Honestly, I don't think that 2 lbs a week is really going to be easily attainable for you. You're simply not fat enough! A more reasonable rate would be 1-1.5 a week. If you were over 200 lbs, 2 lbs per week would be doable; at 167, it's just not likely. :) I'm a good 20 lbs heavier than you, and I average 1 or so a week... any more is just too big a strain on my body.
It's not about the calories you burn a week through exercise. It's what you eat combined with what you exercise; burn too many (create too large a calorie deficit per day) and your metabolism will slow down, sabotaging your efforts.
What you do is set up your program to have a more reasonable weight loss goal. Go in, and set it for 1-1.5. Then tell it how many calories per week you burn, based on a sustainable amount of exercise you can do long term (not just the most you can possibly do as fast as you can). Sparkpeople will provide you a range to eat in based on those numbers.
Basically, you adjust your diet to the amount of exercise you do, so that no matter if you burn 700 a week, or 2000, you lose weight at the same rate. This is important, because shortchanging yourself to lose weight faster will simply shortchange your body of the nutrition it needs to function, resulting in slower weight loss, less energy, more exhaustion, and a greater chance of burnout and failure.
And if you do it long enough, you can do lasting damage to your metabolism.
Edited by: DRAGONCHILDE at: 5/29/2013 (13:53)
Writer, mother, wife, and breadwinner. I love to run, but running doesn't love me, so I'm switching to my low-impact bike.
I'm not pregnant, just fat: My blog. fatnotpregnant.blogspot.com/
| current weight: 186.4