please explain the problem with low calories...

MadeLyndoNolan

I don't get all these posts saying 1200 is too low, I set mine to 1000. I eat things like omelots, sandwiches, salads, tuna, salmon, veggies, fruit, cereal, cheese and I don't feel hungy at 1000. I think I'm getting a good mix, but I don't get why that is so low. Shouldn't it be about what you are eating, rather than just looking at the number itself? Not trying to be defensive, but I just don't get it. I'm losing weight and I definitely need to incorporate exercise, but my food calories will remain at 1000, maybe 1200 on the weekends. Is this just horrible? I don't feel starved at all and once I get to my goal, I of course will increase the calories but keep a healthy diet and also exercise. I'm 5'7" and weigh 157 right now, trying to get to 135.

sunsetzen

Because its lower than your bmr, which is the basic calories to run your body without any other action (as in, a comatose state). If you eat below that, you run a high risk of losing muscle mass and damaging your organs and functions.

1PatientBear

Your body needs a certain number of calories just to maintain normal function. It's like having gas in the gas tank. Half full, you might be able to drive to Temple from San Antonio, but you aren't getting back without refueling. If you are 5'7" and 157, 1000 calories is WAAAAAY too low. You may not have any ill effects immediately but you will. Do yourself a favor and educate yourself about why eating too little is so dangerous and PLEASE feed yourself.

ThickMcRunFast

Not being hungry doesn't mean you're getting the right nutrition. At 5'7", I cannot imagine that you are getting enough protein to maintain your lean body mass at 1000 cal/day. You will lose weight at such a low deficit, but you will lose muscle (and probably hair after a while). You may get down to 135 with this, but you will not look the way you want. Eating at this low of a level is what causes saggy skin and the dreaded 'skinny-fat' (though I hate that term). Its not about losing weight as fast as you can, its about doing what is healthy and sustainable over the long haul.

you don't have that much to lose, you should find you TDEE and eat -10% from that.

For the record, I am 5'9, 148ish, and I maintain on 2400 calories a day (that accounts for my normal exercise activity). I also did the whole 1100 cals a day thing (while training for a marathon, so it was even worse). At my lowest, I was about 10 lbs less than I am now, and I looked AWFUL. Weighing more but with more muscle, better definition, and eating in a way that makes me happy is definitely better.

aelphabawest

At 1200, for most people, you're not eating enough. Your body goes into starvation mode, which then means it struggles to hold onto every single pound and it's harder for you to lose weight. When you do lose weight, it tends to be muscle mass, not fat. Bad all around.

I_mustacheU4pancakes

You lose muscle faster and you'll plateau faster the lower your calories are.
If you lose muscle you'll still lose weight but end up regretting it when you realize
How good muscle is and how HARD it is to put on.
Eating less..and less for faster results isn't the route to take,imo.

delicious_cocktail

It's sort of like the problem with low Oxygen. Do you really want to find out where that limit is, and to discover the damage that's done to your mind and body along the way? Or would it perhaps be better to ensure you get plenty of Oxygen without hyperventilating?

PikaKnight

It's sort of like the problem with low Oxygen. Do you really want to find out where that limit is, and to discover the damage that's done to your mind and body along the way? Or would it perhaps be better to ensure you get plenty of Oxygen without hyperventilating?

Holy crap. Best analogy EVER. I need to remember this one.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

Adherence
Nutrient intake
Metabolic damage
Muscle loss
Food is yummy

Hauntinglyfit

Aside from all the (correct) answers you'll get about it being damaging to your body long term, because you can eat more and still lose weight. And because food is delicious.

Melissa22G

It's sort of like the problem with low Oxygen. Do you really want to find out where that limit is, and to discover the damage that's done to your mind and body along the way? Or would it perhaps be better to ensure you get plenty of Oxygen without hyperventilating?

3dogsrunning

Adherence
Nutrient intake
Metabolic damage
Muscle loss
Food is yummy

That pretty much sums it up.

I'd also like to add that hunger isn't a reliable indicator of whether you are eating enough. Anorexics often don't experience hunger and they can literally be starving. Hormones can affect hunger signals and eating too low can affect hormones. Some people who are overweight report constant hunger and they do not need more food.

cwolfman13

In addition to what everyone else is saying, it's really hard to actually get all of your proper nutrition with such paltry calories. Of course, most people in your position fail to understand that dietary fat is an essential nutrient and go all low fat/no fat to keep calories to a minimum...they think just **** tons of fruit and veg is "healthy"...all the while, malnourishing their bodies of needed dietary fat. I would imagine your protein intake is rather lacking as well.

vorgas

If I told you I could reduce your weight, but to make it happen I would drill microscopic holes in your bones, so they would be a little more fragile, would you do it?

If I told you I could reduce your weight, but in exchange your metabolic process would slow down, so you would take longer to recover from illness and burn fewer calories each day, would you do it?

If i told you I could cut your weight, but in doing so you would probably experience long term damage to organs that may or may not amount to anything, would you risk it?

If I told you I could lower your weight, but you would have to give up some cognitive ability instead, would you do it?

Probably not. At least, I hope not. All of these things and more is what happens if you don't eat enough food. It won't happen in one week. It may not even happen in a month. But keep it up, and it will happen.

AlongCame_Molly

I don't get all these posts saying 1200 is too low, I set mine to 1000. I eat things like omelots, sandwiches, salads, tuna, salmon, veggies, fruit, cereal, cheese and I don't feel hungy at 1000. I think I'm getting a good mix, but I don't get why that is so low. Shouldn't it be about what you are eating, rather than just looking at the number itself? Not trying to be defensive, but I just don't get it. I'm losing weight and I definitely need to incorporate exercise, but my food calories will remain at 1000, maybe 1200 on the weekends. Is this just horrible? I don't feel starved at all and once I get to my goal, I of course will increase the calories but keep a healthy diet and also exercise. I'm 5'7" and weigh 157 right now, trying to get to 135.

Yes, you are

bacitracin

http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/

Your BMR is probably around 1500.

If you eat less than that, your organs get mad at you.

diannethegeek

Additionally, part of losing weight slowly is learning to build healthy habits that will carry you over into maintenance when you reach your goal. Jumping from 1000 calories to maintenance overnight can not only leave the body confused, with a slow metabolism, but it also means that more people just don't know what maintenance is supposed to look like. They either chronically undereat (freaked out by the water weight gain they'll see) or go back to their old eating habits and put the weight back on. Eating at a smaller deficit (like, say, 1500 calories) still lets you drop the weight, but it lets you increase your calories much more easily when you reach your goal.

nomeejerome

OP:
You are getting a crap ton of awesome information. I hope you listen to it.

archoo_letsdothis

HI, could some one please link any study that supports this or otherwise? That a 1000 cal diet would be harmful to muscles. I would really like to know. Thank you.

vorgas

HI, could some one please link any study that supports this or otherwise? That a 1000 cal diet would be harmful to muscles. I would really like to know. Thank you.

On the phone right now so not going to do a bunch of research, but eating at a calorie deficit puts the body in a catabolic state, which means (in terms of muscle) that muscle will get broken down. Remember that your body is a balancing machine. If it's not getting enough food it will do things to limit the amount of energy it requires on a daily basis. Muscle requires more energy than fat to keep around.

Now this does depend on your overall body fat amount. Obviously if you have 35% body fat your body will go to these stores first. But if you only have about 15% body fat, you can expect muscle loss.

Simply do a search for "muscle catabolism" and you can see study after study.

Any body builder can verify this. I'm eating at slight caloric deficit right now (500 calories per day) and it's hard for me to even maintain my strength, let alone gain.

suziepoo1984

Everything has been said above, but why eat so low while you can eat a lot more and still lose weight? I eat an average of 1700+ calories a day and at 5'5, i am still losing weight. I don't even do a ton loads of exercise too.
I want to enjoy maintenance when it comes. Also, i get to eat whatever i love in moderation. I know i am not going to binge eat any-day soon because i incorporate everything in my diet.

ETA: Currently weigh 148 lbs