Can eating too few calories stop you from losing weight?

FrumMama

I've been doing MFP for a little while now, and at the beginning it was a real struggle to stick to my calorie allotment. Now it's gotten much easier, and there are more and more days where I'm fine several hundred calories under my goal. (My goal is in the 1400s, and sometimes I feel full when I hit 1100-1200.) Should I intentionally eat more? I've heard that your body can go into starvation mode if you eat too few calories and make it harder to lose weight. I understand if you're literally starving yourself. But shouldn't I listen to my body and stop eating when I'm full?

I'm by no means at risk of being anorexic or anything. I'm just on the lower boundary of "overweight" in terms of my BMI, or the upper bounds of "normal," depending on the day. I would have no problem at all eating more calories. Just not sure if I should be.

KatieHall77

Good question!
If you're truly feeling full and satisfied, you might be getting enough.
My advice is to start weighing and measuring your servings for everything. Most of us (myself included) will assume that we've eaten one serving, but it's usually so hard to visualize that we wind up eating 2-3 servings.

if this is not the case with you, and you're already sure of how much you're getting, my apologies.
Actually 1200 isn't too bad, assuming you're not like, seven feet tall.

kimny72

FrumMama wrote: »

I've been doing MFP for a little while now, and at the beginning it was a real struggle to stick to my calorie allotment. Now it's gotten much easier, and there are more and more days where I'm fine several hundred calories under my goal. (My goal is in the 1400s, and sometimes I feel full when I hit 1100-1200.) Should I intentionally eat more? I've heard that your body can go into starvation mode if you eat too few calories and make it harder to lose weight. I understand if you're literally starving yourself. But shouldn't I listen to my body and stop eating when I'm full?

I'm by no means at risk of being anorexic or anything. I'm just on the lower boundary of "overweight" in terms of my BMI, or the upper bounds of "normal," depending on the day. I would have no problem at all eating more calories. Just not sure if I should be.

Starvation mode is a myth, so no, eating too little will not stop you from losing weight.

It does however have negative consequences, like losing weight too fast leading to muscle loss, hair falling out, and possible malnutrition among other things. Food (ie calories) is fuel for all the things your body does every day, and not adequately fueling your body is a bad idea. Eating too little every once and awhile is no big deal (especially if it is offsetting other days where you go a little over goal). But if you are routinely undereating, causing you to lose weight too fast, you should eat more.

If it looks like you are undereating over several weeks, but you aren't losing weight, you are probably eating more than you think and missing calories when you log.

NorthCascades

Only if you easy so few that you die.

fb47

When I see pictures of people who live in countries where food is scarce, the one thing they all have in common is that they are all thin and bones. I have yet to see a starving person who is obese. When the nazis had all the jews in concentration camp, what did the jews in those camps have in common, not one had any fat in them. I hate using that example, because it's a sad part of human history, but it goes to show that starvation mode is a myth. Another example is the Minnesota experiment in the 1940's which you can read about it here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment

Alyssa_Is_LosingIt

NorthCascades wrote: »

Only if you easy so few that you die.

This is not true.

After we die, our bodies decompose and we continue to lose weight. Though bloating can be an issue in the beginning.

Jk.

OP, starvation mode is a myth. You will not halt weight loss by eating too few calories. If this were the case, then starving children in Africa would be a whole lot fatter.

I agree with @kimny72 about the negative consequences associated with consistently undereating, though. It's definitely not healthy or sustainable, and for the most part you should be trying to eat a little closer to your goal, especially if you're exercising. Though a day or two of undereating is probably fine as long as it doesn't become a habit.

solieco1

Only if it causes you to give up and go on a binge regularly.

AnvilHead

https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/another-look-at-metabolic-damage.html/

lacyphacelia

Isn't there a sticky around here for adaptive thermogenesis? I'd see those links posted all the time in similar questions. A sticky would be helpful for general information.

diannethegeek

lacyphacelia wrote: »

Isn't there a sticky around here for adaptive thermogenesis? I'd see those links posted all the time in similar questions. A sticky would be helpful for general information.

There are at least two, currently:

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss/p1

And

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/761810/the-starvation-mode-myth-again/p1

You can also nominate new stickies here: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10260479/nominate-posts-for-announcement-status-stickies#latest

Mandylou19912014

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

janejellyroll

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I think there are some specific circumstances where "eating for the sake of it" would be a good practice. For example, if I'm about to go for a long run in the morning, I may not be hungry. But I'll eat something light because I know from past experience that if I run more than 10 miles or so, I can't do that on an empty stomach.

Another example would be people with specific medical conditions or taking certain prescription drugs.

kimny72

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

Food is fuel. In many cases, eating too little is just as bad as eating too much. Many people's hunger cues are broken from a lifetime of being surrounded by convenient food, so eating for the sake of getting the right amount of calories is something to consider.

stanmann571

janejellyroll wrote: »

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I think there are some specific circumstances where "eating for the sake of it" would be a good practice. For example, if I'm about to go for a long run in the morning, I may not be hungry. But I'll eat something light because I know from past experience that if I run more than 10 miles or so, I can't do that on an empty stomach.

Another example would be people with specific medical conditions or taking certain prescription drugs.

I have a history of getting distracted and not eating for days. Then I eat(for days). My hunger cues have been jacked up for 20+ years. And I don't have a full cue. I do have some craving and satiety cues, but they're not perfectly reliable either. I know that my situation isn't exactly uncommon. So yeah, if your hunger and satiety cues are on point, Eat from hunger to satiety.

That's not to say that I have no hunger or satiety cues, just that they aren't reliable and by the time they're noticeable, I'm either REALLY hungry or totally overstuffed.

janejellyroll

stanmann571 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I think there are some specific circumstances where "eating for the sake of it" would be a good practice. For example, if I'm about to go for a long run in the morning, I may not be hungry. But I'll eat something light because I know from past experience that if I run more than 10 miles or so, I can't do that on an empty stomach.

Another example would be people with specific medical conditions or taking certain prescription drugs.

I have a history of getting distracted and not eating for days. Then I eat(for days). My hunger cues have been jacked up for 20+ years. And I don't have a full cue. I do have some craving and satiety cues, but they're not perfectly reliable either. I know that my situation isn't exactly uncommon. So yeah, if your hunger and satiety cues are on point, Eat from hunger to satiety.

That's not to say that I have no hunger or satiety cues, just that they aren't reliable and by the time they're noticeable, I'm either REALLY hungry or totally overstuffed.

Yep, not everyone has hunger cues that are operating well.

There's also an emotional component. When I'm medium stressed, I do tend to comfort eat. But when I'm very, very stressed or in grieving, I do have to force myself to eat.

So everyone with hunger cues that are firing normally and result in them eating the right amount all the time -- that's great! But that's not everyone's situation and that's okay. It's not necessarily bad to make yourself eat something. Sometimes it is the best way to care for yourself.

fb47

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I hope you don't eat 1000 calories on a regular basis.

Mandylou19912014

fb47 wrote: »

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I hope you don't eat 1000 calories on a regular basis.

I’m aiming not too, I think minimum 1200 would be better .. Some days I will probably eat a lot more so it would even itself out

Mandylou19912014

janejellyroll wrote: »

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I think there are some specific circumstances where "eating for the sake of it" would be a good practice. For example, if I'm about to go for a long run in the morning, I may not be hungry. But I'll eat something light because I know from past experience that if I run more than 10 miles or so, I can't do that on an empty stomach.

Another example would be people with specific medical conditions or taking certain prescription drugs.

Yeah definitely, I think I would pass out if I exercised on an empty stomach! Generally speaking I’m trying to just eat when I’m hungry unless of course I really need to

BoxerBrawler

When I first started this journey years ago I wanted to cover all bases. I took some time and would let myself get super-hungry, then I'd eat real slow until I began to feel a little full. I did this for weeks until I knew how to listen to my own body again. I was totally eating based upon eating times - Breakfast, lunch, dinner - and that's a BS way to eat! When I feel hungry I eat, it might be once a day or it could be every two hours throughout the day. I do track my macro's but since I follow a cron plan I don't necessarily care about hitting a high level of calories per day, for me it's more about the food quality vs. quantity.

CSARdiver

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

fb47 wrote: »

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I hope you don't eat 1000 calories on a regular basis.

I’m aiming not too, I think minimum 1200 would be better .. Some days I will probably eat a lot more so it would even itself out

I think this is a good mindset. If this just happened one day then the ramifications would be the same as overeating - largely irrelevant.

Drawing from the checkbook and finance analogy it seems that when someone goes into debt they would want to eradicate all debt as quickly as possible. That being said does it make sense to stop paying your rent in order to pay off debt? You may be trading a lesser risk in the short term for higher risk in the long term.

Christine_72

One of the downsides over under eating for me is it always catches up with me, and i end up over eating. Even one or two days of lower than recommended calories sets up a binge for me. I just can't do it.

wmd1979

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Mandylou19912014 wrote: »

I’m currently trying to only eat when I’m hungry so I can break out of the habit of eating based on what time of day it is. And yesterday for example I only had 1000 calories, today’s looking slightly more .. I don’t think you should ever eat for the sake of it, I agree with eating only when your feeling hungry and stopping once you are full

I think there are some specific circumstances where "eating for the sake of it" would be a good practice. For example, if I'm about to go for a long run in the morning, I may not be hungry. But I'll eat something light because I know from past experience that if I run more than 10 miles or so, I can't do that on an empty stomach.

Another example would be people with specific medical conditions or taking certain prescription drugs.

Yeah definitely, I think I would pass out if I exercised on an empty stomach! Generally speaking I’m trying to just eat when I’m hungry unless of course I really need to

Eating has been proven to aid in survival, so I would make it a priority to eat. 1000-1200 calories is definitely too low.

WilmaValley

The answer to your question is yes, only because if you starve yourself, you will eventually overeat. Human nature.

beachbody4l

You will not magically gain weight from eating too low, if that were the case we wouldn't have starving children in the world.
I lost a LOT of my weight at first eating very, very low amounts. I'm saying unhealthy and very damaging amounts. I lost a little bit of hair, and my face is much more wrinkled from lack of nutrition, but I did lose weight and quickly. This is not to say I would recommend it, but the less you eat the more you will lose. As long as you don't go into binge mode and eat it all back. I actually find it is harder to NOT overeat after years of heavy restricting. So...I guess decide for yourself if it's worth it.

richardgavel

Yes to the question, because eating too little will reduce your energy levels and make you less willing to move and burn calories. True, there is a point you can go below which is "just enough to maintain body functions" but that's pretty low.

hotmammabear1

I would be very careful taking advise from a discussion board. Best to rely on evidence based information for advise. Check this article, it has the science to explain how the body works, what "starvation mode" really is, and how to deal with it. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/starvation-mode