Low Cal, High Cal, Ima just eat my cals & feed the troll

Options
Look. It is not normal to eat 700 calories, okay, we all know this. The one thing I don't see much talk about is we also don't all need 2,000 calories. 1,200 is the minimum, or usually stated as such, and yes it seems low to some people. I have to say though I think people keep thinking what they want is what someone else wants. While you may want to look like Vin Diesel, someone else may want to look like Jim Carrey. While you want to look like Jillian Michaels, someone else wants to look like Paris Hilton or Kelly Clarkson (skinny or chubby, who knows). Now, telling someone who wants to be thin and not muscular to eat 2,000 calories is probably a bad idea. It is probably a worse idea if the person does not exercise regularly and you do not ask them to find out before telling them 1,200 calories is too low and they will lose muscle. Maybe they don't care if they lose muscle or have some to spare, once again, who knows. I just think if we give advice we should be clear about the other factors involved. IE: You should eat 2,000 calories and exercise 3+x per week if you want to be "cut" or gain muscle mass, but if you just want to lose weight and are less worried about if your tummy is soft or solid feel free to eat 1,200. Not just, "1,200 is not enough. You should eat 2,000/1,700/3,000,000" (you see my point) I, personally, despised all muscle until I came here and even now prefer to just be what a lot of you think of as "skinny fat". I actually prefer a bit of meat on my bones and don't even prefer skinny. The only reason I am trying to maintain and gain muscle mass is because I will be able to be more active with my kids. Otherwise, I would be more worried about weight loss and being a little more tone, but not so much bulky or oober muscular with any sort of pack, 2, 4, or 6. For some people who are single, without kids or just in general this may not matter as much as to lose a few pounds would. Just my opinion. If the person is eating 700 calories, by all means let them know that is insane unless they have a special reason, but otherwise I think it is silly to tell a person who seems healthy that 1,200 calories is not enough, especially since a real BMR test can often show results that low.
«1

Replies

  • Arunakae
    Options
    This is amazing and I absolutely agree with you. Thank you for taking the time to write this. I agree that everyone is unique and we can't just have this one speech for everyone, because not everyone has the same goals. I'm one of those people that wants to be muscular, I don't particularly want a six pack, I just want my tummy to be a little hard. But I'm also a bellydancer, and the dances often look better if you have a bit of meat on your bones. So, I don't mind a little fluff. I think you're wonderful for addressing this issue, feel free to add me if you like.
  • nikilis
    nikilis Posts: 2,305 Member
    Options
    people should calculate their BMR and healthy deficit full stop. I lot of people end up on 1200 or VLC diets through ignorance.

    I agree there is a lot of "GET IN MY BOX" advice. not everyone wants to go to the gym etc. but on the low end its about health. too low and you can do some serious damage to yourself. thats not really about looks, its about health. low cal intake can damage your health.

    in other news, have you seen this dog

    girl-and-a-laughing-dog.jpg

    gets me every time.
  • sunshinefrei
    Options
    Great post ! I am one of those who eats 1200 because I can't do any exercise or workouts like most!! If I eat more than this I gain weight.
  • Jonna13
    Jonna13 Posts: 288 Member
    Options

    in other news, have you seen this dog

    girl-and-a-laughing-dog.jpg

    gets me every time.

    Love it! :)
  • Kaiukas
    Kaiukas Posts: 111 Member
    Options
    I have been doing NET kcal of 1200 for 56 days now. I aimed to lose 1 lb a week and MFP sure has delivered: in 8 weeks I have lost 8lb. I do eat back all my exercise calories, so most days I end up eating quite a large amount, but today is my one day of rest a week and I will be having just 1200 kcal worth of very yummy healthy food.

    My fitness levels have soared which was my main aim to start with and I genuinely feel so good I could eat like that for the rest of my life without batting an eyelid. And, yes, I did calculate all my BMRs and TDEEs and what not and the result was: 1200 kcal (+exercise kcals).

    I think there are a lot of born-again dieters on this site and they feel the need to preach the message to everyone who has ears (and even those who don't). I understand their (over)excitement and don't hold it against them one bit. Yes, it can be mildly-to- moderately annoying sometimes, but hey! :wink:

    My advice: do your calculations and then see how it goes. If it doesn't work, check whether you have been accurate in your recordings and if need be, modify. And whatever you do, drink a loooooot of water (I am a born-again water guzzler :laugh: )

    :flowerforyou:
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,136 Member
    Options
    tennantclapping.gif
  • Verity1111
    Verity1111 Posts: 3,309 Member
    Options
    This is amazing and I absolutely agree with you. Thank you for taking the time to write this. I agree that everyone is unique and we can't just have this one speech for everyone, because not everyone has the same goals. I'm one of those people that wants to be muscular, I don't particularly want a six pack, I just want my tummy to be a little hard. But I'm also a bellydancer, and the dances often look better if you have a bit of meat on your bones. So, I don't mind a little fluff. I think you're wonderful for addressing this issue, feel free to add me if you like.
    Awesome! I actually am thinking of getting into belly dancing when I lose a little more. It seems so fun and it is the one dance I can do well. I've seen you around and Id love to add you. You seem very nice :] Thank you for the kind reply
  • Verity1111
    Verity1111 Posts: 3,309 Member
    Options
    @nikilis I kept seeing angry posts about low calorie diets and arguing and I think it is pointless. This is all about health for sure, but for some people healthy means having a better mental image. If eating less and not being as muscular as you would like makes the person feel happy then I think that is healthy in its own way. Love all the pictures you post! Lol

    @sunshinefrei I know what you mean. It really depends for me. I can eat around 1700 if I work out for a hour or two, but usually I need to eat less. I'm 5'4" and while some people my height can eat more, I gain and lose easily in both directions.

    @Kaiukas Nice work!!!! I could do to lose some more :] I think I have because I weighed today and I was 166.4 after I ate a cup of mac n cheese, a slice of bread with a veggie dog and drank a 16oz bottle of water. Lol. Id say I must be 1lb less at least and last time I was 166.6 woo I hope I am small when I double check tomorrow. Thank you for the input and experience. When I exercise I eat back about 85% of my calories or more.
  • Verity1111
    Verity1111 Posts: 3,309 Member
    Options
    @zyxst You have no idea how much I wanted to report/quote that picture just because it is awesome. lol!
  • californiagirl2012
    californiagirl2012 Posts: 2,625 Member
    Options
    Look. It is not normal to eat 700 calories, okay, we all know this. The one thing I don't see much talk about is we also don't all need 2,000 calories. 1,200 is the minimum, or usually stated as such, and yes it seems low to some people. I have to say though I think people keep thinking what they want is what someone else wants. While you may want to look like Vin Diesel, someone else may want to look like Jim Carrey. While you want to look like Jillian Michaels, someone else wants to look like Paris Hilton or Kelly Clarkson (skinny or chubby, who knows). Now, telling someone who wants to be thin and not muscular to eat 2,000 calories is probably a bad idea. It is probably a worse idea if the person does not exercise regularly and you do not ask them to find out before telling them 1,200 calories is too low and they will lose muscle. Maybe they don't care if they lose muscle or have some to spare, once again, who knows. I just think if we give advice we should be clear about the other factors involved. IE: You should eat 2,000 calories and exercise 3+x per week if you want to be "cut" or gain muscle mass, but if you just want to lose weight and are less worried about if your tummy is soft or solid feel free to eat 1,200. Not just, "1,200 is not enough. You should eat 2,000/1,700/3,000,000" (you see my point) I, personally, despised all muscle until I came here and even now prefer to just be what a lot of you think of as "skinny fat". I actually prefer a bit of meat on my bones and don't even prefer skinny. The only reason I am trying to maintain and gain muscle mass is because I will be able to be more active with my kids. Otherwise, I would be more worried about weight loss and being a little more tone, but not so much bulky or oober muscular with any sort of pack, 2, 4, or 6. For some people who are single, without kids or just in general this may not matter as much as to lose a few pounds would. Just my opinion. If the person is eating 700 calories, by all means let them know that is insane unless they have a special reason, but otherwise I think it is silly to tell a person who seems healthy that 1,200 calories is not enough, especially since a real BMR test can often show results that low.

    A real BMR test would be awesome, but really you can start with what MFP says and tweak your way to the correct calories for you. Not everyone has the chance to get a BMR test at a lab, but in general they will show most people have a lower RMR than they realize, and most people need less calories than they realize (that is how we all got fat in the first place).

    1200 is such a stupid number to get stuck on. What you need to eat for a deficit is relative to your RMR. If you are short you really don't have much room for up compared to the 1200. If you are taller you will have a higher RMR and can go up or down and still be in a deficit (way above 1200) so you can lose no matter what. All that matters is a calorie deficit.

    To tell everyone eat more is wrong.

    To tell everyone to eat less is wrong.

    To find the exact amount of calories for you to be in a sustainable calorie deficit is correct. Some people can handle a deeper calorie deficit than others. Some people have emotional eating disorders and it comes into play. Even a small deficit puts your body in a state of flux with hormones and such and everyone is different.

    You just need to find the correct calories for YOU to be healthy and sustainable and still lose weight. It might require some experimentation and tremendous patience. You can always notch up and down by 100 until you find what is sustainable and still allows you to lose weight.

    If you have emotional eating issues than you are not going to be able to handle such a deep deficit and if you eat to low it will backfire. A better strategy is to eat at a shallower deficit, and sometimes give yourself a break from the deficit and eat at maintenance. This is not going backwards, but eating to low and then binging because you can't sustain it is going backwards. It's better to stay forwards even if it is slower. The tortoise wins this race in the end.
  • Verity1111
    Verity1111 Posts: 3,309 Member
    Options
    One added side note: I spoke to a few "cut" people who were female and about 15% body fat and some of them stopped periods and had negative effects. If they want to do that, it is just fine, but I also think it is wrong to lecture people for having too high of a body fat if yours is too low according to normal standards. I know it is a bit cliche and ghetto, but I was told by a few people "You do you. I'ma do me" I don't mean that in a "get arrested for indecent exposure" way either Lol. Unless they are anorexic or bulimic or on the verge of death eating 4000 calories a day, with little or no exercise, I say relax
  • Verity1111
    Verity1111 Posts: 3,309 Member
    Options
    Look. It is not normal to eat 700 calories, okay, we all know this. The one thing I don't see much talk about is we also don't all need 2,000 calories. 1,200 is the minimum, or usually stated as such, and yes it seems low to some people. I have to say though I think people keep thinking what they want is what someone else wants. While you may want to look like Vin Diesel, someone else may want to look like Jim Carrey. While you want to look like Jillian Michaels, someone else wants to look like Paris Hilton or Kelly Clarkson (skinny or chubby, who knows). Now, telling someone who wants to be thin and not muscular to eat 2,000 calories is probably a bad idea. It is probably a worse idea if the person does not exercise regularly and you do not ask them to find out before telling them 1,200 calories is too low and they will lose muscle. Maybe they don't care if they lose muscle or have some to spare, once again, who knows. I just think if we give advice we should be clear about the other factors involved. IE: You should eat 2,000 calories and exercise 3+x per week if you want to be "cut" or gain muscle mass, but if you just want to lose weight and are less worried about if your tummy is soft or solid feel free to eat 1,200. Not just, "1,200 is not enough. You should eat 2,000/1,700/3,000,000" (you see my point) I, personally, despised all muscle until I came here and even now prefer to just be what a lot of you think of as "skinny fat". I actually prefer a bit of meat on my bones and don't even prefer skinny. The only reason I am trying to maintain and gain muscle mass is because I will be able to be more active with my kids. Otherwise, I would be more worried about weight loss and being a little more tone, but not so much bulky or oober muscular with any sort of pack, 2, 4, or 6. For some people who are single, without kids or just in general this may not matter as much as to lose a few pounds would. Just my opinion. If the person is eating 700 calories, by all means let them know that is insane unless they have a special reason, but otherwise I think it is silly to tell a person who seems healthy that 1,200 calories is not enough, especially since a real BMR test can often show results that low.

    A real BMR test would be awesome, but really you can start with what MFP says and tweak your way to the correct calories for you. Not everyone has the chance to get a BMR test at a lab, but in general they will show most people have a lower RMR than they realize, and most people need less calories than they realize (that is how we all got fat in the first place).

    1200 is such a stupid number to get stuck on. What you need to eat for a deficit is relative to your RMR. If you are short you really don't have much room for up compared to the 1200. If you are taller you will have a higher RMR and can go up or down and still be in a deficit (way above 1200) so you can lose no matter what. All that matters is a calorie deficit.

    To tell everyone eat more is wrong.

    To tell everyone to eat less is wrong.

    To find the exact amount of calories for you to be in a sustainable calorie deficit is correct. Some people can handle a deeper calorie deficit than others. Some people have emotional eating disorders and it comes into play. Even a small deficit puts your body in a state of flux with hormones and such and everyone is different.

    You just need to find the correct calories for YOU to be healthy and sustainable and still lose weight. It might require some experimentation and tremendous patience. You can always notch up and down by 100 until you find what is sustainable and still allows you to lose weight.

    If you have emotional eating issues than you are not going to be able to handle such a deep deficit and if you eat to low it will backfire. A better strategy is to eat at a shallower deficit, and sometimes give yourself a break from the deficit and eat at maintenance. This is not going backwards, but eating to low and then binging because you can't sustain it is going backwards. It's better to stay forwards even if it is slower. The tortoise wins this race in the end.

    That is exactly true. Everyone has their own number. Even if I am 5'4" 150lbs and you are 5'4" 150 lbs, we can have totally different BMR/RMR/TDEE (you get my drift) What I found to work best is to either start to slowly lower my calories, OR since I didnt know what I was originally, I started at 1200 and slowly each day I ate 100 more to see how high I could go without gaining or not losing any more. xoxo
  • prairiedawg2014
    Options
    geeez! i just upped my cals from 1200 to 1500 cuz of all the hype about not enuf cals! my weightloss stalled out and it wasn't moving. i just don't know what to believe anymore. upping my cals just scares me to death!
  • Verity1111
    Verity1111 Posts: 3,309 Member
    Options
    geeez! i just upped my cals from 1200 to 1500 cuz of all the hype about not enuf cals! my weightloss stalled out and it wasn't moving. i just don't know what to believe anymore. upping my cals just scares me to death!
    See, that is what I mean. When was it stalled, before or after you upped your intake? It depends on the person 100%. 1,200 is not too little unless you are working to build muscle and abs, but if someone just wants to lose weight and be a normal body type/thinner then 1,200 is okay to start.
  • NocturnalGirl
    Options
    Agreed, one number doesn't suit all. There are various factors that need to be considered such as goals, situation, activity, medical issues, etc. 1200 is just a random number someone made up, setting it as a base for everyone is wrong. Forget about that silly number, BMR and TDEE are the numbers that are more important.
  • nikilis
    nikilis Posts: 2,305 Member
    Options

    geeez! i just upped my cals from 1200 to 1500 cuz of all the hype about not enuf cals! my weightloss stalled out and it wasn't moving. i just don't know what to believe anymore. upping my cals just scares me to death!


    if you went straight from 1200 to 1500 in one day that could cause your body to go "whoa... hold up... what?" 1500 could be too high just like 1200 could be too low, see the formula I posted below. its a BMR calc that takes into account your bodyfat. it is much more accurate than the rest.

    stick with 1500 for now and make sure you watch your cals / micro nutrients. keep monitoring your weight and as long as it doesn't go up quickly (and more than 1lb - bowel movements cal weigh that much).

    also how are you weighing yourself and how long have you been eating 1500.

    you need to do the below BMR including the BF% its very important.
    See, that is what I mean. When was it stalled, before or after you upped your intake? It depends on the person 100%. 1,200 is not too little unless you are working to build muscle and abs, but if someone just wants to lose weight and be a normal body type/thinner then 1,200 is okay to start.

    The only way to figure out a good place to start is through calculating your BMR. you cannot tell anyone that 1200, or any other number is a good place to start without calculating their BMR as accurately as possible. without doing this, its just a guess.

    Everyone needs to calculate your BMR through the Katch-McArdle method, you should give it a go as a lot of the other calculations can be off by 300-500 cals a day. it could be similar, but its worth ruling out.

    doing that you have done your best to make sure your core calculations are correct.

    see below!

    this is the most accurate BMR you can get as it takes into account your BF%

    Katch-McArdle BMR:Considered the most accurate formula for those who are relatively lean.

    Use ONLY if you have a good estimate of your bodyfat %.

    calculate your body fat here
    http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/mbf/

    KM BMR
    http://www.calculatorpro.com/calculator/katch-mcardle-bmr-calculator/


    noone can say what anyones correct intake is without doing those calculations. high or low. yes 1200 might be correct for some people, but not others. others it could damage their health.

    YOU ARE GIVING BAD ADVICE! everyone should investigate their correct BMR and try to apply the formulas to their intake because thats what a nutritionist would do. its not about 1200 its about getting an idea of what should be normal for you.


    Vague and statistically incorrect information helps noone. not being a hater, just speaking the truth.
  • prairiedawg2014
    Options
    geeez! i just upped my cals from 1200 to 1500 cuz of all the hype about not enuf cals! my weightloss stalled out and it wasn't moving. i just don't know what to believe anymore. upping my cals just scares me to death!
    See, that is what I mean. When was it stalled, before or after you upped your intake? It depends on the person 100%. 1,200 is not too little unless you are working to build muscle and abs, but if someone just wants to lose weight and be a normal body type/thinner then 1,200 is okay to start.


    i stalled the last 3 weekis. just upped them today
  • prairiedawg2014
    Options
    i checked many bmr calculator sites, they all say anywhere from 1500 to 2000 cals a day is what i should be eating.
    iam almost 54 yrs old, 5'5" and 154 lbs. so i upped them to 1500
  • NocturnalGirl
    Options
    noone can say what anyones correct intake is without doing those calculations. high or low. yes 1200 might be correct for some people, but not others. others it could damage their health.

    YOU ARE GIVING BAD ADVICE! everyone should investigate their correct BMR and try to apply the formulas to their intake because thats what a nutritionist would do. its not about 1200 its about getting an idea of what should be normal for you.

    Agree with this also. BMR and TDEE is what's important. So is health.
  • babeinthemoon
    babeinthemoon Posts: 471 Member
    Options
    tennantclapping.gif

    Extra points for using David Tennant! Swoon!!!