1000 calories a day
Options
Replies
-
Bro honestly, whatever you're doing consistently now is working. Your numbers are probably off based on only eating 1,000 calories a day and losing just under 2lbs a week. But really, its not a big deal if you're off, you're counting it the same way and you're losing weight at a steady and maintainable rate for your size. Just keep going and dont overthink it to much.
If you start to get super hungry, feeling lethargic all the time or your weight loss drastically slows, then maybe you need to look deeper into it and track things more specifically, but no reason to get obsessed over all the details while its working perfectly for you without the obsession that most people get tracking everything all the time.22 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »Bro honestly, whatever you're doing consistently now is working. Your numbers are probably off based on only eating 1,000 calories a day and losing just under 2lbs a week. But really, its not a big deal if you're off, you're counting it the same way and you're losing weight at a steady and maintainable rate for your size. Just keep going and dont overthink it to much.
If you start to get super hungry, feeling lethargic all the time or your weight loss drastically slows, then maybe you need to look deeper into it and track things more specifically, but no reason to get obsessed over all the details while its working perfectly for you without the obsession that most people get tracking everything all the time.
I completely agree with this. There's no need to get neurotic with tracking as long as you lose steadily and within the recommended amounts. If you start losing more than 1% of your body weight a week, or the scale stalls that'll be the time to tighten your logging and making sure you know exactly what you eat. If it's working there's no need to overthink it. I would recommend to keep a log on how you feel as well, but other than that keep at it.8 -
Yes that's incredibly low but I don't know what kind of chicken breast and 3 eggs is 450 OR LESS. May want to check your numbers. Are you weighing and logging?1
-
RAD_Fitness wrote: »Bro honestly, whatever you're doing consistently now is working. Your numbers are probably off based on only eating 1,000 calories a day and losing just under 2lbs a week. But really, its not a big deal if you're off, you're counting it the same way and you're losing weight at a steady and maintainable rate for your size. Just keep going and dont overthink it to much.
If you start to get super hungry, feeling lethargic all the time or your weight loss drastically slows, then maybe you need to look deeper into it and track things more specifically, but no reason to get obsessed over all the details while its working perfectly for you without the obsession that most people get tracking everything all the time.
While there's no need to become obsessive about the numbers I think it's important that OP learns how to accurately weigh, measure, and log his food NOW. Not only to learn proper portion sizes but also for when he gets closer to his goal weight and weight loss slows. He may get frustrated because he's not been accurate prior to that. He may falsely believe he's been doing it "right" all along and now suddenly his method doesn't work. Just my opinion.14 -
gimpybayou0 wrote: »I'm 5'9 270 pounds I started intermittent fasting and I eat 1000 calories a day is that bad? I usually dont get hungry until 2 PM I eat 3 eggs with chicken breast and that's usually around 450 or less calories and I get full then my last meal is at 6pm I eat chicken breast with brocolli coliflower half a avocado and a granola bar and thats it.
Yes, that's bad...but you might be eating more than you think.
1500 calories is the minimum for a male who is sedentary...but like I said, given your rate of loss, you're probably eating more than you think.1 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »Bro honestly, whatever you're doing consistently now is working. Your numbers are probably off based on only eating 1,000 calories a day and losing just under 2lbs a week. But really, its not a big deal if you're off, you're counting it the same way and you're losing weight at a steady and maintainable rate for your size. Just keep going and dont overthink it to much.
If you start to get super hungry, feeling lethargic all the time or your weight loss drastically slows, then maybe you need to look deeper into it and track things more specifically, but no reason to get obsessed over all the details while its working perfectly for you without the obsession that most people get tracking everything all the time.
While there's no need to become obsessive about the numbers I think it's important that OP learns how to accurately weigh, measure, and log his food NOW. Not only to learn proper portion sizes but also for when he gets closer to his goal weight and weight loss slows. He may get frustrated because he's not been accurate prior to that. He may falsely believe he's been doing it "right" all along and now suddenly his method doesn't work. Just my opinion.
All this, plus - I would worry that as OP loses weight and requires fewer calories, he will both tighten up his logging and cut calories at the same time. That will result in an actual undereating problem, plus probable motivation issues as he thinks he can only eat 800 calories or less to continue losing.7 -
mrsnattybulking wrote: »Yes that's incredibly low but I don't know what kind of chicken breast and 3 eggs is 450 OR LESS. May want to check your numbers. Are you weighing and logging?
Not necessarily. Three eggs will be 210 calories, which saves 240 for chicken breast -- so that leaves 7 oz of chicken breast, which is a really good sized serving.
yes, the OP needs to weigh food, but this wasn't really the best example of "you're wrong."2 -
collectingblues wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »Yes that's incredibly low but I don't know what kind of chicken breast and 3 eggs is 450 OR LESS. May want to check your numbers. Are you weighing and logging?
Not necessarily. Three eggs will be 210 calories, which saves 240 for chicken breast -- so that leaves 7 oz of chicken breast, which is a really good sized serving.
yes, the OP needs to weigh food, but this wasn't really the best example of "you're wrong."
Those are really small steamed eggs3 -
"Just keep doing what you're doing" might work, but it doesn't help that much.
Because the process works for good reasons. OP, you have said that you eat a certain amount. You obviously eat more than that, but the what is apparent is that basics of the process are important to you. The more you understand the process correctly, the better choices you can make.
Using the food scale is your first best step. Understanding that your energy requirements, even as as sedentary person are quite a bit higher than 1000 calories is also important.
Trying to determine how to eat more without yet knowing where you are won't help. Your stats indicate, based on the weight loss that you stated, that you are more likely eating closer to 1700-1800 calories - maybe more. So I would hesitate to give any advice to try to up calories, because I think the initial premise is incorrect.
OP, take some time to read a little bit more and weigh and measure everything.6 -
Oil averages 120 calories per tablespoon.
Are you weighing your food with a food scale or eyeballing the sizes? A scale can help give you a better idea of what the serving size looks like, even if you don't use it every time.
Also, I found this picture helpful in terms of visually estimating serving size (from https://missionnutritionblog.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/topic-serving-sizes/):
this isnt going to be the case for everyone thats why a food scale is better and more accurate. the visual estimates can be higher in calories especially if you have larger hands.10 -
mrsnattybulking wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »Yes that's incredibly low but I don't know what kind of chicken breast and 3 eggs is 450 OR LESS. May want to check your numbers. Are you weighing and logging?
Not necessarily. Three eggs will be 210 calories, which saves 240 for chicken breast -- so that leaves 7 oz of chicken breast, which is a really good sized serving.
yes, the OP needs to weigh food, but this wasn't really the best example of "you're wrong."
Those are really small steamed eggs
A "typical" large egg is 70 calories. Sure, it's going to have more if you fry it -- and then you're talking "three eggs, chicken breast, and oil" -- but three hard boiled eggs is in the ballpark of 210 calories.6 -
gimpybayou0 wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »gimpybayou0 wrote: »May I ask how long you've been eating this way? Often there's a 'honeymoon' period where you feel on top of the world, energized, in control, and amazed at your newfound willpower. Then you crash. Weak, tired, and hungry isn't fun.
I've been doing it for I'd say 5 months now I started at 300 now I'm at 265
That's 7lbs per week, that's just crazy and I am not saying this in a good way.
It's 1.75lbs a week
Perfect rate of loss, you're eating more than you think
Well idk how many days has it been I'm not keeping count just tracking my calories and macros and step on the scale is all I do
Where have you been tracking your calories? I looked at your food diary. You have no entries for June and the first part of July. Seems like you have only been entering food into your diary for about a week - and not consistently.
A couple of things I noticed about your diary:- You are not entering any drinks. What are you drinking?
- You list "medium" eggs as something you often eat. Are you sure about that? Most common egg size is "large" - it will state so on the carton.
All I drink is water nothing else I've been drinking water for 2 years now3 -
just something to think about. a toddler over te age of say 3 needs more than 1000 calories a day. a toddler should eat 35 to 40 calories per lb thats coming from the institute of medicine. yes toddlers are more active but still if you are eating less than a toddler and are not under the care of a dr its too little of calories. that goes for anyone. I know the OP is eating more than he thinks due to the rate of weight loss,which is a good thing.5
-
1000 calories is bad, but it sounds like you’re eating more than you think based off of your weight lost in 5 months2
-
I've listed everything I used on my diary today in total is 1475 calories0
-
gimpybayou0 wrote: »I've listed everything I used on my diary today in total is 1475 calories
your total is 1400 and you have a GOAL of 1800...so you have about 400more calories
have a baked potato or some rice - or are you keeping your carbs low for a reason?2 -
deannalfisher wrote: »gimpybayou0 wrote: »I've listed everything I used on my diary today in total is 1475 calories
your total is 1400 and you have a GOAL of 1800...so you have about 400more calories
have a baked potato or some rice - or are you keeping your carbs low for a reason?
I started intermittent fasting and heard carbs make more insulin that's why I'm trying to keep away from it.6 -
while IF is a thing, the carb thing is fuzzy science
please be sure you are measuring what you eat. make sure you are eating at 1500/day
eating regularily under minimum can lead to quitting, hair loss, dizziness, crankiness, muscle loss2 -
gimpybayou0 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »gimpybayou0 wrote: »I've listed everything I used on my diary today in total is 1475 calories
your total is 1400 and you have a GOAL of 1800...so you have about 400more calories
have a baked potato or some rice - or are you keeping your carbs low for a reason?
I started intermittent fasting and heard carbs make more insulin that's why I'm trying to keep away from it.
I don't see anything wrong with doing OMAD or low carb, but if you're going to do it then research it and find out why you're going it. "Carbs make more insulin" is a poor understanding of why you're doing something.
Generally speaking, when you reduce carbs you'll have to increase one of the other two macros to make up the calories. Most people choose fat because it's easy. Pick some of your favorite fat sources and start including some variety in your diet.
You seem to be doing a lot of things designed to reduce your appetite (low carb and IF) but then it's going too far in the opposite direction. Hunger signals are a bad way to determine whether or not you're eating enough since the hormones that control them can be knocked out of whack by so many things (including prolonged undereating). Once you get a food scale and get your logging more accurate (be sure you're double-checking that the entries you use are accurate and appropriate as well. There's a lot of bad data in the database) then you need to trust that there's a reason you should eat above your minimum needs and start adjusting to fit your needs.
I can't tell from your log what your meals look like so I'll just ask outright: How are you currently measuring your meats without a scale? Are you measuring them raw or cooked and do the entries you choose match?
4 -
gimpybayou0 wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »gimpybayou0 wrote: »I've listed everything I used on my diary today in total is 1475 calories
your total is 1400 and you have a GOAL of 1800...so you have about 400more calories
have a baked potato or some rice - or are you keeping your carbs low for a reason?
I started intermittent fasting and heard carbs make more insulin that's why I'm trying to keep away from it.
Do you have a reason to be concerned with your insulin levels?5
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions