Eating less than your recommended daily calorie intake?

2»

Replies

  • robin52077
    robin52077 Posts: 4,383 Member
    Robin, u really are harsh, and quite frankly it is a FACT if u eat less, u loose weight, does it matter in figures how MUCH less??
    Either way, your comments are supposed to be a supporting comment, not one that makes members (and anybody trying to loose weight) feel like they are doing something wrong when they are clearly progressing.

    Says the person who just joined, to the person who has done tons of research, helped tons of people, and REACHED their goal....

    Does it matter how much less? HELL YES! It matters a LOT! Do you only want the number on the scale to go down by any means necessary? If so, then by all means starve yourself. But the number on the scale will reflect loss of muscle, not just fat.

    You don't want to lose "weight". You want to lose FAT. and if you have too high a deficit you will lose MUSCLE. which is BAD. And if you have WAY too high a deficit, your hair can fall out, your skin will be dull, your metabolism will slow drastically...
    read this thread:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/174065-starvation-mode-is-real-and-ugly
    a first hand account of a woman who is dealing with the effects of long term underfeeding.

    You want to be HEALTHY, STRONG, SLIM,and FIT.....not "skinny".

    I am not being "harsh". My responses are to educate and help people. And I get way more inbox messages asking for help and way more thank you's than I do comments like yours .
  • runningneo122
    runningneo122 Posts: 6,962 Member
    Robin, u really are harsh, and quite frankly it is a FACT if u eat less, u loose weight, does it matter in figures how MUCH less??
    Either way, your comments are supposed to be a supporting comment, not one that makes members (and anybody trying to loose weight) feel like they are doing something wrong when they are clearly progressing.

    Says the person who just joined, to the person who has done tons of research, helped tons of people, and REACHED their goal....

    Does it matter how much less? HELL YES! It matters a LOT! Do you only want the number on the scale to go down by any means necessary? If so, then by all means starve yourself. But the number on the scale will reflect loss of muscle, not just fat.

    You don't want to lose "weight". You want to lose FAT. and if you have too high a deficit you will lose MUSCLE. which is BAD. And if you have WAY too high a deficit, your hair can fall out, your skin will be dull, your metabolism will slow drastically...
    read this thread:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/174065-starvation-mode-is-real-and-ugly
    a first hand account of a woman who is dealing with the effects of long term underfeeding.

    You want to be HEALTHY, STRONG, SLIM,and FIT.....not "skinny".

    I am not being "harsh". My responses are to educate and help people. And I get way more inbox messages asking for help and way more thank you's than I do comments like yours .

    WOOOOOOHOOOOOOO !! :flowerforyou: :flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:
  • 123Jude
    123Jude Posts: 56 Member
    so because i don't get people e-mailing me for help, or get comments, or because ive just joined, means i know nothing about this process, and i have done no research ??

    hmm, well i hope your happy with yourself for making me feel belittled, JUST BECAUSE ive just joined the site.

    if you "help" people so much, im sure these people will have had a "just starting point" at the first stage, so im sorry if ive JUST decided yes im fat and i need to do something about it, but hey, **** **** stinks.

    and im not somebody who wants to become the worlds fittest human, i just want to loose WEIGHT, FAT is obviously a part of that.
  • Xanadar
    Xanadar Posts: 23
    Eating too little will cause your metabolism to slow down. Remember, your body does not know you are trying to lose weight. If you are not getting enough nutrients, your body thinks food is scarce. It wants to keep you alive, and will slow things down if you are not eating enough. On the flip side of the coin, you cannot just eat 1200 or 1500 calories in one or two big meals. The same thing happens. Your metabolism slows down. NEVER skip a meal. Eat small meals six to eight times a day, about two to three hours apart. Keep it under 300 calories for breakfast, lunch and dinner, and have three or more snacks of 100- 200 calories each. This will boost your metabolism like you won't believe. I've been following this plan and have lost about 3/4 of a pound every day. If you are having trouble eating your required calories, I suspect that you are not hungry because your activity level is too low. If you increase your level of exercise, your body will require more calories, and will respond by increasing your hunger.
  • scagneti
    scagneti Posts: 707 Member
    I'm curious what people having trouble reaching 1200 calories a day are planning on doing once they're at that magical number on the scale that makes every day sunny life's problems just disappear. Do you just plan on undereating forever? How long do you think you have until your body has eaten away any muscle or tissue to protect itself from starving? Or is it that you're saying that you can't reach your target because you're hoping that by starving yourself, you'll shave a couple of weeks off your weight loss journey? Do you have a timelimit or something? If that's the case, what do you think will happen when your body -- that is used to eating less than 1200 calories a day for YEARS -- when it's reintroduced to maintainence calories? Do you think it'll be all "oh I can totally adapt to this new caloric amount and will use it properly"? 'Fraid not. That's why this likely isn't your first time going through weight loss, and frankly won't be your last time.

    And your body isn't hungry because you've CONSTANTLY UNDERFED IT so it doesn't bother to waste what little fuel it has sending messages to your brain or stomach to let you know that you're hungry because you've ignored it for so long.

    My left eye is extremely poor. I grew up in the country with practically no access to doctors and eye exams weren't exactly top priority. I didn't bother telling anyone when I was a kid because I honestly thought everyone's left eye was weaker than the right one. By the time it was noticed, I was in my early twenties (after I had moved to the city), so I went to as many eye specialists as I could find. Every one of them has said that by then, it was too late for corrective lens/surgery because my brain has learned over the years to ignore any information from my left eye and to rely solely on my right eye. I've continued to try eye specialists to see if science has caught up with me, but sadly, that's confirmed time and time again. So if I have my right eye closed and my left eye sees a Mac truck heading towards me, my brain will not register the danger. Doesn't mean the danger isn't there, just my brain won't register it.

    (hopefully you can see how that relates to hunger signals, but if not, left eye seeing danger = chronically underfed body experiencing hunger.)
  • sdoherty1000
    sdoherty1000 Posts: 146 Member
    My story is this, in the first 2 months I lost loads of weight really quick and then it stuttered, in march I haven't lost that much and here's why. On a saturday I would weight myself and noticed only a slight drop in weight but then by Tuesday I had put on a kg- 1.5kg then by Saturday I was still heavier than what I weighted in at the week previous. I then started making sure my net cals were 1200 or higher and the weight is now dropping off again at a decent rate. In my opinion you should make sure your net calories is higher than 1200. You need to eat more to lose more and this is certainly working fr me at the minute.

    Today I burnt 1079 calories in the gym which now gives me a total of 2469 calories which I intend to use till me net is 1200
  • kfue
    kfue Posts: 17
    If one day I go WAY(~300-400) over my calories and the next day I exercise a ton and am under my daily calorie intake, is that a bad thing?

    I still have 400 calories left to consume today (already entered in my dinner). I just don't wanna send my body into shock.

    Anyone know?
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,432 MFP Moderator
    I can tell you that the study that i did on mfp and posted suggested those with lower body fats ate more. I can tell you there is a thread right now on eating more to lose more works, from personal experience and working with others on this board and i can tell you hih deficit cause muscle loss which causes your metabolism to slow down. So i ask is a little more short term weight loss greater than longer terms weight loss? I can tell you when you lose a lot od weight quickly and much of which is muscle it sure makes losing weight more difficult in the long term. Hell people on the hcg tend to lose 50% of their weight from muscle loss. So i question do you plan to always eat vlcd or would you like to be able to eat 2000+ calories without gaining weight?
  • samkomissarov
    samkomissarov Posts: 2
    I'm curious what people having trouble reaching 1200 calories a day are planning on doing once they're at that magical number on the scale that makes every day sunny life's problems just disappear. Do you just plan on undereating forever? How long do you think you have until your body has eaten away any muscle or tissue to protect itself from starving? Or is it that you're saying that you can't reach your target because you're hoping that by starving yourself, you'll shave a couple of weeks off your weight loss journey? Do you have a timelimit or something? If that's the case, what do you think will happen when your body -- that is used to eating less than 1200 calories a day for YEARS -- when it's reintroduced to maintainence calories? Do you think it'll be all "oh I can totally adapt to this new caloric amount and will use it properly"? 'Fraid not. That's why this likely isn't your first time going through weight loss, and frankly won't be your last time.

    And your body isn't hungry because you've CONSTANTLY UNDERFED IT so it doesn't bother to waste what little fuel it has sending messages to your brain or stomach to let you know that you're hungry because you've ignored it for so long.

    My left eye is extremely poor. I grew up in the country with practically no access to doctors and eye exams weren't exactly top priority. I didn't bother telling anyone when I was a kid because I honestly thought everyone's left eye was weaker than the right one. By the time it was noticed, I was in my early twenties (after I had moved to the city), so I went to as many eye specialists as I could find. Every one of them has said that by then, it was too late for corrective lens/surgery because my brain has learned over the years to ignore any information from my left eye and to rely solely on my right eye. I've continued to try eye specialists to see if science has caught up with me, but sadly, that's confirmed time and time again. So if I have my right eye closed and my left eye sees a Mac truck heading towards me, my brain will not register the danger. Doesn't mean the danger isn't there, just my brain won't register it.

    (hopefully you can see how that relates to hunger signals, but if not, left eye seeing danger = chronically underfed body experiencing hunger.)



    in two months alone i lost 13 pounds because when i burn off my calories i dont eat them back. If your not hungry dont eat!! DUH its not rocket science. I am by no means starving im just active and eat healthy. Sorry if i cant stuff my face when im not hungry just to hit a calorie goal. Not being a glutten doesnt mean your starving it means your not hungry.
  • Rays_Wife
    Rays_Wife Posts: 1,173 Member



    in two months alone i lost 13 pounds because when i burn off my calories i dont eat them back. If your not hungry dont eat!! DUH its not rocket science. I am by no means starving im just active and eat healthy. Sorry if i cant stuff my face when im not hungry just to hit a calorie goal. Not being a glutten doesnt mean your starving it means your not hungry.

    You just missed the whole point of her post. DUH! :flowerforyou:
  • CyeRyn
    CyeRyn Posts: 389 Member
    Nice thread necro!
  • anifani4
    anifani4 Posts: 457 Member
    Many times I am under... but oh well

    NO, not "oh well".

    There are many, many negative ramifications of being underfed.

    Please everyone, rethink your goals. If you only have a small amount to lose (say, less than 50 pounds) do NOT set it for 2 lbs a week, you will be creating too large a deficit. People with more to lose can start with the higher deficit but will have to eat MORE as they LOSE, believe it or not.
    You need to FUEL your body, not STARVE it, in order to lose weight healthily.

    Set it to half pound or 1 lb a week, eat healthy foods, drink a lot of water , and move your body in any way you can. EAT all your calories for the day and you will look AND feel better, I promise!

    I am now maintaining at 103-108 on any given day and I eat close to 2000 a day.
  • sml1974
    sml1974 Posts: 1
    I am over 450 lbs. My intake is between 1000-1400 calories a day though it tells me to shoot for 2700... No way can I eat that much when I'm watching what I eat. I'm keeping carbs below 70 and proteins over 100.
  • drfalktorres
    drfalktorres Posts: 30 Member
    It's better to look at it over the week, as there will be some days when you may be over your goal and it would balance out. I too am often under my calorie goal, but there are also times I've over...! ;-)
  • DamnImASexyBitch
    DamnImASexyBitch Posts: 740 Member
    I'm usually just barely under, so I don't think it's that big of a deal. I'm still learning balance and portion control at this point so I'd rather be slightly under ( I'm talking like 25 calories difference ) than be above.
  • yellowbird591
    yellowbird591 Posts: 3 Member
    Starvation mode is a myth according to one poster who linked to some research. Apparantly, you have to not eat ANYTHING for 2 and a half days to get to starvation mode!! I think going under a couple hundred cals every so often is ok.

    i have seen a lot of research that supports this... i.e. if you look up the benefits of fasting. It really doesn't make sense for your body to go into "starvation mode" if you eat 200 cals under your BMR. We evolved to survive DAYS without food.. not a few hours.
  • Alovett1
    Alovett1 Posts: 4 Member
    Im at a deficit today, but just don't feel like eating. Can't believe I just said that! Yesterday I was over a bit, so I'm ok with being under today. I know how you feel. I don't want to eat when I'm not hungry.
  • photojunkie28
    photojunkie28 Posts: 292
    my goal is 1800 I stay around 1500

    If you chose 2 lbs a week, you already have a 1000 calorie deficit, If you eat 300 below goal you are eating at a 1300 calorie deficit, which is way too much. That's just over 2.5 lbs a week, which is too much unless it is monitored closely by a doctor.

    Your weigh loss will stall, you'll wonder why, you'll lower it more, you will be sick and starving. You need to RAISE it, not lower it.

    Tough love, people. I am not trying to sound mean.
    It's just that half the women on this site are undereating and most don't even realize it.
    Most would lose weight faster and healthier if they ate MORE.


    THIS! I just recently found out that even though I dont feel like I need to eat more than 1800 calories most days, I need to in order to lose weight and be healthy. My body is revolting and I havent had my period in 3 months because of it (sorry if that was TMI...but food is important people)

    Just to put it in perspective. I am 5'5 28 years old, weight 168 with a BF% of about 27% and need to eat more than 1800 calories to LOSE weight. 1800 was apparently too big of a deficit for me.

    P.S. My information came from a health professional.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,432 MFP Moderator
    Does everyone realize this thread if from Feb of 2011 right?
This discussion has been closed.

Categories