Question? Not enuf calories = slowed metabolism.. really?

swfloridagal · August 2012

I've heard it said that you can shut or slow down the metabolism not eating enough. I am 60 pounds overweight and dont think that would apply to somebody my size.

I'm trying to eat 1200 calories but I frequently eat less or burn off what I ate so its less than the 1200. Is this something I should worry about? I'm very satisfied with what I'm eating so I don't think anything is wrong. i'm losing about 2 lbs per week.

What do ya'll think? If I MAKE SURE to eat the 1200 calories would the weight drop faster? Does it matter how I eat my calories? I mean can I eat whatever I want to add on the calories to make 1200?

For example: If I eat 1000 calories and see I'm short by 200 calories. Does it matter if I eat ice cream for 200? Or if I eat grilled cheese for 200? Or if I eat hummus and pita for 200? As long as its 200 does it matter where it comes from in terms of meeting my caloric intake for the day?:frown:

sportybrewerschick · August 2012

bump!

its_rierie · August 2012

There is a lot of debate about this. I'm of the opinion that every body reacts differently.

The major problem with eating that little, is that it's usually not sustainable, and most people will go back to bad habits.

Soann · August 2012

bump

TinGirl314 · August 2012

Bumping because I want to know too...
Sorry I don't have the answer!

subcult · August 2012

If you can lose 2 pounds eating 1700 or lose 2.1 pounds netting under 1200 which would you choose? So eat what you want to fill the gap if the majority is healthy. Edit I'm. Trying to eat as many calories as I can and exercise. As little as I can (excluding. Lifting), so when I finally. Do stall I have plenty of options on the table.

KareninCanada · August 2012

Well you're asking two different things....

First question about calorie intake.... your age, your size and your activity level all determine what you really need. But generally you shouldn't be dropping below 1200/day unless you're very petite or morbidly obese and on a program supervised by a doctor. I don't think you are either one. Really you should probably be looking at more like 1400-1500/day - that'd be a bare minimum total intake, without you taking the time to figure out exercise calories and net calories after exercise. (My experience as a mid-thirties girl is, I lose best at around 1500, and still steadily at 1650. When I was doing weight training I was building muscle and losing weight at 2200.)

Re your second question about the quality of your calories - yes it absolutely matters. Especially given your health concerns, you should focus on making sure that all of your calories come from quality food and not junk (or as close as possible).

Pebble321 · August 2012

I'd agree that there isn't a hard and fast answer that is going to apply to everyone.

But, I do think that eating very little (and I consider 1000 cals very little!) can put you at risk of not getting all the nutrition you need to stay healthy.
I don't think that eating at 1000 cals for one day is going to hurt anyone, but if this is what happens every day, you are giving your body very minimal energy to work with - and that can't be good in the long term.

Why not eat what MFP suggests (1200 plus any calories you burn from exercise) for a month or so and see how this works out for you? If you aren't losing weight after a month, you can change things around if you need to. Why deprive yourself unnecessarily.

I know many people (myself included) have lost lots of weight eating a whole lot more than that, so there's a good chance you will too.

Regarding the choice of food - in general I don't think there is anything wrong with a cheese sandwich or some icecream, but you will really need to be careful that most of the food you eat is very nutrition dense, as you are eating so very little to start with.

AShawneeF · August 2012

i just read an article on this. by not eating enough, your body becomes more efficient, needing to burn less to preform the same daily tasks, which causes an overall slowed metabolism. I know a lot of people will net under what they should for a while, then eat what they should for a while, and rotate so their metabolism never really has time to get used to anything and thus keep max burn up.

leska1216 · August 2012

I have the same problem with eating -- I don't like to eat, so i force myself to eat everyday. I am trying to do better. I have upped my caloric intake/goal, but it is difficult to maintain. However, I do realise that I need to eat the higher calorie amount to keep my body healthy.

Weight loss is difficult at any calorie level. I waffle back and forth, 3 up and 3 down. My weight has not changed in years, yet my clothing size has gone down.

I am trying to add more calories as I am also trying to add more exercise.

I do not understand net calories or their significance. I struggle to understand and maintain calories.

capriciousmoon · August 2012

If you go on eating less calories than your body needs you will lose weight. You won't notice that your metabolism has slowed unless you try to eat to more later, and I don't even mean "back to you old ways" more. Depending on how low your net is and how long you keep it up, you could potentially gain on as little as 1200 calories.

I'm not an expert and don't even play a doctor on tv, it's just based on personal experience.

KareninCanada · August 2012

One other thing. Personally... I would REALLY recommend you make an appointment with a dietitian/nutritionist. As a lady in your 50's, diagnosed with prediabetes, high cholesterol, high blood pressure and an auto-immune disease to boot... a professional consultation would probably serve you well. Especially if you find someone who is a nutritionist and has a medical background. When one considers the big picture, it is possible that some of the advice on a weight loss forum may in fact be harmful for you.

Crochetluvr · August 2012

I can only say what I do. I try VERY hard to get in the 1200 minimum if I dont exercise that day. If I DO exercise, I will probably eat more but I don't eat back all the exercise calories. My choice. I am not losing too fast or too slow and I feel fine. But there are other factors that can affect a person....age, how overweight, medical issues. You have to play with your plan till its right for you AND for the health of your body.

theartichoke · August 2012

No, it doesn't matter. Health wise, sure. For fat loss, if you ate 1200 calories a day of bacon you'd still lose weight.

Yes, your metabolism will slow down. That's true for anyone in a deficit. Where the problem can come in is when you reach your goal and move to maintenance calories. You'll experience weight gain while your body adjusts to the new level. You won't infinitely gain weight though and it's recommended at that point to raise your calories slowly. The other concern is loss of lean body mass. Eating at a more conservative deficit, getting enough protein and adding some form of resistance training can minimize this. If it even matters to you. If not, that's okay too.

There are wonderful reasons to find your BMR and TDEE, preserve LBM as much as possible and eat at a smaller deficit. However, if what you're doing works for you and you're happy with it, I see no need to change it. If you ever hit a plateau keep in mind that the answer will begin with eating more, not less. You won't shut your metabolism down or cause irreparable harm to yourself eating 1200 calories. Just do your research! Get a solid understanding of your numbers, what they mean and what to do if someday, you need to change things up. That's true for all of us, 1200 calories or not.

ChasingStarlight · August 2012

This is what I think, although it doesn't entirely answer your question. Do you want to be constantly going on a diet of 1200 cals for the rest of your life? Assuming the answer is no, you need to put into place a long term lifestyle change. There is little point in going on a crash diet, eating junk but staying under 1200 cals and then going back your old eating ways.

My view is that long term it is better to eat the cals mfp sets in a healthy manner overall with fruit and vegetables and a little treat each day. Maybe not eat back exercise cals if that is your mindset. Then, you should reach your goal with a new habit of eating which is hopefully maintainable.

To answer your original question, I don't find eating under 1200 cals slows my metabolism, but my bmr is 1240 as I am only 5'2 which may explain it.

themommie · August 2012

I think you need to find what works for you. i have lost 105 lbs in 2 yrs eating 1000-1250 cals a day. Some people say I could have lost eating more, maybe???? all I know is what i have done and what has worked for me. Good luck finding what works for you. The most important thing is to not give up

Lunasash · August 2012

As far as eating less calories per day, your metabolism will eventually adjust and begin to slow down. If you are getting those calories from junk foods like candy you are not eating other nutrients your body needs, such as calcium and iron, etc. Ice cream can be a good snack in moderation because it does have some nutrients your body needs. Remember to try and get the nutrients you need from your food instead of from pills or supplements, your body can absorb them better.

shorty35565 · August 2012

You should always eat 1200 minimum. I personally wouldn't even go under 1400 cals. I used to eat like you and I dont like where it's put me 57lbs later. Granted I started eating higher after 40lbs down, but the majority of my lose was eating low. Now I've ended up with low weight and high body fat (5'5 128lbs, 29.6% body fat) because I lost more muscle than I had to. Of that 2lbs you're losing, how much of can u say was fat and how much was muscle? The truth is tht some is muscle and the more u eat (and the higher you get in protein) will allow u to lose more quality weight (fat)
About where the calories come from, that's a debatable topic. You WILL lose weight if you eat at a deficit no matter where the cals come from. But will it b healthy? NOPE! Chose the healthier option. If you're satisfied like you say eating that low, then eat higher calorie food that will get them cals up. Nuts, natural Peanut butter and Bananas are a few healthy things I can think of that are rather high in cals.

Danardeener · August 2012

I wouldn't eat under 1200 calories and if you are losing two pounds per week, there is nothing wrong with that. I personally eat about 1600 calories a day but I exercise 5 days a week. You can eat what type of food you want up to your amount of calories and still lose weight but you will feel satisfied longer with healthier food.

hattris · August 2012

You will find a ton of literature for and against the "Not enuf calories=slowed metabolism". I think it best to not intake less then the 1200 cal's a day, and walk or jog for about 30 minutes a day to create your calorie deficit. I'm not an expert, but I have noticed that if I take in to few calories my weight loss does slow. I am 300+ pounds (Male 6'1" so about 70lbs over my goal weight) currently and run 5km every other day, and if I eat less then my total daily cal's the weight loss slows. However, if I take in my calorie total (type of food hasn't made a difference for me but I try and eat healthy 6 out of 7 days) I have steadily lost pounds.

Here is a link you can read...but google the subject yourself and you can decide for yourself based on all the "expert" opinions out there. Good luck and keep striving towards your goal!

http://www.everydayhealth.com/weight/fewer-calories-stalls-metabolism.aspx

KDaniels2512 · August 2012

I started out at 1600 calories a day and when I lost 30 pounds MFP switched me to 1200 a day. This actually made me plateau for about 4 weeks until I upped my calories back to 1600! Now I am consistently losing weight

TheVimFuego · August 2012

1200 calories of bacon ... lovely ...

I think it's a question of calorie quality, not quantity. So 200 cals of ice cream are not the same as 200 cals of carrots or whatever.

Let's stop thinking about this as a maths problem (because the human body is not a calculator) and more of a biological one (because there are more factors to liberating fat than creating an energy deficit).

Option 1)
Less Calories = Less Nutrients = Your Body Wants To Hold On To Fat (because it is nutritionally starving) = Stall = Hunger = Frustration = Metabolic Disaster

Option 2)
More Calories Of A Higher Quality (nutrient dense ... meat, fish, eggs, veggies, etc) = Body Says Lovely, I'll Have Some Of That = Body Gives Up Some Fat Because It Can See It Is Not Needed = Full Tummy = Nice Warm Glow and a bit of fat loss into the bargain.

#2 might not work for all but I know what I'm opting for.

One of many thinking the same thing ...

http://thesmarterscienceofslim.com/jonathan-bailors-smarter-science-of-slim-podcast/

Get the body working right metabolically and you don't have to worry about the calories, within reason

Seriously, the 3500 calorie deficit = 1 lb fat loss thing is a freaking joke that has been repeated so much that it has been taken as gospel.

Try this if you have an open mind ...

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/the-knowledge/20-diet-myths-busted/

Eat real food, enjoy real food, real food is not the enemy.

Eating is meant to be enjoyable not some freaking daily trial.

I may have ranted there ... Hey, do what works for you

postrockandcats · August 2012

I second finding a nutritionist.

I'll tell you where I am right now. I started off thinking that the less I eat, the more I loose. It makes sense, really. But, it never worked, it never stuck and I was a miserable witch when I cut my food down. I stumbled onto this place accidentally and really started reading more into the "eat more, loose weight" theory. It actually makes MORE sense to me than starving myself.

So, I tried it. I'm eating approx 1700 calories a day on average (sometimes less, sometimes more depending on if I work out) and I'm at a 6 pound loss for my first month. I'm not in a bad mood all the time, I'm seeing results, I feel good and I can actually eat real food. I've even ditched the low fat foods in favor of full fat ones because I wasn't getting enough. Of course, once I get smaller, I'll need less food, but we will cross that bridge we when get there.

ItzPSGina62 · August 2012

I agree with this. I ate healthy and worked out almost daily and could NOT lose weight. I have a thyroid disorder and diabetes runs on both side of my family. I went to The Metabolic Research Center and I am so glad I did. First she took me off estrogen (synthetic) and put me on a patch that is bio-identical. She then added meformin. I have been dropping weight. I am amazed. I was on Weight Watchers last year for 6 weeks and did not lose a pound and stayed within my points. I did lose inches however, but I wanted to see the scale move. Now I am.

volume77 · August 2012

I think it's a good idea to switch things up constantly. I do unintentionally and intentionally switch up calorie in take and it seems that it keeps the body guessing. I also do low carb and honestly that has been the most successful part of my diet but I have done many different thing including hcg (500 calories). And I definatley lost weight on that but it has been low carb that I have lost the most on. Including very low calorie. I'm just greatful I can eat as much food as I can now... I used to think I had to keep Resricting all the time...

Karly36 · August 2012

I think it is important to eat your calories no matter what the food may be...I have consistently ate 500-1000 calories the majority of the time and have maintained a 100+ fat excess. Not purposely...just get busy and forget. I am moderately active..but spent 20 years dieting and slowed my metabolism to nothing. I got back on fitness pal to make myself eat enough to drop weight. Weight watchers is another great program and their system says yes..if you have 200 calories left and u want ice cream...go for it...better to eat the calories...than have the body go into starvation phase as mine has so many of the years.

akinomikon · August 2012

Good links. Very different approaches.

birdieaz · August 2012

I was eating 1200 since Jan and around June hit a plateau, so I kept lowering the cal and working out more. Reached the point were I was only netting between 400-600cal, but was still stuck.

Finally decided that if this was how I was going to have to lose weight then it wasn't worth it. I made the choice to do my homework and find out how many cal my body needed to be properly nourished. If I couldn't lose weight eating that amount I was prepared to be happy at my current weight.

Since then I have upped my calories steadily first going back to 1200, then 1300, 1450, 1550 and now 1750. Yeah that last jump was huge. I did gain 3lbs so I'm back to 123 BUT since hitting 1750 I have lost .5lb...yes not much but it is the first reverse movement of the scale I've had in 3 weeks. I'm going to keep eating 1750 and more on days I work out

bathsheba_c · August 2012

Go to the tools sections, and use the BMR calculator to figure out your basal metabolic rate (i.e. how many calories you need to keep your heart pumping, your gut digesting, and your spleen doing what spleens do). You want to be eating at least that every day in order to prevent your metabolism from slowing down too much.

Aside from metabolism, there are two reasons to make sure to eat enough calories. The first is to make sure you are getting enough vitamins and minerals in your diet. The second is that eating too few calories encourages your body to burn muscle along with fat, which is not ideal.

postrockandcats · August 2012

When you loose weight, you loose fat and muscle. That's just how weight loss works. You work out and strength train to build muscle to loose more fat than muscle. It works! Look at all the success stories and studies about loosing weight with diet alone vs with diet and exercise.

purple_potion · August 2012

Well everyone IS different, but this was my experience... right after having my second child, I weighed in at a 192 (and I'm only 5'2") so that's about 60 lbs over weight for my height... but I had already made up my mind that after giving birth, it was time to get serious about loosing weight!! So I cut my calories back to around 500 a day (sumtimes even fewer) and just did treadmill & occasionally elliptical for about 4-5 hours a week... Now I know that wasnt healthy... but in doing so, I steadily & rapidly lost weight!! In just a month and half, I had lost almost 50 lbs and was down to 145!!...which is on the very high end of a "normal weight range" for my height... (and also the weight that I always tend to get stuck at with very restrictive dieting...) lol
So do i think that eating less than 1200 cal a day will slow or halt ur metabolism?? Strictly based on MY (unhealthy) weight loss experience while being 60lbs overweight, Absolutely not!! And if ur currently satisfied with around 1000 cal a day and loosing 2lbs a week, I think adding the other 200 would only slow ur weight loss if anything.. at least until u become within ur normal weight range, and then ur diet may need sum tweaking if u want to continue loosing weight beyond that point**.. (personally, I do, because I'd prefer to be on the lower end of my "normal weight range"... but that's just me)

And as for what KIND of calories you eat, (with my experience) i don't think they're all created equal. because I've noticed that when most of my calories for the day come from drinks, there's a lesser number on the scale the next morning, as opposed to when most of my calories come from food... and lyk for instance, if you were to eat 1200 cal of something high in carbs like pasta, I think that's gonna take a lot longer to burn off than 1200 cal of sumthing lyk fruits & veggies... but idk, sum people say it doesn't matter and for them, it might not, but MY body seems to react differently to different types of calories ...so u just have to figure out wut works best for u and go with that!!

** Now for those of u who would lyk to know about my experience with trying to loose weight while being 10-15lbs above my "normal weight range", (while everyone is different and keep in mind that I'm now VERY sedentary and pretty much NEVER work out...) I've still found that cutting my calories way back has helped me loose weight, and loose it fast!! Only to a certain point though... I've cut calories back to lyk 500 a day (some days fewer) and lost about 15 lbs in 2 weeks (just bringing me down to that retched 145 mark lol)... then, nothin!! =\ So I think that's about how long (or either the weight at which) it takes MY body to figure out that I'm starving it, and shut my metabolism off lol But wut I've done after that is bring my calories back up by a few hundred, sum days eat around 1,200 and of course that'll make me gain a FEW pounds back, but not nearly everything that I lost... then my weight will usually be stuck at around 148-150 for a few weeks or so before my metabolism will adjust to my new weight, and allow for more rapid weight loss from restrictive dieting... (I've currently gotten down to 135 from following this diet routine.. (NOT THAT IT'S A HEALTHY ONE, I kno!! lol) but hopefully I'll be able to reach my goal of 115 reguardless!!

So (strictly for the purpose of weight loss) in my opinion, if your eating fewer than 1200 cal a day AND have STOPPED loosing weight by doing so, then your metabolism has prolly shut down and u need to start eating a little more to pick it back up.

But as for working out... it pretty much works lyk a drug... (as for me anyway) the more I do it, the more I have to, to get the same effect (in terms of weight loss) lyk if I've just started working out, I'll loose weight like crazy, AT FIRST... but then my body becomes accustomed to it, and I'll have to start working out longer, and harder, in order to keep loosing the same amount of weight and honestly, that's just sumthin I'm too lazy to do!! lol however, I have noticed tho, (when I'm at heavier weights) the same work out routine has more of an effect and for a longer period of time. So I actually think that (when in a "normal weight range" and accompanied with a low cal diet) exercising only when u've stopped loosing weight from dieting will have more of an effect and take less effort than vigorous daily exercise that u're body will just become accustomed to and need more of.

So: (and this is just MY personal, unhealthy opinion to weight loss) lol

But If your substantially over weight:
a low cal diet alone will drop pounds pretty quick without slowing ur metabolism... and when accompanied with exercise, will shed pounds lyk CrAzY fAsT!! =D

If ur a normal weight: Only exercising to fill in the weight loss gap of a low cal diet will have a quicker and more effortless weight loss effect.
Or if ur like me and just never want to exercise... fluctuating between low cal and normal cal diet will of course take longer than ^^, (because ur weight will SLIGHTLY elevate when eating normally again) but it will still be on a downward path (such as going down 3 stairs, and up 2, down 3, up 2... you'll still get to the bottom where u wanna be, it just takes a little longer

but will still be more effective than just remaining on a strictly low cal diet ..which (when already at a normal weight) usually shuts ur metabolism down, and prevents u from loosing ANYTHING!!

So in conclusion, (finally lol

I hope this EXTREMELY lengthy explanation has helped to answer sum questions without offending ne1!!

but pls remember, this is just MY experience with QUICK weight loss techniques that work for ME and I'm not suggesting that any of this is healthy, or should be replicated by anyone, in fact, it really shouldn't be!!.. but good luck to everyone in their weight loss journey and if u have any questions, pls feel free to message me!!

[/url

Question? Not enuf calories = slowed metabolism.. really?

Replies

Categories