Am I under eating or not

Dollypollylolly

Ok I’m averaging out at 1,328 daily and apparently this is under my BMR? Is this right which is in my data so any exercise ones are added later.

I walk daily with some speed walking thrown in now and again. That’s an hour or 2 per day and is broken up to.

I’m lowish carbing as in under 130g carbs a day or less most days. I drink plenty of water

I’m losing inches from bust, waist and hips and I thought I wasn’t losing weight but I am as I recalculated and I’ve lost a stone since May the 17th

So is this ok as I’m not hungry or starving for that matter.

spiriteagle99

Are you trying to lose weight? What was your starting weight? If you have lost a stone in 2 months, then unless you were very obese, that is probably too fast. You shouldn't be losing more than 1% of your weight each week, so basically 2 lbs a week is okay if you are more than 50 lbs overweight, 1 lb. is fine for 25-50 lbs. overweight, and if less than 25 lbs. you shouldn't be losing more than about 1/2 lb. a week.

If you are speed walking an hour or two a day, say 4-8 miles, then you are burning at least 400 calories. Those calories should be eaten back. If you are grossing 1300 calories and burning an additional 400+, then you are well under the minimum that a woman should eat.

Not feeling like you're starving isn't really a good gauge because it can take time for the effects of undereating to show up. You don't see the muscles disappearing or the stress inadequate nutrition can do to your body. You might notice when your hair starts falling out, but you can't see the damage to your heart.

rosebarnalice

BMR is your "basal metabolic rate"- or what's estimated to be how many calories you need at rest, so if you want to lose weight, you want to eat less than that.

Between 1300-1400 calories is about what I consume when I want to lose, so I don't think you're in danger.

wunderkindking

rosebarnalice wrote: »

BMR is your "basal metabolic rate"- or what's estimated to be how many calories you need at rest, so if you want to lose weight, you want to eat less than that.

Between 1300-1400 calories is about what I consume when I want to lose, so I don't think you're in danger.

Uh, no.

To lose weight you want to eat less than your TDEE - which includes calories for actual activity level. Even sedentary includes things like getting up to go pee and moving around your house, doing dishes, doing laundry, whatever. Since most people do not spend all day laying down in bed and not moving, most people do not need to eat less than BMR (what you'd burn in a coma) to lose. As you get close to a normal weight or goal weight you MAY want to go lower than BMR (if you're sedentary) so you have a deficit that will show up on the scale more quickly. It isn't dangerous in theory/as a concept (but could be in practice depending on assorted individual factors), but you don't HAVE to unless you're trying to lose weight while you're unconscious in a bed and not even chewing your food or blinking.

I lose on about 1600-1800 if I want to lose relatively quickly and am not doing specific dedicated exercise (and I'm 5'5" and 140lbs, so not working with a lot of extra calories to maintain being obese anymore). If I am doing exercise I can lose on 2000-2100. 1300 can be fine. It can also not be, depending on sustainability for an individual's size and *their activity level*, but unless you're in a coma you do not need to consume less than your BMR to lose.

AnnPT77

The best early warning of losing too fast, IMO, is 4 or more weeks of personal calorie counting and scale weight data that says one is losing faster than 1% of current body weight weekly on average, when not both (1) severely obese, and (2) under close medical supervision.

Hunger or current energy level is not a clear guide. I accidentally lost too fast for a while, and felt great, not hungry . . . until I suddenly hit a wall. I was weak and fatigued. It took multiple weeks to recover. No one needs that. And I was lucky nothing worse happened. Well, maybe a little hair thinning, a few weeks later. Still, not major health consequences, which are possible.

To be clear: 1% a week could still be too fast, maybe 0.5% better, such as if getting within maybe 25-50 pounds of goal weight, or with other significant physical or psychological stressors in the picture in addition to the fast loss. But faster than 1% is certainly risky.

Is health doom guaranteed if losing "too fast"? No. Just more likely. Giving up is also more likely, because fast loss feels punitive after a while, and determination usually fades over the many weeks to months it takes to lose a meaningful amount of weight.

Dollypollylolly

Thanks guys

I’m struggling to eat to all my calories and I did the ratios for over the week as some days I’m lucky I’m eating 1,200 and I know that’s not right as I walk everyday and need to eat those calories back, but I do eat low carb and I do feel fuller on it. I do snack but not always.

I’m also type 2 diabetic on meds (forxiga) for now but I’m not obese just overweight at 69.5/70kg and 5ft 3inches

I’ve worked it out I’m averaging 2lbs weekly loss since 17th May but worried I’ll go back to bad habits to get the calories in as I know I’m not eating enough well to me I’m not. Eating to my meter you see.

Of to actually see what my TDEE is and what I’m meant to be eating as I think it should be closer to 1,600 maybe a bit more.

Changing eating habits is hard but I thought I had a handle on it, now I’m trying to eat enough which for me is strange as boy did I overeat before.

merchddefaid

I've got roughly similar numbers to you (5'6", SW 168.2 lbs, CW 160.1 lbs, maybe a bit more sedentary, don't have your extra health challenges) and am averaging 1380 cals/day since May (targeting 1400/day) and losing just over 1 lb/week. What I do when I don't have the appetite for all my calories, if I've already hit my protein target, is just add some more olive oil to whatever I'm having for dinner. It's easy to calculate the amount needed to top my calories off and usually it's not very noticeable, just makes whatever the food is a bit more lush tasting.

wunderkindking

Dollypollylolly wrote: »

Thanks guys

I’m struggling to eat to all my calories and I did the ratios for over the week as some days I’m lucky I’m eating 1,200 and I know that’s not right as I walk everyday and need to eat those calories back, but I do eat low carb and I do feel fuller on it. I do snack but not always.

I’m also type 2 diabetic on meds (forxiga) for now but I’m not obese just overweight at 69.5/70kg and 5ft 3inches

I’ve worked it out I’m averaging 2lbs weekly loss since 17th May but worried I’ll go back to bad habits to get the calories in as I know I’m not eating enough well to me I’m not. Eating to my meter you see.

Of to actually see what my TDEE is and what I’m meant to be eating as I think it should be closer to 1,600 maybe a bit more.

Changing eating habits is hard but I thought I had a handle on it, now I’m trying to eat enough which for me is strange as boy did I overeat before.

I think a lot of people do the over-correcting thing and end up struggling to eat all their calories - because they've removed all the higher calorie things from their diet (or most of them) and found a lot of satiating things or high volume things to 'replace' them. It can be a weird one to get back, if the change was a radical one.

It can also be part of what leads to sustainability issues, IMO.

honestly, how I've eaten has had to change frequently over the last year to keep things working.

At first. There was a LOT of substitution, though the subs happened over time. Non-fat dairy, low calorie bread, fat-free mayo, sugar-free EVERYTHING. Lots and lots of veg, lean protein, and things like berries and carrot chips (so many carrots LOL). I ate 200-300 calories about every three hours. That wasn't actually the function of 'burn off carbs fast' it was a function of coming off a lot of calories and keeping volume in my diet while having a deficit.

Then I stopped needing to eat so often. My calories dropped because I was still eating all the subs for my 'regular' options. Like they really dropped. I was eating basically 2 meals and a snack a day (lazy IF, but not intentionally). I was scraping 1200 calories if I worked at it, because of all the subs and things I'd basically gone 'not worth it' on and removed.

So, I then added some stuff back, like full fat yogurt and cottage cheese, and some rice or potato with my otherwise low calorie meals. Put some cheese back on things. This upped my calories AND satiation, yet again.

So I basically started eating one meal a day, and a couple of snacks. So again with having to adjust to get my nutrient and calorie goals. At this point I was eating basically what I used to eat, just one meal of it, not three and a couple of snacks not grazing all freaking day on whatever.

THEN I upped my activity because summer and was hungry more often and my BMI was lower. My TDEE is actually HIGHER now than when I was obese (which, wild) At this point my eating eating patterns are, ironically, pretty danged close to what they were before I started the whole weight-loss process - as in: 3 Meals and 2 snacks most days, with a few but not many subs. The changes that had to stick to make my diet one to maintain a healthy weight were really minor - smaller portions, less oil and 'extra' things (extra cheese, extra butter, extra oil, extra snacks, extra sugar) and not having total calorie blow outs every Friday and Saturday night.

So basically, yeah. Adapt and you'll be okay. It's not uncommon to have to adjust as you go, in various directions. I'm sure end of summer I'll be adjusting again and probably come winter going back to more subs of my usual things.

PAV8888

wunderkindking wrote: »

So basically, yeah. Adapt and you'll be okay. It's not uncommon to have to adjust as you go, in various directions.

and that how you stay in the game... which you can only win if you're in!