Weigh 329 lbs eating 1,500 calories
Corptheater
Posts: 9 Member
Hi,
I am trying to understand metabolism information and its a little confusing to me. For the past week, and at least next 7 weeks, I am on a 1,500 calorie diet. I am using the premium myfitnesspal to track all my food and make sure I am getting the nutrients on this diet. So far, its been successful. I don't feel like I'm starving and I eat when I'm hungry. Normally, my meals are split up in about 6-8 small portioned meals that are prepared by me and counted on this app. I have lost a good amount of weight and its not water weight! I stay hydrated by drinking 64 oz a day. I also have energy. I swim or take brisk walks most days. What concerns me is I read articles about how your metabolism slows down as you reduce your calorie intake. But, 90% of them are talking about doing those low calorie diets or below 1,000 calorie diet which I am not doing. But, they always throw in there that if you lose more than 2 lbs a week it will cause issues with your metabolism because it requires you to starve yourself to achieve that over 7,000 calorie a week deficiency. But, again, I'm not starving. I feel full after most meals and I eat when I'm hungry. So, I'm looking for advice. Do you think I am messing up my metabolism by eating 1,500 calories, getting my needed nutrients, and still having energy even though I weigh over 300 lbs? Or, given my weight, is that not as much of a factor?
I am trying to understand metabolism information and its a little confusing to me. For the past week, and at least next 7 weeks, I am on a 1,500 calorie diet. I am using the premium myfitnesspal to track all my food and make sure I am getting the nutrients on this diet. So far, its been successful. I don't feel like I'm starving and I eat when I'm hungry. Normally, my meals are split up in about 6-8 small portioned meals that are prepared by me and counted on this app. I have lost a good amount of weight and its not water weight! I stay hydrated by drinking 64 oz a day. I also have energy. I swim or take brisk walks most days. What concerns me is I read articles about how your metabolism slows down as you reduce your calorie intake. But, 90% of them are talking about doing those low calorie diets or below 1,000 calorie diet which I am not doing. But, they always throw in there that if you lose more than 2 lbs a week it will cause issues with your metabolism because it requires you to starve yourself to achieve that over 7,000 calorie a week deficiency. But, again, I'm not starving. I feel full after most meals and I eat when I'm hungry. So, I'm looking for advice. Do you think I am messing up my metabolism by eating 1,500 calories, getting my needed nutrients, and still having energy even though I weigh over 300 lbs? Or, given my weight, is that not as much of a factor?
6
Replies
-
I wouldn't stress about it. Being heavier you burn more calories because it takes more energy to move. But if your not feeling starved or overly tired etc don't stress. Just don't go into dispear if your weight loss slows, it will be just the fact you've got fitter, or are burning less due to have less to carry, or water retention for exercise. Keep up the good work every pound lost is one less you have to carry
7 -
Hi OP and well done on the weight loss so far AND nailing what sounds like a sustainable approach for you so early on !
MFP is a great source of info - its also a great source of opinion on what everyone else should or could be doing (or not).
If it ain't broke, don't try and fix it. If you are feeling a little anxious, perhaps check in with your GP/MD.
Sounds to me like you are doing really well ! You've got this !5 -
How much weight do you have to lose?0
-
Corptheater wrote: »Hi,
I am trying to understand metabolism information and its a little confusing to me. For the past week, and at least next 7 weeks, I am on a 1,500 calorie diet. I am using the premium myfitnesspal to track all my food and make sure I am getting the nutrients on this diet. So far, its been successful. I don't feel like I'm starving and I eat when I'm hungry. Normally, my meals are split up in about 6-8 small portioned meals that are prepared by me and counted on this app. I have lost a good amount of weight and its not water weight! I stay hydrated by drinking 64 oz a day. I also have energy. I swim or take brisk walks most days. What concerns me is I read articles about how your metabolism slows down as you reduce your calorie intake. But, 90% of them are talking about doing those low calorie diets or below 1,000 calorie diet which I am not doing. But, they always throw in there that if you lose more than 2 lbs a week it will cause issues with your metabolism because it requires you to starve yourself to achieve that over 7,000 calorie a week deficiency. But, again, I'm not starving. I feel full after most meals and I eat when I'm hungry. So, I'm looking for advice. Do you think I am messing up my metabolism by eating 1,500 calories, getting my needed nutrients, and still having energy even though I weigh over 300 lbs? Or, given my weight, is that not as much of a factor?
First off you should understand that when you start really heavy there can be a honeymoon phase which allows you to eat much less and still feel fine. Also understand that feeling fine is not a true indicator of nutrition. Some people feel fine for months and then they end up in trouble.
You should list your stats because 1500 calories may still be too low for you.
Being heavier does allow you to lose at a faster rate than 2 pounds a week. I wouldn't push much past 2.5 pounds a week though which is a total deficit of 1250 calories per day.
Do not expect a lot of guidance in articles about people like us. I have looked and looked myself and I have even been to a dietitian. My doctor admits that he doesn't know enough to offer help other than monitoring my health. I have decided to push fast but never too fast. I feel like if I stay below the 1 percent rule I should never have anything to worry about with my metabolism. I also take diet breaks occasionally as added insurance.
Why the 8 week plan?9 -
You're probably looking at adaptive thermogenesis. A fat body has a higher metabolism than a skinny body because that's what it takes to keep a fat body moving. As you lose weight, your metabolism slows as a survival feature. A skinny body just doesn't need that much energy burn.
Furthermore, your body doesn't recognize the difference between "eating less to lose weight" and "eating less because I'm starving." You start taking in less calories and your metabolism will slow as your body fights to preserve your life and energy.
That said... it doesn't matter. It will never slow enough to prevent you from losing weight. Look at those poor souls on Biggest Loser. Those were very obese people exercising 7 or 8 hours a day and eating, in some cases, less than 800 calories a day.
They still lost major weight. And while studies show their metabolism slowed more than usual, it was by a comparatively small amount.
Don't go on an actual starvation diet, for so many reasons, and stop worrying about your metabolism. If you do this right and hit a plateau at some point, you can go on a diet break, spend a couple weeks eating at maintenance, and your metabolism will pop right back up again (because you won't be "starving.")8 -
Almost everything that claims to change your metabolism, either speeding it up or slowing it down, is a myth. The human body just doesn’t work that way.
“Starvation mode” as it’s typically discussed is also a myth. There are many good reasons not to go on a very low calorie diet, but starvation mode or damaging your metabolism are not among those reasons.
It’s really common for people who are new to counting calories to feel full despite undereating. That doesn’t change the fact that those folks are undereating, though.
Is 1500 the number MFP gave you to lose 2 lb/week? At your weight you might be able to safely lose at a faster pace, but I would make sure to check with your doctor before trying a more aggressive deficit.6 -
Hey everyone! Thank you for the replies.
Lets answer a few questions.
Why the plan/how much weight: So, as of today, I am looking to lose 19.4 lbs by July 7th. I say as of today because I have already dropped a number of lbs and my most recent weigh in was today. That is 51 days away. Based on my calculation, to do so, I need to lose 2.6 lbs a week. Yes, this is over the recommended 2 lbs a week which I completely understand is not ideal but, there is a financial aspect to this that is driving me to do so. (I know, its not the purest of drives but it is a drive) Based on how quickly I have lost weight so far, I am expecting that I will lose more than 2.6 lbs during this week and next. After that, I can start adjusting my goals each week to the calorie deficit I need. It will all be based on sedentary lifestyle that way when I do workout I am shedding a few extra calories. Now, let me be clear, I will NOT drop below 1,500 calories if my weight lose slows down. If I see this is not working next week or the following or any week, I will start gradually increasing my calories back up to a more reasonable 500-750 daily calorie deficit.
Nutrition: I meal prep and my meals are being tailored around making sure I am getting the correct amount of nutrients in my body. Has it gone perfectly? No. My protein is a bit too high and carbs are a bit too low. I'm doing stellar on vitamins, calcium, Omega 3's, fats, sugars, and fiber. Cholesterol is a bit high (but then again when you read all the articles that have been coming out recently this doesn't seem to matter much anymore), potassium needs some work and iron is about halfway to goal. But, I have already looked into and started purchasing items to meet those needs for this weeks meal prep.
Feeling Full: This one confuses me. lol I don't know how I can feel full but still be starving. I don't say that be condescending, I just don't understand. lol
The Future: Lets say everything goes perfect. I meet my goals and have achieved everything I want! lol Next step for me is start gradually moving back a more long term achievable goal because I still have weight to lose after this goal is meet. I will starting eating 150-200 more calories a day in 4-5 day increments until I get a calorie deficit of 500-750 calories a day. But not too fast that I start gaining weight back.
All in all, I think I have the right mind set. I understand its aggressive but I also understand that I may need to back down if I see any health related issues. Hopefully, in 7 weeks, I can come back and say I did it but I won't be ashamed to say I tried and failed.
2 -
Corptheater wrote: »Feeling Full: This one confuses me. lol I don't know how I can feel full but still be starving. I don't say that be condescending, I just don't understand.
Some of the answer is that appetite is less of a physical drive than you might assume. There's a big psychological aspect to it, which is how some people can completely forget to eat if they're busy; because the mind is occupied, it forgets to send hunger signals!8 -
1) Did your doctor tell you that you needed to lose 19.4 lb. by July 7th? If not, then there's no reason why you need to pursue an aggressive deficit in order to meet this arbitrary goal. Nothing bad is going to happen to you if you don't lose that amount in that time, and nothing good other than a temporary sense of satisfaction, and having lost 19.4 lb., will happen if you do. But what if you lose, say, 17 pounds in that time frame? Will you feel sad that you didn't meet your goal, even though you lost 17 pounds? And if you have to make yourself miserable to meet this goal, will you want to continue your weight loss long term? I would strongly recommend not putting arbitrary deadlines on your weight loss. Consistently stay in a reasonable deficit and you will lose weight.
2) Nutrition is good for other health and fitness goals, and it is important to get proper nutrition, but your macros are not directly relevant to weight loss. Weight loss happens in a calorie deficit. For the purposes of weight loss, it doesn't matter what macros you get those calories from.
3) People can feel full while undereating from a variety of things, from filling up on lots of very low calorie/high volume food, to drinking too much water and feeling full because of that.
5) Is 19.4 lb. all the weight you want to lose? If so, then after you lose 19.4 lb, you should gradually add calories back until you're eating at maintenance. But if you want to lose more weight than that, it does not make sense that you are temporarily pursuing an aggressive deficit until you reach an arbitrary goal. Overly aggressive deficits are more likely to result in fatigue, psychological burnout, and health problems if you continue them long enough. Eat at a reasonable deficit now, not 19.4 lb. from now.
6) Why would you wait and see if you have health problems, instead of doing what you can to prevent them in the first place?8 -
It's fine to be a bit over protein and a bit under on carbs, in fact, many of us, myself included, tweak the MFP default macros to accomplish exactly that
I wouldn't worry about micro-nutrients too much unless you have diagnosed deficiencies - much of the info in the MFP database is crowd-sourced and people may have left micros out. Also, potassium wasn't required to be on labels so you can guarantee those numbers are wrong.
However, if you eat a lot of whole foods and use entries that MFP pulled from the USDA database, you will have correct micro info.
Unfortunately, the "verified" green check marks in the MFP database are used for both user-created entries and admin-created entries that MFP pulled from the USDA database. To find admin entries for whole foods, I get the syntax from the USDA database and paste that into MFP.
Note: any MFP entry that includes "USDA" was user entered.
For packaged foods, I verify the label against what I find in MFP. (Alas, you cannot just use do a bar code scan and assume what you get is correct.)
3 -
Hey apullum, I think might have missed a portion of number 1. There is a financial aspect that is causing this drive.
I appreciate your input though!
1 -
Corptheater wrote: »Hey apullum, I think might have missed a portion of number 1. There is a financial aspect that is causing this drive.
I appreciate your input though!
Does that mean that you joined something like Diet Bet?4 -
At your size for that amount of time, I doubt that 2.6 lbs/week is too aggressive. It likely is long-term, but it appears you have a handle on that concept already. (i.e. don't do that long-term even if it becomes intoxicating to watch the numbers fall quickly). For the 7 weeks between now and then, you're probably fine.
Shifting to the long-term view, preserving muscle and maintaining appropriate energy for activities is best achieved at a slower rate, which may test your patience. But it is well worth it. Play the long game. You'll be happy you did!
7 -
Corptheater wrote: »Hi,
I am trying to understand metabolism information and its a little confusing to me. For the past week, and at least next 7 weeks, I am on a 1,500 calorie diet. I am using the premium myfitnesspal to track all my food and make sure I am getting the nutrients on this diet. So far, its been successful. I don't feel like I'm starving and I eat when I'm hungry. Normally, my meals are split up in about 6-8 small portioned meals that are prepared by me and counted on this app. I have lost a good amount of weight and its not water weight! I stay hydrated by drinking 64 oz a day. I also have energy. I swim or take brisk walks most days. What concerns me is I read articles about how your metabolism slows down as you reduce your calorie intake. But, 90% of them are talking about doing those low calorie diets or below 1,000 calorie diet which I am not doing. But, they always throw in there that if you lose more than 2 lbs a week it will cause issues with your metabolism because it requires you to starve yourself to achieve that over 7,000 calorie a week deficiency. But, again, I'm not starving. I feel full after most meals and I eat when I'm hungry. So, I'm looking for advice. Do you think I am messing up my metabolism by eating 1,500 calories, getting my needed nutrients, and still having energy even though I weigh over 300 lbs? Or, given my weight, is that not as much of a factor?
It's hard to actually measure your metabolism unless you go to a doctor who specializes and can run tests. Your body gives you a lot of clues though if you stay in tune.
1500 is a relative number, it depends on your size, mainly your height. What is your estimated TDEE? That is the important number relative to your calorie intake.
If you eat up to TDEE at least 1-2 days a week that helps keep your hormones stable and helps keep your metabolism running well.
If you are exercising, both cardio and resistance training, you are helping your metabolism.
If you are not eating too low based on your TDEE you are helping your metabolism.
It's not always so much the meal timing, what matters most is the calories in a 24 hour period, extended out 60-90 days that give you results you can measure.
Listen to how you feel, but at the same time know that hunger is tricky. Your body can adapt to too little food and also too much food. You can feel fine sometimes until you don't, and the more you do this the more you can head off problems at the pass before you "feel" a problem.
I hope this makes sense. Best of luck to you!
Roberta
3 -
Given your starting weight, a loss of up to 1 percent of your bodyweight per week should be ok. Definitely be sure your protein stays on the high side to help prevent too much muscle loss. If you start losing too quickly, I’d recommend readjusting your plan.
Side note - 1500 calories still sounds low. I lose at 1500-1600 daily and am 140 lbs at 5’1” tall with my activity level.6 -
If you have a financial incentive just keep in mind that losing 2.6 pounds a week may very well not show up on the bathroom scale when you need it to. The scale can go up unexpectedly while you are losing fat weight.
It is not unhealthy to lose 2.6 pounds a week if you weight 329. If it were I would have been in trouble a long time ago.
It is better to be over your protein unless you have problems with your kidneys. Carbs can be low without consequence.
If you are using the MFP db to track potassium and iron you should keep in mind that a lot of entries are missing this information. It is best to just strive to have a varied diet unless your doctor has a concern.8 -
emmamcgarity wrote: »
Side note - 1500 calories still sounds low. I lose at 1500-1600 daily and am 140 lbs at 5’1” tall with my activity level.
This is important too. I can't tell from your posts what your stats are - other than your weight.
1500 is minimum for men, so I am going to assume you are male.
For point of reference, when I started to lose weight I was 240 lbs at 5'11" (54 yo at the time). With an activity level of light to moderate (about 10K steps per day), I lost 2 pounds per week for several weeks on a 2200 calorie per day intake.
So while 1500 may work in the short term, I seriously doubt it will be so after the "deadline". So back to my original response: might be fine for the next 7 weeks, but be very careful what you do after that.4 -
I'm a little bit concerned about the fact that you seem to have a lot of arbitrary rules set up for yourself. Keeping things simple is generally a more reliable path to success.
Other than that, I agree with above poster that the scale may let you down in terms of your financial plan.Corptheater wrote: »If I see this is not working next week or the following or any week, I will start gradually increasing my calories back up to a more reasonable 500-750 daily calorie deficit.
This comment makes me think that you may be under the impression that the scale will show a nice, steady drop of 2.6 lbs/week. Unfortunately, that's not how it works. Some weeks you may see big losses, some weeks you may not see any, and some weeks you may even show a gain. The long-term trend is what you're looking for. It wouldn't be wise to make changes based on anything less than 4-6 weeks worth of data, especially for women (don't know your gender).5 -
Hey all! Thanks again for the information and more importantly for your concerns.
So, based on what I am hearing I will start focusing on making adjustments to my calorie count. I do want to see how I am doing after next week, health wise, weight wise, and overall mindset wise. It is very possible I am eating too few calories and losing more weight than I need to. I tend to ignore the first week only because that when you lose the most weight no matter what. But, next week should give me more of an idea. If I notice I am rapidly losing weight at a rate that is more than needed, I will start working on moving the calorie count up.
And again, 100% this is not a long term project. To be honest, I enjoy food too much make this long term. I will be returning to a diet where I will be happy to lose .5-1.5 lbs a week until I reach my goal weight.
Also, I completely understand that this will not be steady decline.
1 -
There's a few different phenomena that happen that kind of get grouped together without understanding the differences between how real, evidenced, and understood they are.
There's adaptive thermogensis - this is the resting / basal metabolic rate slowing down because one is in a deficit. This is a pretty well evidenced phenomena that as far as can be told, happens to everyone to one extent or another. So long as you are losing weight, the body will reduce certain processes to try to save calories. It also impacts some levels of physical activity - people won't exercise as vigorously, won't move around as much voluntary, and even do things like less twitching. This part of it also stops with a sustained (weeks) return to calories that maintain the current bodies weight.
There's metabolic rates that happen from losing weight. This too pretty much happens to everyone and is unavoidable, as well as being well evidenced. If you have less living body mass, there is less energy needed to keep it alive. Every pound of body fat takes about 4 calories a day to keep it alive. Every pound of muscle lost is about 6 calories a day, and person will probably lose some muscle from carrying less weight unless they are following some kind of resistance training to maintain the muscle.
Finally, there is the idea of metabolic damage / permanent adaptive thermogenesis. This has mixed evidence for it. Frankly, there isn't enough research to say that it happens from faster or slower weight loss, how individualized it is, if it is actually permanent, or what physiological mechanisms control it. I've even seen some propose that it is explained purely by the already mentioned weight loss - that what is actually happening is that lean tissue, of more types than just muscle, is lost, and this explains the lower metabolic rate.
Ultimately, I don't see the point in worrying about the last part as a reason to avoid losing weight. It seems like worrying that you shouldn't lose weight because your clothes won't fit right anymore.8 -
Also, if you are not eating back at least a portion of your exercise calories, or have deliberately chosen an inaccurate activity level, you are not using MFP the way it was intended. 1500 is already the bare minimum for men... if you are netting less than that due to activity, that puts you in unsafe territory, particularly if you aren't under a doctor's care.3
-
There was an interesting article in the NY Times that summarized a recent study. "The subjects were recruited by scientists at the National Institutes of Health and assigned to live in a research facility for four weeks. There they were fed both diets — a whole foods diet or an ultra-processed one, along with snacks in each category — for two weeks each and carefully monitored. They were instructed to consume as much or as little as desired." A week's worth of meals for both conditions was provided. The processed-food group, also given extra fiber supplement since their diet contained less fiber & the processed foods weren't just what some folks would call "junk" but pretty typical food Americans eat (Cheerios, muffins, deli turkey sandwiches, turkey sausage, bagels, etc)
Edited to add - 20 stable weight adults (10 males, 10 females) were monitored for 28 days - half started on processed diet, half on unprocessed diet for two weeks, and then they switched to the other without a washout period. The journal article gives all the various conditions. The NYTimes article provides pictures of 7 days of each condition's meals/snacks. The total # of calories available for consumption was around 5,000/day.
The article summarized the results: "The subjects spontaneously ate a lot more calories on the processed diet and, not surprisingly, gained weight. On the unprocessed diet, they consumed far fewer calories and lost weight. An analysis of their hormone levels seemed to indicate why: On the unprocessed diet, their levels of the appetite-suppressing hormone PYY increased while levels of ghrelin, a hormone that stimulates hunger, fell."
The link to the article is here: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/well/eat/why-eating-processed-foods-might-make-you-fat.html
The link to the study is here: https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/fulltext/S1550-4131(19)30248-7
In terms of your level of satiety, OP, maybe if you are eating less processed food and more whole food, your level of ghelin (MFP spellcheck wants that to be gherkin lol) is more suppressed.9 -
Most of the evidence I have seen suggests that a loss of 0.25 to 0.75% of bodyweight per week would facilitate a minimal loss of lean mass. And there is lots of agreement to extending to 1% for the same. There is even quite a bit of agreement extending that to up to 1.25 or 1.5% of bodyweight per week.
And when your fat to lean mass ratio is where it is currently, you are probably quite safe losing at both more than 2lbs a week AND at a faster rate approaching that 1.5%
But before we all get too sure of ourselves... the rates of bodyweight per week only apply in the context of successfully applying the deficit.
And the larger the deficit and leaner the person the less likely the success of the application!
THAT SAID.
Your "hunger" right now while you're at a deficit says nothing about your hunger long term or what will happen when you experience rebound hunger when you eventually exit your deficit. And whether that rebound is more likely and more intense if you apply too large of a deficit for too long.
CAN THE DIET BETS. You will probably win this one because you're in an ideal position to do so. However, long term, your motivation better be your own.
Fun and games are fun but if you don't discover your inner reasons for losing the weight and maintaining the weight loss, the money motive is not going to help you manage.
Also weight loss does not, long term, happen on a time table. Just because you applied your deficit today does not mean it will be reflected on the scale tomorrow. And the opposite holds true too.
Right now your losses are working like clockwork for you because you're in a position of being able to apply an excessive deficit. You won't be able to do so for the full length of your weight loss. And if you do try to apply an excessive deficit for the full length of your weight loss, the likelihood of a rebound, in my opinion, increases.
You have a long period of loss in front of you, If you do it at a reasonable pace. We are talking a couple of years, not a couple of months. If you incorporate the occasional refeeds. If you incorporate diet breaks when you need them. If you manage the weight loss and keep things manageable you may get to the end of it knowing enough about yourself and having enough tools in your tool-belt to successfully defend your weight loss.
If you decide to go hell on wheels instead, I hope that you have a competent team around you who will offer the nutritional support, and the counselling and insights you will not have the time to self discover.
You need time to develop new habits and a new relationships with food, general activity, and even exercise. And you need the time for these habits to become quite embedded before you're done with your weight loss phase/honeymoon of feeling good while losing weight.
Spend your time trying to discover a variety of foods that are filling and which you enjoy eating and which will work for you long term. Spend your time trying to change your life around so that you have more options for daily activity and a layered defence plan for when things go sideways--because they always do.
Health, injuries, family, job, all these things tend to interfere with our plans and need to be accommodated to first of all succeed with and then defend the weight loss.
Last thought for you.
Do you see yourself eating @1500 Cal a day for the remaining years of your life? Are you just on a diet, or should you also be figuring out and practicing how you're going to function in the coming years?
12 -
Not at all. I think you are doing exactly the right thing You are right on track. Keep it up and good luck! 1
-
So, since I don't like it when people don't post the outcome after a discussion such as this, I figured I should say how it went.
I ended up following my plan to the T and won! I felt fine during the entire process. I wasn't ever hungry, tired and I didn't experience any medical issues. This was a great experience but I think if I decide to do another one of these bets I will make sure to work harder to meet the goal at a steadier pace.
Since I saw people posting about Dietbet a lot on here I want to make it clear I didn't use Dietbet. I don't like it when the time constraints are set for you. I used HealthyWage. I can choose the amount of weight I want to lose and how long I want the bet to last. Again, even with that, I still procrastinated. lol However, I did learn my lesson. 1 -
I don't think anyone expected you to have "medical issues" for a short term burst like that. It is if you do it for a long time that is a problem. It may also be a problem if you have been pushing your weight loss to the outer limits for a long time and then tried to push harder.
Congrats on winning I suppose. I can't be too cheery about an idea I don't like I am afraid.2 -
As I posted earlier, I have no plans of pushing this plan out any further.
And..thanks...I suppose.0 -
Yes, congratulations on winning! More importantly, congratulations on losing a lot of weight that will hopefully make you healthier, happier, and more able to do more things, so happier again. Win, Win, Win, Win!2
-
Congrats on the weight loss OP !
You've gone all out to get informed before you start which was good thinking.
There is always a lot of judgement / side eye on these forums, especially if you arent doing what other people think you should.
Ultimately, your life, your choices ! Again, well done !4 -
OooohToast wrote: »Congrats on the weight loss OP !
You've gone all out to get informed before you start which was good thinking.
There is always a lot of judgement / side eye on these forums, especially if you arent doing what other people think you should.
Ultimately, your life, your choices ! Again, well done !
We see a lot of people come through here and while the OP may have been well-suited for the challenge others may think it is a good idea but employ water fasts and whose knows what else to win.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K 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
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions