Doctor says 1500 calories is too drastic

2»

Replies

  • deksgrl
    deksgrl Posts: 7,237 Member
    how heavy and/or tall are all of you? if you don't mind me asking. i'm at 150 and 5'4. should I still be coming in at 1200?

    1200 PLUS your exercise calories. Puts you in the ballpark of 1500 I would think.
  • kmbweber2014
    kmbweber2014 Posts: 680 Member
    how heavy and/or tall are all of you? if you don't mind me asking. i'm at 150 and 5'4. should I still be coming in at 1200?

    I'm the same measurements as you and I eat between 1400 and 1600 and have been steady losing inches (I don't weigh myself all that often).
  • ApocalypticFae
    ApocalypticFae Posts: 217 Member
    I think that 1500 is very reasonable for most people. But not everyone. At 5'1" with the frame I have, 1500 is my maintenance mode. At one time not too long ago I was eating around 2,000 and managed to gain 20 lbs. in a relatively short period of time. Just one of the downfalls of being short with a small frame. Right now I'm eating 1200-1300, which I think is reasonable for someone my size. And I'm losing at about the rate that MFP predicted for me.

    ETA: Oh yeah, and I always eat back my exercise calories. It would be really hard not to. :smile:
  • ska41
    ska41 Posts: 15 Member
    To each their own I guess, but I've been at 1050-1200 for 9 months now. I'm being followed by my physician, a Registered Dietitian, and a trainer. They're all fine with the plan I'm following. I'm 5'9", started at 333 lbs. in September. Now at 205. I focus on getting plenty of protein to help preserve as much muscle as possible, then healthy fats. Any calories left can go to carbs. I eat a lot of chicken and veggies, not a lot of bread and sweets (I don't have the calories for that right now). I supplement with a multi vitamin and fish oil to make sure the bases are covered. I strength train 3 times a week for an hour and swim laps 2 or 3 times a week in between. I do get hungry occasionally, but I just snack on protein - like a few chicken nuggets, turkey or ham - and that does the trick.

    Anyway - 1200 and a little lower, can be done safely for some. It works for me and my average loss has been 2 - 3 lbs. a week.
  • manders376
    manders376 Posts: 53 Member
    Medical school itself is 4 years long, then there is the residency portion which ca nvary anywhere from 3-8 years, depending on how specialized. "nutritionist" isn't a "specialty" and no , as far as i know nutrition isn't covered as much as it could be and last i heard, they're making efforts to include more. Nutrionists are "below" Dietitians and that is a masters or doctoral programs. Medical school is a professional school, not really graduate school in that sense.

    This is just what I kind of know as a pre-med

    This is true. I am in medical school planning on going into family medicine. Medical school is 4 years, Family Medicine residency is 3 (so 7 years). Nutrition was one of our classes first year. It was about half the length of a "normal" class (genetics, anatomy, etc). It is also covered on the national boards though not in great detail.

    Any doctor will know as much about nutrition as they educate themselves on. Not every doctor sits around thinking what they learned in medical school will cut it. Many people continue to do research and stay up to date, many do not. The best bet is to find a doctor you trust and that you believe continues to educate themselves beyond their medical school education or to see a nutritionist/dietician.
  • herblackwings39
    herblackwings39 Posts: 3,930 Member
    I pretty well stay below or at 1200 calories a day. Never usually go above 1300 calories and I find I am definitely eating enough. I'm never really starving. I just started this diet May 1st with My Fitness Pal. Started at 235lbs and it told me to eat 1350. When I lost my first 10lbs it told me to eat 1300 and then after my next 5lb loss it told me to eat 1200 which it has kept me at even with the further weight I've shed.
    If it isn't a problem for me to stay in that 1200 zone and i'm not starving, is it a big deal that i'm only having 1200 a day?

    If it's working for you, you're not hungry all the time, you haven't stalled, and are eating your exercise calories back to make sure you net the 1200 it may not be a big deal. The problem tends to be what happens after you lose the weight. MFP won't take you lower than 1200 so you'll eventually stall out since you can't go lower. That's usually when people get unhealthy and lower the calories to 1000 or 800, don't eat their exercise calories, do tons of cardio, etc.

    You can lose weight eating 1200 calories, some people can only lose weight that way, but most people can lose weight eating more. Figure your BMR and TDEE based on your exercise routine and see what the difference is.
  • Roxiehart9
    Roxiehart9 Posts: 32
    Did the docs say why? How tall are you both? I'm wondering because I'm just under 5"4" and can't seem to stay below 1300 cals - I just like eating too much. My weight loss has been REAL slow, and was considering going even lower if I could stand it. I walk about 5-6 times a week for about an hour at a pretty fast pace and hope that's helping.
  • Roxiehart9
    Roxiehart9 Posts: 32
    Yuor body could have gotten used to your routine. It's good to change up your routine every 2-4 weeks. If you are usually walking 6 times a week, change it up to walk 3 times and run 3 times or boke all 6. Either way, your body learns your habits and adjusts accordingly. That's usually what hinders weight loss the most in people that are pretty disciplined with their diet. If you keep subtracting calories, at some point you're going to be too low in calories and that's not going to work because your body will go into starvation mode. Just keep eating healthy, stay focused, change up your cardio and work out a bit and you should see the scale start to move again.

    Good Luck!
  • JeffseekingV
    JeffseekingV Posts: 3,165 Member
    Some arbitrary calories number doesn't mean much when you don't post your height/weight/activity level. What is fine for someone that's 5'3" and 150lbs isn't fine for someone that's 6ft and 250lbs.
  • jaygreen55
    jaygreen55 Posts: 315 Member
    ...
  • leebesstoad
    leebesstoad Posts: 1,186 Member
    Medical school itself is 4 years long, then there is the residency portion which ca nvary anywhere from 3-8 years, depending on how specialized. "nutritionist" isn't a "specialty" and no , as far as i know nutrition isn't covered as much as it could be and last i heard, they're making efforts to include more. Nutrionists are "below" Dietitians and that is a masters or doctoral programs. Medical school is a professional school, not really graduate school in that sense.

    This is just what I kind of know as a pre-med

    This is true. I am in medical school planning on going into family medicine. Medical school is 4 years, Family Medicine residency is 3 (so 7 years). Nutrition was one of our classes first year. It was about half the length of a "normal" class (genetics, anatomy, etc). It is also covered on the national boards though not in great detail.

    Any doctor will know as much about nutrition as they educate themselves on. Not every doctor sits around thinking what they learned in medical school will cut it. Many people continue to do research and stay up to date, many do not. The best bet is to find a doctor you trust and that you believe continues to educate themselves beyond their medical school education or to see a nutritionist/dietician.

    But you would agree that the RDs are the experts? They are the ones the docs tuirn to? There is a reason why every newly diagnosed diabetics is encouraged to meet with an RD to review diet, and why they are used as an ongoing resource for all diabetics.

    It's one reason I love my gym and the fact that they have an RD on staff for consults (yes it's extra and you pay for it) with members who want it to help them plan a diet. And it's why she loves it because she gets to work with the clients and the personal trainers in a ongoing real-world situation that most RDs don't.

    With all the info that FPs have to keep up on, keeping up on nutrition, is unfortunately, going to remain a low priority except for those few docs that have a personal interest in it.
  • BCKWilke2013
    BCKWilke2013 Posts: 23
    Did the docs say why? How tall are you both? I'm wondering because I'm just under 5"4" and can't seem to stay below 1300 cals - I just like eating too much. My weight loss has been REAL slow, and was considering going even lower if I could stand it. I walk about 5-6 times a week for about an hour at a pretty fast pace and hope that's helping.

    Do you do other exercises besides walking? Just like eating, you have to have a variety in your exercise because after awhile your muscles get used to your work out routine and will burn less and less calories. Try doing some aerobics, a little bit of strength training or even a bike ride, that way you are working out different muscle groups and will lose more weight and you won't plateau. You also have to remember as you exercise you are boosting your metabolism and your body actually needs more calories to function.....if you eat to few calories you are actually putting your body into starvation mode where it becomes highly resistant in letting go any calories, fat, etc. Hope this helps =)
  • Vailara
    Vailara Posts: 2,466 Member
    I think that 1500 is very reasonable for most people. But not everyone. At 5'1" with the frame I have, 1500 is my maintenance mode. At one time not too long ago I was eating around 2,000 and managed to gain 20 lbs. in a relatively short period of time. Just one of the downfalls of being short with a small frame. Right now I'm eating 1200-1300, which I think is reasonable for someone my size. And I'm losing at about the rate that MFP predicted for me.

    ETA: Oh yeah, and I always eat back my exercise calories. It would be really hard not to. :smile:

    Same here. I'm eating around 1500 to lose at the moment, but it's very slow and eventually I'm going to have to drop down, as 1500 total will be maintenance level for me closer to goal. If sedentary, maintenance will be around 1350. It's going to be hard! One size doesn't fit all

    However, I read in one of my diet books (I think it was the Beck Diet) that you should never go below 1500 because it's too difficult AT MAINTENANCE. So if you're eating 1500 calories a day and not losing weight, you have to accept your current weight as your maintenance weight. I can see the sense in it - I think the idea is that it's better to eat 1500 calories for life and maintain an "overweight" weight, than to eat 1350 calories for a year to maintain a "healthy" weight but end up giving up and yo-yo dieting. I've been thinking about this a lot recently because I'm at the stage where I'll have to go below 1500 if I want to keep losing, but I'm still very overweight.
  • VegKate
    VegKate Posts: 55 Member
    Did the docs say why? How tall are you both? I'm wondering because I'm just under 5"4" and can't seem to stay below 1300 cals - I just like eating too much. My weight loss has been REAL slow, and was considering going even lower if I could stand it. I walk about 5-6 times a week for about an hour at a pretty fast pace and hope that's helping.

    I'm 5'8", I can't remember the why the doctor gave, other than my body needs at least 1500 just to maintain it's various processes.
  • StarChanger
    StarChanger Posts: 605 Member
    Your Dr. Didn't spend 9 yrs in Medical school just for Fun.
    Listen to your Dr.

    If your doctor spent 9 years in med school, I would recommend getting a different doctor. Med school is 4 years max.

    I think they were talking med school + residency + fellowship = 9 years.

    This...plus add in 4+ years of college +/- grad school in the top 1%, generally.
  • MeIShouldB
    MeIShouldB Posts: 578 Member
    how heavy and/or tall are all of you? if you don't mind me asking. i'm at 150 and 5'4. should I still be coming in at 1200?

    Don't mind at all. I'm 24, 5'5 and currently 191 (started at 224)
  • lavaughan69
    lavaughan69 Posts: 459 Member
    I agree with them. I personally developed gallstones and required emergency surgery after 8 weeks on a 1200 calorie diet. I don't want to assume that was the reason, but it seems possible-- check out this news story from 3 days ago. The lower your calories, the greater the risk of gallstones, apparently.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/07/us-crash-diet-gallstone-idUSBRE95615J20130607

    Did you read the article correctly? It said there was an increase in gallstones on CRASH dieters, not low calorie. MFP doesn't recommend less than 1200 calories and certainly not crash dieting.

    "Their study included 6,640 dieters, half of whom went on a crash diet and the other half of whom went on a low calorie diet.

    The crash diet involved liquid meals of just 500 calories a day for six to 10 weeks, followed by the gradual introduction of normal food, and then nine months of a weight maintenance regime of exercise and healthy eating.

    The other dieters ate 1,200 to 1,500 calories a day, including two liquid meals, for three months, followed by the nine month weight maintenance period."
  • Balance_Breathe
    Balance_Breathe Posts: 41
    I did read it correctly-- it said there were also problems with gallstones among the 1200-1500 group, just not as many.

    Hey, I'm no expert, just sharing an experience I had. If I'm honest, I want to try taking my own calories down since I'm only 5'4" and have a lot to lose. Just makes me a little nervous after what happened before.

Categories