Very short duration VLCDs - still a "no no"?
goldthistime
Posts: 3,213 Member
MFP does not advocate, and in fact deletes posts that advocate very low calorie diets. I agree with their stance, for a multitude of reasons.
But I do think that losing weight quickly for a short period of time is not such a bad thing.
I'm looking to open a discussion on this topic. If even a short period of low calorie consumption is still verboten, then so be it. Delete away.
But just in case...
In my mind, it's definitely ok to push it the first week, maybe even two weeks, and possibly even 3 or 4 weeks (depending on how "very low" is defined). The risk of VLCDs of course, is loss of LBM. Not just skeletal muscle loss but organ tissue cannibalization. Organ damage that has the potential to be permanent. No joke in my mind.
Currently my motto is "Learning to lose weight s-l-o-w-l-y". I don't have what it takes to go on a VLCD for even a day or two. I can't tolerate the reduced energy and the hunger pains that go with it. But there have been times in my life when I was happy to start off with fairly severe restriction of calories. The bonus was that I made great strides quickly, and then from there lost the remaining weight in a slow and sensible manner over the next few months.
I have heard it argued that for obese people, an initial period of a fairly low calorie restriction has the benefit of quickly improving most of their health markers. A sensible diet should be followed after that "honeymoon period". I introduced this idea in a thread here at one time and got lambasted. "Do you have any idea how difficult it is to adhere to a low calorie diet? You are setting these people up for failure!". I didn't have a chance to respond then, but I would say that it depends on how the dieter views success/failure. Would it be so bad to say "You should be eating 1600-1800 calories per day in order to lose 1-2 lbs/week, but during the first three weeks, and the first three weeks ONLY, you are allowed to eat as little as 800 calories per day".
Is the concern that someone would develop an eating disorder during those three weeks? Or that it would reduce their total time in a calorie deficit to such a short duration that proper diet/exercise habits never have a chance to get established, leading to yo-yoing?
Here is someone else who thinks short term low calorie diets are ok... http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/size-of-deficit-and-muscle-catabolism-qa.html/
But I do think that losing weight quickly for a short period of time is not such a bad thing.
I'm looking to open a discussion on this topic. If even a short period of low calorie consumption is still verboten, then so be it. Delete away.
But just in case...
In my mind, it's definitely ok to push it the first week, maybe even two weeks, and possibly even 3 or 4 weeks (depending on how "very low" is defined). The risk of VLCDs of course, is loss of LBM. Not just skeletal muscle loss but organ tissue cannibalization. Organ damage that has the potential to be permanent. No joke in my mind.
Currently my motto is "Learning to lose weight s-l-o-w-l-y". I don't have what it takes to go on a VLCD for even a day or two. I can't tolerate the reduced energy and the hunger pains that go with it. But there have been times in my life when I was happy to start off with fairly severe restriction of calories. The bonus was that I made great strides quickly, and then from there lost the remaining weight in a slow and sensible manner over the next few months.
I have heard it argued that for obese people, an initial period of a fairly low calorie restriction has the benefit of quickly improving most of their health markers. A sensible diet should be followed after that "honeymoon period". I introduced this idea in a thread here at one time and got lambasted. "Do you have any idea how difficult it is to adhere to a low calorie diet? You are setting these people up for failure!". I didn't have a chance to respond then, but I would say that it depends on how the dieter views success/failure. Would it be so bad to say "You should be eating 1600-1800 calories per day in order to lose 1-2 lbs/week, but during the first three weeks, and the first three weeks ONLY, you are allowed to eat as little as 800 calories per day".
Is the concern that someone would develop an eating disorder during those three weeks? Or that it would reduce their total time in a calorie deficit to such a short duration that proper diet/exercise habits never have a chance to get established, leading to yo-yoing?
Here is someone else who thinks short term low calorie diets are ok... http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/size-of-deficit-and-muscle-catabolism-qa.html/
1
Replies
-
I think it's risk vs. benefit.
The risk of VLCD for under 12 weeks in duration are (source):
Fatigue, constipation, nausea, diarrhea, gallstones
The benefits are things like: lower BP, improved diabetes readings, cholesterol, 40+ lbs of loss
Children and people over 50 are typically not indicated for VLCD.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Thanks for your reply. But I just noticed that there is a good discussion already going on here...http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10240808/taboo-subject/p30
-
Was. A number of national / international bodies support use of VLCDs in obesity especially with complications like diabetes.
So adults with a BMI over 30 or maybe 35 might be prescribed a specified VLCD with a minimum protein level, essential fats and full mins & bits to be used for a 6-8 week period.
A VLCD is not just a case of dialling 800 into MFP and nibbling celery.1 -
Given that the thread I linked is closed for review...I want to commend @WBB55 for her short but smart post. I hadn't realized that gallstones were a frequent outcome of VLCDs. Great link too.
@yarwell, I don't understand the "minimum protein level" comment. Can you elaborate? If you had a look at my bodyrecomposition link, Lyle thinks that it's important to make protein a priority when keeping calories very low.
Hope this doesn't sound too kissass, but I'm grateful to MFP for making calorie counting so easy. I am just assuming that I was eating under 1000 calories a day at the beginning of past diets because I wasn't counting. I know I was resistant to the concept of IIFYM initially because I still had in my head that when keeping calories low, you had to make sure every calorie was packing a whopping of nutrients.
0 -
Duh, you didn't say "minimal protein level", you said minimum protein level. NM.0
-
MINIMUM protein level means that they are supposed to eat AT LEAST that amount of protein and no less, so they agree with what you are saying.goldthistime wrote: »@yarwell, I don't understand the "minimum protein level" comment. Can you elaborate? If you had a look at my bodyrecomposition link, Lyle thinks that it's important to make protein a priority when keeping calories very low.
1 -
Can VLCD be appropriate in certain situations? Certainly! In some cases are they even more beneficial then slow and steady weight loss? Again, YES! Should they be strictly implemented under the care of a physician? I believe another resounding YES. There are inherent risks of doing vcld's that we are all aware of. A professional should be the one to discuss those risks, compare them to the possible rewards, and guide you in making the decision whether the vcld is the right choice for you. They will also be the ones responsible for monitoring you while on the diet, deciding how long it should go without a break, and whether or not the diet should continue.1
-
I think that the distinction should be made here that the restricted usage of these short term VLCDs should only be under medical supervision.
There's a risk/benefit analysis that determines if they're appropriate, and in some cases they are. However, careful monitoring is essential.
This definitely is not something to DIY.0 -
I have never crash dieted in my life...well, I tried Slimfast for about 36 hours once. That's it. I did go on a low-calorie diet and was under the supervision of several - I think five - different doctors at the time. I lost a good deal of weight. I lost it safely and as healthily as possible. And I stayed full.
The only problem I had was that when they gave me an inch, I took a mile and began eating things I shouldn't have been eating. But then I got that under control and came to a healthy and happy diet with lots more work.
Everyone has to do what is right for them and that should be decided by them and their doctor(s).
Most the women I know have crash dieted. Magazines, fitness gurus and online sites run silly diets all the time. I think it's silly, but I don't pretend that every woman who crash diets has an ED anymore than I pretend that everyone who lifts weights has BDD.0 -
How many of these threads are going to pop-up this week?-2
-
Not if you're doing it on your own. If you are under a doctor's care and are going in weekly for check ups to make sure you're getting the nutrition you need, then I have nothing against it. Most doctors aren't going to recommend it unless you NEED it or it's preparation for a surgery, but with monitoring it can be safe for a short while. But the problem is so many people buy into the 'cleanse' and 'detox' bs and try to work out a VLCD of their own based on what random internet or magazine people said would work. That can be dangerous, which is why MFP says don't do it.0
-
Not if you're doing it on your own. If you are under a doctor's care and are going in weekly for check ups to make sure you're getting the nutrition you need, then I have nothing against it. Most doctors aren't going to recommend it unless you NEED it or it's preparation for a surgery, but with monitoring it can be safe for a short while. But the problem is so many people buy into the 'cleanse' and 'detox' bs and try to work out a VLCD of their own based on what random internet or magazine people said would work. That can be dangerous, which is why MFP says don't do it.
Depends on the doctor. There are weight loss clinics with doctors just waiting for suckers the desperate to cross their thresholds willing to fork over the cash. They are unscrupulous, imo, and all too easy to find.
1 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »Not if you're doing it on your own. If you are under a doctor's care and are going in weekly for check ups to make sure you're getting the nutrition you need, then I have nothing against it. Most doctors aren't going to recommend it unless you NEED it or it's preparation for a surgery, but with monitoring it can be safe for a short while. But the problem is so many people buy into the 'cleanse' and 'detox' bs and try to work out a VLCD of their own based on what random internet or magazine people said would work. That can be dangerous, which is why MFP says don't do it.
Depends on the doctor. There are weight loss clinics with doctors just waiting for suckers the desperate to cross their thresholds willing to fork over the cash. They are unscrupulous, imo, and all too easy to find.
True, you can always find those, which is sad. But I was thinking a person's regular doctor who doesn't have a financial stake in WLS. I know my regular doctor would regard it as a last-ditch effort to AVOID a WLS. That would be a case I wouldn't argue with, as long as the person was under strict monitoring.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »I think that the distinction should be made here that the restricted usage of these short term VLCDs should only be under medical supervision.
There's a risk/benefit analysis that determines if they're appropriate, and in some cases they are. However, careful monitoring is essential.
This definitely is not something to DIY.
I agree with this.
I would add that doing something like the protein-sparing fat loss approach tends to assume you know a little something about what you are doing, which most people with a great deal to lose just starting out likely do not.
That said, I actually do think that there's too much caution often here (from posters, not the site) about doing lower calories when you have lots to lose--and yes I'm NOT talking about VLCD now. I've seen several people doing 1200-1500 when 200+ get told that at their weight they should start slower and do a more gradual deficit and even on occasion that they should do TDEE-15% (which for the person in question likely would have been less than 1 lb/week). I know for some the shift from maintenance at 225 to 1300 would be extreme and hard to stick to, but often they are really ready for the change, aren't that hungry at first, and find it the easiest time to go low (and can make simple changes in the diet to get there sometimes).
I did 1250 when at 200 (and likely lower pre MFP, when I was even fatter), and found it not difficult at all and the losses both motivating and helpful in getting active more quickly.
I'm not especially an advocate of low calories either, as I couldn't do it now.0 -
Threads about VLCDs under medical supervision arent deleted. Threads promoting rather than discussing VLCDS are deleted according to their terms.0
-
I did a VLCD for a while at the start of the year. I did drop weight quickly. I had a BMI of 52 and was struggling to breath in bed, and to get up off the floor etc. My doctor said the benefits outweighed the risks.
I would never do it long term and it was NOT fun. AT ALL. I also think I still would have lost weight quickly eating at a more normal amount. I was having about 800kcal per day and losing 3-4 pounds a week.
I have gone from 253.5lbs to about 169.5lbs since Jan 4th and I eat twice what I did at the start.2 -
I was on it under medical supervision for a few weeks. I'd not do it again. So unpleasant. I would also insist, beyond the cautions listed above, on access to a 24/7 help line. And not be left alone. There's risk of fainting or falling.0
-
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10056296/eu-guideline-for-vlcds-revised - 75 grams minimum European recommendation.0
-
2 things
- If a person has high or unrealistic expectations about the diet, and does not adhere (binges), they may internalize this outcome as a failure, and develop negative beliefs about their capacity to succeed (become discouraged & stop dieting altogether)
- Various scary things are associated with successful adherence, even when done right, and agree that probably many are not "doing it right"
So yeah, agree this should be reserved exclusively for people in imminent danger related to conditions secondary to extreme obesity & done under supervision.0 -
11 months ago I finally broke my carb addiction by going off all sugar and grain and started eating <50 grams of carbs daily for pain management. 30 days later my pain was being managed by my diet. 6 months later my 40 years of IBS was cured. Very Low Carb Very High Fat eating lifestyle is something the masses will not be interested in doing because they will not walk away from carbs for the 90 days needed to give it a test drive. For those that are willing to actually eat <50 grams of carbs some will stick with it for life and others will not I expect. For weight LCHF may be of some value to some. On average weighting about 200 pounds I am losing about 3 pounds a month when eating at 2600 calories a day and can maintain at 3000 calories daily. While I do this eating lifestyle for pain management I know some do it for blood glucose management.0
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »11 months ago I finally broke my carb addiction by going off all sugar and grain and started eating <50 grams of carbs daily for pain management. 30 days later my pain was being managed by my diet. 6 months later my 40 years of IBS was cured. Very Low Carb Very High Fat eating lifestyle is something the masses will not be interested in doing because they will not walk away from carbs for the 90 days needed to give it a test drive. For those that are willing to actually eat <50 grams of carbs some will stick with it for life and others will not I expect. For weight LCHF may be of some value to some. On average weighting about 200 pounds I am losing about 3 pounds a month when eating at 2600 calories a day and can maintain at 3000 calories daily. While I do this eating lifestyle for pain management I know some do it for blood glucose management.
Does that have anything at all to do with the subject?2 -
I think maybe he thinks VLCD means "Very Low Carb Diet" ?
It means Very Low CALORIE diet.2 -
I am currently on day 4 of a VLCD, probably my last day. It is to be done for a maximum of 7 days. I never thought I would be able to stick to it but I have not been hungry, just in the evening but that's my weak time anyway. And I still have good energy. It's good to know I can do it for a few days whenever I find myself eating too much and starting to gain to get me refocused again. And to do it without becoming hangry and tired.
It is simply boiled eggs, apples and a few almonds. Easy to prepare and eat. But only for a few days to a week, no more.
I don't believe in quick fixes and know my normal is .5/week when eating at a deficit but it is a nice boost and certainly has helped curb my appetite and cravings.0 -
I am currently on day 4 of a VLCD, probably my last day. It is to be done for a maximum of 7 days. I never thought I would be able to stick to it but I have not been hungry, just in the evening but that's my weak time anyway. And I still have good energy. It's good to know I can do it for a few days whenever I find myself eating too much and starting to gain to get me refocused again. And to do it without becoming hangry and tired.
It is simply boiled eggs, apples and a few almonds. Easy to prepare and eat. But only for a few days to a week, no more.
I don't believe in quick fixes and know my normal is .5/week when eating at a deficit but it is a nice boost and certainly has helped curb my appetite and cravings.
I'd recommend adding EFAs, best in the form of fish oil to that, and you should be fine. Though, I find it hard to believe you're getting adequate protein and still staying VLC with eggs and nuts being involved.1 -
I just don't understand why anyone would want to do this for any amount of time.2
-
Ha! I looked up and saw myself in this thread from long ago. Funny.
I've since learned about another form of a short term VLCD that does guard against muscle loss and is safe in some circumstances. It's not for the faint of heart.
Kenda, I'll second Gallowmere's recommendation for the EFA's. I couldn't tolerate fish oil (it gave me horrible diarrhea), but agree it's a superior source.
I too question the adequacy of your protein intake and worry about the safety of the protocol you're on. There are better methods than what you're doing. They require a lot more protein. If your diet is truly low calorie, your consumption of eggs and almonds has to be quite low.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Ha! I looked up and saw myself in this thread from long ago. Funny.
I've since learned about another form of a short term VLCD that does guard against muscle loss and is safe in some circumstances. It's not for the faint of heart.
Kenda, I'll second Gallowmere's recommendation for the EFA's. I couldn't tolerate fish oil (it gave me horrible diarrhea), but agree it's a superior source.
I saw that too!! You are doing fantastic!!0 -
I just don't understand why anyone would want to do this for any amount of time.
I've personally used RFL for a period of weeks at a time, though there's an entire protocol there. It's not just "cut to X amount of calories and go at it". Believe it or not, when you can cram four months of normal cutting into a few weeks, it makes up for the suffering. I'd post my before and after pictures, but I don't want to seem like I am advocating for it and get the thread closed. Just know, that for certain segments of the population, the short term drawbacks are well worth the kickstart to long term results. It just has to be done properly, or you absolutely can hurt yourself.1 -
queenliz99 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Ha! I looked up and saw myself in this thread from long ago. Funny.
I've since learned about another form of a short term VLCD that does guard against muscle loss and is safe in some circumstances. It's not for the faint of heart.
Kenda, I'll second Gallowmere's recommendation for the EFA's. I couldn't tolerate fish oil (it gave me horrible diarrhea), but agree it's a superior source.
I saw that too!! You are doing fantastic!!
Funny, that's the me I still see in the mirror. At least I no longer see the original me.
Thanks, love.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions