How many calories are too little???
averyquiring
Posts: 22 Member
I work out 5-6 times a week for about 30-60 minutes each. My goal is to lose two pounds a week, therefore my calorie goal is 1300. I usually averaged around 1100-1200 and do not eat back the calories I work off. Is this too little, will my body go into starvation mode under these conditions?
Side note! I am vegetarian, but eat no eggs and rarely dairy products
Side note! I am vegetarian, but eat no eggs and rarely dairy products
0
Replies
-
Starvation mode is not a thing.
That said from what you described you're eating too little to properly fuel your body and your workouts0 -
You need to eat more. You will soon find that you lack the energy and strength to get through your workouts and will feel like ick. Slowly up your calories so you don't feel overwhelmed, your body will thank you!0
-
I agree with juggernaut. While starvation mode really isn't a thing, malnutrition totally is. If you're not getting enough protein in particular, you could be sabotaging your muscles. My advice would be to eat back at least half of your exercise calories.0
-
the better question is why is a 19 year old female trying to lose two pounds per week????0
-
Everyone knows what is meant when you use the term "Starvation mode" so that's why it's used. Agree with jenathp....call it what you want...but when you eat to few calories, certain things happen and don't happen within your body. It's those things that matter. Not what you call it.0
-
Upstate_Dunadan wrote: »Everyone knows what is meant when you use the term "Starvation mode" so that's why it's used. Agree with jenathp....call it what you want...but when you eat to few calories, certain things happen and don't happen within your body. It's those things that matter. Not what you call it.
actually, we don't know, so please tell us what is meant by starvation mode?0 -
With 23,000+ posts, I'm sure you do know. For those that don't you can Google it and find plenty of articles on the topic. Here's one of many.
authoritynutrition.com/starvation-mode/0 -
Upstate_Dunadan wrote: »With 23,000+ posts, I'm sure you do know. For those that don't you can Google it and find plenty of articles on the topic. Here's one of many.
authoritynutrition.com/starvation-mode/
Adaptive thermogenesis is not what is described when people use the term "starvation mode" around here. In fact, the commonly used description of the body not losing, or actually gaining, from too few calories is debunked and a violation of the conservation of energy.0 -
Upstate_Dunadan wrote: »Everyone knows what is meant when you use the term "Starvation mode" so that's why it's used. Agree with jenathp....call it what you want...but when you eat to few calories, certain things happen and don't happen within your body. It's those things that matter. Not what you call it.
actually, we don't know, so please tell us what is meant by starvation mode?
Its a description of something that has been proven false but still lingers in the locker rooms, google articles, and forums until someone educates the user of such information to its bro-science qualities.0 -
If you feel good, strong, healthy and can power through your workouts, you're probably doing okay. If you feel hungry, tired, weak, cannot really power through a workout or are ever light-headed, you'll probably want to eat more.
For an expert opinion, though, you should see your doctor and maybe get a referral to a dietitian. We cannot really know what is best for you.0 -
averyquiring wrote: »I work out 5-6 times a week for about 30-60 minutes each. My goal is to lose two pounds a week, therefore my calorie goal is 1300. I usually averaged around 1100-1200 and do not eat back the calories I work off. Is this too little, will my body go into starvation mode under these conditions?
Side note! I am vegetarian, but eat no eggs and rarely dairy products
Set your goal to 0.5 lbs per wek. Your goal is the problem here, it is not healthy for you. It would only make sense if you were very obese to begin with.0 -
We would all love to lose 2 lbs of fat a week. But with 19 body to lose, that will not happen. At this point, you should be aiming to lose 1/2 to 1 lb per week. And based on age and how many times you workout, that is probably around the 1700-2100 mark (average for many women that I know).
What type of exercise are you doing? Are you lifting (structured routine)? Because if not, you should be as it will provide the greater changes in the way your body looks.0 -
Upstate_Dunadan wrote: »With 23,000+ posts, I'm sure you do know. For those that don't you can Google it and find plenty of articles on the topic. Here's one of many.
authoritynutrition.com/starvation-mode/
nope, I want you to explain it to me on your own, please.0 -
Upstate_Dunadan wrote: »With 23,000+ posts, I'm sure you do know. For those that don't you can Google it and find plenty of articles on the topic. Here's one of many.
authoritynutrition.com/starvation-mode/
nope, I want you to explain it to me on your own, please.
Generally the context of members on this forum..
Eating too little stops your metabolism and you get fat and/or you can't lose weight. Which is perpetuated non sense.0 -
Upstate_Dunadan wrote: »With 23,000+ posts, I'm sure you do know. For those that don't you can Google it and find plenty of articles on the topic. Here's one of many.
authoritynutrition.com/starvation-mode/
nope, I want you to explain it to me on your own, please.
Generally the context of members on this forum..
Eating too little stops your metabolism and you get fat and/or you can't lose weight. Which is perpetuated non sense.
cosign ..
but I was hoping THAT poster would break down his understanding of it, rather then posting an article….
0 -
OP never came back ….0
-
Yes too little.0
-
We would all love to lose 2 lbs of fat a week. But with 19 body to lose, that will not happen. At this point, you should be aiming to lose 1/2 to 1 lb per week. And based on age and how many times you workout, that is probably around the 1700-2100 mark (average for many women that I know).
What type of exercise are you doing? Are you lifting (structured routine)? Because if not, you should be as it will provide the greater changes in the way your body looks.
Thanks for the advice! I do crossfit three times a weak, and run or do body weights workouts at home the rest of the time.
0 -
averyquiring wrote: »We would all love to lose 2 lbs of fat a week. But with 19 body to lose, that will not happen. At this point, you should be aiming to lose 1/2 to 1 lb per week. And based on age and how many times you workout, that is probably around the 1700-2100 mark (average for many women that I know).
What type of exercise are you doing? Are you lifting (structured routine)? Because if not, you should be as it will provide the greater changes in the way your body looks.
Thanks for the advice! I do crossfit three times a weak, and run or do body weights workouts at home the rest of the time.
Yea as i suspected. You shouldnt be looking for the minimum. You should be looking for thr maximum you can eat, that will allow for weight loss and fuel your workouts.
Personally I would start with 1500 to 1700, and macros around 40% carbs 30% fats and protein. The increase in protein along with resistance training will help with muscle retention and give you a leaner look. I would also pick up a food scale to increase accuracy of logging. With such little weight to lose, you have a lot less room for error.0 -
averyquiring wrote: »I work out 5-6 times a week for about 30-60 minutes each. My goal is to lose two pounds a week, therefore my calorie goal is 1300. I usually averaged around 1100-1200 and do not eat back the calories I work off. Is this too little, will my body go into starvation mode under these conditions?
Side note! I am vegetarian, but eat no eggs and rarely dairy products
Look at your goal from a different angle. Worry less about barely escaping "starvation mode"--eating the bare minimum of healthy calories--and start thinking about fueling all of that great exercise you are doing. You want to have a healthy body and fit appearance, yes? That's the purpose of that exercise, and you need fuel if you are going to keep at it and get the most benefit from it. Exercise is not the primary driver of your weight loss. To reduce fat, you just have to maintain a deficit below your caloric intake after taking into account activity/exercise. Whether that's 1500 calories or 3000, it's based on your fitness goals and how you fuel them. Eat back 50%-75% of those exercise calories. If you find you are losing faster than 2 pounds a week over the course of month, then eat back more of the exercise calories. Eat back fewer exercise calories if you aren't losing (or start gaining).
0 -
If you dont eat enough you lose muscle tone...its better to keep your muscle because that in the long run burns calories. You dont want skinny fat do you? Be healthy, eat at deficit but log your workouts and calories burn. You dont have to to eat more then 50 percent calories burned but be sure you eat enough0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions