I weigh 295 and need to get down to 150. I have heard all my life to stay on a 1200 calorie diet. I need to lose weight very fast because I feel so bloated and short of breath. To all those who have lost - what is your calorie count to be able to lose 2 pounds (at least) a week? The most I can walk now is one and a half miles before my knees hurt.
To lose weight, you need to create a caloric deficit. Try tracking your calories on something like http://www.fitday.com - find out how many calories your body burns in a day, then tailor your diet to that.
You need to burn approximately 3,500 calories for one pound, so to lose 2 pounds in a week, you would need to have a deficit of 7,000 or 1,000 calories in a day. Losing more than 2 pounds a week is not medically recommended, but if it comes off faster, great! What you need to remember, though, is that since the weight most likely did not come on quickly, it may not come off quickly, either. You need a steady approach that you can stick with forever, even once you are done with losing weight.
I wouldn't suggest starting out on a 1,200 calorie diet. See how your body likes 1,600 calories, then work your way down from there. The weight will come off quickly at first, as some of the weight you will lose will be water.
Last edited by NightengaleShane; 10-25-2007 at 05:57 AM.
That question gets asked a lot around here. Through trial and error we can all find what works for ourselves. There is no guarantees about how much weight we can lose during any 7 day period. It's all just an estimate. As far as losing weight quickly, well it didn't take us overnight to gain the weight, it's not going to be overnight to lose it. The best thing you can do to get your weight off in a safe and permenant manner is to choose a plan that you can live with for life and be very, very consistient with it. If you eat well and exercise, the weight WILL come off, have no fear. But the key is to STICK with it.
Here is a link from the Calorie Counters Forum from a sticky there with great information. Please read all of it. And remember it's just a guide. Every body is an individual and needs to tweak this to suit what's right for them. Best of luck to you.
Hey again! It's pretty hard to maintain a 1000 calorie a day deficit without burning more cals through exercise. Most folks would have to eat less than 1200 cals a day, and that's not a good idea unless you're under a doctor's supervision.
My average weight loss was a little more than a pound a week. My average calorie intake during my first phase was 1350 a day--average calories burned was 1950. I use FitDay to keep track. So, that's 600 cals deficit, average, per day. It took six months for me to lose 30 pounds.
Yeah, I think a 1,000 calorie deficit would be impossible without exercise. ****, it is hard to keep that big of a deficit even *with* exercise, I've found, because exercise can be quite hunger inducing!
I've kept a 500-1,000 calorie deficit per day and lost 35 pounds in about 4 months. These last few pounds are very tough, though. It seems like no matter how large the deficit I create is, nothing will make them budge!
How many calories a day are you consuming now? First figure that out and then reduce your daily intake. You may need to incorporate exercise as well, but try to avoid drastic calorie reduction. Maybe give us an idea of an average day's intake and we can help you tweak it.
You said you can only walk a mile and a half........ Don't say ONLY!! That is an awesome starting point. I only started with a half mile per day and I was losing up to two pounds a week with reducing my calories to 1600-1800 a day (A bit high, but I nurse)
Not judging here, but looking at your current weight, I would say 1200 calories a day is too low for you. The heavier we are, the more calories we burn just doing regular activities. I am losing more or less a pound a week on about 1500-1600 calories a day (working out 5x/week), and based on our weights, my caloric needs would be significantly less than yours. I agree with the others, figure out your caloric requirements, then eat 500 a day less than that. I know losing it that way isn't very sexy, but you have to look at this as a long term project, not an "as fast as possible quick fix", or you'll never be able to stick to it long enough to achieve your goal. Aim for distance, not height.
Last edited by Janie Canuck; 10-25-2007 at 04:07 PM.
I am in the 1500 to 1700 range for calories per day and I am trying to get some sort of exercise in daily. What works (calorie amount wise) for someone who is lighter/heavier than you is not necessarily what will work for you. At your weight you can start higher and then as the weight comes off the caloric intake will need to drop some. If you start at 1000....where are you going to go when you plateau?
Can you share a sample of a typical day's menu? 1.5 miles is *GOOD*!! Any movement is good. It all makes a difference. As many people have said here before...its a marathon...not a sprint! That is just SO true!
I've just realised that I have been losing weight for 24 weeks now and have lost 48lb so have averaged 2lb per weeks. I average 1400 calories a day but do keep the fat grams to no more than 45g a day (often much less). I currently only do light exercise. I plan to up the exercise when I reach a plateau, rather than reducing calories further. I do use Slimfast products, mainly due to the convenience of knowing exactly what I'm eating, but do have a proper meal every evening.
However, like in everything we are all different so what works for me may not work for others.
first off...if your are short of breath...it may be because of your weight HOWEVER, you should have a dr examine you to make sure that it is just that. Next 1200 calories is too low for your weight right now. You'r body will force itself into starvation mode. Try to take it slow..i know you want to lose weight fast...but successful and long term wt loss is a slow process..you will start to feel you breath return and less bloating as the weight comes off.
Pretty much repeating what's been said, but would like to point out that the faster you lose, the faster you'll gain it back. And that won't be of any use to you.
I was getting short of breath too and was over 250 pounds. I didn't even COUNT calories when I started, just ate right. I figured it up later, and I was consuming around 2,000 calories a day when I first started. Mostly fruits, whole grains and lean meats. Yet I lost 5 pounds some weeks. The bigger we are, the easier to shed the pounds at first. As I lost, I had to start counting and adjusting, and also added exercise. All I could do was a mile too. But I did that mile religiously and worked up to more. And you can do it too.
Pretty much repeating what's been said, but would like to point out that the faster you lose, the faster you'll gain it back. And that won't be of any use to you.
IMO, losing it a quicker rate has no correlation to how quickly you gain it back. Or if you gain it back AT ALL. If you REMAIN using the method that you used to LOSE the weight, regardless of how fast it came off, there is no reason for it to come back on. The "trick" is to just keep doing the same thing. That's why it's ESSENTIAL to choose a method in which you can live with forever. No diets here - lifestsyle change.
Weight comes back on after weight loss because one stops doing what they did to get the weight off, no matter how quickly, or slowly for that matter, it came about. If you go back to your old ways, the ones that made you overweight in the first place, you most certainly will gain the weight back. If you don't go back to your old ways and continue on with the new lifestyle, well then there's no reason whatsoever for it to come back on.
Last edited by rockinrobin; 10-25-2007 at 05:04 PM.
I found this article in a Prevention magazine I picked up the other day. It says if only do light activities (or are over 55): multiply your goal weight by 13. If you excercise for 30 minutes, 4 days or more a week: multiply your goal weight by 15. I don't know if this works or not, but maybe it'll give you something to start from. Best of luck!
For me, that calculation gives too high a value. I think I just have slower metabolism. But, you're right--at least it's a starting point, and one could work from there.