*** Big Fat Weight Loss Thread ***

Ok, not as bad as a total fast but i'd be a miserable sod on those days for sure :D

Depends on what you eat.

I have one decent meal a day for 600 calories, but you could easily use other foods. Such a fruit and vegetables to increase the volume. I mean you could eat a 400g punnet of strawberries for lunch and still have 500 calories left for an evening meal.

I've also done a full 72 hour fast a couple of times, which is something you could do once a month instead of the other fasting methods.
 
Depends on what you eat.

I have one decent meal a day for 600 calories, but you could easily use other foods. Such a fruit and vegetables to increase the volume. I mean you could eat a 400g punnet of strawberries for lunch and still have 500 calories left for an evening meal.

I've also done a full 72 hour fast a couple of times, which is something you could do once a month instead of the other fasting methods.

I've fasted before, it's not all that hard to be fair with the condition that i'm occupied, moment i'm in front of TV, get the munching urge :D

I just generally enjoy food too much to restrict myself to that extent two days a week, I do eat restrictively already on a calorie/macro basis but that's just habit now.
 
Just 2 days on 600kcals, or are the other 5 completely zero kcal fasting days?

Two non consecutive days you eat 600 calories, the other five days you eat normally.

You can divide the 600 calories in anyway you like throughout the day on any foods you like. Bear in mind that calories from drinks count in your total. So best to drink water, black tea/coffee or zero calorie drinks.
 
Hmm... That doesn't seem like much. Since WFH during Covid and being all sedentary, I've barely been averaging that same 600 during a normal day anyway.
For an "average" male it would work out at almost a 4k kcal deficit a week assuming they ate the standard 2500kcals the other 5 days and therefore it would equal slightly over a lb a week.

That's a very nice steady drop if it means you can sustain it for a good period of time.
 
For an "average" male it would work out at almost a 4k kcal deficit a week assuming they ate the standard 2500kcals the other 5 days and therefore it would equal slightly over a lb a week.
That's a very nice steady drop if it means you can sustain it for a good period of time.
Back when I was underweight I often struggled to hit 2500 in the first place, unless I went in for loads of unhealthy crap like sweets and the like. These days I'm just not that much into food, any more.
Maybe I need more Big Macs and Coke in my life... or are Plant-Based Whoppers too 'corner-sofa'?
 
For an "average" male it would work out at almost a 4k kcal deficit a week assuming they ate the standard 2500kcals the other 5 days and therefore it would equal slightly over a lb a week.

That's a very nice steady drop if it means you can sustain it for a good period of time.
I wish i could eat 2500 cals per day and maintain weight :(
 
I wish i could eat 2500 cals per day and maintain weight :(

Yeah, i think that that 2500 massively overestimates peoples activity level. I'm a biggish guy at 6'3 and 95kg and yet i would say that i would put on weight at 2000kcal a day and that's including short walks with the dogs twice a day.
 
My weight loss update is..... I haven't lost any. :p
After a really clean and Dry January I got down to 13st 3. Didn't particularly want to go too much lower (due to rugby).
I've still eaten good in the week and do loads of exercise but I do allow myself to enjoy the weekend, have a few beers eat a takeaways etc. I don't feel like I'm cutting or anything.
Get on the scales this morning and i'm still 13st 3 which I'm pretty happy with as the gym is going well.
 
I'm not aiming to lose weight, however, I'm trying to follow a diet. I try to add more products that help to boost metabolism. I follow a list on the Canada Drugs health blog. Cause I feel bad when I gain a couple of extra kilos.
 
Last edited:
I wish i could eat 2500 cals per day and maintain weight :(

I'm going to say nothing..... :D

Yeah, i think that that 2500 massively overestimates peoples activity level. I'm a biggish guy at 6'3 and 95kg and yet i would say that i would put on weight at 2000kcal a day and that's including short walks with the dogs twice a day.

I'm smaller than you (184cm) and similar weight (97kg), but I'm eating 3.2k cals to maintain, but I have relatively low bf and am pretty active. Also remember than more muscle = more calories used just by being alive. BMR increases with lean muscle mass.

The thing is, numbers are just guidelines, it's not fair on anyone to say - 2500cals is too little/high, without knowing their physiology, their activity levels, their gut health, their bodyfat percentage, their dietary allergens (everyone has them, but they don't manifest themselves evidently, e.g. dairy is awful for gut health)... there are so many factors to take in. Hormonal levels also affect how you store fat / expend energy etc...

So even though I'm on higher calories, it's just my physiology and genetic make up, and body composition and everything combined that means that that works for me. And that's where a lot of people fail, they take a generic piece of advice and don't look at the bigger picture.

However, I will caveat that with, for general weight loss, it's fine to be a bit more broad brushed, but transforming body composition is actually a lot longer process and far more involved.
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah, i'm fairly active due to running etc , but i always used to set my initial base as "inactive" which gave a calorie goal around 1500 to lose weight and then would eat back any calories on exercise days. As i've now got much more regular in exercise and being active 5-7 days a week i'm just working to eat a more constant level of food to average over the week.

Also to add that the majority of my 95kg is fat :p
 
My cut starts on Monday 5th April for the 12 weeks. Got my supps in, my food planned and workouts too.
God speed!

6 months and 28lbs down for me, look like I've lost at least double that though. The visual change really surprised me when I put the two pictures side by side.
 
Back
Top Bottom