Stop the Low-Cal Insanity!

BoatReadyBody

I am currently on a 1200 cal diet and no I dont eat rabbit food, and no Im not hungry. I dont judge anyone out there and how they chose to do their diets. I dont know whats going on in anyone elses life, as well as noone knows anythnig about mine. So if someone wants to be too quick to judge and delete me as a friend, then it would be their loss not mine. If they cared enough to be supportive they would stay around and find out that I cant work out and am under a doctors care for the last 8 months, and am waiting for surgery. Please dont judge someone just based off their calorie intake.

Amen to that.. I think some should mind their own untill asked for advice. I mean A lot of mfps get on to others for their low cal diets. Call it a eating disorder and make quick judegments but is not a high cal diet which got most of us here a e.d? Just the other way. So please be easy when casting stones.

JoniBologna

Life of an MPF'er:

1. Sign up
2. Eat as little as possible while posting a thread asking if it's ok to eat as little as possible.
3. Get miserable and stop losing weight.
4. Actually read the forums and decide to up calories to a reasonable level.
5. Start losing weight.
6. Comment on similar threads in forums to try and stop newbies eating as little as possible.

Too true. Every single person who is getting defensive about this is A) Probably eating too few calories and/or A newbie.

mgobluetx12

I am currently on a 1200 cal diet and no I dont eat rabbit food, and no Im not hungry. I dont judge anyone out there and how they chose to do their diets. I dont know whats going on in anyone elses life, as well as noone knows anythnig about mine. So if someone wants to be too quick to judge and delete me as a friend, then it would be their loss not mine. If they cared enough to be supportive they would stay around and find out that I cant work out and am under a doctors care for the last 8 months, and am waiting for surgery. Please dont judge someone just based off their calorie intake.

^This. I'm eating at TDEE- 50%. It's working for me and I'm not hungry and I have the energy to work out 4-5 times a week. If I stop losing, I'll increase my cals and then take it from there. Point is...It's working for me and my doctor approves this. Why does anyone else care?

Lilphoenix

I don't understand the low cal craze either. I'm 5'3" tall and just over 200 and my calorie target is 1660. Why would anyone want to eat half of that?

I think it has to do with impatience more than anything. Most people just starting out want all the fat gone NOW, and they don't think about what they're doing to get there.

I would agree that for some people, that's true. For myself, it's a mental obstacle. A lot of people, men and women, have an issue of control over food, and it's not impatience, it's fear-driven. I still panic when I hit over the 1000 during the day, and have to take a moment to chill and get over it before I hit the gym too much or stop eating. It's definitely not a choice, I mean, I've been eating near 1400 for the past couple days, and I have WAY more energy then when I was at 700-800 a day. But I definitely see what point your making, I just wanted to add my two cents that it's not the same for some

catrinawaters

and I find it annoying how ppl eating 2000 and losing come and try to ¨teach¨ people like if they were a fitness guru.

Yes I eat 1200 cal a day, yes im a shorty, and no i wont eat more than that cause I stop losing thank u.

If you eat 2000 and you lose, GREAT for you :drinker: , if I eat 1200 and lose, GREAT for me :drinker: . What works for you doesnt work for me and viceversa. To each their own, do your thing and stop worrying/complaining about what other people do.

I absolutely agree. Let's not criticize one another, but support each other on our weight loss quest. What works well for one may not work as well for somebody else.

ChildrenCryinNCoffee

BUMP---saving this! Great post--thanks! :0)

JanaCanada

Here is the danger of all the Eat More people telling everyone what they should do.

There are numerous people struggling to lose weight on here. They are told that their BMR is like 1800 and their TDEE is like 2500 so they should be eating like 2200 per day.
Other people tell them that they MUST eat back their exercise calories.
So they ride their stationary bike for an hour and MFP tells them they burned 700 calories. Yippee! They now have 2900 calories they can eat per day! They think that sounds like way too many calories, so they only eat 2400 calories per day. That should give them an extra 1 pound loss per week, right??
After the first week or 2 of extra water weight they lose, they stop losing and even start gaining. People tell them they need to add weight training, so they go to the gym a couple days a week and lift a few weights. Ok, now when they gain weight, people can tell them that it isn't fat they are gaining, it is muscle. That is a good thing.
Other people tell them that since they are 'exercising' so much, that they now need to eat even more. So they do. And they continue to gain 'muscle'. Meanwhile, 3 months have passed and they have not lost 1 pound of the 80 pounds of fat they needed to lose.

They now get discouraged and decide that 'diets don't work for them' and quit altogether.

But hey, they have at least taught themselves how to eat 3000 calories per day so they won't go into 'starvation mode' and lose all their LBM!


Good job Gurus, good job!

So perhaps that is a little bit of an exaggeration, but hopefully you see my point. Seriously, right now I am watching several women who are getting so discouraged because they are eating around 1700-1800 cals per day and not losing any weight at all. The BMR calculators give them way too high of a number to start with and are convinced they have a TDEE of 2500. Then the MFP exercise calculators give them a number two times the number of calories they are actually burning, so they can't understand why they aren't losing weight. Now they have people 20 years younger than they are, who spend hours a day in the gym, telling them that they just need to eat more, don't worry you are gaining muscle not fat, just wait, give it more time and you will start losing, etc.
I feel horrible for these people because I understand their frustration.

If someone has 50 pounds of fat to lose, losing at 1-2 pounds per week is completely safe and healthy. Whatever calorie level puts you losing at that amount, and you are getting the right amount of nutrients where you are not starving all day and have zero energy, then eat at that amount. There is no magic number. Whatever number is working for you, is the right number. If after the first 2 weeks you stop losing and don't lose for a month, then you are eating too many calories.
PLEASE note that I am not directing this towards someone already at a healthy weight. This is for those who have a lot to lose. I also do not condone calories lower than 800 per day for anyone, long term. The CDC states that 800 is the minimum calories for most women and 900 for most men, to get in the proper nutrients and lose weight safely. AGAIN, I am not saying that everyone should eat at that low of a level, but if an overweight person is eating that low for the purpose of treating obesity, then leave them alone and let them and their doctor worry about it.

That is a bit of an exaggeration.

1. The outcome of the person "rage-quitting" because they gained all this muscle in the process of all this exercise they are doing is a billion times better than the person "rage-quitting" after spending months conditioning their body to get used to excessively low calories with some potential permanent impact to their metabolism because their body has started eating away at muscle.
2. Your body can only "chip away" at fat so fast, especially when you start losing weight and you don't have much more fat left to lose. It might work well to start off with, but it will all come crashing down eventually.

Excessively low calorie diets are absolute madness, because once you stop "losing", it is a difficult process to get your metabolism to actually "fire up" again. As another poster pointed out earlier - if she eats at 1500 calories, she gains weight - this is a sure sign of a metabolism that has slowed down (probably due to prolonged periods on low calorie diets). That's why people can be "skinny fat" - high % body fat with low weight, because of lack of LBM. THAT's what low cal diets cause. Less muscle means slower metabolism.

Another major problem with these low calorie diets is that once people have lost the weight, what then? How do you suddenly survive - the moment you start eating what a "normal" person should eat, you will simply balloon again and you are forever trapped in this vicious cycle. Low calorie diets are almost like self-fulfilling prophecies - the less you eat, the less your body can burn, the less you should eat, therefore proving that low cal diets "work". But it's just an endless trap that's really difficult to get out of.

^^THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

skygoddess86

So many people here have chronically restricted calories for so long their adjusted RMR and TDEE is so far from baseline. Then when they make use of prediction formulas, their decreased energy needs are so far off they start to believe that their current intake is what they truly need. Although it's true those formulas may be inaccurate, by people sabotaging their endocrine system, they're making it unnecessarily more difficult and stressful than needed.

I never ate low before i ate anywhere from 1500 to 1900 cals so your theory is not correct in my case. I also have bradycardia ( low resting heartrate 38-40 due to medication.

So again there are reasons for people eating low and it really should not be of anyone elses concern.

Then exclude yourself from the conversation and exit.

Why so rude?

jeleclekat

I 100% agree and see your point...but when you have lived for a very long time on a low calorie diet it can be very difficult to adjust to eating more than you're used to. Especially if you dont feel hungry, which i guess is a result of your body being used ot getting the amounts that it does. Just like some people find it difficult adjusting to diets that have less calories than they are used to, it can similarly be as hard the opposite way

I am not by any means saying that very low calories diets are healthy though, or right for everybody

I have to agree with you although I understand the op advice. My MFP calorie target is 1650. I usually get in 1100 to 1400. I'm just not hungry and don't want to stuff myself just to get the 1650. If I do, I feel miserable.

rawhidenadz

We’ll assume she needs 1 gram of protein for every pound of lean body mass. Some experts recommend more, some less, but it’s a good middle number to work with. She has 140 pounds of LBM, so she needs 140 grams of protein. Eat too much less than this, and you risk losing muscle. Not good. Since 1 gram of protein is 4 calories, she needs 560 calories of protein every day.

I'm confused....

I recently learned in a nutrition class that the RDA for protein in an average person is 0.8 grams per KILOGRAM and 1 to 1.5 grams per KILOGRAM for an athlete, so where is the 1 gram for every POUND coming from? Multiplying by pounds leads to a protein intake of more than twice the RDA. Calculating using the RDA guidelines, that gives a 140 pound "average" person a protein range of 50 to 95 grams daily (dividing 140 by 2.2 to get 63 kg and multiplying that times 0.8 and 1.5). So a 140 pound woman doesn't NEED 140 grams and 560 calories of protein daily..... Can anyone clarify what I'm missing here????

If you're eating at a deficit you need more protein than if you're maintaining.

Edit: and people who are exercising regularly need even more than that.

whitelaurel

Everybody's suddenly a health professional once they've been on a weight loss website for a few months...

geebusuk

Less muscle means slower metabolism.

But current research suggests not by a massive amount - maybe 6 calories per of muscle. So an extra 34lb of muscle would be 'equalled out' by having a three-digestive-biscuits snack! (And of course an extra 34lb of muscle on a 120lb is actually a massive amount, we're more likely talking one biscuit a day .)

Another major problem with these low calorie diets is that once people have lost the weight, what then? How do you suddenly survive - the moment you start eating what a "normal" person should eat, you will simply balloon again and you are forever trapped in this vicious cycle.

You slowly bring calories up, maybe doing a bit more exercise too?
Seems to work fine for a lot of people.

likemeinvisible

:flowerforyou:

and I find it annoying how ppl eating 2000 and losing come and try to ¨teach¨ people like if they were a fitness guru.

Yes I eat 1200 cal a day, yes im a shorty, and no i wont eat more than that cause I stop losing thank u.

If you eat 2000 and you lose, GREAT for you :drinker: , if I eat 1200 and lose, GREAT for me :drinker: . What works for you doesnt work for me and viceversa. To each their own, do your thing and stop worrying/complaining about what other people do.

:flowerforyou:

:flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:
Not all of us have 140lbs of lean mass to maintain, so the numbers in the OP won't work for everyone.

Helloitsdan

Life of an MPF'er:

1. Sign up
2. Eat as little as possible while posting a thread asking if it's ok to eat as little as possible.
3. Get miserable and stop losing weight.
4. Actually read the forums and decide to up calories to a reasonable level.
5. Start losing weight.
6. Comment on similar threads in forums to try and stop newbies eating as little as possible.

Too true. Every single person who is getting defensive about this is A) Probably eating too few calories and/or A newbie.

#truth

ironanimal

:flowerforyou:

and I find it annoying how ppl eating 2000 and losing come and try to ¨teach¨ people like if they were a fitness guru.

Yes I eat 1200 cal a day, yes im a shorty, and no i wont eat more than that cause I stop losing thank u.

If you eat 2000 and you lose, GREAT for you :drinker: , if I eat 1200 and lose, GREAT for me :drinker: . What works for you doesnt work for me and viceversa. To each their own, do your thing and stop worrying/complaining about what other people do.

:flowerforyou:

:flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:
Not all of us have 140lbs of lean mass to maintain, so the numbers in the OP won't work for everyone.

This is why you work out your own estimates for your own body...

stroutman81

Take a 120 lb woman.

This would put her at around 1800 for maintenance.

A reasonable deficit might be 35% off of maintenance.

This makes no sense. Unless this 120 woman wants to lose like 50 pounds, why the hell would she be on a 35% off maintenance deficit? Insane.

1) When I'm working with someone who's lean wanting to get leaner, the deficit isn't in place, constant, for long spans of time. I pretty much exclusively use a cyclic approach at this stage in the game.

2) This was just ONE example I used in an article to show opposing ends of a giant spectrum. I think you're reading into the numbers a bit much. I don't handle any one client's nutrition exactly the same.

3) Percentages are relative metrics. Not absolute. We can't really say a 35% deficit is "insane." Especially not without knowing more..

stroutman81

I understand where you are coming from and can see that you are experienced in the field, however I cannot accept that its just about weight and a multiplier.
Of course you will get results when putting the body in a state that requires change.
The formulas I tend to use adds in Age, height, weight, body fat and activity.

If I did simple multiplier for myself id be eating small children at work and I think thats where this conversation started.
Its about finding that reasonable deficit.

Different strokes I suppose. My calorie recommendations are a living, breathing process that evolves and adjusts on the fly based on biofeedback. Which is why I take a very loose, educated guess at TDEE. In fact, I'll scale the estimated maintenance of 14-16 x bw based on things like age, body fat %, degree of previous weight loss, activity factors, etc. Beyond that though, I simply don't see a need in making it more complex than that.

If you choose to do so, that's perfectly fine.

It's just that I prefer to focus my efforts on the process over anything else.

There are many ways to skin this cat.

jodi41086

Great post. I recently had to delete two people who were posting crazy nonsense about eating 700 calories and they think they may be anorexic. I'm sitting here like "uh yall need to get it together"

DebbieLyn63

No matter what you punch in for your activity level or age or weight etc, If you put down that you would like to lose 2 pounds a week, MFP sets 1200 as your calories intake

u joking? this isnt true

if you put in 2 pound per week loss, MFP will take 1000 calories off of your estimated BMR plus whatever exercise calories you would burn at the activity level you entered. Most people at sedentary or lightly active do not have a number higher than 2200, so taking off 1000 would put you at or below 1200 per day. Since MFP won't suggest lower than 1200, it raises the minimum up to that number.
For very active/muscular people, the number would be above 1200. But then they don't usually shoot for 2 pound loss per week.

My base number is only around 1600 without exercise, so a 2 pound loss would put me at 600 calories. MFP is not about to tell me to eat that many calories a day, for fear of lawsuits