How much should I worry about net calories being "too low"

Options
fieldeffect
fieldeffect Posts: 8
in Health and Weight Loss
I'm very overweight, and a month ago started a serious diet and gym program that i'm enjoying. It's working fantastically (down from 113Kg to 106Kg in just over four weeks), and while I am usually eating the 1200 calorie minimum that most experts seem to recommend and eating a well rounded diet nutritionally, the exercise i'm doing usually takes my net calories down to about 800 per day. This has actually turned into a routine for me - I set my MFP target to 800, with the intention of eating 1200 and burning 400 in exercise, so basically I have to exercise to "earn" my dinner :)

As I said it is working incredibly well so far, and is easily manageable (I don't get too hungry most of the time, and when I do, I snack on apples and low cal vegetables), so I want to keep going like this, but i've seen a lot of warnings that very low net calories risks me slowing my metabolism a lot in the long term and hitting a brick wall with weight loss. My theory as to why my metabolism isn't slowing down is that i'm keeping it active with lots of exercise, but I have no scientific basis for that.

So should I...

a) Stick at it the way that I am, on the basis that it is working?

b) Stick at it the way I am, and start to look at changes only if the weight loss slows down a lot?

c) Change now because i'm going down a path that is going to make me hit a brick wall eventually?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

BTW I am as of today 106Kg, my short term goal (by Christmas) is 100Kg, what I feel I would be happy with is 90Kg, and my "proper" target weight is 80Kg.

Replies

  • GrAlVt
    GrAlVt Posts: 42
    Options
    The more overweight you are, the longer it takes for the slowdown to happen. I'm down from 133 kg to 94 kg since last Fall. It's taken almost that long for me to run into the wall, but it WILL happen. I was surprised too when for the first 3-6 months I consistently lost 2 or more pounds a week, but that's down to about 1 pound every 3 weeks more recently, in part due to the decrease in activity and increase in calories. In my case, I can eat 3000 calories a day and still lose weight over the course of a month. Coming back up to 3000 from a 2000-2500 limit probably let my metabolism stabilize as well.

    Short answer is a question. Can you keep doing what you're doing for the rest of your life? If so, then go for it. Eventually your body will settle into the shape and size best suited to your intake and activity. It's entirely possible, though, that stable point will not be the physical result you expected. My original goal was 230, just over 50 pounds down from my original. My body, even at 208 lbs now, is still no where near where I want it to be. To get there, I'll probably have to go below 200 and add some muscle. My end weight will probably be 185-190, if I don't bulk up.

    Keep in mind, when you reach your goal, metabolic stability is a good thing. It'll help you maintain instead of change your weight. The lower your final metabolic rate, however, the less robust you'll be against binges, moments of weakness, and changes in your daily diet.
  • tracymat
    tracymat Posts: 296 Member
    Options
    I'm curious about people's opinion about this too. Most days when I'm working all day and busy I have no problem staying at 1000 -1200 calories - with exercise it brings me quite low.

    I just started this and am losing so far..... wondering if this is somethign that will hurt me eventually also.
  • Helloitsdan
    Helloitsdan Posts: 5,564 Member
    Options
    As long as you continue getting stronger on a week to week basis by progressively loading weight you'll be fine for a while.
    By progressive loading I mean adding more reps per session up to 15 in a weight then adding 5lbs then lifting to failure.
    This double progressive method will give the best results when starting out.
    Now if you could lose the same amount if weight eating a proper dietary number like 1600+ daily then I'd say go that route.
    It's more sustainable and won't negatively effect RMR/BMR.
    Just remember that the day you move to maintenance, 2k-3k in most adults, if RMR/BMR is reduced you'll probably gain.
    Also keep in mind that even though you are losing fat, you ate also giving good reason for fat to exist on you because you are eating so low.
    That said when you eat above TDEE for a given day ie thanksgiving or any large portion day you'll probably partition the nutrients to fat as storage.
  • PaveGurl
    PaveGurl Posts: 244 Member
    Options
    As long as you continue getting stronger on a week to week basis by progressively loading weight you'll be fine for a while.
    By progressive loading I mean adding more reps per session up to 15 in a weight then adding 5lbs then lifting to failure.
    This double progressive method will give the best results when starting out.
    Now if you could lose the same amount if weight eating a proper dietary number like 1600+ daily then I'd say go that route.
    It's more sustainable and won't negatively effect RMR/BMR.
    Just remember that the day you move to maintenance, 2k-3k in most adults, if RMR/BMR is reduced you'll probably gain.
    Also keep in mind that even though you are losing fat, you ate also giving good reason for fat to exist on you because you are eating so low.
    That said when you eat above TDEE for a given day ie thanksgiving or any large portion day you'll probably partition the nutrients to fat as storage.

    ^this^

    you can lose on what you're doing, but you're not really fueling your body, so it will hold on to fat to make sure it can continue to survive. You're kinda making your body choose what it should fuel by eating so little - and then it holds on to stuff to keep you moving. It doesn't know WHY you're starving it, just that it's not getting enough fuel. Kinda like a car - if you don't keep fuel in the tank, eventually, it will shut down. Right now, it's got lots of fuel - on your body - to pull from, but it also knows it's not taking in new stuff, which it will eventually need.
  • rides4sanity
    rides4sanity Posts: 1,269 Member
    Options
    Have you tried 1400-1600 with the exercise? It might work just as well for you, and provide your body with more fuel for your workouts. I'm not a "starvation" person, but I do believe our bodies adapt to the situation. If I don't give my body adequate nutrition, whether too few calories or not enough protien, whatever, it will not function at optimal levels. Personally I don't like feeling sluggish and weak, so I try to eat over my BMR, at a relatively high protien level and add extra calories (~50% of what I burn) to fuel any workpouts I have planned. This I can live with, so this I can maintain.

    I'm also not a big fan of meal replacement drinks, but if you look at my diary that's what I've done the past 2 days, because I've been a little under the weather and didn't feel much like eating, but I wanted the nutrients. Peace.

    Good Luck!
  • prietys
    prietys Posts: 11 Member
    Options
    As long as you continue getting stronger on a week to week basis by progressively loading weight you'll be fine for a while.
    By progressive loading I mean adding more reps per session up to 15 in a weight then adding 5lbs then lifting to failure.
    This double progressive method will give the best results when starting out.
    Now if you could lose the same amount if weight eating a proper dietary number like 1600+ daily then I'd say go that route.
    It's more sustainable and won't negatively effect RMR/BMR.
    Just remember that the day you move to maintenance, 2k-3k in most adults, if RMR/BMR is reduced you'll probably gain.
    Also keep in mind that even though you are losing fat, you ate also giving good reason for fat to exist on you because you are eating so low.
    That said when you eat above TDEE for a given day ie thanksgiving or any large portion day you'll probably partition the nutrients to fat as storage.

    Hi Dan,
    Could you explain a bit more on "By progressive loading I mean adding more reps per session up to 15 in a weight then adding 5lbs then lifting to failure." Or point me to where you have already explained it :)

    Thanks
  • geekyjock76
    geekyjock76 Posts: 2,720 Member
    Options
    Hi Dan,
    Could you explain a bit more on "By progressive loading I mean adding more reps per session up to 15 in a weight then adding 5lbs then lifting to failure." Or point me to where you have already explained it :)

    Thanks
    Volume, in exercise, is the amount of resistance x number of repetitions you do. What he means is that you are alternating between increasing the number of repetitions done per exercise and then increasing the resistance. You must continue to place greater stress on the skeletal muscular system to progress and get stronger/increase lean body mass.

    For example, you start with a set of 8 reps doing 5 lb front shoulder raises. If one is a beginner, doing that for 3 weeks will get rather easy, thus, you'll need to adjust the volume as such in the following example:
    Week 4: 15 reps x 5 lbs
    Week 8: 10 reps x 8 lbs
    Week 12: 15 reps x 8 lbs
    Week 16: 10 reps x 10 lbs
  • Espressocycle
    Espressocycle Posts: 2,245 Member
    Options
    It's fine to do this if you are very overweight -pretty much what they do on The Biggest Loser. 400 exercise calories isn't a huge difference one way or the other for a large person.
  • 3foldchord
    3foldchord Posts: 2,918 Member
    Options
    I dunno..
    Personally, I now I should eat more, BUT When I eat enough calories my macros and Sodium, etc. are all messed up. I can't get it ALL done and balanced every day and it is driving me CRAZY.

    I guess if you have energy and feel good (not tired, moody, lethargic, etc) it's not too horrible- that is what I am telling myself right now.
  • Helloitsdan
    Helloitsdan Posts: 5,564 Member
    Options
    What the jock said!
    =D
  • fieldeffect
    fieldeffect Posts: 8
    Options
    Have you tried 1400-1600 with the exercise? It might work just as well for you, and provide your body with more fuel for your workouts. I'm not a "starvation" person, but I do believe our bodies adapt to the situation. If I don't give my body adequate nutrition, whether too few calories or not enough protien, whatever, it will not function at optimal levels. Personally I don't like feeling sluggish and weak, so I try to eat over my BMR, at a relatively high protien level and add extra calories (~50% of what I burn) to fuel any workpouts I have planned. This I can live with, so this I can maintain.

    I'm also not a big fan of meal replacement drinks, but if you look at my diary that's what I've done the past 2 days, because I've been a little under the weather and didn't feel much like eating, but I wanted the nutrients. Peace.

    Good Luck!

    Every time I consider upping my calorie intake, a little voice in my head reminds me that every 3500 calories I eat is a pound that I haven't lost. I know it's nowhere near that simple, but psychology is a ***** :)

    I guess I should have a word with my inner demon and tell him that even if I accepted his reasoning, an extra couple of hundred cals a day only adds up to half a pound a week.

    My vague plan is to try to lose weight aggressively down to a level (maybe 90Kg), then change my diet a lot to go into an almost maintenance mode and slowly lose the last 10 down to 80Kg over a much longer period (on the basis that i'll be less likely to bounce back because by that point I should be in a fairly stable state).
  • GauchoMark
    GauchoMark Posts: 1,804 Member
    Options
    Don't worry about the NUMBER as much as the RESULTS.

    The numbers are there as a guide and starting point, but ALL of them are estimates. Stick with a reasonable routine for a while and then take a look at the results that you got from that routine. If the results are not too drastic and you are making steady progress, don't change things. If you are losing too fast or slow, tweak your routine some.

    Just be sure to be collecting enough data all along so you can actually see your results.
  • prietys
    prietys Posts: 11 Member
    Options
    Hi Dan,
    Could you explain a bit more on "By progressive loading I mean adding more reps per session up to 15 in a weight then adding 5lbs then lifting to failure." Or point me to where you have already explained it :)

    Thanks
    Volume, in exercise, is the amount of resistance x number of repetitions you do. What he means is that you are alternating between increasing the number of repetitions done per exercise and then increasing the resistance. You must continue to place greater stress on the skeletal muscular system to progress and get stronger/increase lean body mass.

    For example, you start with a set of 8 reps doing 5 lb front shoulder raises. If one is a beginner, doing that for 3 weeks will get rather easy, thus, you'll need to adjust the volume as such in the following example:
    Week 4: 15 reps x 5 lbs
    Week 8: 10 reps x 8 lbs
    Week 12: 15 reps x 8 lbs
    Week 16: 10 reps x 10 lbs

    Thank You !

Categories