# Why 2lb per week?????



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

Whenever people try to reduce bf the phrase bandied about every time is '2lb per week should be the goal'. I have always used it as a guide myself tbh but just because i have always heard others use it as a guideline for weightloss, ive never really thought too much into it.

As an example do you think it is possible to lose more than 2lb of fat per week whilst retaining all muscle using AAS, fatburners and thyroid meds??? (i mention these as most bbers use them up to show and still use 2lb per week as a target).

If its not possible then surely for someone cutting natty 2lb per week whilst retaining muscle would seem a bit too ambitious??

I arent saying it is not the best guideline to go by im just wondering why everyone uses 2lb per week as this magical number, is it just something that has been passed down over time or have people reached this conclusion through trial and error??


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

pffftttt clearly you are a newb

haven't you realised?

2 IS the magic number

"how much should you aim to lose when dieting"

"2lb a week"

"how much should you aim to gain when bulking"

"2lb a week"

"how much gear are you on" (ask several high profile bbers)

"2 sust, 2 deca"

"how much gear are you on" (ask several gym dickheads who have been training for 2 min and already on gear"

"2ml" (doesn't matter what of, its 2ml)

You see, 2, in bodybuilding, is the magic number, the holy grail.


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

PS the real answer is it is just another bollocks rule spouted more often than not by folks that don't have much of a clue :thumbup1:


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

rs007 said:


> pffftttt clearly you are a newb
> 
> haven't you realised?
> 
> ...


Ah now it has all just clicked lmfao!!!!!

In all seriousness it hit me today as i actually said use 2lb per week loss as a goal and then thought to myself why the fck am i saying that when i dont have anything to actually base it on:confused1: :lol:


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

rs007 said:


> PS the real answer is it is just another bollocks rule spouted more often than not by folks that don't have much of a clue :thumbup1:


Cant leave it at that ffs!!!! Whats the real magic number if not 2lb??????


----------



## Boshboshbosh (Nov 23, 2009)

2 is a good amount to slowley lose fat without losing too much muscle in the process i believe, lose "weight" too fast and itll be more water and muscle, if you lose a bit every day thru deficit then itll be fat your losing....


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

BoshBoshBosh said:


> 2 is a good amount to slowley lose fat without losing too much muscle in the process i believe, lose "weight" too fast and itll be more water and muscle, if you lose a bit every day thru deficit then itll be fat your losing....


so what your saying is if losing 2lb per week will be fat your losing but if say 3lb per week it will likely be muscle tissue as well?? even on aas?? did you lose more than 2lb per week and find a noticeable loss in muscle compared to when losing 2lb???

i arent trying to say it is not a good guideline im just a bit baffled as to how this is the magic number as it were.


----------



## LittleChris (Jan 17, 2009)

I have a friend down the gym who can lose 3-4lbs a week without much effort. He eats burgers and fries and when he cuts he does 20mins on treadmill 3times a week.

He doesn't even juice but looks better than 90% of UKM.


----------



## Boshboshbosh (Nov 23, 2009)

Dig said:


> so what your saying is if losing 2lb per week will be fat your losing but if say 3lb per week it will likely be muscle tissue as well?? even on aas?? did you lose more than 2lb per week and find a noticeable loss in muscle compared to when losing 2lb???
> 
> i arent trying to say it is not a good guideline im just a bit baffled as to how this is the magic number as it were.


nah it can fluctuate but people have to put a rough number on things dont they, it all depends on individual genetics, some retain muscle more easily, some lose it fast, same with metabolism and fat.

If your losing 5lbs a week for a month, then either your mega fat and losing fat and water fast or some of its gonna be muscle

in the 13-20% bodyfat range your talking 2-3lbs a week, when you get to 10-15% bodyfat your body will be holding onto bodyfat even more so you need to be careful not to be to aggressive with dieting and training without feeding your muscle otherwise your body wont grow at the same time was its ripping up


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

LittleChris said:


> I have a friend down the gym who can lose 3-4lbs a week without much effort. He eats burgers and fries and when he cuts he does 20mins on treadmill 3times a week.
> 
> He doesn't even juice but looks better than 90% of UKM.


dont start trying to wind people up on my serious thread, pr1ick:laugh:


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

BoshBoshBosh said:


> nah it can fluctuate but people have to put a rough number on things dont they, it all depends on individual genetics, some retain muscle more easily, some lose it fast, same with metabolism and fat.
> 
> If your losing 5lbs a week for a month, then either your mega fat and losing fat and water fast or some of its gonna be muscle
> 
> in the 13-20% bodyfat range your talking 2-3lbs a week, when you get to 10-15% bodyfat your body will be holding onto bodyfat even more so you need to be careful not to be to aggressive with dieting and training without feeding your muscle otherwise your body wont grow at the same time was its ripping up


I understand were you're coming from but as you say it depends on the person. To take the wise words of rs007 i wonder how many people are in reality limiting themselves because of this 'rule'.


----------



## d4ead (Nov 3, 2008)

Weights a load if crap look in a mirror


----------



## Lois_Lane (Jul 21, 2009)

Total nonsense number.

You don't just lose fat you lose water glycogen and possibly muscle.

2lb is just an often used number as it uses the calorie deficient calculator and using it you would need to be 1000calories under maintance per day.


----------



## MrO2b (Aug 19, 2010)

d4ead said:


> Weights a load if crap look in a mirror


using 'weight', ie "i need to lose some weight", allows people to subconsciously feel they are not responsible for the gaining of said weight, that it's not such a bad thing, that it is just 'weight' and not fat. it's a blurred, fluffy, non-descript way of avoiding reality. people just don't want to say- "look, i've ate too much food and too much of the wrong food for too long and done too little exercise and now i've gotta shift this ugly looking body fat".

would 'Weigh****chers' be as popular as it is if it was called 'Fa****chers'? nope. it's all a sham. someone could get weighed one week, then sit in a sauna for an hour before the next weeks weigh in, and get a pat on the back for losing 'weight'. whereas the actual issue of reducing body fat is ignored.

i guarantee if every fat person who ever said "i need to lose weight' lost the weight of their excess body fat, they would be happy with their weight.


----------



## d4ead (Nov 3, 2008)

Is that saying the same as me but in more detail.


----------



## MrO2b (Aug 19, 2010)

pretty much...


----------



## d4ead (Nov 3, 2008)

That's fine, as long as I havnt gone mad that's all good then ;p


----------



## Boshboshbosh (Nov 23, 2009)

tbh it probs doesnt matter

if your gonna be able to lose 5lbs a week, the amount of time sames means you'll have to time to put muscle back on


----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

because it says so on the internet


----------



## 54und3r5 (Apr 11, 2008)

You can lose more than half a stone in the first week of dieting from a heavy bulk... Glyogen and all other sh1t should be taken into consideration!


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

The 2lbs fat loss is just a guideline for what an average person should be able to achieve in a week with hard work but without being totally wiped out by the diet.

With people of different sizes, bodyfat levels and levels of training ability might be able to lose a lot more or less without struggling.

Remember that to burn 2lbs of fat in a week you'd need to be in a caloric deficit in excess of 7000kcals for the week... that kind of deficit is normally equal to two-three whole days food out of every seven, and restricting calories more than this makes a diet hard to stick too due to how draining it is. Better to do small and managable for longterm success than to do a crazy extreme diet and then mess it up because it's too hard to follow.

There are also a range of reasons why a gradual diet might be better for insulin sensitivity, thyroid levels etc but that's another topic.


----------

