Why 1000/1200 calorie diets are bad - backed by science
Replies
-
in...for the oncoming sh$t storm and show!
Ha. Me too.
Me three!0 -
I honestly never noticed a difference with losing weight with or without exercising. If I work out, then I naturally get hungrier and end up eating the calories I burned. I am not saying I am pro sitting on your butt starving yourself, but just that I haven't noticed a real difference.
That doesn't mean that's true for everyone, though. I didn't change my eating habits at all to lose weight. I just started exercising regularly again. I didn't count calories or log anything. Just got my lazy bum up and moved. I dropped 2 dress sizes (my goal) in 5 months.
No it isn't true for everyone, just like with your experience with adding exercise. I initially dropped 40 lbs just by eating smaller portions and making healthier choices and just doing a walk 5 days a week. It was almost entirely from changing my diet. I have maintained my weight whether I am working out hardcore or sitting on my butt which I have been doing for a year now. It seems my body is happy here so if I am more active it tells me to eat more so I don't drop anymore weight.0 -
Including you right?Everyone's an expert.0 -
I honestly never noticed a difference with losing weight with or without exercising. If I work out, then I naturally get hungrier and end up eating the calories I burned. I am not saying I am pro sitting on your butt starving yourself, but just that I haven't noticed a real difference.
That doesn't mean that's true for everyone, though. I didn't change my eating habits at all to lose weight. I just started exercising regularly again. I didn't count calories or log anything. Just got my lazy bum up and moved. I dropped 2 dress sizes (my goal) in 5 months.
No it isn't true for everyone, just like with your experience with adding exercise. I initially dropped 40 lbs just by eating smaller portions and making healthier choices and just doing a walk 5 days a week. It was almost entirely from changing my diet. I have maintained my weight whether I am working out hardcore or sitting on my butt which I have been doing for a year now. It seems my body is happy here so if I am more active it tells me to eat more so I don't drop anymore weight.
You do need to eat more to maintain if you exercise because your TDEE will be higher. You were just eating too much more if you gained.
I had the opposite problem. I stopped exercising, thereby lowering my TDEE, but kept eating the same amount as with exercise. I could have lowered calories (I was already eating healthy foods, just too much of them) but I really like to eat, and drink.0 -
-How can I gain muscle but make sure I don't put any fat on?
1) Impossible. If you are gaining weight, you are gaining fat. You can make sure you are gaining as much muscle as possible in relation to fat by gaining slowly and weightlifting.
Um... what?0 -
One thing that stands out from the first study is the average 454 calories decrease in the TDEE of people in -25% caloric restriction group after 3 months. This means that the slowed metabolism would fully counteract the -25% caloric deficit if your starting TDEE is less than 1816, resulting in the dreaded plateau.
Let's say a sedentary person's TDEE is 2000 calories. A 25% caloric reduction would put him on a 1500 calories diet. If that 25% reduction ends up slowing his metabolism to 1546, he only has effectively 54 calories of deficit, which is barely perceptible and can easily be negated by miscounting a couple of tablespoons of sugar.
The most important point is that you can combat slow metabolism through exercise.
But your hypothetical people likely do not need to lose weight. I used my height (69.5") and age (54) and selected sedentary on a TDEE calculator and got 1968 when I set the weight for a BMI of 25 (171). When I set it to my old weight of 225, it went up to 2371. Throw in moderate exercise and it goes over 3000. Older and/or shorter people can have the lower TDEE numbers but again, if you add in extra pounds, the numbers go up. I don't think the study validates the idea of plateaus at all.
I agree about the exercise, but I am not sure whether that study proves it or not.
I'm 5'8" and my sedentary TDEE for my starting weight of 175lbs is a little above 2100. Shorter people can easily have 1800 TDEE or less and be overweight.
The study shows that the group that did both calorie restriction and exercise did not see any reduction in their TDEE.
I seen alot of your posts and none of them make any sense.
This one doesnt either0 -
My BMR - using a calculator that ACTUALLY takes into account my 40% BF and DOESN'T assume that at 170 lbs, I am at a good balance of BF and LBM for my height - is about 1370. In a sedentary lifestyle, my TDEE is 1644. Not everyone is running 2000+ TDEEs, and not everyone is eating "extremely low calorie" at 1200 or less. Just throwing that out there. For some of us sedentary, short women, 1200 calories or less is actually necessary to lose any sort of proper weight
0 -
Another thought about exercise...
My understanding about reduced metabolism is that it is achieved by the body doing less work (lower HR and respiration, slower peristalsis, less hormone production, etc) not by doing work more efficiently. Running (my primary exercise) is pretty much always measured by units of work - moving mass over distance. So my belief is that lowered metabolism does not decrease the extra deficit caused by exercise.0 -
Then unless you're willing to point out where I'm wrong, I say you need to read better.One thing that stands out from the first study is the average 454 calories decrease in the TDEE of people in -25% caloric restriction group after 3 months. This means that the slowed metabolism would fully counteract the -25% caloric deficit if your starting TDEE is less than 1816, resulting in the dreaded plateau.
Let's say a sedentary person's TDEE is 2000 calories. A 25% caloric reduction would put him on a 1500 calories diet. If that 25% reduction ends up slowing his metabolism to 1546, he only has effectively 54 calories of deficit, which is barely perceptible and can easily be negated by miscounting a couple of tablespoons of sugar.
The most important point is that you can combat slow metabolism through exercise.
But your hypothetical people likely do not need to lose weight. I used my height (69.5") and age (54) and selected sedentary on a TDEE calculator and got 1968 when I set the weight for a BMI of 25 (171). When I set it to my old weight of 225, it went up to 2371. Throw in moderate exercise and it goes over 3000. Older and/or shorter people can have the lower TDEE numbers but again, if you add in extra pounds, the numbers go up. I don't think the study validates the idea of plateaus at all.
I agree about the exercise, but I am not sure whether that study proves it or not.
I'm 5'8" and my sedentary TDEE for my starting weight of 175lbs is a little above 2100. Shorter people can easily have 1800 TDEE or less and be overweight.
The study shows that the group that did both calorie restriction and exercise did not see any reduction in their TDEE.
I seen alot of your posts and none of them make any sense.
This one doesnt either0 -
You can say what you want but I have been surviving on a 1200 calorie diet, as recommended by my dietician, since December. It is the first time I have been successful at losing weight. I have tried dieting with higher calories allotments and with as much exercise as I am doing now...but with no results. ABSOLUTELY NONE. As I said, this is the FIRST TIME that I have been successful at losing weight in a very long time.
I also know that, as I continue on this journey of mine, my exercise is increasing not decreasing. I am moving more than ever, and loving it.
I believe everyone is different and there is no exact science to weight loss. My diet is working, better than I ever hoped it would, and I am sticking with it. It is balanced, thus providing me with all of the nutrients I need, and I can do this. No charts and graphs are going to change my mind. Thanks for trying, though.
I would be really careful with such a restrictive calorie goal. In the long term there is a very real possibility of 'falling off the wagon' and ending up binging because you are restricting your calorie intake so much. You shouldn't take these things personally, it is very possible that you have done well on 1200 but that doesn't mean it will always work. Realistically, existing on a higher calorie goal is much more sustainable and lessons the chance of going back to old habits or encountering problems.0 -
Bump0
-
The top diagram puts me in mind of someone learning to pull a pint of Guinness and putting too much head on it. The second diagram, well, that's obviously glasses of red and white wine that some wag has managed to stick underneath, and invert on top of, a table.
I'll admit I didn't get beyond those images to actually read it. :noway:
I'm off to the pub, anyone want to join me? :drinker: :drinker:0 -
You can say what you want but I have been surviving on a 1200 calorie diet, as recommended by my dietician, since December. It is the first time I have been successful at losing weight. I have tried dieting with higher calories allotments and with as much exercise as I am doing now...but with no results. ABSOLUTELY NONE. As I said, this is the FIRST TIME that I have been successful at losing weight in a very long time.
I also know that, as I continue on this journey of mine, my exercise is increasing not decreasing. I am moving more than ever, and loving it.
I believe everyone is different and there is no exact science to weight loss. My diet is working, better than I ever hoped it would, and I am sticking with it. It is balanced, thus providing me with all of the nutrients I need, and I can do this. No charts and graphs are going to change my mind. Thanks for trying, though.
I would be really careful with such a restrictive calorie goal. In the long term there is a very real possibility of 'falling off the wagon' and ending up binging because you are restricting your calorie intake so much. You shouldn't take these things personally, it is very possible that you have done well on 1200 but that doesn't mean it will always work. Realistically, existing on a higher calorie goal is much more sustainable and lessons the chance of going back to old habits or encountering problems.
Thank you for your kind imput. I do allow myself an indulgence, once a week. I think this really helps me. My problem is that when I eat more than 1200 calories daily, I do not lose weight. And I am determined to be successful and to never go back. Also, as a short, post-menopausal woman, 1200 calories does not feel restrictive. I do not feel hungry or deprived. However, I can't imagine a man would be able to exist on so few calories. My point in even joining in this discussion is that the heading says "1000/1200 calorie diets are bad." I think it would have been better if it said "Why 1000/1200 calorie diets may be bad." I don't believe the study takes into account that there are changes in estrogen levels in women after menopause that decrease their metabolism naturally.0 -
I hate when people get so unbelievably defensive about their 1000-1200 calorie diets. I was a 1200 person for a long time, and even then I never got defensive when someone said it was bad. I just carried on, until I stopped losing, and became constipated, and was hungry all the time. I'm now up to 1600, still losing, and feel great. Moral of the story is, sure it might work for a while, but eventually your car will need more fuel.0
-
It's amazing that there are still people that think eating 1200 calories per day (especially if you're either not exercising or not eating back your calories) is perfectly healthy. Unless you're tiny, that's not enough calories. It's simple math.
I'll use myself as an example. My BMR is 1500 calories. As we all know, BMR is the amount of calories our bodies need just to function if we were in a coma. If I get up and walk to the restroom, I've burned more than 1500 calories that day. So, there's absolutely NO reason you should eat below your BMR unless you're completely sedentary. It's simply illogical. I follow the TDEE-25% rule and am now eating about 1500 per day. And I should be eating more, but I'm working my way up so I don't gain. I exercise almost every day, but I don't have super intense workouts that require a whole lot of extra calories.
All eating 1200 calories per day will accomplish is breaking down your body. As soon as you stop eating that way, you'll gain weight. This is coming from someone that was stubborn and continued eating 1200 calories a day until it stopped working. Now I have to work on getting my metabolism back to normal from years of ruining it by eating too little. I just started, but eating 1500 calories instead of 1200 has made me feel so much better. My energy has increased like you would not believe. I no longer dread going to the gym, because I've fueled my body instead of starving it. And I was in so much denial before regarding how good I felt that it's not even funny.
"I've been eating 1200 calories a day for a year and I've been just fine" really isn't an argument. Of course you lose weight! You might even get so used to it that it feels like plenty of food. But you're harming your body, no doubt about it. We only get one body in this lifetime - we should treat it right. The biggest problem with 1200 calorie diets is just that - it's a diet. And diets just don't work. You can't sustain 1200 calories per day for the rest of your life. Eventually you'll start eating like a normal person again, and then what? You gain it all back. I'm glad I've gotten myself out of this viscious circle and I'm on my way to real weight loss that lasts. I'm so sick of being on a roller coaster with my weight - gain, lose, gain, lose, gain, lose. I'm done with it! It's time to worry more about my body and less about the number on a scale.
THIS! ^^^^^0 -
OP, may I ask what calorie level your lady friend kept while cutting for her competition?0
-
Yet I do exist... :bigsmile:Thank you for your kind imput. I do allow myself an indulgence, once a week. I think this really helps me. My problem is that when I eat more than 1200 calories daily, I do not lose weight. And I am determined to be successful and to never go back. Also, as a short, post-menopausal woman, 1200 calories does not feel restrictive. I do not feel hungry or deprived. However, I can't imagine a man would be able to exist on so few calories. My point in even joining in this discussion is that the heading says "1000/1200 calorie diets are bad." I think it would have been better if it said "Why 1000/1200 calorie diets may be bad." I don't believe the study takes into account that there are changes in estrogen levels in women after menopause that decrease their metabolism naturally.
For me, it definitely is not something I can continue long term but I am not sure I would have lost the weight trying to slowly step it down. In fact, I have failed at trying to do that a few times. A few things to consider - I have averaged 2 pounds a week for 24 weeks and at this point my BMI is still above 25. The suggested maximum rate of weight loss for overweight people (above 25 BMI) who are otherwise healthy is 2 pounds per week. The suggested minimum calorie diet for overweight people who are otherwise healthy is 1200 calories per day. Eating back exercise calories is not part of that suggested minimum. Once I lose 6 more pounds, I will technically no longer be overweight and I will drop back on my rate of loss substantially.
One thing I hope plays out in my favor is that I was not overweight for most of my life, only the last few years. I would really like my old old habits to come back (as opposed to my new old habits).0 -
That explained 1000-calorie diets, but not 1200. I've been doing 1200 for more than a year now and am doing fine.
I have to agree with you. I work in a clinic with several doctors and the docs who are in shape and fit are all for 1200 calories and not taking in as many calories. Yes, they stress the importance of exercise along with not taking in as many calories. No, they don't promote going below 1200 calories and we have seen what happens with some of our drug reps who come in and are doing the 500 calorie diets and having hair loss etc. Just a fine line of cutting back on junk and increasing physical activity.0 -
In other news...... Science says "Eat less, move more".
Who knew?0 -
I'm off to the pub, anyone want to join me? :drinker: :drinker:
Funny thing is, every time someone mentions pubmed in these forums, I think about having a pint......0 -
Backed by science?
Science has backed so many weird things, I get extremely suspicious when science tells me something is absolutely true for everybody.
People are different.
People have different needs.
Science deals with statistics over a very wide range, and they disregard the extreme responses.
People consist of individual variations.
To use science sensibly, start with it as a baseline, then adjust the methods individually. For some people that means eating 1000 - 1200 calories a day. For some people it means eating 2500 - 3000 calories a day. They may both be perfectly healthy.
Don't use it as a stick to beat individuals.0 -
What about with an active person? I am on a 1200 calorie restriction, I dont go hungry at any point and cycle to work (8 miles there and back) 4 times a week. I do toning at the weekend, I've been losing a steady 1lb a week which is a healthy loss for someone my size and have not had any bad repercussions so far. TBH I'm feeling much better then when I was eating 1800 calories which made me feel sluggish and bloated.0
-
As we all know, BMR is the amount of calories our bodies need just to function if we were in a coma. If I get up and walk to the restroom, I've burned more than 1500 calories that day. So, there's absolutely NO reason you should eat below your BMR unless you're completely sedentary. It's simply illogical.
But (luckily) we are not in a coma
BMR = TDEE when activity is zero
It is NOT the minimum food intake you need to stay alive unless you have no stored fat.
You do NOT go into multiple organ failure and die if you eat below your BMR.
It is simply the same as eating below your TDEE when you are active - you start to use stored glycogen and fat reserves to supplement your food intake to supply your body with its energy requirements (TDEE). As soon as you eat below your TDEE you are in fact, by definition, eating less than your body needs to function, hence weight loss occurs as your body uses stored glycogen and then fat.
True, but in a very selective manner mostly using fat reserves - it's called losing weightAll eating 1200 calories per day will accomplish is breaking down your body.0 -
Everyone's an expert.
Eating 1200 cal/day is so bad, I lost 80 lbs and have kept it off a year and a half. Its awful, don't do it!
lol, so true!! I truly believe we each have to find out what works for each of us through trial and error. You look great!!0 -
I'm off to the pub, anyone want to join me? :drinker: :drinker:
Funny thing is, every time someone mentions pubmed in these forums, I think about having a pint......
It FRIDAY!!! Yay!!! I will be off to the pub with you!!! :drinker:0 -
Yup...
True, but in a very selective manner mostly using fat reserves - it's called losing weightAll eating 1200 calories per day will accomplish is breaking down your body.
0 -
Yup...
True, but in a very selective manner mostly using fat reserves - it's called losing weightAll eating 1200 calories per day will accomplish is breaking down your body.
Wow, great job!!!0 -
You must have a calorie deficit to loose weight. Burning more than 3500 calories than you consume results in the loss of 1 pound. By reducing your calories/ day by 500 (from your maintenance calories/the calories your body burns without additional exercise) you will loose 1 pound a week. By only loosing 1 pound a week you also prevent your body from going catabolic and using your muscle as an energy source.
So, if my maintenance calories works out to be about 1850/day than I should be eating 1350 calories/day. Which I have been doing and which has helped me to loose 40 pounds. When I was swimming varsity I wasn't calorie counting and although I was swimming 2 hours every day plus lifting I was eating to my maintenance and therefore had no deficit.
Now if a body building male tried to eat 1200 calories it would be devastating and he would loose muscle mass because his maintenance calories are so high. The average woman however has a maintenance of about 1700 so therefore 1200 would be the perfect amount.
Source: Varsity swim team coaches, online research, personal experience dieting bodybuilding and varsity swimming.
Babygirl, it's LOSE.0 -
-How can I gain muscle but make sure I don't put any fat on?
1) Impossible. If you are gaining weight, you are gaining fat. You can make sure you are gaining as much muscle as possible in relation to fat by gaining slowly and weightlifting.
Um... what?
Yes, please explain. If you are gaining weight, you could be gaining muscle, not fat.0 -
-How can I gain muscle but make sure I don't put any fat on?
1) Impossible. If you are gaining weight, you are gaining fat. You can make sure you are gaining as much muscle as possible in relation to fat by gaining slowly and weightlifting.
Um... what?
Yes, please explain. If you are gaining weight, you could be gaining muscle, not fat.
He's right.
Whilst it would be terrific if all the excess calories / nutrients above your normal TDEE were all shunted towards muscle growth unfortunately the body doesn't work that way. Some inevitably finds its way to fat storage.
There are certain things you can do to ensure a greater % goes towards muscle but really the biggest determinant of this will be genetics.
In short: when you gain it will always be a mix of fat and muscle, just the same as when you lose.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions