Eating Below Your BMR..

Options
12357

Replies

  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    I have the greatest respect for anyone that is more focused on health then that dam scale. I am trying my darndest to stay away from it. You people that are losing weight?? Do you know what kind of weight you are losing? Do you care? Those are some questions I ask myself each day when it comes to maybe eating more then I "feel" like. The more I focus on activity in my life, the less interest I have in food as something to do rather than "use" as fuel.

    And what I don't get it why anyone "obviously" thinks people on here are lying to them as if others want you to stay fat. Did it even occur to you that these people are trying to help you?

    I highly recommend hooking up with the people on emtwl or just anyone that fuels their bodies properly.

    denise:drinker: :drinker:

    Worth bumping so it can be read twice!
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,401 MFP Moderator
    Options
    Hmmm, I'm starting to think I might have a much lower BMR than the sites give me. how would I go about actually getting this tested?

    You could google "RMR testing" for your city. But even though that gives you a better estimate of your RMR/BMR you still don't know your TDEE, which is what matters to weight loss.

    The easy way to find out your TDEE (though no one ever seems to consider it so perhaps it's not so easy) is to simply track everything you eat and your weight for months. If you lose weight at around a pound a week on average (look at many weeks at a time, not one) and eat say 1500/day, you burn around 2000/day.

    Oh, I've done that. I've eaten at 1500 for 6 weeks, 1800 for 6 weeks, 2000 for 6 weeks, and now 1650 for about the same time. I gain at 2000 but maintain at all others. Sigh.

    Lisa i get where you are coming from.. and as you know i am ahuge fan of yours. And at this point, i would almost believe its a culture thing. And by culture i mean alcohol. You.and several other of my uk female friends all have the same issue. All healthy weights, all eat 95% good but all drink several nights a week. Maybe its how they do their beers, maybe its how they prepare foods or whatever it may be. I suspect though, if you cut this out for two months you might get a different result. But i understand its largely a part of the the culture and none of my uk pals will try this expirement.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,401 MFP Moderator
    Options
    And no matter what you want to call it, starvation mode, or other, eating too little to fuel our bodies is not healthy.

    Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight. It's perfectly healthy. Most authorities agree that losing up to 2 lbs/week is healthy as long as you eat over 1200 (not "net"). It's just a set of people here who think they know more than the authorities. Which is fine for them to use their methods on themselves. But to label those using respected methods as irresponsible is wrong.
    Here is the issue with this statement.. very few of these studies are done on normal weight people. And lets face it, someone with 50+ lbs to lose has a different effect than how it would affect someone thay is a healthy weight. And i know you are an advocate of the 1200 calorie diet and many of us dont. I know i am not becuase i see too many people fail at it. More so than those that are successful. And for those that do succeed... what next.. live on 1200 calories the rest of their lives? I dont know about you but would you rather prefer to start gaining weight at 1500 calories or 2500 calories. I love the fact i can have a bad weekend at 3500 calories a day or more and still not gain weight.

    I also love the fact that when i eat ore calories i can lift more weight, have better form and my cardio.is improved. The thing is i train like and athlete and eat like an athlete so i can look like one. And lets face it, there is no sexier thing on a person than muscle and a defined body.
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options
    And no matter what you want to call it, starvation mode, or other, eating too little to fuel our bodies is not healthy.

    Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight. It's perfectly healthy. Most authorities agree that losing up to 2 lbs/week is healthy as long as you eat over 1200 (not "net"). It's just a set of people here who think they know more than the authorities. Which is fine for them to use their methods on themselves. But to label those using respected methods as irresponsible is wrong.

    LOL! Oh really?

    mmapags, I'm so surprised you don't see the truth here, because in most matters I agree with you. But with responses like "LOL! Oh really?" I have no clue what part of the truth you don't understand. You don't agree that most authorities think 1200 calories is fine for weight loss? Or that eating less than you burn is how you lose weight? Or that anyone who doesn't eat by "EM2WL" rules is deemed irresponsible here? Use your words, pal.

    Have you ever heard of WW? Have you seen the make up of their scientific advisory panel? They've had people eating 1000-1200 calories for weight loss since before most people here were born. Ever heard of Mayo Clinic? Or do you only read sources like 'helloitsdan' and 'nwgal' (or whatever other forum chatter)? They are so wrong on this point. Some of our BMR is like 1400 and our TDEE is like 1600. Do you really think we're in starvation mode at 1200? 400 below TDEE? Or do think maybe just maybe the people with PhDs and MDs in this field might have it right, and the fat on our *kitten* is perfectly fine fuel for our activities?
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options
    [And i know you are an advocate of the 1200 calorie diet and many of us dont.

    This is all that made sense to me of your post and you all are so wrong. I am not an advocate of a 1200 calorie diet. I am an advocate of people choosing their own intake level based on accurate info. The info given here is nearly always that 1200 is dangerous. That's b.s. That's all I'm saying. Eat what you want. But be aware that 1200 is perfectly healthy in the eyes of those with authority and education in the field. Eat 2500, 3500, 4000, I don't care. But don't tell people 1200 is dangerous without something to back it up besides years of forum myth.
  • Helloitsdan
    Helloitsdan Posts: 5,564 Member
    Options
    Some of our BMR is like 1400 and our TDEE is like 1600.




    99% of this site is about fitness so you wont find people sitting around!

    TDEE of 1600 is someone who is either real old or really really small.
    Fiddling with my calculator I came up with a 60 year old woman 5 tall and about 150lbs with a sedentary lifestyle is about 1612.

    So if you think that eating less and sitting on your *kitten* is a way of life then by all means!


    Lets play a bit!

    20 year old woman at 5' 150lbs sedentary TDEE is about 1848.
    30 year old is 1789
    40 year old is 1730
    50 year old is 1671

    Who wants to eat 1200 cals and sit on their *kitten* all day long?

    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(12)61031-9/abstract

    Mcarter if you ever even tried eating more, like some of the 50 and 60 year olds on my numbers who could ace you in deadlifts, you'd see that there is more to life than cutting cals and sitting on the *kitten* analyzing BS studies all day!
    You arent losing weight!
    You're rotting away!

    Point my name out when all I get are success stories on my numbers run for people who are sick of dieting on bird food!
    You have so much to say about my methods and science and math but our tickers are moving in the right direction while yours.....

    Proof is in the pudding Mcarter.
    I produce results with high cals!

    So shove off!
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,401 MFP Moderator
    Options
    [And i know you are an advocate of the 1200 calorie diet and many of us dont.

    This is all that made sense to me of your post and you all are so wrong. I am not an advocate of a 1200 calorie diet. I am an advocate of people choosing their own intake level based on accurate info. The info given here is nearly always that 1200 is dangerous. That's b.s. That's all I'm saying. Eat what you want. But be aware that 1200 is perfectly healthy in the eyes of those with authority and education in the field. Eat 2500, 3500, 4000, I don't care. But don't tell people 1200 is dangerous without something to back it up besides years of forum myth.

    I never said it was dangerous, you are assuming that. 1200 calories is fine for a person that isnt active. Also, many of us dont look at just weight loss but rather encourage fat loss and muscle retention instead of just weight loss. That is why i dont care for WW as they make money by people losing weight, and much of that can be muscle. Does it worm, yes, in fact my friends dad lost 65 lbs doing it.

    Also, 1200 calories is for women, 1500 is for men.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,401 MFP Moderator
    Options
    In all fairness Dan mcarter has tried 1800 calories and didnt work, which i suggested to back it down to 1600 as she might have less lbm than the average person or if she did lcd for a long period, her metabolic rate might have slowed down to compensate.

    Mcarter, one last thing... just because a person doesnt have a PhD in nutrition doesn't mean they cant be knowledgable. There are plenty of self taught mechanics, craftsmen, engineers etc.. infact, at a recent science fair in Massachusetts a 17 yr olf won the science fair after discovering a way to treat cancer without killing the tissue around it.
  • Helloitsdan
    Helloitsdan Posts: 5,564 Member
    Options
    Why wouldn't that info be available?
    Why make it seem Like she lives by what she preaches?

    Apologies on the ticker remark.
    It can be frustrating when losing weight.
    I'm truly sorry that this way doesn't work for you.

    I'm always going to try to help those who aren't doing well with weight loss!
    And some day I will have the degree and certifications.
    Till then you have me!
    The way I am now!
    Always inviting whomever wants an easier softer way of losing weight.

    Just remember that all I've had was results.
    Positive results.

    I'll always speak up when I see the posts about not losing weight while working out 7 days a week on 1200 cals.
    And until I start getting negetive results I won't change my methods.

    Again I apologize for the ticker remark and won't mention your progress in any future posts.
  • lilbbyangel
    lilbbyangel Posts: 1
    Options
    just wondering if you know your true BMR - the 'books' tend to say my BMR IS 1800+, I had it tested 2 ways and is actually 1540-1600, which makes a difference of nearly 400 calories a day, or shy of 1 lb per week. eye opener for me but valuable to know
    just wanted to say congrats on your great progress! u r an insperation
  • Silverkittycat
    Silverkittycat Posts: 1,997 Member
    Options
    One thing I notice is that a lot of people seem to think these calculations are accurate. They are not. They are just websites that are estimating based on information you provide. Your TDEE could be off by as much as 500 calories, give or take, or more depending on other issues that you may not be aware of. So, my recommendation to people as a total novice and having zero expertise or knowledge about this other than reading a lot, is to find your TDEE, cut it 15 or 20%, then wait 6 weeks and see if it's working. If your not losing weight or body fat, drop 100 calories. Continue for 6 weeks, if no results, drop 100 calories, and keep doing this. Eventually, you'll find the sweet spot where you see results. You have to. If you do this for months and months and no weight or fat loss, please see your doctor because something is wrong.

    Then, with every 10 lbs, recalculate all over again.

    This is good advice.

    Personally, I know what Starvation Mode is (scientifically, which isn't anything anyone here need to be worried about). And also know the issues of eating below your BMR.

    Can you eat below your BMR and lose weight? Yes, if you know how to do so properly. It is not exactly about ENERGY supplied, it is about NUTRITION. Eating below your BMR with inadequate nutrition is typically unhealthy and can lead to significant health problems. If you are cool with completely micro managing EVERYTHING you eat, and ensure you got the proper nutrition (including protein), then you can do it. BUT... this does not really teach you "healthy" eating, and once you deviate from it after achieving your goals, are just as likely to put the weight on as any other crash and burn diet.

    Your body does have extra store of calories to use for energy, it does not have much in the way of stored vitamins, minerals, and proteins.

    I personally never advise people to eat under their BMR simply because I wish people to understand they can still eat normally, healthy, and feel full while losing weight, and given the current state of vitamins (completely unregulated, could be an arsenic pill and the law couldn't do crap about it) I do not feel comfortable suggesting them.

    I agree. I can't eat much below my BMR because I'm already quite small and don't care to micro manage. I focus on my micros more than anything, more than my macros even, but I eat what I like to eat so I end up eating quite a bit more to ensure I'm getting the vitamins and minerals I need without supplementing. Granted, I'm not here to lose weight, and anecdote is not data, but I do find that as long as I focus on nutrition my weight remains the same and I remain healthy. :)
  • Rory_123
    Rory_123 Posts: 68 Member
    Options
    My Katch Mcardle is 1320, and 80% TDEE is 1340 - I eat in the 1200's, which is within the margin of error. 1 or 2 days a week I eat more like 1800, because food+socializing makes me happy.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,401 MFP Moderator
    Options
    My Katch Mcardle is 1320, and 80% TDEE is 1340 - I eat in the 1200's, which is within the margin of error. 1 or 2 days a week I eat more like 1800, because food+socializing makes me happy.
    Does your tdee include exercise or do you not exercise?
  • Rory_123
    Rory_123 Posts: 68 Member
    Options
    My Katch Mcardle is 1320, and 80% TDEE is 1340 - I eat in the 1200's, which is within the margin of error. 1 or 2 days a week I eat more like 1800, because food+socializing makes me happy.
    Does your tdee include exercise or do you not exercise?

    Due to injury, I only walk. Sometimes it's 2 hrs a day, but still easy, light walking. I move, a lot, but I don't exercise right now.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    Bump to read later.
  • suziecue66
    suziecue66 Posts: 1,312 Member
    Options
    One thing I notice is that a lot of people seem to think these calculations are accurate. They are not. They are just websites that are estimating based on information you provide. Your TDEE could be off by as much as 500 calories, give or take, or more depending on other issues that you may not be aware of. So, my recommendation to people as a total novice and having zero expertise or knowledge about this other than reading a lot, is to find your TDEE, cut it 15 or 20%, then wait 6 weeks and see if it's working. If your not losing weight or body fat, drop 100 calories. Continue for 6 weeks, if no results, drop 100 calories, and keep doing this. Eventually, you'll find the sweet spot where you see results. You have to. If you do this for months and months and no weight or fat loss, please see your doctor because something is wrong.

    Then, with every 10 lbs, recalculate all over again.

    This is good advice.

    Personally, I know what Starvation Mode is (scientifically, which isn't anything anyone here need to be worried about). And also know the issues of eating below your BMR.

    Can you eat below your BMR and lose weight? Yes, if you know how to do so properly. It is not exactly about ENERGY supplied, it is about NUTRITION. Eating below your BMR with inadequate nutrition is typically unhealthy and can lead to significant health problems. If you are cool with completely micro managing EVERYTHING you eat, and ensure you got the proper nutrition (including protein), then you can do it. BUT... this does not really teach you "healthy" eating, and once you deviate from it after achieving your goals, are just as likely to put the weight on as any other crash and burn diet.

    Your body does have extra store of calories to use for energy, it does not have much in the way of stored vitamins, minerals, and proteins.

    I personally never advise people to eat under their BMR simply because I wish people to understand they can still eat normally, healthy, and feel full while losing weight, and given the current state of vitamins (completely unregulated, could be an arsenic pill and the law couldn't do crap about it) I do not feel comfortable suggesting them.

    The American College of Sports Medicine recommends most people eat .8 gram protein for each 1kg of body weight, or 10-15% of your diet as protein. For a 150 lb. person that would be around 55g protein per day, which is around 220 calories. That's pretty easy to do eating at 1200.

    I agree with both but wondered why you would wait 6 weeks to change calorie amount if not seeing results. Seems like a long time.
  • suziecue66
    suziecue66 Posts: 1,312 Member
    Options
    I was only responding to your comment about protein. That pamphlet actually agrees. It recommends 10-35% protein for adults. The higher percentages are typically recommended for endurance and strength athletes, which few here are. It also says "Inadequate protein intake in the United States is rare." Most American and Canadian authorities recommend 45-56g, which is pretty effortless, even for non-meat-eaters.

    I don't think one needs to micromanage their intake at 1200 EXCEPT for satiety purposes. But most people who take it seriously quickly learn what sorts of foods are their 'calorie bargains' and will keep them full to the next meal.

    And what about: Iron, Vitamin A, B6, B12, C, D, K, Selenium, Potassium, Calcium, Sodium, Fiber.... the list goes on.

    Health is not simply about adequate protein to lose weight in calorie deficits. There is much more nutrition in the world than simply protein. And as I said, Vitamins are 100% unregulated in the USA. They are not required by law to contain anything they say they have on the label, and are also not required by law to NOT contain anything they don't have on the label.

    I do agree with you it can be done. I'd push for more protein than you suggest personally (As the 10% range the FDA and Health Department suggest that level is for sedimentary people with no exercise). But that is of minor significance at best.

    Overall, who is going to show the best long term results? Person A that eats a balanced diet rich in nutrition while maintaining a calorie deficit for steady weight loss, or a person that can only have 2 chicken breasts or 2 fish filet a day?

    I try to keep my diet as healthy as I can. And at nearly 1400 calories a day, it takes a good portion of effort to ensure my proper nutrition. I have difficulty believing most Americans can adequately do what I do at 1400 but with 1200 (And I have formal and informal education in this area).

    Supplements in the short term to make up for shortfall of nutrients.
  • megziejo
    megziejo Posts: 47 Member
    Options
    Bump
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    And no matter what you want to call it, starvation mode, or other, eating too little to fuel our bodies is not healthy.

    Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight. It's perfectly healthy. Most authorities agree that losing up to 2 lbs/week is healthy as long as you eat over 1200 (not "net"). It's just a set of people here who think they know more than the authorities. Which is fine for them to use their methods on themselves. But to label those using respected methods as irresponsible is wrong.

    LOL! Oh really?

    mmapags, I'm so surprised you don't see the truth here, because in most matters I agree with you. But with responses like "LOL! Oh really?" I have no clue what part of the truth you don't understand. You don't agree that most authorities think 1200 calories is fine for weight loss? Or that eating less than you burn is how you lose weight? Or that anyone who doesn't eat by "EM2WL" rules is deemed irresponsible here? Use your words, pal.

    Have you ever heard of WW? Have you seen the make up of their scientific advisory panel? They've had people eating 1000-1200 calories for weight loss since before most people here were born. Ever heard of Mayo Clinic? Or do you only read sources like 'helloitsdan' and 'nwgal' (or whatever other forum chatter)? They are so wrong on this point. Some of our BMR is like 1400 and our TDEE is like 1600. Do you really think we're in starvation mode at 1200? 400 below TDEE? Or do think maybe just maybe the people with PhDs and MDs in this field might have it right, and the fat on our *kitten* is perfectly fine fuel for our activities?
    Psulemon pretty much explained my response in the post before your. Quite honestly no I don't trust MD's in regard to nutrition. And The Mayo Clinic?? They still publish articles that sound like mainstream nutrition advise from 25 years ago. As you so crudely put, the fat on our *kitten* is not adequate fuel. There are no amino acids for lean tissue maintenance or growth. If you enjoy catabolism, knock yourself out! Lastly, I am not part of any EMLW or whatever you called it. Quite honestly, you really come across as off a wall on this topic. You cherrie pick your data and ignore whatever doesn't support your position. I could not disagree with you more on this.
    Btw, who I read and where I get my info is from many sources.
    Obviously, different ones than you. The tone of your post is rather demeaning. You sound like your losing it here.
  • Elleinnz
    Elleinnz Posts: 1,661 Member
    Options

    Have you ever heard of WW? Have you seen the make up of their scientific advisory panel? They've had people eating 1000-1200 calories for weight loss since before most people here were born. Ever heard of Mayo Clinic? Or do you only read sources like 'helloitsdan' and 'nwgal' (or whatever other forum chatter)? They are so wrong on this point. Some of our BMR is like 1400 and our TDEE is like 1600. Do you really think we're in starvation mode at 1200? 400 below TDEE? Or do think maybe just maybe the people with PhDs and MDs in this field might have it right, and the fat on our *kitten* is perfectly fine fuel for our activities?

    Oh how wrong you are - the fat on our *kitten* (actually think it should be arses) is not fine fuel!! What happens when you are eating too little - and then making it even worse with lots of cardio is that you are using muscle for fuel - and not that fabulous fat on our arses .......

    You can attack helloitsdan as much as you want - but the bottom line is why on earth would you eat 1200 calories a day - and not see results - if you can eat closer to 2000 calories a day - and actually see results - to me that is a win / win :-)

    I have also NEVER seen Dan tell someone who actually do have a TDEE of 1600 to eat more than that - but frankly I suspect that the majority of healthy people in the "normal" population would not have an TDEE of 1600....

Categories