Stop the Low-Cal Insanity!
Options
Replies
-
EXTREMELY well said - totally agree - people need to realise that it is a lifestyle change and that the body needs to stay healthy.
I have lost around 50 pounds since the end of January - averaging around 1 pound per week - doesn't seem much, but I still enjoyed the food I love - didn't deprive myself of anything - but just made sure that the majority of the choices were healthy and greatly reduced the portions I was having -especially of 'naughty'foods.
I had a net calorie count of around 1400-1500 per day and haven't looked back. Now that I am maintaining, I know that I don't need large portions and because I am not 'reintroducing' foods that were 'naughty' my weight is staying the same.
I haven't been on a 'diet' - I have just changed the way I approach food and embraced a whole healthy lifestyle.
It can be done without depriving!!!!!!
Congrats on your success, and I am glad that you found what works for you. So how many calories a day do you eat now to maintain your weight? How much exercise do you do now as well? I am simply curious, as I am around your age and have 50 more to lose myself.0 -
People tend to want instant results. Low cal diets give an instant result, albeit not long-lasting.
Without knowing the impact of our actions, most people I know would rather see really good and fast results on the scale and "have it over" really quickly where they can "go back to normality". Who wants to go slow for months and months and months with really slow losses? It's just a reflection of the society we live in - that's why drive thrus are so popular, the fast food business is booming, even our TV is "on-demand", we use email, not post. Whatever you want, you get...instantly.
There are many people who just don't care about what they are doing to their body. As long as the number on the scale says what they want it to, they don't care if it's water, fat or muscle. The attitude for many is "the weight's coming down", so that must be healthy.
People expect the weight that took years and years to build up, to come off instantly.0 -
I love these threads.....0
-
I didn't just guess, that was the number that MFP gave me when I set it. However, since MFP gave me that number and I've been following it I have lost over 10kg and drastically increased my fitness levels which has got me thinking it might be time for an adjustment.
I understand the concept of BMR/TDEE and that is what has got me thinking that maybe I should up my calories, however, the numbers I have gotten online for my TDEE seem WAY too high (2,994....really?!) which has confused me.
Not only that but if I struggle to make 1200 net on days I work out because I'm too full to eat, why would upping this number benefit me if I can't reach it? And if I feel great and it's working for me then why should I feel like I have to change anything? If it aint broke then maybe I shouldn't fix it?
I'm not saying this as someone who is totally ignorant, I have learned a lot from the forums on here and my own research, but if it's confusing for me then it is definitely confusing for someone at the start of their journey. All the heresay and conflicting opinions would be enough to make someone give up entirely because it all gets made out to be much more complicated than it really is.
(Also I'm 21, 158cm and 71kg....if you don't use the metric system you will have to figure that out)
you're 5'2" and 156 lbs. your base BMR (for spending all day in bed sleeping) is approx. 1526
your daily BMR/TDEE assuming no exercise and a sedentary activity level is 1831.
if you don't exercise at all and want to lose 1 lb per week, you should eat at 1331.
these numbers should all be recalculated every 5 or 10 lbs in weight change though. but for now 1331 or thereabouts is the number for you to lose 1 lb per week, so although 1200 is a little lower than that, it's not really going to be an issue for you and i think you're fine at that number (a 631 calorie deficit assuming you don't exercise).
however, if you are also exercising, then your BMR/TDEE needs to be adjusted for that. if for example, you're burning 500 calories a day by running/jogging/walking/dancing, then 1200 would definitely be too low for you. that would have you at an 1130 calorie per day deficit, which is too big for somebody your size.
so do you exercise?
Thank you!
Yes, I do exercise. Since I bought my HRM (around a month or a bit more) I have been regularly burning 400-700 calories per workout. I do a mix of cardio and strength training and recently just started lifting heavier. I work out, on average, probably 4-6 times a week.
ETA: I also work in retail so spend a lot of time on my feet. I have myself set at "lightly active" but that's probably changed too with my increased exercise
let' say that you burn 550 calories and you exercise 5 times a week. averaged over the week, thats 390 calories per day.
changing you from sedentary to lightly active as well.
now your daily TDEE is 2488. understanding that this is just an estimate, now 1200 appears way too low for you.
alot of people would say you're not fueling your body enough for the level of activity you have. you could probably eat 1200 for a couple of weeks at a time, but it would be healthier for you to eat at the 1700-1800 level. that would still be 1.5 lbs of weight loss per week so long as you did the exercise religiously. that's the point that MFP community is trying to make... instead of severe restrictions in diet, make moderate restrictions that are sustainable for the rest of your life.
so long as you understand all of this and it's your choice to try and stick to 1200 calories for a limited period of time and you have the willpower to do it and know the risks of possibly binging later as a result of your body wanting more food now, i'm not going to tell you that 1200 is wrong for you.
if you look at my original post, i simply said that 1200 as a number pulled out of thin air bothered me. that 1200 if derived from an understanding of BMR/TDEE is something i don't have an issue with. i think 1200 is too low for you and if you didn't want to go all the way up to 1700-1800 calories per day, then i'd suggest you consider 1500. but if you know the risks and you understand what you're doing, then go for it.0 -
I really wish everyone would just let everyone else get on with what works for them!!
The other point that many people seem to forget about is the other many factors that make people different. Health issues, exercise restrictions, metabolic syndromes, body composition and how much weight the person needs to lose etc.
You could have 2 individuals of the same height and weight. But person 1 has little fat and a large amount of lbm, person 2 could have 40+% fat and little lbm. You would not tell these people to eat the same, would you? Its obvious!! The difference can be 300cals or more for their BMR!
SO...It's not ALL about calories!
Maybe more people need to realise that everyone is different and you cannot tell someone to eat x amount of calories without knowing more about them and their composition.
i know it sounds all warm and fuzzy to say that, but it's not really true.
the BMR/TDEE calculations are pretty close for everyone except the extremely obese and the extremely muscular. so 2 women of a similar age who are 5'4" and 150lbs are going to have pretty similar BMRs even if one of them has more muscle than the other. if not, then there would be no science behind any of this and you could argue that drinking cow pee was just as good a way to go about weight loss as eating at a moderate calorie deficit and exercising.
BTW, i'm not kidding about the cow pee nonsense either.
http://www.ehow.com/way_5723936_cow-urine-weight-loss.html
I checked my BMR using 30% BF and 50% BF. There was over 200 calories difference between them. (MFP calculator was around the 30% level, and my actual BF was closer to 50%.
I also would ride my stationary bike for an hour and MFP would say I burned 700-800 calories. I started using a HRM and it showed me burning around 300 calories for that hour.
That made a difference of 600-700 calories per day. That is quite a large discrepancy. And the scale supports it. Now my frustration level is much lower, knowing that I am eating at the right level, and losing at the rate I should be.
i don't trust the MFP numbers on exercise. some are way off. i do all of my own calculations for BMR and everything else. i recognize that these online estimators are all giving me estimates. if my numbers are off by 200, that's only 10% for me and an acceptable error because i build pessimism into my calculations.
if you can get more exact numbers, great. i would encourage everyone to inspect their numbers and results with a critical eye and adjust accordingly. this is why i do my real tracking of everything in a spreadsheet. i can play around with the numbers however i see fit. for people not willing to do that, MFP gives them something "close enough" so that they can start their weight loss journey.
but my point isn't that online estimators are 100% accurate for everyone, it's that this whole "we are all different, what works for one person might not work for somebody else" excuse is a fallacy.
The "we are all different" speech is made because our BMRs can differ drastically between 2 people. A 25 yo woman who is 5'3" and weighs 155 pounds and has only 10% body fat, because she is a powerlifter and spends hours a day in the gym, will have a BMR that is quite different from a 50 yo woman, same height and weight, but is sedentary and has a 60% BF. And it will be several hundreds of calories difference, not simply 2 or 3%. The powerlifter may need 3000 cals per day to retain and build her muscle mass, whereas the other woman may maintain on only 1500 cals per day. If she wants to lose 1 pound per week, she would need to consume 500 less calories per day, putting her at 1000 cals. Of course she could go to the gym every day for a couple of hours and burn 500 calories, but she would still need to eat at only 1500 cals a day to lose 1 pound per week. She might decide that eating less is a better option for her, due to time restraints, and medical issues.0 -
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.
AMEN! I don't know why people are so bothered about how other people want to lose weight. Do you and let me do me.0 -
I don't think people understand BMR and TDEE. That seems to be a trend I have noticed among the super low cal group.0
-
People tend to want instant results. Low cal diets give an instant result, albeit not long-lasting.
Without knowing the impact of our actions, most people I know would rather see really good and fast results on the scale and "have it over" really quickly where they can "go back to normality". Who wants to go slow for months and months and months with really slow losses? It's just a reflection of the society we live in - that's why drive thrus are so popular, the fast food business is booming, even our TV is "on-demand", we use email, not post. Whatever you want, you get...instantly.
There are many people who just don't care about what they are doing to their body. As long as the number on the scale says what they want it to, they don't care if it's water, fat or muscle. The attitude for many is "the weight's coming down", so that must be healthy.
People expect the weight that took years and years to build up, to come off instantly.
Sad but true in many cases. I'm not even sure weight should be one of the top 3 priorities. Steve Troutman said something not too long ago that stuck in my head. I can't find the quote so I'm paraphrasing but it went something like, don't focus on weight. Focus on health, performance, funtionality and physique. If these things are optimized, weight will settle where it should. Wisdom!0 -
And what really aggravates the heck out of me is when someone comes on saying that 1200 is 'starving yourself and your brain will die at that level' and that they would 'chew their arm off if they ate so little', etc. Then you check their diaries and they average around 1200-1300 per day, and part of those calories are beer. SMH. Seriously, I have seen this.0
-
Focus on health, performance, functionality and physique. If these things are optimized, weight will settle where it should. Wisdom!
Very much agree with this, especially physical fitness and long-term health.0 -
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 am also short, so if i was to eat 2000 calories, i would be putting on weight, not losing it. i'm slowly losing weight at 1200, so i think that's about right for me. everyone is different and it's important for people to realise this!0 -
I've been at 1200, eat back most of my exercise calories and i'm losing. Slower than I'd like, but I realized this week while I was wokring out 4-5 days a week I wasn't hitting the calorie burn MFP had set for me. I was burning 350-400 two or three of those days. I'm going to increase my exercise to meet teh MFP goal- and hope to get back to 1-2 lbs a week.0
-
What's a flapjack?
A very nice food, made of oats, sometimes fruit/honey.
There's a good recipe here: http://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/1205637/flapjack
Funny how different areas have different names for things. A flapjack in West Virginia is a pancake. LOL0 -
The "we are all different" speech is made because our BMRs can differ drastically between 2 people. A 25 yo woman who is 5'3" and weighs 155 pounds and has only 10% body fat, because she is a powerlifter and spends hours a day in the gym, will have a BMR that is quite different from a 50 yo woman, same height and weight, but is sedentary and has a 60% BF. And it will be several hundreds of calories difference, not simply 2 or 3%. The powerlifter may need 3000 cals per day to retain and build her muscle mass, whereas the other woman may maintain on only 1500 cals per day. If she wants to lose 1 pound per week, she would need to consume 500 less calories per day, putting her at 1000 cals. Of course she could go to the gym every day for a couple of hours and burn 500 calories, but she would still need to eat at only 1500 cals a day to lose 1 pound per week. She might decide that eating less is a better option for her, due to time restraints, and medical issues.
You're sort of blending two concepts together... those being BMR and TDEE.
But your point remains... BMR can vary quite a bit across populations of matched age, height, and weight. The variance can be as much as 15% +/- the average. So from highest to lowest you might see a 30% variance, which is pretty substantial.0 -
Oh, and someone asked who Steve is. That be me.
0 -
Thank you for your post. My calorie goal on MFP is 1550, but I exercise hard. I try not to let my net calories go under 1200 which means some days I'm over 2000 cal. I feel almost guilty about this when I see how low others are but I feel like its the healthy option for me. I have a sister that under ate due to illness for over a year and seen the effects of malnutrition. Not pretty. Her skin is in bad shape and her hair is thin. And she gained weight fast as soon as she started eating more.0
-
Yes...and here is the kicker..I was doing 1200...and losing...BUT I was hungry, irritated, deprived, unhappy...and so generally I was doing without or exercising just so I could eat back some calories...I found I was happy around 1800
and then I went back to my settings and I was set up to lose 2lbs a week...wait a minute..what's the rush? I am in this for the long haul and while I would like to have that bikini body yesterday...I want that bikini body forever...so...stop the train.
I reset to 1lb a week and voila...I'm at 1750 cals, right where I was happy before..and on exercise days...I'm laughin'
But I swear, I went on my first binge in at least ten years a couple nights ago...and I think it was a combination of things, one of them being deprivation...so NO MORE
I looked at somebody's food diary the other day...she had several days around 800...she blamed it on feeling sick...but I think she was sick because before that she had several days at around 1000...she didn't know what she was sick from..she just felt "blah"
Being malnourished will make you feel blah.
Great post!0 -
How can a "binge" be blamed on deprivation? To binge is not some uncontrollable thing that you just can't physically stop yourself from doing, right? It's a decision....0
-
Oh, and someone asked who Steve is. That be me.
Hey man! Did I do a reasonably accurate job of paraphrasing you above?0 -
The "we are all different" speech is made because our BMRs can differ drastically between 2 people. A 25 yo woman who is 5'3" and weighs 155 pounds and has only 10% body fat, because she is a powerlifter and spends hours a day in the gym, will have a BMR that is quite different from a 50 yo woman, same height and weight, but is sedentary and has a 60% BF. And it will be several hundreds of calories difference, not simply 2 or 3%. The powerlifter may need 3000 cals per day to retain and build her muscle mass, whereas the other woman may maintain on only 1500 cals per day. If she wants to lose 1 pound per week, she would need to consume 500 less calories per day, putting her at 1000 cals. Of course she could go to the gym every day for a couple of hours and burn 500 calories, but she would still need to eat at only 1500 cals a day to lose 1 pound per week. She might decide that eating less is a better option for her, due to time restraints, and medical issues.
60% BF is in the area where none of the BMR formulas work. that's extremely obese.
so that's not a a good example to prove your point.
however, using the Katch-MacArdle equation shows that for most people, the BMR numbers are pretty close.
155lb woman.
10% BF --> 1739
20% BF --> 1587
30% BF --> 1435
that's +/- 9% from the 20% BF number0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 991 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions