"Starvation." (All opinions wanted!)

hush7hush

Do you (personally) think that it would be more detrimental to a person's health to eat only 500 calories per day, and no exercise OR to eat 1200 calories per day, and burn off 700 through exercise? (Both would leave a 500 calorie NET for the day.) Assume this person has a typically sedetary lifestyle.


Opinions (backed by research, or NOT) appreciated!


Apparently it needs to be stated AGAIN: This is hypothetical. This is not meant to speak of any person specifically. This is not MY plan for loss.

1_up

if I had to choose, I'd say 1200 calories with the 700 burn would be better then the straight 500.... At least the 1200 is getting some kind of nutrients. 1200 calories net would be even better.

NewVonnie

Pshhh...Pants to both..PANTS!!!! :grumble:

Twasney

The 1200 is the bare minimum to let your body survive and stay out of starvation! Even if you do the 700 calories exercise and you don't eat them you are going to lose weight more slowly as you will not have the body resources to actually build the muscle necessary to burn fat.

cownancy

Can I be blunt if I tell you that I am not trying to be mean or rude? OK...I think that ANYONE eating 500 net calories a day is a fool. You cannot survive in any healthy manner on that amount of fuel. You are starting your body. I know this because I am 54 years old and have been on almost EVERY type of diet out there and have spent hours and hours with nutritionists and dieticians learning about how to eat and, until now, not being good at doing what I learned.

If you want to lose weight, and think you should eat only 500 calories, get a doctor's opinion. I mean it. Your life is important. If you have a 1200 calorie goal and exercise 700 calories off, you should be eating back the 700 calories because 1200 is the MINIMUM you should be eating in order to lose the right kind of weight. Otherwise, you may very well get to your goal, but as soon as you resume eating a "normal" diet, you will gain it back and probably be less healthy in the long run.

I am honestly trying to support you, just being concerned about your health.

hush7hush

I am honestly trying to support you, just being concerned about your health.

This has nothing to do with ME.

As I said, it was just opinions wanted.

I am not the person in question, thank you for your concern.

katep2492

Everyone's starvation Calories are different but typically 500 is the starvation line, you could do this for a week or two but really no longer then that without permanent damage to your metabolism.

Gilbrod

You want to burn it off since you're sedentary. Remember, your body adjusts. So if you living off 500 calories, and weight loss is your goal, a rude awakening comes when you realize that your muscle is gone, and now you have that flabby skinny look. Better to eat up and burn than not too.

NewVonnie

Everyone's starvation Calories are different but typically 500 is the starvation line, you could do this for a week or two but really no longer then that without permanent damage to your metabolism.

Ummmm..yeah..so since WHEN has 500 calories been the starvation line????

epeebes

1200 plus 700 burned with exercise. I need food to function whether its to exercise or do daily tasks. 500 cals is not enough to eat for a day! I don't believe your net calories have to be 1200 or you'll starve. When you are hungry you know you are hungry. I personally gained weight not through feeding my hunger but through my affection for loving to taste food. I can eat when not hungry just for something tasty. Yes I was a Glutton. :blushing:

bhagavatilad1

ABSOLUTELY, its just like losing blood your body gets deprived of certain vitamins that are essential to maintain a healthy lifestyle/body etc. I shall be dissapointed with you if you go the 500 cal per day route. Add me as a friend I'll give you support to lose the weight in a healthy manner.

Artemis_Acorn

You are asking for the lesser of the evils? Eat 1200 at least gives you a few more nutrients, so that's the best option if those are the only two options of what I hope is just a hypothetical question.

If this is in fact about a real person, there is a psychological problem underlying what is self-destructive behavior. They should seek medical advice and assistance in overcoming what would seem to me to be an eating disorder.

AmerTunsi

Well, it is pick your poison. With 1200 at least your body is getting more nourishment but eventually you will get weak and pass out from fatigue and possibly injure yourself. Then there is 500 and you just are fatigued and can't move ... hair starts to fall out and you waste away. Hmmmmmm. So the question is do you want to be conscious or unconscious while your body shuts down?

katep2492

Everyone's starvation Calories are different but typically 500 is the starvation line, you could do this for a week or two but really no longer then that without permanent damage to your metabolism.

Ummmm..yeah..so since WHEN has 500 calories been the starvation line????

I said that wrong or didn't say enough! I was treated for an eating disorder when I was younger and they would call 500 calories the "danger zone" or the "starvation line" and you couldn't eat below that or you would get sent back to treatment! I by no means think that is healthy or safe I know that your body doesn't get enough nutrition if you eat under 1200 calories. I also said that that is not a sustainable way of eating. I guess I didn't word my statement very well. You CAN eat 500 calories a day but not for long periods of time, It would be healthier to eat 1200 calories a day and burn 700 but people really should have a net calories of 1200!

overzoelous

Eating 1200 and burning 700, obviously.
http://matchstickmolly.com/post/4080716502/why-starving-seems-to-work

hush7hush

Thank you to everyone that replied! [:

littlemili

I don't advocate how I work but it gets results. I have lost 1-4lbs per week, every week, for 5 months, despite being a normal weight and it has come from fat not muscle. I am posting to disprove starvation mode in my body not to tell anyone to eat like this. Also I never deny myself food when hungry and I don't care about net calories, I just try really hard to eat 1000 and exercise as much as I feel like doing.

I eat usually 900-1200 per day. I burn 200-500. I don't eat anything back.


Disclaimer: I have EDNOS so it's not a mentally stable eating pattern.

yoghurtand

Definitely eating 1200 and burning 700. I used to do that every day and it's a lot more sustainable than just eating 500 in my experience. You get a lot more nutrition if you eat the additional 700cals - that is a HUGE meal that could be filled with all sorts of vitamins, minerals, fats and proteins. Eating 500 makes you woozy, fainty and really lethargic, but burning 700 is an hour or two of exercise and as long as you eat enough carbs, you can probably stick at it for quite some time (although mental fatigue from constant exercise will definitely eventually wear you down if you don't collapse first). Not that either option is sensible as a weight loss strategy, but still.

hush7hush

Anybody else wanna put in their two cents?

SCC88

Anybody else wanna put in their two cents?

I know you said it was hypothetical, but I figured I would add my experience:
When I was a teenager I heard on TV that nicole richie got slim by eating only 500kcals a day, so I wrote up a diary and I copied this
brekkie: porridge with water and multivitamins
lunch 50kcal light cupasoup
dinner: fish fillet and salad
EVERY SINGLE DAY for 2 months
plus i used to go to the gym and only pay for one class but stick around all day doing up to four classes a day til I thought I was going to faint.
I lost 28lbs in the first month and then it slowed down to 14lbs the next month.
Everyone told me I looked too skiny but I still wasnt satisfied and I still wanted to lose another 14lbs.
When I plateaud I stopped eating and drinking altogether and became anemic with my mum pushing me to the doctors every week with bruises and my hair falling out.
I never really considered myself to have an ED though
Within 1 year I gained back SEVENTY POUNDS and was heavier than when I started in the first place!!!
Sooooooo .... these are just my two cents LOL!

bluefox9er

Hush... Thus is purely and simply a PERSONAL observation/experience. Until the last 2 weeks, I've been regularly eating my Mfp calorie quota for the day, about 1,300 cals a day. I also exercised pretty much about 500-1000 calories worth of exercise with my diet, and occasional year a couple hundred or so of my exercise cals on top of my minimum 1300 food calories. Yes, I dropped weight and also had a fierce appetite but stuck at the numbers I quoted, losing approx 1 to 2 lbs a week, not the 2 lbs Mfp projected, which didn't and still dosn't bother me one little bit simply because I'm eating and exercising regularly as I too have a fairly sedentary job where I drive a lot and walk very little....



HOWEVER.....

All that has changed the last 2 weeks as I have had a recurrence of the most intense and chronic pain I've ever had... Simply insufferable . My doctor put me on a condition of pain killers, anti-depressants that are muscle relxants at low doses and advised me to I'm dearly STOP doing any exercise whatsoever, not even gentle walking. However, the drugs have completely supressed my appetite and even if I'm hungry the mere thought of food made me feel nauseous and sick, so all id eat in a day is maybe a bowl of cereal and a small piece of fruit. As a result, I have dropped 5 lbs in weight in LESS than one week, and whilst the scale worshippers amongst us would be throwing parties and doing cartwheels, I actually felt the complete opposite, and my body is now in a constant state of extreme fatigue and pain and I'm actually FORCING my self to eat as much as possible, completely ignoring mfp's guidelines and calorie counts.

Guess what I am trying to say is that eating nothing or stupidly small amounts of food whether you exercise or not is every bit as dangerous, if not more so thanthe diet people who eat 5000 calories a day without exercising have. Food is fuel . Our body is a Ferrari . If you want to take your Ferrari on a long road trip and only fill it up with a few drops of nasty generic branded gas, you will not only not get anywhere near your destination, but also do incredible damage to your Ferrari ... Whose parts, much like our own body parts need to be maintained and are almost impossible to repair.


Food us important, and so is exercise. The science if making the right combination if the 2 isn't difficult.... But it's insanity to starve wilfully .



Sorry about the rant, but I'd give ANYTHING to regain my appetite back and to exercise again because I know my body is going to hell in a handbasket right now.

Love always ,

Dee

FifiLea

Do you (personally) think that it would be more detrimental to a person's health to eat only 500 calories per day, and no exercise OR to eat 1200 calories per day, and burn off 700 through exercise? (Both would leave a 500 calorie NET for the day.) Assume this person has a typically sedetary lifestyle.

I think it would depend a lot on what you ate. 500 calories of really good nutritious food vs 1200 of rubbish, for example, but both would suck....

That said I'd definitely go with the second idea, but the thought of BOTH of them makes me want to cry! I feel hungry just thinking about it! :sad:

fionarama

i think it strange that you are asking. you know the answers, surely.
I don't think anyone would manage to eat 500 calories a day in either method mentioned, you'd crack and probably completely pig out . Or get run down and sick. Unless you did have some kind of eating disorder.

THCamel

It may not be healthy, wise or recommended...... but I'm sure it has potential to give you scale results fast.

Plus, rapid weight loss can be a great psychological incentive and could mean for many that there more likely to comply with the a more sustainable diet in the long term. (...if they can avoid developing an eating disorder)

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/the-incredible-shrinking-man-546259.html

I'm not condoning or recommending, just sharing a cent or two

hush7hush

i think it strange that you are asking. you know the answers, surely.
I don't think anyone would manage to eat 500 calories a day in either method mentioned, you'd crack and probably completely pig out . Or get run down and sick. Unless you did have some kind of eating disorder.

I think that I clearly stated it was a hypothetical question and wanted opinions on the topic, not your opinion on my character or what I question.

Thank you for your input.

thedodgeruk

i some times do this , 1200 caloires intake and do 600 - 700 exercise.
this does not do me any harm , im male , 37 , 156 lbs

i have tryed doing the sensible thing about 1600 cals a day with no exersise and i put on a lot of weight.

every persons body is different , i think the 1200 is a generail rule

every one knows a female who can eat 2500 a day , with no exersise and still be a size 6 , so i figure its a rough rule

Sherrielsb

Its a testament to will power to be able to stick to only 500 calories, if it isn;t done for long periods of time, I doubt there is an harm. The human body is quite adaptable. I don't think there is anything wrong with it

dgribb11

The whole "starvation mode" has confused me since I joined and no one really had a right answer. I took the advice of someone to just do what I feel good with.

I usually exercise if I want to eat more calories or if I'm going out for dinner or go over the 1200. If I exercise without a planned big meal I only eat them back if I'm hungry and just leave them if I'm not.

Working for me

PinkAndSparkle

I'll respond by providing my personal experience: I was diagnosed with a "hybrid" eating disorder when I was 19 (Anorexia/Bulimia/Purging disorder). After I stopped purging, I thought I was "cured" and ate about the same thing every day for approximately 5 years and maintained my weight within 3 or so pounds. Then last year, BAM! I gained 10 lbs out of nowhere. I began tracking my calories on MFP to see where my baseline was...and it was about 600 calories/day with about 450 calories burned. My metabolism was effed and I am still struggling to get that weight off. My advice, it's not a huge problem to dip below normal once in awhile, but take it from my experience, it's NO good in the long run.

HappyLuna

The answer is neither. Even as a hypnothetical question it is just wrong! Why would you want peoples opinions on this? Your just asking people which way would they like to damage themselves or die?! I would rather talk 'hypothetically' about HEALTHY ways to lose weight rather than give my opinions on how I would like to strave myself to death.

Just my opinion but I just don't get why you would post this if you say you wouldn't do this and this is about you or anyone you know?!

ETA:

I would like to say the good thing that has come out of this post is people feeling they can share there own experiences, and clearly pointing out neither is a good idea. Thank you to those who have been able to share there experiences. I hope they can speak to others x

routerguy666

You can go google for yourself the clinical research on very low calorie diets (less than 800c a day). For obese people, they have a lot of merit in addition to rapid weight loss (which, as mentioned above, is a psychological boost that a lot of people need to get themselves in the right state of mind for an extended period of weight loss).

No one dies, no one's metabolism is permanently damaged, etc, etc, etc.

edit to add: and obviously dieting at any level is not the same as learning how to eat/what to eat/the importance of exercise/creating an overall healthy lifestyle