It makes me sad...

astronomicals

... to see all the people who suffer through low calorie diets.

In the end you will destroy your metabolism and do severe damage to your health. The most unfortunate part is that almost everyone will gain all the weight back because of how it was lost. If done correctly, you could have probably lost FAT at nearly the same pace, while retaining your muscle and keeping your metabolism up.

After these people hit their goal weights, and shift their diet, they gain all the weight back and usually dont try again. It saddens me that they are so excited as the weight comes off and they have no idea the damage they are doing and what the ultimate outcome will be... All that hard work and suffering and the end result will be you'll be just as fat and even less healthy than before.

I guess the other alternative is they continue the diet forever and become anorexic.

Sometimes all I can do is shake my head because people just don't listen.

ETA: I'm talking about people eating at 6-7 calories (or less) per pound of body weight between the ages of 20-40 while also doing exercise (and not eating said calories)

for example , the 27 year old 200# girl eating 1200-1400 calories

These are not exact ranges... they are examples

quirkytizzy

1) This is true.

2) I appreciate the sentiment.

3) Be prepared for hordes of low-calorie dieters to charge in and start defending their low calorie diet.

CristinaL1983

If you have any peer reviewed studies to support what you're saying that would be awesome. Otherwise, you just seem to be trolling.

lilpoindexter

PREACH IT MY BROTHA...
Tracking what I eat is one of the best thing I've ever done. How can you expect the changes to last a lifetime, if you are eating in a way you can keep up for the rest of your life?

quirkytizzy

If you have any peer reviewed studies to support what you're saying that would be awesome. Otherwise, you just seem to be trolling.

I'm not sure what specific low calorie number he's talking about, but for simplicitys sake, we can argue below MFP's minimum of 1200. (Which often isn't enough, but it's a lowball, minimum number.)

One doesn't need peer reviewed studies to know that undereating can cause a host of physical and mental problems - gone on long enough, death.

imchicbad

If you have any peer reviewed studies to support what you're saying that would be awesome. Otherwise, you just seem to be trolling.

^ oh please!!! get real and get out of town I AM THE PROOF. now study that ish

Sabine_Stroehm

If you have any peer reviewed studies to support what you're saying that would be awesome. Otherwise, you just seem to be trolling.

Is it trolling to post a commonly held belief?

CLFrancois

Tiredofbeingfat13

^^^^lmmfaooo

BusyRaeNOTBusty

http://body-improvements.com/resources/eat/#starvationmode

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html


And most importantly:

Food is yummy.

VelociMama

Very few people who need to hear this are going to really listen. Sadly, many people just measure their success by the number on the scale and not anything else. They don't care to learn anything else either.

Let it go and move on to help those who are willing to listen and learn. It'll save your own sanity.

Also, agree with BusyLady. Food is yummy!

RoadsterGirlie

I'm proof as well. I never went lower than 1400 to 1500 and got to the bottom of my weight range. Of course, I also discovered I'm small boned, now that some are partially visible. It could be genetics, but it could also be smart planning and following a healthy diet. I've had no problem maintaining that loss for almost two years.

I now maintain on 2100 calories a day or thereabouts, so it's pretty easy. I just make better food choices as opposed to going without.

quirkytizzy

Curse you! I have that same gif and was saving it to use sometime! But now I can't cuz you made it cool first! :sad:

triciab79

Everyone is different. I went low cal to lose and I had no issue adjusting that number back up to maintain. My metabolism didn't suffer any damage. I have seen studies that show that even after months of controlled fasting the metabolism is only reduced by about 180 calories a day in an overweight individual so your advise may be right for you but not for everyone.

Willowana

AMEN!! 1200 is insufficient for anyone above the age of what....12? I don't need peer reviewed studies. I have my own body to tell me. At 1200 calories, I lost a little water weight and then promptly hit a plateau for weeks. I went to 1400 and started losing .2 one week, .4 the next. I went to 1600 and I lost 3 lbs. last week.

So there's your peer reviewed study. I'm your peer, and I reviewed it.

LavenderBouquet

1) This is true.

2) I appreciate the sentiment.

3) Be prepared for hordes of low-calorie dieters to charge in and start defending their low calorie diet.

This ^

astronomicals

If you have any peer reviewed studies to support what you're saying that would be awesome. Otherwise, you just seem to be trolling.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12675647

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/permanent-metabolic-damage-qa.html

Or watch this video/rant by Dr. Layne Norton

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHHzie6XRGk


Nearly all the peer reviewed studies of VLCD ( very low calorie diets) are done with the very obese. The reasoning is that they are the only group where then ends justify the means. There isn't studies of normal overweight people because its foolish and there isn't even a point of doing a study.

If you've ever read and studies you'd realize that a large majority of them have all sorts of poorly controlled variables and the results are often biased. Also, a majority of the tests done are never done on humans. Getting humans to follow a specific diet and get reliable results is way easier said than done. In reality, such studies are slim to none. People like you act as if there has been a study on everything. This isn't Nazi Germany. We don't do torturous studies just to disprove ridiculous theories. The research will never be done. Ever.

One of our best resources is what we've seen within the population of the fitness world. That's the essence of "bro science". We don't need peer reviewed studies because the evidence is all around us. People do these types of diets and and have been bouncing back for years. The damage you've done won't result in a tattoo on your forehead that says "less healthy than before". There are plenty of obvious cases of metabolic damage that have been seen but the exact science behind it isn't concrete.

I'm not here to spoon feed you. It's much harder to debate the existence of a fact than it is for you to just use silly attacks to discredit it. To be honest, I don't care if you become anorexic. It's still sad though.

People defend their VLCD like many researchers defend their claims. In the face of opposition people protect their opinions like it was their child. Many people would rather do something wrong than admit they're wrong. At the end of the day you have to choose who you wish to believe.

Mock_Turtle

Can you please specify how big of a deficit you're talking about?

1000 cals/day deficit is a pretty common, but aggressive plan. I don't think there are many out there advocating going much beyond that.

dixiewhiskey

I agree.

For once, I have to say this is one of your better posts I've seen recently. There is a lot of truth to what you are saying.

nokanjaijo

If you have any peer reviewed studies to support what you're saying that would be awesome. Otherwise, you just seem to be trolling.

Who needs science? Sixty-two thousand four hundred repetitions make one truth.

dixiewhiskey

If you have any peer reviewed studies to support what you're saying that would be awesome. Otherwise, you just seem to be trolling.

You're joking right?