Why eating too little calories is a bad idea.....
Replies
-
Bumpity bump bump!
2 -
Bump!2
-
Bumpers!
2 -
Can I gain muscle while losing weight? Thanks1
-
tombradysbc wrote: »Can I gain muscle while losing weight? Thanks
You would be better off posting your own thread as this is off topic for this thread. You would have two options really Recomp or Bulk/Cut cycles.
Recomp is covered here, however, it's quite slow going in terms of building muscle.
Bulk and Cut cycles would mean eating at a surplus for a time whilst following a strength training program and this would lead to gain of both muscle and fat and then eating at a deficit to lose fat/maintain the muscle. Continuing this process until you were happy with the results. You can find more info on that here5 -
Threads that go BUMP in the night!
2 -
Interesting. I am losing extremely slowly (25 lbs since January) and I never eat my exercise calories back.
SW: 252
CW:227
Goal: 150 ish?
Daily calories allotted by MFP 1500 (ish)- I have a desk job where I sit most of the day. I always eat my calories allotted. On days I exercise it looks like 1500 calories, 400 for working out, 1900 total but I always try to have approximately my exercise calories remaining when I end the day. Does that mean I only ate 1100 calories because of the exercise?0 -
dontcallmecandi wrote: »Interesting. I am losing extremely slowly (25 lbs since January) and I never eat my exercise calories back.
SW: 252
CW:227
Goal: 150 ish?
Daily calories allotted by MFP 1500 (ish)- I have a desk job where I sit most of the day. I always eat my calories allotted. On days I exercise it looks like 1500 calories, 400 for working out, 1900 total but I always try to have approximately my exercise calories remaining when I end the day. Does that mean I only ate 1100 calories because of the exercise?
@dontcallmecandi
25lbs isn't slow at all that's around 6.25 pounds per month, the recommended rate of loss is 1-2 pounds per week, so you're losing at a healthy rate. Chances are although in theory you're netting 1100 calories (yes to your bolded question) the likelihood of this being the case also depends on the accuracy of your food logging and how accurate your calorie burns are for your exercise.
Depending on your height, a sedentary TDEE (Calorie Burn for the day) for someone your weight (example here is someone 5'4" which is about average height for a woman and aged 30) would be 2150 calories, if you're losing 1.5lb per week on average (750 calorie deficit per day), that would put your net intake at around 1400 calories.
So you're likely over-estimating your calorie burns, underestimating your calorie intake or a combination of the two. So nothing to worry about for now, just note that as you get closer to goal and weight loss slows you'll likely need to get more accurate.
8 -
dontcallmecandi wrote: »Interesting. I am losing extremely slowly (25 lbs since January) and I never eat my exercise calories back.
SW: 252
CW:227
Goal: 150 ish?
Daily calories allotted by MFP 1500 (ish)- I have a desk job where I sit most of the day. I always eat my calories allotted. On days I exercise it looks like 1500 calories, 400 for working out, 1900 total but I always try to have approximately my exercise calories remaining when I end the day. Does that mean I only ate 1100 calories because of the exercise?
You are not losing slowly! 25 pounds since January is about 5lbs a month, a little over a pound a week!
You should be eating back most of your exercise calories, that's how MFP was set up. I don't eat back all of my exercise calories because I feel like my burns are grossly overestimated(some days Fitbit adjusts to 1,500+ exercise, but I know that is *way* too high for what I did that day) and my slower loss shows it.
And to answer your question, you ate 1500 regardless of your burn. Your net intake is 1100. You should eat back some of those calories, you earned them! As long as you're 100% sure your intake is accurate! I bought a cheap scale a few years back and use it except for when I eat out. It's an eye opener for portions!6 -
Time for this to take another stroll through page 1.4
-
bump0
-
Bump
Bump
Bump
3 -
I love this post!! I also learned the hard way!!
I dropped calories too low for too long. The thing that's missing on that list is when the electrolytes get low or out of balance and the body loses muscle mass, the heart is a muscle that loses that mass too.
When either of these happen, the walls of the heart weaken and one or more chambers become enlarged... Heart failure, which causes extreme weight gain from water weight (I gained over 100lbs in less than two months) and body deformity.
The heart failure led to A LOT of health and hormonal issues... Including gallstones. Chain reaction of problems to follow.
I thought I was healthy, never thought this would happen to me. I was 5'8" 134 lbs age 25, and kept calories between 800-1100 daily... Some days higher or lower. I thought, I was eating when hungry and listening to my body.
I also had extremely normal menstruation, no fatigue, no dizziness, no mood swings, no hair loss, strong nails, and clear complexion. There were no warning signs or precursors to heart failure.
I will try to screenshot this and save links!!
Thanks for posting!!14 -
Emmapatterson1729 wrote: »I love this post!! I also learned the hard way!!
I dropped calories too low for too long. The thing that's missing on that list is when the electrolytes get low or out of balance and the body loses muscle mass, the heart is a muscle that loses that mass too.
When either of these happen, the walls of the heart weaken and one or more chambers become enlarged... Heart failure, which causes extreme weight gain from water weight (I gained over 100lbs in less than two months) and body deformity.
The heart failure led to A LOT of health and hormonal issues... Including gallstones. Chain reaction of problems to follow.
I thought I was healthy, never thought this would happen to me. I was 5'8" 134 lbs age 25, and kept calories between 800-1100 daily... Some days higher or lower. I thought, I was eating when hungry and listening to my body.
I also had extremely normal menstruation, no fatigue, no dizziness, no mood swings, no hair loss, strong nails, and clear complexion. There were no warning signs or precursors to heart failure.
I will try to screenshot this and save links!!
Thanks for posting!!
No problem, to the bolded - Organ (Heart/Lungs/Kidney/Liver) Damage and Electrolyte Imbalance are both mentioned on the initial post.
6 -
bumpity bump
0 -
tinkerbellang83 wrote: »Emmapatterson1729 wrote: »I love this post!! I also learned the hard way!!
I dropped calories too low for too long. The thing that's missing on that list is when the electrolytes get low or out of balance and the body loses muscle mass, the heart is a muscle that loses that mass too.
When either of these happen, the walls of the heart weaken and one or more chambers become enlarged... Heart failure, which causes extreme weight gain from water weight (I gained over 100lbs in less than two months) and body deformity.
The heart failure led to A LOT of health and hormonal issues... Including gallstones. Chain reaction of problems to follow.
I thought I was healthy, never thought this would happen to me. I was 5'8" 134 lbs age 25, and kept calories between 800-1100 daily... Some days higher or lower. I thought, I was eating when hungry and listening to my body.
I also had extremely normal menstruation, no fatigue, no dizziness, no mood swings, no hair loss, strong nails, and clear complexion. There were no warning signs or precursors to heart failure.
I will try to screenshot this and save links!!
Thanks for posting!!
No problem, to the bolded - Organ (Heart/Lungs/Kidney/Liver) Damage and Electrolyte Imbalance are both mentioned on the initial post.
Was trying to point out that two symptoms on the list (electrolyte imbalance and muscle mass loss) actually cause the organ failure to the heart. Sorry, if I didn't word it clearly. I'm on a mobile app that stops working frequently, so I try to type fast.
I had congestive heart failure caused from electrolyte imbalance and heart muscle mass loss.
I think congestive heart failure is a little more extreme than organ damage. It is organ failure, which is not listed and what I was trying to add.11 -
Bump in the night!0
-
This is why I don't count calories I eat healthy foods until I am satisfied!The body knows what it needs 0
-
cuteangelkitten wrote: »This is why I don't count calories I eat healthy foods until I am satisfied!The body knows what it needs
I'm glad this works for you, but I don't think it's universally true. This site is full of people whose ability to listen to their body is broken in some manner or another.16 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »cuteangelkitten wrote: »This is why I don't count calories I eat healthy foods until I am satisfied!The body knows what it needs
I'm glad this works for you, but I don't think it's universally true. This site is full of people whose ability to listen to their body is broken in some manner or another.
Amen, if I listened to my body I'd be neck deep in junk food as that is what my body wants.......It ain't blummin' getting it tho!10 -
tinkerbellang83 wrote: »I have been on MFP since 2011 but only used it properly and the forums for the last 6 months, the number of posts I see (mostly) from women eating 1000 calories and under or netting less per day when they could lose by eating a higher and healthier intake is heart-breaking. When I used MFP in the past and was a serial starter, I have eaten quite low calories (Around 1300) because I hadn't really a clue what I was doing so I hope this post goes some way to educating those who think that the only way to lose weight is to starve yourself and it will save me typing out the same response repeatedly
What is a healthy weight for you and what rate of loss is healthy?
The BMI range is a good place to start. You can calculate your BMI here http://www.nhs.uk/Tools/Pages/Healthyweightcalculator.aspx
US & UK departments of health* recommend a steady weight loss of 1-2lb per week for those who are obese. If you have any medical concerns it's best to consult with your doctor.
The science behind weight loss/maintenance/gain
If you're new to MFP you may or may not have heard the term CICO being thrown around.
CICO is an energy balance of Calories In & Calories Out.
To lose weight your CALORIES IN must be less than your CALORIES OUT (CI<CO)
To maintain weight your CALORIES IN must be the same as your CALORIES OUT (CI=CO)
To gain weight your CALORIES IN must be more than your CALORIES OUT (CI>CO)
Understanding how your calorie allowance is calculated
Eating low calorie but still not losing weight
There are many posts already on this subject but in summary, those who are eating low calorie and not losing weight, for the most, this is down to logging inaccuracies either in underestimating calories in or overestimating calories out. Using measuring cups or estimating/eyeballing portion sizes are very inaccurate ways of calculating the calorie content of meals. Using the MFP database/Machine Readings/Non-HR fitness trackers for calorie burns can also be an inaccurate method of determining burns.
Net Calories and Eating Exercise Calories Back
Your initial calorie allowance is essentially a net figure - the way MFP is set up you are intended to eat back your calories burned as they are not accounted for in the calculations to acquire the figure. If you ate none of your exercise calories you are putting yourself in a larger deficit than you have set yourself in MFP. This may be ok if you're set at lower rate of weight loss, however if you're already at 2lb per week loss (1000 calorie deficit) then you could be getting less food than you need to fuel your body sufficiently. Going back to "Mildred" above if she didn't eat any of her calories back she would be netting under 850 calories on her active days and this would no doubt impact her energy levels and her running performance.
The Negative Effect on Weight Loss from Undereating
Some people may well be able to stick at a 1000+ calorie deficit for long periods of time, however for a lot of us what actually happens when you are being overly restrictive is that we can only manage it for a short while because it's too drastic and we are simply hungry so we decide to pack it in and go back to the way we were eating before and end up in a vicious cycle of binge and restrict that doesn't actually achieve anything.
The Short & Long Term Effects of Undereating Without Medical Supervision
In the short term undereating can have the following effect (this is by no means an exhaustive list):- Mood Swings
- Fatigue
- Constipation
- Hair Loss
- Menstrual Irregularities
- Dizziness
- Brittle Nails
- Poor Skin Condition
- Headaches
In the long term it can have far more negative effects, such as:- muscle loss
- gallstones
- electrolyte imbalances
- organ damage
- bone density loss
- vitamin/mineral deficiencies
Other useful posts that can be read in conjunction with this one:
Accurate Logging
Weight Loss is Not Linear
Why am I not losing weight?
*https://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/losing_weight/index.html *http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/loseweight/Pages/should-you-lose-weight-fast.aspx
I have been told by a dietician that I am not eating enough, I usually have 3/400 calories spare on an exercise day (3days per week) I have lost only 1.2 kilos in the last 8 months so if I start eating back the calories burned as per MFP, Will I put on weight? How long will it take to adjust? Any thoughts please, I feel quite lost
2 -
barneshall wrote: »tinkerbellang83 wrote: »I have been on MFP since 2011 but only used it properly and the forums for the last 6 months, the number of posts I see (mostly) from women eating 1000 calories and under or netting less per day when they could lose by eating a higher and healthier intake is heart-breaking. When I used MFP in the past and was a serial starter, I have eaten quite low calories (Around 1300) because I hadn't really a clue what I was doing so I hope this post goes some way to educating those who think that the only way to lose weight is to starve yourself and it will save me typing out the same response repeatedly
What is a healthy weight for you and what rate of loss is healthy?
The BMI range is a good place to start. You can calculate your BMI here http://www.nhs.uk/Tools/Pages/Healthyweightcalculator.aspx
US & UK departments of health* recommend a steady weight loss of 1-2lb per week for those who are obese. If you have any medical concerns it's best to consult with your doctor.
The science behind weight loss/maintenance/gain
If you're new to MFP you may or may not have heard the term CICO being thrown around.
CICO is an energy balance of Calories In & Calories Out.
To lose weight your CALORIES IN must be less than your CALORIES OUT (CI<CO)
To maintain weight your CALORIES IN must be the same as your CALORIES OUT (CI=CO)
To gain weight your CALORIES IN must be more than your CALORIES OUT (CI>CO)
Understanding how your calorie allowance is calculated
Eating low calorie but still not losing weight
There are many posts already on this subject but in summary, those who are eating low calorie and not losing weight, for the most, this is down to logging inaccuracies either in underestimating calories in or overestimating calories out. Using measuring cups or estimating/eyeballing portion sizes are very inaccurate ways of calculating the calorie content of meals. Using the MFP database/Machine Readings/Non-HR fitness trackers for calorie burns can also be an inaccurate method of determining burns.
Net Calories and Eating Exercise Calories Back
Your initial calorie allowance is essentially a net figure - the way MFP is set up you are intended to eat back your calories burned as they are not accounted for in the calculations to acquire the figure. If you ate none of your exercise calories you are putting yourself in a larger deficit than you have set yourself in MFP. This may be ok if you're set at lower rate of weight loss, however if you're already at 2lb per week loss (1000 calorie deficit) then you could be getting less food than you need to fuel your body sufficiently. Going back to "Mildred" above if she didn't eat any of her calories back she would be netting under 850 calories on her active days and this would no doubt impact her energy levels and her running performance.
The Negative Effect on Weight Loss from Undereating
Some people may well be able to stick at a 1000+ calorie deficit for long periods of time, however for a lot of us what actually happens when you are being overly restrictive is that we can only manage it for a short while because it's too drastic and we are simply hungry so we decide to pack it in and go back to the way we were eating before and end up in a vicious cycle of binge and restrict that doesn't actually achieve anything.
The Short & Long Term Effects of Undereating Without Medical Supervision
In the short term undereating can have the following effect (this is by no means an exhaustive list):- Mood Swings
- Fatigue
- Constipation
- Hair Loss
- Menstrual Irregularities
- Dizziness
- Brittle Nails
- Poor Skin Condition
- Headaches
In the long term it can have far more negative effects, such as:- muscle loss
- gallstones
- electrolyte imbalances
- organ damage
- bone density loss
- vitamin/mineral deficiencies
Other useful posts that can be read in conjunction with this one:
Accurate Logging
Weight Loss is Not Linear
Why am I not losing weight?
*https://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/losing_weight/index.html *http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/loseweight/Pages/should-you-lose-weight-fast.aspx
I have been told by a dietician that I am not eating enough, I usually have 3/400 calories spare on an exercise day (3days per week) I have lost only 1.2 kilos in the last 8 months so if I start eating back the calories burned as per MFP, Will I put on weight? How long will it take to adjust? Any thoughts please, I feel quite lost
Chances are you're eating more than you think if you've been losing weight at such a slow rate.
If you lost 1.2kg in 8 months that means your actual deficit is an average of 40 calories per day, so you've more or less been eating maintenance over those 8 months. If you then added 3-400 calories then yes you would gain weight.
Without seeing your diary or knowing your stats it's very difficult to offer any advice.
8 -
Bumpage.2
-
I have a hard time reaching my 1200 calories a day. I was banded back in 2007 and tho I have put on about 20 pounds since my initial weight loss, I feel full with the amount I am eating with all the fat and under 20 carbs per day. I guess I will be able to gauge if I am not eating enough if the scale doesn't move???1
-
dianefinnegan1 wrote: »I have a hard time reaching my 1200 calories a day. I was banded back in 2007 and tho I have put on about 20 pounds since my initial weight loss, I feel full with the amount I am eating with all the fat and under 20 carbs per day. I guess I will be able to gauge if I am not eating enough if the scale doesn't move???
Scale by itself isn't a great way to know - even then need usually more than 30 days of say trend weight to really discern what's going on with it.
Have to see past the noise of normal water fluctuations.
Measure in the known 2 or 3 spots you gain or lose fat first to get an idea too.
And undereating sadly can have some bad side-effects before you can discern from either of those that things are going the wrong direction.
For instance body can adapt and cause you to move less to conserve energy.
If that doesn't work lower level functions can be slowed down for same reason - nail/hair growth, skin replace, ect.
You feeling full and your body being fully fed are 2 different things.
And I'm betting that 1200 a day was base calories when you are truly at the activity level you selected. And only that.
Did you pick Sedentary?
Do you actually have household responsibilities weeknights and weekends that keep you moving - or truly hitting the couch/chair when you get home from a desk job/commute and all weekends? Former is lightly-active
Did you pick a weight loss rate that was reasonable - if 20 lbs to lose, 1 lb weekly is reasonable for about 5-10 more lbs, then 1/2 lb weekly would be.
And that base calorie goal has NO expected exercise to it. You'd eat that 1200 (if even correct amount) only when no exercise.
You do more, you eat more.
You do less, you eat less. (that's the kicker direction that caused 20 lb gain)
In a diet a tad less in either case.
That's the life lesson regarding weight control MFP is trying to teach.
If your shrunken stomach makes it easy to feel full then it's working - but then you need to eat more frequently if you truly need to meet a goal.
A goal is something you meet, not try to come way under.
5 -
barneshall wrote: »I have been told by a dietician that I am not eating enough, I usually have 3/400 calories spare on an exercise day (3days per week) I have lost only 1.2 kilos in the last 8 months so if I start eating back the calories burned as per MFP, Will I put on weight? How long will it take to adjust? Any thoughts please, I feel quite lost
This may be more suitably discussed in its own post as opposed to as part of this much longer thread.
@heybales has discussed some good points above; but, in general, if you are receiving professional advice from a registered dietician who has seen you in person and knows your case history and is caring for you on an ongoing basis... how can our generic and faceless and varying quality non professional opinions and suggestions override that advice?
Now if you've tried that advice and it doesn't work, or are asking if you should seek a second professional opinion because the first one sounds outrageous, then I can see crowd sourcing answers on the internet.
But in your case I would address your concerns with the advising dietician and ask them directly to explain the mechanism that under pins their advice and why they think it applies to your case. There is a good chance that it may.2 -
heybales, I have increased my calories but now I find I go over on fat. What happens then??? I am still learning how to put food together to try and get as close as possible to cal, carb, fat and protein. Can you go over on fat and still loose??1
-
dianefinnegan1 wrote: »heybales, I have increased my calories but now I find I go over on fat. What happens then??? I am still learning how to put food together to try and get as close as possible to cal, carb, fat and protein. Can you go over on fat and still loose??
For weight management only your calories matter.
For health reasons you may choose to emphasize some macros more than others.
I generally consider my (set to default) MFP goals as calories are what I want to manage, protein= a desired minimum, fiber=a desired minimum, sodium= something I wish I would not exceed as often as I do, and since I am usually neither very low or very high in terms of total fats, I view then as something where I don't want my saturated fats to be too high, i.e. I would like to see them under 15 grams for myself4 -
dianefinnegan1 wrote: »heybales, I have increased my calories but now I find I go over on fat. What happens then??? I am still learning how to put food together to try and get as close as possible to cal, carb, fat and protein. Can you go over on fat and still loose??
Calories are what matter for weight management especially in the short run.
Close on macro goals, on a "average over days" basis, is fine for nutrition and health. Many people here (me included), think of protein and fat goals as minimums (because those are "essential nutrients" in the technical sense that your body can't manufacture those on its own out of other macros), and fiber likewise (because it's the only thing that does what it does in the body; no substitute). Carbs are more of a "eat them if you like them or they make you feel energetic" or "eat less if you don't love them or they trigger your appetite" thing (as long as you're not diabetic, or something like that).
You can go over or under on any of them, as long as calories are reasonable, and still lose weight. Consequences of poor nutrition are more on the health and long term calorie compliance side, for reasons like these:
* If you seriously under-eat protein, you might lose more than minimum muscle mass while losing weight.
* Many people (not all) find either protein or fat satiating, making compliance with calories easier if those are in line.
* Eating low to medium Carbs can affect some people's energy level negatively.
* Eating medium to high carbs can spark some people's appetite/cravings, and make calorie compliance harder.
* Seriously undereating fats can lead to problems with digestive throughput (i.e., bluntly, constipation), hormone balance, and - long-term - cellular health.
* Getting plenty of varied, colorful fruits and veggies is generally a good thing, for fiber and micronutrients.
* Poor nutrition can lead to worse energy level (fatigue) and worse body composition (muscle vs. fat) in the long run, and those could have indirect implications for weight management.
Most of those effects (especially the protein and fat ones (except maybe that "digestive throughput" one)) take a while to show up, if you don't start with a doctor-diagnosed deficiency or relevant medical condition of some sort. That means you can use your food diary to review what you're eating, and gradually revamp it to dial in better nutrition, in a practical, manageable way.
Even in the long run, like I said, close on macros is fine for nutrition and health: You don't have to be exact every day, especially if you're a little under on one one day, but over on that one another day, in a way that averages out over days to a week or so, more or less.
Humans are adaptive omnivores. You have some wiggle room on nutrition. Calories count for weight management. :flowerforyou:
10 -
I'm voting for this to be stickied as well. Great info!!!
Sort of in line with this, something I've always wondered because it's been preached in various diets and programs I've tried (or friends have tried)...is "starvation mode" a real thing? Meaning you eat so few calories (or your calorie deficit is so massive) that your body hangs on to weight and fat instead of shedding it?
I'm not not really asking for myself as I make sure to eat almost all the calories I'm allotted daily (I love food! Haha) but I've always been curious and never found a definitive yes or no on the web.
I am 5'3" and through a medically founded weight loss company did a 6 mos long diet of 800 cals a day but OVER 125gms of protein, for a consistent loss of 2lbs a week with no additional exercise.
When I eat the recommended 1200 to get my "loss to post to the feed" I sit at the same weight unless I workout. Not all of us want to workout. Ive done my fair share. macro based weight loss works for me.... 125 gms of protein in a day is SO MUCH nutrition.. i am STUFFED and dont desire more but my calorie load is too low for mfp standards. For ladies 4"10'-5" 2', I don't like this. They have a broad standard in place that Does work for many, even most. But not for all.
Be sure to eat. Food drives metabolism. 💓6
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