Everyone seems to eat below daily calories??

PaulaWallaDingDong

ruthfmoy wrote: »

. If you are lowering your caloric intake for weight reduction, you are actually setting yourself for high weight gain when you do being to eat properly again.

If you are overweight, you weren't eating properly in the first place, so you shouldn't be going "back to" anything. Also, reducing calories (and perhaps adding exercise to assist) is the only way to lose weight.

But since you're an expert, you already knew all that.

ndj1979

LyiannaTameka wrote: »

As insightful as this post is, it fails to take individual differences into account. Everyone's metabolic rate varies, some can lounge around all day & still naturally have a high metabolic rate. Genetics do play a part & everyone is different. For example, I was on a low-calorie diet for a while. At a point, I was eating 500-600 calories a day for a few weeks. It wasn't permanent, it was more like an experience. I wanted to see what results I would yield. I lost quite abit of weight, then I ate recklessly for a straight week (I'm talking 2000+ calories), & I only put on half a pound. People always say you'll gain back the weight fast but it really depends on a plathora of things. You could really maintain weightloss without doing much. It depends.

Ops post is not insiteful, it is dead wrong

diannethegeek

It's polite to include a link to the source when you rip someone off. In this case, the original seems to be here: https://www.healthstatus.com/health_blog/body-fat-calculator-2/caloric-intake-affects-health-2/

PeachyCarol

Don't ever look at my diary! I ... don't use the system in a way that would seem meaningful to an outside observer unless you knew my Fitbit TDEE. My calorie underages are sometimes calories I bank for less active days, and I look like I have really low net calories because of how I have things set up. It's simply a function of how MFP and Fitbit work together.

I'm not worried about it.

In general, yes, you're right, people should not be eating well below 1200 calories, but you can't make generalizations. When I was eating 1200 calories, I often left a buffer of 100-150 calories to account for logging errors and possible over reporting/calculation of exercise calories. That worked out well too.

queenliz99

diannethegeek wrote: »

It's polite to include a link to the source when you rip someone off. In this case, the original seems to be here: https://www.healthstatus.com/health_blog/body-fat-calculator-2/caloric-intake-affects-health-2/

Wow @diannethegeek nice catch. Linking source is important

_Terrapin_

diannethegeek wrote: »

It's polite to include a link to the source when you rip someone off. In this case, the original seems to be here: https://www.healthstatus.com/health_blog/body-fat-calculator-2/caloric-intake-affects-health-2/

Yikes! Muscle loss in 3 days in a deficit?!? High calorie diets lead to disaster!?!? Holy Bad Blog Batman! I would recommend the OP link the blog since I do not see the word 'being' used in most sentences like the one in the blog. Source link would've have been beneficial.

kuroshii

My daily goal per MFP is generally around 1500, not 1200, and yet even when I clock in at 1490 it still says I was "under my calorie goal" on my feed. I've stopped paying attention to it.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

alizesmom

Generalizations are a problem. My calorie goal is set at 1260 and I'm often under BUT I am also 5 ft 1/2 inch and 62 years old. I've been doing this since Christmas of last year and feel great. There are days that I also eat goal or go over. I am not hungry or sluggish. In fact I have more energy than I've had in years. Am I harming myself? I don't think so but I am also aware that when I reach goal weight I will still be short and in my 60s which means maintenance calories for me will be less than what some people can eat and lose.

sarahlifts

I eat under maintenance and have eaten under maintenance for some time now 3 years of 9 months below maintenance 3 months at maintenance. Presently my MFP cals are set higher than my cut though I'm still in a cut. I can cut on 1800 cals I'm set to 1665 and my intake is around 1500...plus you don't see the chit I don't track....There is always that... lololol

Checks for muscles...yep still there.

I'm not even gonna bother to explain how to retain muscle mass in a cut....SEARCH THE BOARDS GOOGLE IT YES I'M YElling

DumbbellHell

Well that's nice and all, I'm going to continue netting between 1200-1100 because I'm a super sedentary college student. I'll be sure to let you know when I start dying.

lyttlewon

Except any time you are under your calorie goal it says that you ate below. I'm at 2,000 maintenance calories. You know how obsessive I would need to be to hit exactly 2,000 calories every single day? If I'm short 100 calories one day I'm not going to eat a bunch of carrots to make sure my MFP tracker logs me at the correct count.

LivingtheLeanDream

HappyCampr1 wrote: »

IdLikeToLoseItLoseIt wrote: »

abatonfan wrote: »

Did you consider that some people set their goals to maintenance and then leave 250-500 calories remaining each day? I hate seeing the red numbers if I need to go over to treat a low blood sugar (and it also gives me the freedom to decide one day that I'm really hungry and want to eat at maintenance). My blood sugar has been running super high today (and don't like eating until I get down to a lower range), so I'll be lucky if I can reach 1000 calories. I'm irritable and have a killer headache from the high, but I'm going to try to enjoy this bacon-fest.

From personal experience, I know I'm facing some of the effects of "starvation diets." For three months, I didn't know that my body was unable to metabolize carbs (and a portion of protein due to certain metabolic pathways -yay, type 1 diabetes ), so despite consuming at least 2000-2500 calories, my body would only be able to generate energy from about 600-700ish; all the other calories were peed out ("sugar in the urine"). I certainly lost a ton of weight super quickly (about 55 pounds in three months), but I also lost a ton of muscle (and have a lower BMR now because of it). I will never remember the look on my mother's face when she realized how much weight I was losing; her exact words to me were "you look skeletal."

Setting your goal to maintenance and eating 250-500 below is a very interesting idea! I had never thought of that, so thanks for passing that concept along. I don't know whether that would mess with my head too much, but the beauty of MFP is that I can always try that and then go back to the traditional way if it doesn't work!

I have a friend who does this. She said she didn't like the guilt when she got red numbers. Now she can feel good when she has a 450 calorie deficit instead of feeling bad that it wasn't 500 if she went over by 50.

I do this too

lithezebra

ndj1979 wrote: »

ruthfmoy wrote: »

When your caloric intake is too low you will have several health problems. One problem is reduced muscles mass. Your body searches for sources of energy to just keep vital organs functioning and it will turn to your muscle mass for those energy foods. This is called catabolism. Your metabolic rate will drop dramatically if you eat too little calories and after three days of low calorie intake this will compound your muscle mass loss. When you don"t eat enough calories you become sluggish, develop nutritional deficiencies, and are often highly irritable. If you are lowering your caloric intake for weight reduction, you are actually setting yourself for high weight gain when you do being to eat properly again.

I am sorry but your body will not start cannibalizing muscle at three days of low intake. That takes months of eating almost nothing to happen.

Please stop fear mongering and spreading pseudoscience, there is enough of that on these boards.

I know from a nasty little bout of illness that you can lose a lot of muscle in just a few weeks of eating too little.