I'm gonna post this in the beginners forum because this is such a basic question. I've had a lot of my friends ask me about this, and I've heard a lot of different answers...

If a person had a lot of weight to lose (around 35% bodyfat or so) would it be possible for them to lose 4 pounds a week. Obviously it would not all be fat, but if they were more concerned about meeting a weight than a bodyfat would it be possible?

Diet would have to be immaculate and cardio/weights a must.

Any thoughts?

I think the general rule is 1-2lbs a week. But you can get more specific and say 1% of body weight per week. I remember Jeremy Likness's post saying that men can safely lose up to 1-1.5% of their body weight a week in fat while women are more in .5%-1% range.

Thanks chris! That's what I was assuming, just wondering about extreme circumstances. Thanks again.

It's more than possible to lose 1-2lbs a week - take for example some of the people they have on that show "The Biggest Loser." Some of those people lose upwards of 10lbs/week. Now, don't think for a second that I'm advocating that. I think losing that much weight is not only unhealthy, but it sets bad goals for future weight loss. The reason 1-2lbs/week is recommended is because it is both easily manageable and relatively harmless to your body.

Just curious, but why are you more concerned with meeting a body weight instead of losing body fat?

Yeah, what Matt says.

Losing slower you don't lose valuable muscle, which burns huge amounts of calories compared to fat. While losing fat you want to build a base not only on your body but also on your habits.

We're all in the military, where they don't take into account your body fat as much as your weight. The army has body fat built into their standards, but they also have a screening weight. If you meet the screening weight, they don't test your body fat... If you don't, they test your body fat, but when it comes to promotions you're more likely to get sidelined, even if you meet the body fat standards.

Long story short, it's much easier and more beneficial to meet the weight requirements than make body fat. I know, it's lame...

We're all in the military, where they don't take into account your body fat as much as your weight. The army has body fat built into their standards, but they also have a screening weight. If you meet the screening weight, they don't test your body fat... If you don't, they test your body fat, but when it comes to promotions you're more likely to get sidelined, even if you meet the body fat standards.

Long story short, it's much easier and more beneficial to meet the weight requirements than make body fat. I know, it's lame...

So a guy that's 5'6" but is "overweight" because he's built like a tank is less likely to be promoted than some 6'5" guy who is underweight but doesn't have an ounce of muscle on him? Seems a bit fishy.