please explain the problem with low calories...

Akimajuktuq

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

tracysbeans

I say NET your BMR because it's not okay to eat 1500 calories and then go spend an hour at the gym burning off 500.

Oh wow I'm new to all this and I didn't know doing this was an issue. Thanks for the info. So that is why MFP is adding in what I worked out to my food intake. I didn't realize that's why it was happening.

I need to etch this into my brain and not forget it!

Cheeky_and_Geeky

Basically your body will eat the muscle more than the fat. try to up your calories a bit & do strength training. I suggest taking a multivitamin that contains vit D. I eat 1200-1400 calories with moderate exercise & strength training & have lost 19lbs in 2 months.

vorgas

ok not a single person has backed up their claims either against or for eating at 1000 cal. Every one explains their science. Not one person, except the person who said abt the study where 1000 cal diet was advised for obese test volunteers. Come one people , If we are to have an eye opener , you should back up what you say . I have been searching for studies that show either way , but have not seen any. This would be a good thread to direct people to If we resolve it.

That's because you won't find any

Ok.

Here's a study that shows "Calorie restriction enhanced the catabolic response to inactivity by combining greater protein catabolism in the postabsorptive state with an impaired postprandial anabolic utilization of free amino acids." For the layman, catabolic response is when muscles get broken down. http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/86/2/366.full

Here's a study that shows "Weight loss results in adaptive thermogenesis." ATG is a is a disproportional or greater than expected reduction of resting metabolic rate. http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/97/5/990.abstract?sid=d9131f0e-cd5b-421b-9ff9-f04c30cc9a79

Here's a study of healthy men that showed weight loss from a restricted calorie diet led to about 4% protein loss. When adjusted for various factors, it's actually about 1/4 of the total weight loss of muscle (25% of lost weight came from muscle): http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/24/8/913.abstract?sid=84c552f6-942f-4a44-9042-747811853b71

Here's a study that shows that Resting Energy Expenditure is suppressed during a restricted calorie diet (meaning you burn less while at rest). This was done on morbidly obese women, so the "your body will still use fat if you're fat" folks may not have as much room for argument: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/46/6/893.abstract?sid=84c552f6-942f-4a44-9042-747811853b71

Here's a study done on morbidly obese subjects where they were trying to figure out the best way to prevent muscle loss during restricted calorie dieting. In other words, muscle loss happened, they were just trying to figure out how to prevent it: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/40/3/611.abstract?sid=84c552f6-942f-4a44-9042-747811853b71

Here's a quote about a study, which unfortunately is not linked in the article, however it was reviewed by the Associate Professor of Medicine at HARVARD MEDICAL, basically saying low calorie diets can lead to all sorts of problems: WARNING ON EXTREME DIETS
Extreme diets of fewer than 1,100 calories carry health risks. They are also often followed by bingeing or overeating, and a return to obesity. Such diets often do not have enough vitamins and minerals, which must then be taken as supplements. Most of the initial weight loss is in fluids. Later, fat is lost, but so is muscle, which can account for more than 30% of the weight loss. No one should be on very strict diets for longer than 16 weeks, or fast for weight loss. Severe dieting has unpleasant side effects, including fatigue, intolerance to cold, hair loss, gallstone formation, and menstrual irregularities. There have been rare reports of death from heart arrhythmias when liquid formulas did not have sufficient nutrients. Pregnant women who excessively diet during the first trimester put their unborn children at risk for birth defects. Of note, those whose diets include a high intake of fluids and much reduced protein and sodium are at risk for hyponatremia, which can cause fatigue, confusion, dizziness, and in extreme cases, coma and death.

You're welcome. And guess what Yarwell, I found some

astartig

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.

This is NOT true. starvation mode isn't real.

the reason they state not to go under 1200 for most people is because of nutrients. most people cannot get the nutrients they need at a rate under that.

Chevy_Quest

for reference

Mainebikerchick

Well..I'll just give my input even thought I'm sure it won't be held up as much as everyone elses;

I have an eating disorder. I have to go to the doctor twice a week to watch my blood pressure, that runs around 70/50 because if it gets lower than that, something could go wrong with my heart and I could die. My pulse is also extremely low. My oxygen saturation is low. My body temperature runs around 96 (where a normal body temp is 98.6). I have to regularly get blood test to check and make sure that there is no damage to my kidneys or liver and a slew of other things (There is an order for blood work sitting right beside me right now, the orders on it are TSH, CBC, CMP (chem 14), ESR (Sed Rate), A1C) because what I have done to my body. How did I get said eating disorder? Eating less than 1000 calories a day. Dropping weight quickly. Deciding since I was dropping weight so quickly I would drop down more and more and more. Now my teeth are falling out, my hair is coming out in handfuls, and there is something wrong with my kidneys.

But good luck with your "healthy" low calorie diet.

Thank you for sharing that. You need to post that as its own topic as a warning for all the people here on their "healthy" low calorie diets. Best of luck to you!!

^^Definitely agree!!!!

astartig

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

Pretty sure a real live doctor that you go to and have a patient/relationship with is a far better source on what is right for the individual than the advice of a thousand talking monkeys found on the innerwebz.

vorgas

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.

This is NOT true. starvation mode isn't real.

the reason they state not to go under 1200 for most people is because of nutrients. most people cannot get the nutrients they need at a rate under that.

Here's the thing: technically, you are correct. MOST of the weight loss, meaning more than 50% does not come from muscle. HOWEVER, a much larger proportion of weight loss comes from eating at a low calorie diet than normal, like 25% to 30% of the total weight lost! VLCD also has many detrimental side effects regardless of your obesity level, but holding onto ALL of your fat isn't one of them. So yes, Starvation Mode is very real. No, it's not what most people think it is. That doesn't make it any less terrible or any less real.

For reference, see several studies I posted a few up.

Fullsterkur_woman

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

Pretty sure a real live doctor that you go to and have a patient/relationship with is a far better source on what is right for the individual than the advice of a thousand talking monkeys found on the innerwebz.

Yes, a real, live doctor who has probably next to no nutritional training surely knows more about the dangers of eating too low calorie than someone who is actively recovering from an eating disorder who has multiple checkups A WEEK with several health care professionals who are HIGHLY specialized in the field. And monkeys might fly out my butt.

ETA before I see anybody's responses- I just realized some of you might not recognize last thing as a cultural reference. It's just a line from a silly comedy, not intended to be offensive.

astartig

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

Pretty sure a real live doctor that you go to and have a patient/relationship with is a far better source on what is right for the individual than the advice of a thousand talking monkeys found on the innerwebz.

Yes, a real, live doctor who has probably next to no nutritional training surely knows more about the dangers of eating too low calorie than someone who is actively recovering from an eating disorder who has multiple checkups A WEEK with several health care professionals who are HIGHLY specialized in the field. And monkeys might fly out my butt.

the problem here is you are assuming everyone is like you. 1000 calories a day isn't optimal but it's also not truely in the realm of very low calorie and it's not in any kind of eating disorder zone. Maybe that wouldn't be right for you. If someone is going to a doctor and being monitored and the doc has no problems with it then they're probably right.

sorry. the medical degree wins out over your history with eating disorders.

astartig

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.

This is NOT true. starvation mode isn't real.

the reason they state not to go under 1200 for most people is because of nutrients. most people cannot get the nutrients they need at a rate under that.

Here's the thing: technically, you are correct. MOST of the weight loss, meaning more than 50% does not come from muscle. HOWEVER, a much larger proportion of weight loss comes from eating at a low calorie diet than normal, like 25% to 30% of the total weight lost! VLCD also has many detrimental side effects regardless of your obesity level, but holding onto ALL of your fat isn't one of them. So yes, Starvation Mode is very real. No, it's not what most people think it is. That doesn't make it any less terrible or any less real.

For reference, see several studies I posted a few up.

1000 calories is not really what they'd call a vlcd. UNDER that is. Edited because webmd says it's under 800

http://www.webmd.com/diet/low-calorie-diets

delicious_cocktail

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.

This is NOT true. starvation mode isn't real.

the reason they state not to go under 1200 for most people is because of nutrients. most people cannot get the nutrients they need at a rate under that.

So, wait - people shouldn't eat under 1200 calories because you won't get enough nutrients? If you're talking about micronutrients, it is impossible to survive on vitamins. If you're talking about macronutrients . . . well, that's just food.

vorgas

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.

This is NOT true. starvation mode isn't real.

the reason they state not to go under 1200 for most people is because of nutrients. most people cannot get the nutrients they need at a rate under that.

Here's the thing: technically, you are correct. MOST of the weight loss, meaning more than 50% does not come from muscle. HOWEVER, a much larger proportion of weight loss comes from eating at a low calorie diet than normal, like 25% to 30% of the total weight lost! VLCD also has many detrimental side effects regardless of your obesity level, but holding onto ALL of your fat isn't one of them. So yes, Starvation Mode is very real. No, it's not what most people think it is. That doesn't make it any less terrible or any less real.

For reference, see several studies I posted a few up.

1000 calories is not really what they'd call a vlcd. UNDER that is.

Funny, one of the articles I mentioned explicitly mentioned under 1100 calories. 1000 is less than 1100 last time I checked. Of course, what with your medical degree from Harvard Medical, like, you know, the guy who approved this article, I'm sure you have a good reason for opinion.

caymanapril

The conventional thinking is that you a) won't get enough nutrition, b) will cause your body to overwork in an unhealthy way, etc. but if you eat enough protein, take the right supplements and drink lots of water along with plenty of veggies -- you probably won't lose muscle mass. I spent the past three months on 1,000 calories a day and maintained 95% of my muscle mass but I had to take a ton of supplements and four cups of veggies plus protein shakes/bars for that to happen.

thesupremeforce

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

Pretty sure a real live doctor that you go to and have a patient/relationship with is a far better source on what is right for the individual than the advice of a thousand talking monkeys found on the innerwebz.

Yes, a real, live doctor who has probably next to no nutritional training surely knows more about the dangers of eating too low calorie than someone who is actively recovering from an eating disorder who has multiple checkups A WEEK with several health care professionals who are HIGHLY specialized in the field. And monkeys might fly out my butt.

the problem here is you are assuming everyone is like you. 1000 calories a day isn't optimal but it's also not truely in the realm of very low calorie and it's not in any kind of eating disorder zone. Maybe that wouldn't be right for you. If someone is going to a doctor and being monitored and the doc has no problems with it then they're probably right.

sorry. the medical degree wins out over your history with eating disorders.

That's only true if the doctor knows what he/she is talking about on the given subject. I wouldn't go to a doctor who specializes in brain injuries for a sprained wrist either.

astartig

the medical definition sure appears to be 800 or less

http://www.webmd.com/diet/low-calorie-diets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_low_calorie_diet
http://win.niddk.nih.gov/publications/low_calorie.htm

astartig

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

Pretty sure a real live doctor that you go to and have a patient/relationship with is a far better source on what is right for the individual than the advice of a thousand talking monkeys found on the innerwebz.

Yes, a real, live doctor who has probably next to no nutritional training surely knows more about the dangers of eating too low calorie than someone who is actively recovering from an eating disorder who has multiple checkups A WEEK with several health care professionals who are HIGHLY specialized in the field. And monkeys might fly out my butt.

the problem here is you are assuming everyone is like you. 1000 calories a day isn't optimal but it's also not truely in the realm of very low calorie and it's not in any kind of eating disorder zone. Maybe that wouldn't be right for you. If someone is going to a doctor and being monitored and the doc has no problems with it then they're probably right.

sorry. the medical degree wins out over your history with eating disorders.

That's only true if the doctor knows what he/she is talking about on the given subject. I wouldn't go to a doctor who specializes in brain injuries for a sprained wrist either.

way to straw man it. a gp specializes in over all health and somehow that would be the reasonable assumption over someone going to a brain specialist for diet advice.

jofjltncb6

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

Pretty sure a real live doctor that you go to and have a patient/relationship with is a far better source on what is right for the individual than the advice of a thousand talking monkeys found on the innerwebz.

Yes, a real, live doctor who has probably next to no nutritional training surely knows more about the dangers of eating too low calorie than someone who is actively recovering from an eating disorder who has multiple checkups A WEEK with several health care professionals who are HIGHLY specialized in the field. And monkeys might fly out my butt.

the problem here is you are assuming everyone is like you. 1000 calories a day isn't optimal but it's also not truely in the realm of very low calorie and it's not in any kind of eating disorder zone. Maybe that wouldn't be right for you. If someone is going to a doctor and being monitored and the doc has no problems with it then they're probably right.

sorry. the medical degree wins out over your history with eating disorders.

That's only true if the doctor knows what he/she is talking about on the given subject. I wouldn't go to a doctor who specializes in brain injuries for a sprained wrist either.

way to straw man it. a gp specializes in over all health and somehow that would be the reasonable assumption over someone going to a brain specialist for diet advice.

My gp is fat.

Seemed relevant to the discussion.

Fullsterkur_woman

I don't pay much attention to the number. I eat now WHEN I am hungry and I rarely come near the 1000 mark much LESS the 1200 or above. I am still losing, my trainer and Dr aren't upset, soooooooooooooooooo..It is a number

Good luck with the long term success of that strategy.... and fyi, your doctor and trainer may know *kitten* about nutrition. Your doctor for sure, and your trainer should know better-well so should the doctor but they don't usually take more than one course in nutrition in all their years of university. There are a whole bunch of Certified Personal Trainers right here on MFP that give the worst advice, and can't even get their own health in order.... So.

Pretty sure a real live doctor that you go to and have a patient/relationship with is a far better source on what is right for the individual than the advice of a thousand talking monkeys found on the innerwebz.

Yes, a real, live doctor who has probably next to no nutritional training surely knows more about the dangers of eating too low calorie than someone who is actively recovering from an eating disorder who has multiple checkups A WEEK with several health care professionals who are HIGHLY specialized in the field. And monkeys might fly out my butt.

the problem here is you are assuming everyone is like you. 1000 calories a day isn't optimal but it's also not truely in the realm of very low calorie and it's not in any kind of eating disorder zone. Maybe that wouldn't be right for you. If someone is going to a doctor and being monitored and the doc has no problems with it then they're probably right.

sorry. the medical degree wins out over your history with eating disorders.

That's only true if the doctor knows what he/she is talking about on the given subject. I wouldn't go to a doctor who specializes in brain injuries for a sprained wrist either.

way to straw man it. a gp specializes in over all health and somehow that would be the reasonable assumption over someone going to a brain specialist for diet advice.

It's not a straw man. It's hyperbole, which is not a logical fallacy. The point is that a GP specializes in nada by definition of "general". And the training that all medical students get is woefully inadequate. (It's the same problem with veterinarians.) It is absolutely not a reasonable assumption that they will be adequate for nutrition advice. You need to have more specialized knowledge for that, and most GPs just don't have it. You can pretend otherwise all you like, but that won't change the underlying fact of the matter.