Stalled after raising my calorie from 1200

BurtHuttz

I'll save you some time. There aren't any. The study's that show those results are ones that deal with VLCD's. Very low calorie diet (VLCD) is a diet with very or extremely low daily food energy consumption. It is defined as a diet of 800 kilocalories (3,300 kJ) per day or less.

So, 1200 is fine.

Let it be known that this man considers the difference between "perfectly fine" and "dangerously unhealthy" to be a bagel with cream cheese.

CristinaL1983

I'm losing weight eating 1200 calories per day. I have been using MFP since January 17. I have not lost any lean muscle (confirmed by DEXA), I'm happy with my strength gains and rate of fat loss.

I specifically chose 1200 because, while I could lose weight eating more, I have been trying to lose this last bit of weight for a while and found that on higher calories with a slower rate of loss, I have a habit of falling off the wagon (with regard to calorie counting, tracking and weighing food, etc...). With a more restrictive diet and greater rate of loss each week, I can stick to it.

At the end of the day, whether you can stick with what you're doing and whether it's getting you to the body composition you desire is the most important thing. For some people, sticking with a more restrictive diet leads to failure while for others, losing more slowly leads to failure. You are going to have to decide what's going to help you the most.

As far as things like "starvation mode" and "metabolic damage" they generally refer to the natural lowering of your total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) with ANY level of calorie restriction. The longer and more drastic the calorie restriction, the more your TDEE will lower. The greatest measured drop (adjusted for changes in total body mass) was 10%, measured using the Minnesota Starvation Experiment back in the 40s/50s when lean men were starved to below essential body fat percentages. This change has been shown in studies to correct itself within days-weeks of starting to eat normally. For me, my TDEE is around 2200 (obviously changes based on the day). Over the past several months, I have experienced an increase in my TDEE (related to an increase in my activity) but no measured drop. [When I calculate my TDEE based on calories taken in and weight lost, there is no difference from the beginning of my time on MFP and now.] Once I get to maintenance, I will slowly increase my calories until I hit my TDEE. I'm certainly not going to live on 1200 calories forever.

With a diet high in protein and strength training, studies have shown that lean body mass can be maintained even on very low calorie diets (VLCD, defined as 40% of TDEE or commonly referred to as 800 calories or less).

No matter what, if you change something, especially an increase in calories or an increase in strength training, you will need to wait 4-6 weeks to see results. In general, with either of those, your body will retain more water which will increase your weight, after 4-6 weeks, you should see fat loss equaling the increased water retention and then start seeing fat loss again (scale-wise, measurements could still be changing throughout that time).

As with pretty much everything you do, you need to figure out what works for you. If you get frustrated and quit easily with lower rates of fat loss, you may want to go with a higher rate of loss. If you get frustrated restricting your intake, you may want to go with a higher calorie level.

[All uses of the word "diet" within this post refer to your daily diet or food consumed on a daily basis.]

Siege_Tank

I said that if you can eat more and still lose weight why wouldn't you want to. But there are 100's of threads from people saying that they have stalled on 1200 calories. That 1200 calories messed up their metabolism. You only have to look at the forums every day to see that.

Those posts aren't data though, you have no way of knowing that 1200 stalled their weight loss. It could have been a plethora of other factors.

Personally, I believe that people who stall out at 1200 are people who can't handle that kind of cut. There is so much inaccuracy about logging, you can't be sure that there wasn't a couple of hundred calorie handfuls here and there to combat hunger - that subsequently didn't get logged. Or the food that they are logging has an incorrect calorie count. Restaurants and packaged foods are found to have caloric inaccuracy in the ALL THEM TIME!!!!!! as much as 1 in 5 labels are wrong!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/19/diet-sabotage-1-in-5-calo_n_903861.html



Those kinds of arguments are incumbent upon the data and self reporting being accurate. And any counter-arguments about how people started losing again when they upped their calories is likely due to more accurate reporting and less sneaking handfuls due to less hunger.

But there's no way to know for sure, that's why you need to look at what happens in a controlled setting. A "study".

BurtHuttz: 400 calories difference, is a lot...

tracieangeletti

My take on this is first, PATIENCE. Tons and tons of never ending patience. It will take more than a week to tell if it's working or not. Trust me because I'm in the process of upping my calories too. Twelve hundred DID work for me... for awhile, and then nothing. I'm 5' 1" and now eating between 1700 and 1850 a day. And yes, I AM losing. Slowly, but I'm down to 10 or less lbs to lose now and it would be a slow loss regardless. The thing about eating more to lose weight is that it is teaching me how to eat for life. I'm learning how EAT. How to eat lots of food and not be hungry all the time. How to make proper choices. One of my big problems was I really didn't know how to eat healthfully. Eating at 1200 wasn't really teaching me this because I wasn't learning how to eat for LIFE. No way I could sustain 1200 and be able to workout and live a full happy life. It is scary. I still stress and think about each morsel I put into my mouth but it is getting better. My body fat % is dropping and I'm noticing huge differences in my clothes and how my body looks and feels. Second, if you're not doing it already you need to start strength training. It will make ALL the difference in the world!! Low calorie dieting, which I've done all of my life, had turned me into the dreaded "skinny-fat". I looked passable in clothing but naked.... well... we won't go there. lol Lifting weights is changing this though. The fat IS retreating and I'm winning the battle!! I've heard that PCOS can make weight loss a little slower so for you you will really need patience. Stick with it. Don't give up hope and think it won't work. PATIENCE and WEIGHTS!! Good luck!!

Robin_Bin

For me, it boils down to a choice between whether one wishes to lose weight temporarily or lose it permanently while learning a new, sustainable lifestyle?

(tracieangeletti explained it well in the previous post)
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Robin_Bin/view/how-to-use-myfitnesspal-427993

Sarauk2sf

With a diet high in protein and strength training, studies have shown that lean body mass can be maintained even on very low calorie diets (VLCD, defined as 40% of TDEE or commonly referred to as 800 calories or less).

Those studies were on obese people - context is relevant.

Also, read this re the Minnesota Starvation experiment:

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/6/1347.full

There is a laundry list of emotional, mental, hormonal and physical damage that people keep over-looking, even after the experiment ended.

CristinaL1983

With a diet high in protein and strength training, studies have shown that lean body mass can be maintained even on very low calorie diets (VLCD, defined as 40% of TDEE or commonly referred to as 800 calories or less).

Those studies were on obese people - context is relevant.

Also, read this re the Minnesota Starvation experiment:

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/6/1347.full

There is a laundry list of emotional, mental, hormonal and physical damage that people keep over-looking, even after the experiment ended.

I have to run but you're right on both counts. Of course at 223 lbs, OP is likely obese herself and I'm not advocating a VLCD by any means. Second point is that the men participating in the MSE were lean starting and ended at extremely underweight. That is probably just as relevant as the fact that most studies on weight loss are on the obese.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=3086592
This analysis of the MSE shows that initial body composition relates to body comp as weight is lost as well as when weight is regained (as was the point of the MSE). It's really interesting though not particularly relevant to this discussion (not sure if you've seen it before). Since MSE is one of the few studies that shows extreme weight loss in already healthy weight to lean individuals it's definitely an interesting read.

At the end of the day, the couple things you pointed out don't change my position but I was not particularly thorough in my wording and since I only mentioned the BMR reduction from the MSE, I didn't find the other point relevant. :flowerforyou:

slkehl

On that low of a calorie intake, a good portion of that weight loss could be muscle mass. The more muscle you lose, the harder it will be for you to lose weight. Muscle is more metabolically active than fat and burns more calories when you are at rest.

Sarauk2sf

With a diet high in protein and strength training, studies have shown that lean body mass can be maintained even on very low calorie diets (VLCD, defined as 40% of TDEE or commonly referred to as 800 calories or less).

Those studies were on obese people - context is relevant.

Also, read this re the Minnesota Starvation experiment:

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/6/1347.full

There is a laundry list of emotional, mental, hormonal and physical damage that people keep over-looking, even after the experiment ended.

I have to run but you're right on both counts. Of course at 223 lbs, OP is likely obese herself and I'm not advocating a VLCD by any means. Second point is that the men participating in the MSE were lean starting and ended at extremely underweight. That is probably just as relevant as the fact that most studies on weight loss are on the obese.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=3086592
This analysis of the MSE shows that initial body composition relates to body comp as weight is lost as well as when weight is regained (as was the point of the MSE). It's really interesting though not particularly relevant to this discussion (not sure if you've seen it before). Since MSE is one of the few studies that shows extreme weight loss in already healthy weight to lean individuals it's definitely an interesting read.

At the end of the day, the couple things you pointed out don't change my position but I was not particularly thorough in my wording and since I only mentioned the BMR reduction from the MSE, I didn't find the other point relevant. :flowerforyou:

We are good. I was really just trying to clarify context to others reading as I know that you are aware of the context of those studies.

tmauck4472

I lose between 8 and 10 lbs a each and every month. Some months the scale won't move till the end of the month, but I still get it done. Has been this way since I started in January 2012. I don't eat 1200, I won't say what I do eat you can look at that yourself. I'm NOT in starvation mode, my metab is just fine. I'm not hungry, My hair is NOT falling out, my nails are bad but in all honesty they were bad before I started the diet so that's def not the cause. My way of doing things blow your whole starvation mode BS right out of the water. I fast each and every day. I eat pretty clean, not 100% but way better than what I used to eat. I do agree you have to give it longer than a week to work your body is getting used to the new amounts. But why change if you were losing?

I'll save people some clicking and math:

She's consistently netting less than 700 daily.

And eating unflavoured geltine for breakfast. WTF....

To the OP. The main issue I see with younger women eating less is that when they get older (ie my age) they have stuffed their metabolism so much, and have minimal lean muscle mass, that they a/ have to keep eating like a sparrow or b/ the middle age spread takes over. Our metabolism slows down a great deal as we age - mainly due to the withering muscles and menopause.

I am 45, pre-menopausal and my BMR is around 1450, yet I am maintaining about 2200 (TDEE) with daily exercise (cardio + weights). I eat ice cream and chocolate (whenever I feel like it!). I lost weight steadily last year eating around 1800....Granted, I am tall (5'9") so can eat more than a shorter person.

I am fitter and healthier now than I was in my 30s.

First of all I'm not eating gelatin for my breakfast I don't eat breakfast, but I use gelatin for digestive health and other health benifits. I drink it in the mornings and at night, it's no biggie and I DO NOT NET LESS THAN 700 CALORIES A DAY. Fitbit adjust those calories for me by just moving around. I do not eat my exercise calories back but I haven't even gone to Zumba since Tuesday so all that is adjusted by the fitbit is "NORMAL" calorie burn from just being alive *sigh* please know what your talking about before you post. I haven't even worn the fitbit since Zumba on tuesday and it's still adjusting. But my success blows your omg you CAN'T lose weight if you don't more than 1200 calories a day out of the water.

CatMcCheesey

1200 calories is working fine for me, and I'm close in height/weight to the OP. I'm losing 2 pounds a week, just like MFP said I would. I'm lifting weights 3 times a week, and I feel great! Everyone is different.

Broejen

I was one of those doing a 1200 cal. diet, sometimes netting only 1000, at 218lbs. Worked great for the first 4-5 months but then the weight loss slowed down then stopped and now I have been hovering at the same level for 3-4 months now. Had I just eaten more from the beginning, I would probably still be losing! Why would you want to eat so low and ruin your metabolism when you could be eating almost normally and still lose?

CatMcCheesey

I was one of those doing a 1200 cal. diet, sometimes netting only 1000, at 218lbs. Worked great for the first 4-5 months but then the weight loss slowed down then stopped and now I have been hovering at the same level for 3-4 months now. Had I just eaten more from the beginning, I would probably still be losing! Why would you want to eat so low and ruin your metabolism when you could be eating almost normally and still lose?

Why would you think it would ruin one's metabolism?

nicleed

I lose between 8 and 10 lbs a each and every month. Some months the scale won't move till the end of the month, but I still get it done. Has been this way since I started in January 2012. I don't eat 1200, I won't say what I do eat you can look at that yourself. I'm NOT in starvation mode, my metab is just fine. I'm not hungry, My hair is NOT falling out, my nails are bad but in all honesty they were bad before I started the diet so that's def not the cause. My way of doing things blow your whole starvation mode BS right out of the water. I fast each and every day. I eat pretty clean, not 100% but way better than what I used to eat. I do agree you have to give it longer than a week to work your body is getting used to the new amounts. But why change if you were losing?

I'll save people some clicking and math:

She's consistently netting less than 700 daily.

And eating unflavoured geltine for breakfast. WTF....

To the OP. The main issue I see with younger women eating less is that when they get older (ie my age) they have stuffed their metabolism so much, and have minimal lean muscle mass, that they a/ have to keep eating like a sparrow or b/ the middle age spread takes over. Our metabolism slows down a great deal as we age - mainly due to the withering muscles and menopause.

I am 45, pre-menopausal and my BMR is around 1450, yet I am maintaining about 2200 (TDEE) with daily exercise (cardio + weights). I eat ice cream and chocolate (whenever I feel like it!). I lost weight steadily last year eating around 1800....Granted, I am tall (5'9") so can eat more than a shorter person.

I am fitter and healthier now than I was in my 30s.

First of all I'm not eating gelatin for my breakfast I don't eat breakfast, but I use gelatin for digestive health and other health benifits. I drink it in the mornings and at night, it's no biggie and I DO NOT NET LESS THAN 700 CALORIES A DAY. Fitbit adjust those calories for me by just moving around. I do not eat my exercise calories back but I haven't even gone to Zumba since Tuesday so all that is adjusted by the fitbit is "NORMAL" calorie burn from just being alive *sigh* please know what your talking about before you post. I haven't even worn the fitbit since Zumba on tuesday and it's still adjusting. But my success blows your omg you CAN'T lose weight if you don't more than 1200 calories a day out of the water.

Where did I say you can't lose weight netting 1200 cals a day? Quote please.

Broejen

would you think it would ruin one's metabolism?

Well I guess I shouldn't say "ruin" but it definitely isn't as good as it was when I first started. It's slowed down so now I am at maintenance eating the same amount of calories that I was losing at before. Metabolic Slowdown I think is what it's called.

DavPul

1200 calories is working fine for me, and I'm close in height/weight to the OP. I'm losing 2 pounds a week, just like MFP said I would. I'm lifting weights 3 times a week, and I feel great! Everyone is different.

Get back to us when you reach goal and attempt maintenance.

Sarauk2sf

would you think it would ruin one's metabolism?

Well I guess I shouldn't say "ruin" but it definitely isn't as good as it was when I first started. It's slowed down so now I am at maintenance eating the same amount of calories that I was losing at before. Metabolic Slowdown I think is what it's called.

Good youtube video here. It is about competitive body builders so it is about extremes, but is a good listen

http://www.biolayne.com/nutrition/biolayne-video-log-9-metabolic-damage/

Broejen

Good youtube video here. It is about competitive body builders so it is about extremes, but is a good listen

http://www.biolayne.com/nutrition/biolayne-video-log-9-metabolic-damage/

Thanks for that! He also has a follow-up video!

http://youtu.be/EY1DsZMNfNw

dianeb613

I had been stalled for the past 3 weeks eating 1200 calories plus some of my exercise calories. Since I am so close to where I want to be I decided that I would change my settings to losing only 1/2 lb a week so my allowance of calories went up from 1200 to 1420 of which I ate almost all of them each day. I must admit I was scared to get on the scale this morning because for sure I thought I gained. To my surprise I lost .8 which is good for me. Maybe I wasn't eating enough calories.

TurtleSpeed13

this is my 1st time on here. I am trying to figure it all out. Hope you find out what works.
:blushing: