Isn't the minimum calorie limit different for everybody?

kimberliiw

I would guess also that caloric needs aren't totally linear based on weight. Everybody has the same organs that are going to need basically the same calories to function regardless of their weight... brain, heart, intestines, liver, etc. So I think everyone is going to start with a base amount of calories needed for operation and then it will go up from there.

And of course there's the fact that everyone's metabolism is different. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that as a 5'2" menopausal woman that I can actually lose weight eating 1350 calories plus. All my life I've heard a woman should eat 1200 cals a day to lose weight.

angiechimpanzee

So I get what you're saying, but I think it goes beyond deficit size and as it gets lower and lower the real danger is missing out on nutrient needs.

I would imagine a smaller person would have smaller nutrient needs

Perhaps, but the question is really, "Are those nutrient needs still met by the 800 calorie diet or not?" The smaller person likely has fewer nutrient needs, but is it enough to maintain the same calorie deficit as the larger person without sacrificing health and risking malnutrition? I suspect that it's not. There is a certain minimum level of nutrition that is needed by a person, and 800 calories is extremely limiting even for a small person.

I'd be interested to see if anyone has really looked at this as well, scientifically.

Its possible to eat 600 calories a day while getting 20g of fiber, 60g protein, and a ridiculous amount of vitamins & minerals if you choose the right foods & eat mostly clean. Adequate nutrition isn't really an issue if you plan well.

Bob314159

Its one of the standard things that gets copied and pasted everywhere, so it must be true.

Yeah it makes no sense that this magic number applies to every female and 1600 (I think) for all males - I think I heard it was an arbitrary number to make sure you get your vitamins, but thats equally crazy,

FitFabFlirty92

Its possible to eat 600 calories a day while getting 20g of fiber, 60g protein, and a ridiculous amount of vitamins & minerals if you choose the right foods & eat mostly clean. Adequate nutrition isn't really an issue if you plan well.

But why would you WANT to though? Let's say you worked really hard, did your research, and found a way to eat 600 calories a day and get all your nutrients (which by the way is impossible in my opinion, but to each their own). How would that even make sense? Why wouldn't you pick a more sensible calorie amount (doesn't have to be 1200, depends on your body and activity level), and go from there. Why force yourself to eat the minimal amount of food possible to get to your goals?

TinGirl314

I think you're looking at it backwards.
Consider 1200 the unmovable number and look at how little a difference height makes in a daily calorie need.
If 1,200 is your base then height from 4'-6ft changes but it's only by a couple hundred calories.

I don't know if I'm making any sense to everyone else, but it makes sense to me.

geekyjock76

Why are you even pursuing the minimum calorie limit in the first place? If you get the same fat loss results, while eating the maximal amount of calories, you will reduce the alterations to your endocrine system - further decline in lean body mas, RMR, leptin concentration levels, etc. - and plateau far later. Lastly, we have 100s of posts here daily about people freaking out when they contemplate going back to maintenance because they created too large of a deficit.

EnchantedEvening

Let's use cars as an analogy. I hope this helps you understand what we're trying to tell you.

I need to drive 100 miles.

In an SUV, I would probably need about 10 gallons of gas.

In a Ford Focus, I would need about 4 gallons of gas.

Now, just because I have a tiny, little, Smart Car, that doesn't mean I can fill up with one gallon of gas simply because it's tiny. There aren't any cars that get 100 mpg on the highway. (For the sake of the analogy, I'm not counting hybrids and electrics. Bodies are bodies are bodies; no hybrids that I know of.)

1200 calories is that minimum amount for us to "run", just as 3 gallons of gas is probably the absolute minimum amount for a car to run 100 miles, since some of the most fuel-efficient cars can get 40 mpg. Fill up with only one or two gallons, and you end up stranded on the side of the road waiting for AAA.

EnchantedEvening

Now, that said, extremely obese people can run at a large deficit, even under 1200, but it is always, ALWAYS under the supervision of a doctor. It is not meant to be long-term. It's there to jump-start someone who needs to take off 200 pounds right freaking now. You also see it after bariatric surgery, when someone is eating mostly liquids. A doctor supervises to ensure they're still getting enough nutrients. Screw that up, and the doctor puts you right back up to 1200 or more so you don't crash.

I don't know a single doctor worth their salt who would put a 5'2", 125-pound woman on that diet. Most doctors would recommend you aim to lose a half-pound per week, not two. Even with a small frame, your goal range should be 105 - 124. With a medium frame, it's 115 - 129. With a large frame, it's 125 - 140. At this point, I'd focus on slow loss and building muscle. Eat too few calories, and your body will start consuming muscle.

sarahisme18

Here's an answer nobody has given yet.....


Because it has been tried... and tried... and tried again.... and every single time it did not work in the long-term.


That's why.

Bob314159

Here's an answer nobody has given yet.....


Because it has been tried... and tried... and tried again.... and every single time it did not work in the long-term.


That's why.

Please provide documented sources for this statement

katevarner

You say it is starvation but I felt perfectly fine after lunch i didnt feel hungry still and I was full after dinner my dinner alone was about 3 cups of food thats alot of food. Just because what i ate was low in calories you tell me its starvation but the corn and the green beans barely have calories. I know that i have not eaten enough calories today which is why i said i need to go in here to find a snack to bring it up. But what i am saying is that when you tend to eat healthy or cut out bread your calories go way down. Trust me if i ate what i normally would which would have been a sandwich for lunch and pasta or pizza or some kind of bread the calories would have been way more than that.

Starvation doesn't mean you feel hungry. As it's used by MFP, it means that your body starts eating itself (not fat, but lean body mass, including your organs) because there is not enough food to feed it. It doesn't happen just because you go under 1200 calories one day, but you are essentially fasting. And you are eating almost no protein, which means that you will not hold onto your muscle because your body will burn it before fat as close to goal as you are.

Please eat something.

Verity1111

The deficit is an estimate. Unless you had a dr run a BMR test on you by testing your oxygen levels at rest, you should probably not go under 1200, just in case it is your BMR. Just my opinion.

jessienmiller

Well thank you all for your advice, i seen this post and had to comment on it because i always wondered the same thing! And i do eat but i only eat when i am hungry. That is why i do not eat breakfast beacuse if i do i would be hungry all day and i am never hungry in the mornings . There are some days where i eat like double what i normally do i would say 1 or 2 a week but for the most part around 1200 some days even lower if i am extremly busy or just not hungry! Like today i fixed a huge dinner one that i normally would eat until i am stuffed but couldnt even eat half of what was on my plate because i was full so i am sitting at around 750-800 cals today. When i am hungry i do eat though!