Why is calorie restriction considered to be so bad on MFP?

Merkavar

My 2 cents

I think the issue with low calorie diets is the intention behind them.

If for example your eating a well balanced nutritional diet that happens to be low cal, your ticking all the protein fat vitamin A calcium and other boxes then that's probably ok.

But a lot of people seem to think along the lines of, if I eat 500 less calories a day I will lose 1 pound so if I eat 1000 less I lose 2 pounds etc so there goal is fastest possible weightloss so they skip meals etc while not meeting their daily needs like iron or vitamins.

I think it's the 2nd option people have an issue with. The first option would require a bit of research I would expect, to find nutrient rich foods.

One could be healthy while the other not so much.

jgnatca

@christinev297‌ there are pockets of centenarians in several enclaves, including Seventh Day Adventists, Okinawans, Georgians, New Englanders, and Sicilians among others.

http://www.agewatch.org.uk/secrets-of-longevity/centenarian-studies/

JAT74

It's certainly intesting that many people live healthy long lives by restricting calories or fasting in one form or another.

In my case I am happy doing 5:2 because it can help with appetite on the non-fast days amount other advantages.

As for burning calories and logging correctly I will continue to underestimate my burns from exercise and to be honest I only use my HRM to keep an eye on my heart rate when training as I think it pushes me a little harder, so I'm not really focusing on the number shown at the end of the workout. The same with my Fitbit, ie. I know that if according to the Fitbit I've taken 15000 steps in a day that's much better than an average day when I'll only take 10000 etc. Again I do log my workouts separately on MFP from the Fitbit calories but at the end of most days my Fitbit tells me I've burned anything from 19000-23000 calories which I take witha pinch of salt as I am not eating back calories.

Regarding inaccuracies in food logging after years of calorie counting and dieting I am very good at judging portion sizes for most foods now so often I know how many grams are in something or how many calories which is why I sometimes log 0.5 of a 6" banana because three mouthfuls of a banana that size is pretty close in calories to what I've logged and it's really that small a quantity that I'm having.

Of course restaurant meals are never going to be 100% accurate and I know it's only an estimate but again, if I buy something from a shop and look at the packet and see the calorie numbers of the quantity I've had and then the following week I go to a restaurant and I have the same quantity (ie. 5 medium to small spare ribs each dipped once in BBQ sauce) then I know the calorie content is not going to be much more than the ribs of the same size I had in a similar sauce the previous week from a packet). I am also very very careful when I eat out and if I log 2 tablespoons of restaurant sour cream, I've literally taken two mouthfuls of natural sour cream from my plate.

Anyway as already said I'm going to reduce my calorie intake further and increase my exercise from today so I should start seeing some weight loss again soon.

Christine_72

23,000 calories! !?? How much do you have to do to earn that many calories?
I was proud of my 500 and something calorie burn fitbit gave me today for 15,000 steps. It took me all damn day to get those steps in.

isulo_kura

JAT74 wrote: »

Again I do log my workouts separately on MFP from the Fitbit calories but at the end of most days my Fitbit tells me I've burned anything from 19000-23000 calories which I take witha pinch of salt as I am not eating back calories.

I only burn 3000 when I run 20 miles! I think your fitbit maybe wrong

JAT74

Sorry I was half asleep! Mean 1900-2300!!! The most steps I've ever had is 19,800 which was on Saturday but normally it's between 9000 & 12000!

yarwell

JAT74 wrote: »

Lemurcat12 that sounds like a good idea, I haven't thought of that. Taking this month as an example that would make my TDEE 1460 which is much lower than calculators put me at as that also takes into account the exercise I've been doing.

To lose weight at a minimum rate of 1lb per week, I'd therefore have to eat 960 calories per day which is below what MFP recommends. Over the course of a week that means I'd have to eat 500 calories on my fast days and 1144 on my non-fast days taking into account I'm following 5:2.

Most 5:2 regimes advocate eating at TDEE on the 5 and restricting on 2, don't they ?

So in the above case 1460 * 5 + 500 * 2 = 8300 giving a weekly deficit of 1920 cals.

JAT74

Yes that's true, they do recommend eating at TDEE on non-fast days and up until now I thought my TDEE (sedentary) was a bit higher so I was eating 1550-1650 on my non-fast days but from what I've read on 5:2 forums a lot of people eat to their active TDEE which in my case should be around 1800-2200, however either way I'm not losing.

I could lower it to 1460 as that is what I've now figured out my active TDEE could well be, but as you've just pointed out the deficit still wouldn't be enough to lose 1lb per week so in this case I'm going to try and eat 1250 on non fast days which will increase the deficit a little more and hopefully I'll be able to lose that 1lb. The difference between 1250 and what I have been eating on my normal days is quite large so I am hoping it will be enough to get things moving. That combined with going lower carb should hopefully make a difference.

I know my TDEE will lower as I get closer to goal but once I reach my goal body fat % and weight I am hoping that I will be able to maintain on around 1400-1500 which I find a manageable number.