thoughts on the 500cal diet

jennifer_417

Not worth it...

paperpudding

Had I been a man, this conversation would have played out very differently, and I certainly wouldn't have been called anorexic or a crazy b*tch. You do the math.

I'm not sure what maths I am meant to be doing?

But I dont think this would have gone any differently if you were a man- the term' crazy b*tch may not have been used but the anorexia would - men can be anorexic too, you know.

Netting 500 calories per day is not healthy and people would have called you out on that, regardless of who you were.

SLLRunner

The only way I'd say "do it" is if you're prepared to feel weak and tired the whole way through. If you NEED to lose weight for whatever reason in a week, then go for it but it's definitely not a long term solution.

No, not even for a week.

chadya07

misogyny might be better represented in the obsession with minimizing a womans body....

not in telling a woman not to starve themselves.

when you get defensive and start calling people sexist it makes people more inclined to be meaner about what they are saying. but what they are saying is. dont kill yourself just to look cute and tiny.

that is a loving gesture not a hateful one. even if people dont always know how to say it.

SymphonynSonata

500 seems like hell. That's like "here, eat a piece of toast for the day and pretend that it didn't make you hungrier. " **** that I'd rather just fast, at least its upfront about being nutritionally void, miserable and a waste of time.

palmerdanielle

Lol, I'm not here to teach you how deeply ingrained misogyny influenced your behaviors on this forum today, and I'm sure you'll never figure it out, so I'm just going to leave it at that.

Hahahaha yea you're just so much more enlightened than the rest of us about feminism. You are absolutely the reason that feminism gets a bad name when you go around calling people misogynists for disagreeing with you. If you truly are a feminist you're hurting your cause...

^So much this, this is why I don't like to even mention being a feminist, because of the people with these ridiculous points of view
I was so thrown when I saw her mention of misogyny I had to read back and still couldn't see what she was on about. All I saw was people trying to provide information, and if it were a guy eating 500 net calories a day, he'd be hearing the same thing. Y'know, being treated like a person just as she has been. It's the fact she's consistently being so defensive that people are getting frustrated with her, not because of her gender. :noway:

/sigh

goshnames

Anorexia athletica is a sometimes inadvertent disorder that uses exercise as a form of purging calories. Regardless of "nutrition", your organs need more than 500 calories/day to function properly. Without adequate energy, your body will start using muscle tissue for fuel. +1 for equality - biologically we ALL need to eat in order to remain alive. Over time, it will become clear that netting 500 calories/day is not enough to maintain a healthy life.

ROBOTFOOD

Cannot fathom eating below 2500.
500? No way. You're energy will be shot and will likely lead to uncontrollable binges. Sounds like hell.

aedreana

When younger, for many years I would consume under 500, under 400, or under 300 calories per day when dieting. Now I diet on under 700, because that little bit of extra calories means I don't get lightheaded, weak, shaky. I have always been very sedentary. And I only diet for a few weeks. I don't consider this to be the best way to diet for everyone. I don't exercise. It works just fine for me.

st0rmagedd0n

Lol, I'm not here to teach you how deeply ingrained misogyny influenced your behaviors on this forum today, and I'm sure you'll never figure it out, so I'm just going to leave it at that.

Hahahaha yea you're just so much more enlightened than the rest of us about feminism. You are absolutely the reason that feminism gets a bad name when you go around calling people misogynists for disagreeing with you. If you truly are a feminist you're hurting your cause...

^So much this, this is why I don't like to even mention being a feminist, because of the people with these ridiculous points of view
I was so thrown when I saw her mention of misogyny I had to read back and still couldn't see what she was on about. All I saw was people trying to provide information, and if it were a guy eating 500 net calories a day, he'd be hearing the same thing. Y'know, being treated like a person just as she has been. It's the fact she's consistently being so defensive that people are getting frustrated with her, not because of her gender. :noway:

/sigh

Seriously.

We're just living our lives, trying to obtain gender equality through rational, reasonable alterations of gender stereotypes and perceptions, and then the straw feminists just have to stick their oars in and make us all look like frothing crazies.

NRSPAM

Hey snugglesmacks, please read the post I made earlier and tell me what you think. I'm meeting and often exceeding my nutritional needs but netting at around 544 calories a day because of the exercise I do. Any thoughts??

Try googling BMR, or basal metabolic rate. I would bet yours is at the VERY LEAST 1,200. Probably more around 1,400.

SnuggleSmacks

Hey snugglesmacks, please read the post I made earlier and tell me what you think. I'm meeting and often exceeding my nutritional needs but netting at around 544 calories a day because of the exercise I do. Any thoughts??

My thoughts: You are not meeting your nutritional needs, as your nutritional needs include adequate caloric intake to support your bodily functions as well as activities.

I hope that someday you are able to establish a healthy relationship with food which allows you to enjoy the pleasurable and healthful aspects without the need to either overindulge or severely restrict your intake. Keeping your net calories so low is not healthy by any stretch of the imagination unless you have a specific medical reason and are under a doctor's direct and careful supervision. If not, then you are taking great risks with your health.

TimTomakin

Less than 1200 calories a day will put you into starvation mode, thereby shutting down your metabolic rate. The worst part is then your body takes those 500 calories and stores them as fat. Fat cells have this habit of growing when you eventually increase your calories.

Therefore these insanity diets just make you fatter. They are designed to lose weight quickly, the problem is you gain it back twice as fast as you lost it, plus some. So don't do it, stick with your recommended MFP calorie intake for long term, permanent weight loss success.

First, should you eat only 500 calories a day? No. Will you die if you only eat 500 calories a day? No. While I would advise against it, you'll be fine if you choose to go down that path. Just keep in mind that you may experience intense hunger pangs, bad headaches, weakness, fuzzy thinking, lightheadedness and feel very tired

Second, your body is designed to survive. You're metabolism will not shut down and you will not enter a mythical "starvation mode" which automatically turns calories to fat. If you're metabolism is shutting down then you're pretty much dying. The ONE AND ONLY WAY to gain fat is by eating a caloric surplus just as THE ONE AND ONLY WAY to lose fat is to eat at a caloric deficit.

This kind of misinformation drives me bananas...

ah1141

Thanks for replying without accusing me of being anorexic or calling me a crazy b*tch for simply asking for advice and defending my opinions. I've been reading about nutrition online and apparently, caloric intake isn't part of nutrition. Nutrition includes several things like fat, carbohydrates, macronutrients, fiber, photochemicals, vitamins, minerals, etc. but calories themselves don't nourish you. Food does. I eat adequate amounts of food and meet and even exceed several areas of my nutritional needs because I eat things like liver, nuts, spinach, and berries on a daily basis. If I didn't work out, I would be pretty well nourished. The thing is, I do work out and I'm STILL nourished. People have suggested that I should include strength training and more food in my diet so that I don't lose muscle and so that I still have energy at the end of the day, and so I won't binge and crash. Because I have ADHD and depression and I'm taking two stimulants to treat this (and have been for years), I have loads of energy in spite of what I eat and my appetite is suppressed. So, energy and binging will never be an issue for me. So, yeah, I really just wanted to know if what I was doing was unhealthy, and at this point, I'm still not convinced that it is. I'll add more calories to my diet simply to gain muscle, but I'd be nourished either way.

ninerbuff

A VLCD is designed and overseen by doctors or dieticians on an OBESE patient. It's not meant for someone trying to lose under 80lbs or less.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

forkofpower

I think the OP is trolling. Stirring up feminism wank as well as VLCD wank?

SnuggleSmacks

Thanks for replying without accusing me of being anorexic or calling me a crazy b*tch for simply asking for advice and defending my opinions. I've been reading about nutrition online and apparently, caloric intake isn't part of nutrition. Nutrition includes several things like fat, carbohydrates, macronutrients, fiber, photochemicals, vitamins, minerals, etc. but calories themselves don't nourish you. Food does. I eat adequate amounts of food and meet and even exceed several areas of my nutritional needs because I eat things like liver, nuts, spinach, and berries on a daily basis. If I didn't work out, I would be pretty well nourished. The thing is, I do work out and I'm STILL nourished. People have suggested that I should include strength training and more food in my diet so that I don't lose muscle and so that I still have energy at the end of the day, and so I won't binge and crash. Because I have ADHD and depression and I'm taking two stimulants to treat this (and have been for years), I have loads of energy in spite of what I eat and my appetite is suppressed. So, yeah, I really just wanted to know if what I was doing was unhealthy, and at this point, I'm still not convinced that it is. I'll add more calories to my diet simply to gain muscle, but I'd be nourished either way.

I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but calories most certainly are a part of nutrition. Perhaps you're confused because the macronutrients are usually listed in grams. I'll clear it up for you:

1 gram carbohydrates = 4 calories
1 gram protein = 4 calories
1 gram fat = 9 calories

So, if you need, for example, 90 grams of protein in a day, you would have to eat 360 calories of pure protein to reach that goal. If you add in fat and carbs, you'll find that the total you need adds up to way more than 500 calories in order to hit your needed macronutrients. When you exercise, you're burning up some of those calories so that they're no longer available for your body to use for essential functions.

ah1141

You're right, and I eat more than enough calories to meet the requirements for fat, carbohydrates, protein, etc. it's just that the exorcising I do lowers the net calories at the end of the day, not the nutrients.

SomeNights246

The issue isn't disordered eating, it's making up for the calories I lose because of the exorcise I do. Maybe you should reread my post...or not.

Overexercising to burn calories is a form of disordered eating.

ah1141

I'm not over exorcising to burn calories, I do a 60 min aerobics workout and maybe some laps in the pool. That's hardly over exorcising.

meanpooh

If you want to kill your body, knock your socks off.

SnuggleSmacks

You're right, and I eat more than enough calories to meet the requirements for fat, carbohydrates, protein, etc. it's just that the exorcising I do lowers the net calories at the end of the day, not the nutrients.

But....the net calories....are made up....of the nutrients....

It's basic math. The calories are what makes up the nutrients...as I posted above, 4 calories for a gram of carbs, etc. If you're subtracting calories by exercising, then what exactly do you think it is that you're burning up, if not nutrients? Do you believe that the calories are nutrients plus some other thing that you're burning by exercising, leaving the nutrients behind? :huh:

SomeNights246

Idc that this has turned into a feminism argument but I'm just going to refer to the 'starvation mode' myth.

What actually happens is that after a period of not eating enough food, when you return to 'normal' eating, you actually eat an unhealthy amount of food in the other direction. You eat too much food and you keep eating like that and you get fat.

Not really. Even that is a stretch.

Most people recovering from starvation will eat a LOT. A LOT a lot. And need to. But once the body recovers, it slows. Until you taper off at your restored weight. Which will only be 'fat' if you were 'fat' before.

People are really, really clueless about how eating disorders and starvation works.

Actually, that's a good thing. Shows they've never been there. I wish I were clueless about it.

Pathend2

I'm not over exorcising to burn calories, I do a 60 min aerobics workout and maybe some laps in the pool. That's hardly over exorcising.

Plus it helps rid the world of possessed children!

Synchronicity

Thanks for replying without accusing me of being anorexic or calling me a crazy b*tch for simply asking for advice and defending my opinions. I've been reading about nutrition online and apparently, caloric intake isn't part of nutrition. Nutrition includes several things like fat, carbohydrates, macronutrients, fiber, photochemicals, vitamins, minerals, etc. but calories themselves don't nourish you. Food does. I eat adequate amounts of food and meet and even exceed several areas of my nutritional needs because I eat things like liver, nuts, spinach, and berries on a daily basis. If I didn't work out, I would be pretty well nourished. The thing is, I do work out and I'm STILL nourished. People have suggested that I should include strength training and more food in my diet so that I don't lose muscle and so that I still have energy at the end of the day, and so I won't binge and crash. Because I have ADHD and depression and I'm taking two stimulants to treat this (and have been for years), I have loads of energy in spite of what I eat and my appetite is suppressed. So, energy and binging will never be an issue for me. So, yeah, I really just wanted to know if what I was doing was unhealthy, and at this point, I'm still not convinced that it is. I'll add more calories to my diet simply to gain muscle, but I'd be nourished either way.

Calories are a just a measure of heat-energy contained within food... And yes, they are necessary for life. Energy is necessary for life. Our bodies turn the energy contained within food into high-energy chemical bonds that are then stored and used for energy to power all the biochemical reactions that make life possible. If you are not obtaining enough energy from food to provide energy for life, your body will begin to break down the 'non-essential' structures within your body to meet your energy needs. Your brain is one of the most greedy structures in your body and it has specific needs and uses a significant portion of the energy you eat. It requires glucose or ketones for energy and if you don't have enough of those, you will make them to feed your brain by breaking down the proteins in your body.

An individual netting ~500 calories a day will probably start noticing things like brittle/thinning hair, thin finger nails, painful joints, unexplained body aches, and fatigue. These are the natural consequences of a very low calorie diet.

Those who are morbidly obese can tolerate a very low calorie diet better than the rest of us- but the morbidly obese will have some difficulties.

That's not to say it isn't possible to stay on a very low calorie diet for a while... I'm just saying that calories are an important part of nutrition and that they come from food. We need those calories (in the form of glucose and ketones that come from food) to feed our brains.

SomeNights246

I'm not over exorcising to burn calories, I do a 60 min aerobics workout and maybe some laps in the pool. That's hardly over exorcising.

And rest days?

And how many laps?

Because if that's really all you're doing, I have trouble believing you're only netting 500.

musicjunkie67

I have just gone on a calorie controlled diet, at last !! Told my doctor about myfitnesspal and he said it seemed a good idea. I was initially thinking of aiming for 1200 cals per day but he was against this as considered it far too low on a daily basis. As the suggested target for male is 2500 decided myself that I would target 1800 cals per day and that seems to be working as have lost 2kg in 8 days. Male 67yr old.

ah1141

Thanks for clarifying that for me. I read this article, and I think it might disagree with what you are both saying, but I'll take your input into consideration. http://fitlife.tv/nutrients-vs-calories-do-you-know-the-difference/

ChrisM8971

I'm not over exorcising to burn calories, I do a 60 min aerobics workout and maybe some laps in the pool. That's hardly over exorcising.

It is over exercising if you are not eating enough calories to fuel that exercise!

So where do you think your body gets the energy from that it needs to function if not the calories that you eat? Well at your net calories it will come from burning fat and lbm

No amount of protein and weight training will allow you to retain muscle at that calorie level.

In addition you body will adapt over time to the calories you are eating (how much depends on how long you do this) and when you decide to increase your intake the weight you lost will come straight back fast resulting in an overall increase in your BF%

ETA however much you argue the case, what you are doing is not a healthy weight loss method!

bregalad5

Do you believe that the calories are nutrients plus some other thing that you're burning by exercising, leaving the nutrients behind? :huh:

It's because she's exorcising not exercising. I guess it's some kind of demonic monster she's burning off of instead of calories?