (pills etc) can reduce this but whether pills are any good is unproven.
you need to create a weekly deficit of 3500 to lose 1lb of fat. now look at the following two statements carefully and think about what your first answer would be.
1. to lose weight i must consume less calories than i burn.
2. to lose weight i must burn more calories than i consume.
now i'm betting 1. you think diet. and 2 you think exercise. this is a simple trick of the english language both statements are correct and mean the same thing. however no 1 is generally promoted to females via magazines and infomercials. and no2 is generally promoted to males via the same mediums.
but what they don't tell you is burning more than you need is better than consuming less. when you exercise your metabolism is increased during the exercise this burns calories. (ok you know this) but when you finish exercise your metabolism doesn't instantly return to base rate. it takes hours thats right hours to return to base level. so the treamill says you only burnt 100 calories on that walk but over the next 3 hours you may well burn 100 more than base as the metabolism gradually slows down.
if you cut your intake initially you lose weight. however after a shockingly short period of time the metabolism starts to slow down to the new energy intake level this is why your weight loss slows and you eventually stop losing weight. if you run at 1200 calories a day you will eventually adapt to 1200 calories a day. this is your plateau.
at your plateau you are now back at square 1. you have to resort to the above 2 statements again. if you come off your "diet" and revert to old habits. (hand up here guilty, many many times over) but if your body is adapted to 1200 a day and you suddenly go back to 1400 then 1500 etc with junk and fast food you will put weight on and the body annoyingly takes longer to build up its metabolism than slow it down.
Bottom line raise amount of energy used not the amount you consume its the best way all round..
03-11-2010, 01:56 PM
On any given day that you weigh yourself- that weight is just one brief moment in time. That number is an indication of food eaten, energy expended, hormones, movement, water, medication, and other biological functions. A person doesn't always lose weight even when they feel they 'deserve' to because of all the above. I am learning ( I hope ) it as much about having sanity around food than the number. That number can be a guideline.
03-11-2010, 02:09 PM
Congrats on starting over again. I think that's always the hardest step.
As for the number of calories, 1700 is much better! I started out at 1200, but struggled. I'm up to 1800 now and I haven't gained but lost instead. Not to mention, I'm much fuller throughout the day.
It takes tweaking and experimenting. Just remember, you lose calories as you lose chunks of weight, so finding the highest point you can be at and still lose I personally think is a big factor in sticking with a plan.
but, I'm also new at this, so I'm still learning too! lol
03-11-2010, 02:23 PM
I just wanted to say just take it one day at a time and one pound at time. It is great that you are starting again and working toward your goal. Find what works for you and stick with it.
03-11-2010, 04:33 PM
I may not be the fastest loser on the planet, but I aim for moderate and consistency. Looking to lose 1-1.5 pounds a week (about a 500-750 calorie food deficit a day) is easily maintainable, not terribly restrictive, and can be achieved comfortably while still filling you up.
Isn't it better to shoot for a slower loss you can maintain for the rest of your life, than to shoot for a steeper loss curve, feel deprived, binge like mad and gain it all back?
I strongly advise you to start out at closer to 1800 calories and drop them from there to a point that is comfortable for you. Even if you only lose 1.5 pounds a week that is 75-ish pounds gone FOREVER, every year you stick to it.
Focus on your goals and commit to making changes you will stick with forever. My personal philosophy is that I won't even try something if I know it won't work for me through all the changes life can bring. So no four hour gym sessions, sauna visits, pills, liquid diets, or other junk. Moderate exercise I enjoy, healthy and filling food, and food journaling to count my calories.
That's what works for me, your mileage may vary :). The end result of a healthy, maintainable loss is the goal, however you choose to get there.