900 calorie burn - up and down in weight

chrisvinci

If you are really exercise burning 900 calories a day, you need to eat at least 2,000 calories a day. that is the problem and the simple solution.

DirtyCurvesAhead

Yeah, so everyone keep quiet about the fact she's basically starving herself, because that's not what she asked, and this isn't a support forum on a website that promotes safe and sustainable weightloss. :huh:

So yeah, anyway. Weight fluctuations are normal.

She is over 200lbs she has the stored energy to fuel her body for a long time still. She is eating 1300 cals and this gives her the micros she needs to stay healthy(this is the true reason behind the 1200min for weight loss).

How do you know 1300 cals is giving her everything she needs? 1200 is actually a minimum to net on MFP, not eat in total. So actually, she's netting 400 cals a day, which is 800 less than your idea of a healthy minimum.

People with a lot to lose can follow VLCD for a limited time (normally under medical supervision), but this is meant to be a lifestyle change, and MFP promotes healthy weight loss. It's all well and good telling her she can eat this way, but when she eventually gets shaky and tired and miserable and cannot workout properly and plateaus and starts binging, as so many on here that eat too little do, then that would have been some terrible advice.

MFP won't put you below 1200 this is correct. And yes eventually she won't have the excessive fat stores and have to increase her cals to support her energy needs, but for now that is not the case.

Again the reason for cal minimums for people losing weight is to make sure they are getting enough micros to support health. A person regardless of cal intake can be micro deficient so to say increasing cals will ensure a healthy diet is silly.

I didn't say it would make a healthy diet. It's a healthy amount of calories to eat to lose weight. If she uses all those calories on krispy kremes and cheeseburgers, that's up to her, but then if we are going by your reasoning, how can you say that 1200 cals will give her 'enough micros to support health'? That's just as silly.

I notice you've completely ignored my comment about the 1200 cals. Here, I'll bold it out for you, just in case:

1200 is actually a minimum to net on MFP, not eat in total. So actually, she's netting 400 cals a day, which is 800 less than your idea of a healthy minimum.

My idea of a healthy minimum is not net. MFP chooses net as the way to measure and that is fine. I would prefer to say a healthy min is not cals but the appropriate amount of micros, fat, and protein in your diet.

'Your idea' of a healthy minimum is your opinion, and therefore shouldn't be preached as gospel. You shouldn't be coming on here and telling someone who is quite obviously undereating that it's fine to do so. That's shameful.

And yes, obviously diet and macros determine a healthy minimum, but calories are a measurement of energy, and quite simply, if you burn more energy than you take in to the extreme, that is not healthy. What the OP is doing is not healthy, especially not long-term. I cannot understand why you criticize members that point that out and then promote a VLCD.

I love how VLCD is thrown around when someone is eating 1200 cals. LCD sure, VLCD no. It's like starvation mode, it's the fall back for people who only read these boards.

You don't think netting 400 cals is a VLCD?

Medical definition of a VLCD is a total cal intake of 800 cals or less. Sooo......:flowerforyou:

You're very focused on your 'definitions' aren't you? So because a website tells you a VLCD is 800 cals or less, you think that the OP is in fact eating normally and healthily? Sigh. I give up, it's clear you will never see that what you are encouraging is wrong. Perhaps you should start your own weight loss website, seeing as you apparently know more than MFP. :yawn:

Sigh, I give up, asking people to use medical terms as defined by the medical community is too much to ask.:ohwell: