Am i really eating too few calories?

hsacksy
hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
in Food and Nutrition
MFP has my daily goal set at 1,200 calories. Some days i'm over (never more than 150... except on my bf's birthday when i was over by 500 haha) but most days, especially on the days when i'm at the gym) i'm under by a few hundred.*

I see the warning at the end of the day "You may be eating too few calories" and i'm not losing the weight as steadily as i had hoped, so now i'm wondering... am i truly eating too few calories? And if i am, do i start eating more, even if how i'm eating now satisfies me?

*i am not eating less than 1,200 calories on purpose! i'm too hungry to starve myself on purpose ;-)

Replies

  • carly_am
    carly_am Posts: 145 Member
    You're just gonna have to play around with numbers and see what happens. Beware of quick fixes as, in my experience, it is all too easy to fall back into old habits.

    Just try out different things for a few weeks at a time and see what happens :)

    Good luck!!
  • FitNB
    FitNB Posts: 16
    Looked at your diary. You aren't below 1200 by much that often.

    People make the mistake of changing things up too soon. Just stick with what you are doing.
  • hsacksy
    hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
    Looked at your diary. You aren't below 1200 by much that often.

    People make the mistake of changing things up too soon. Just stick with what you are doing.

    Yeah, I have only been tracking since Dec1, and i am down 1lb... it took me a full year to loose my 1st 20 with WW, so i know that patience and sticking-with-it-ness is KEY.

    I was just curious about how literally i should take the little warning i get when i complete my daily log and i'm under. I don't want to accidentally be sabotaging my efforts.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Is that 1200 total calories, or 1200 net? In other words, do you eat more when you workout? If it's net and you pretty close each day then it's unlikely to be a problem. Very low calories may slow your metabolism, which may slow weight loss. But exercising increased metabolism, which can speed up weight loss. If you are eating just under 1200 net that's not really "very low calorie".

    Now, if you are eating just under 1200 total calories and burning a good number of those off during exercise, making your net much lower. Yeah, that could lead to slower weight loss over time.
  • metaphoria
    metaphoria Posts: 1,432 Member
    1200 is too little for most people. I found that out a couple years ago when I joined mfp the first time and started out on 1200 and ate back exercise calories, and I realized I was lethargic, cranky, stressing over calories and my hair started shedding more than usual. I was losing weight, but it was unhealthy and not a sustainable lifestyle.

    Go to fat2fit, they have a bunch of calculators to find out your total daily energy expenditure (calories you use in normal living), and make sure that you eat a couple hundred calories less than what you are burning, including exercise.

    I personally believe that mfp should change their calculations because many people start out relying only on what mfp set for them, like I did, and just about end up with an accidental anorexia. I'm very thankful for the many knowledgeable people on here who were happy to help out a total stranger. :)
  • Chief_Rocka
    Chief_Rocka Posts: 4,710 Member
    Two potential problems:

    1. Suboptimal micronutrition. Which is not to say you can't get adequate nutrients on 1,200 calories, but you certainly don't have much wiggle room.

    2. When you inevitably hit a plateau, it's going to be very difficult for you to reestablish an energy deficit.
  • hsacksy
    hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
    Is that 1200 total calories, or 1200 net? In other words, do you eat more when you workout? If it's net and you pretty close each day then it's unlikely to be a problem. Very low calories may slow your metabolism, which may slow weight loss. But exercising increased metabolism, which can speed up weight loss. If you are eating just under 1200 net that's not really "very low calorie".

    Now, if you are eating just under 1200 total calories and burning a good number of those off during exercise, making your net much lower. Yeah, that could lead to slower weight loss over time.

    Its net calories that are under. And no, i wouldn't say that i eat back enough of my calories on days where i work out more, and those are the days where MFP is telling me i still have tons of calories remaining.

    Example: Last Sunday... I ate 1586 food calories, burned about 843 at the gym (getting a HRM so i can try to gauge this better!!) so i only netted 743 that day!

    I'm still getting the hang of this kind of tracking. WW was the only program i tried before and i did have success with it... This is much more specific (what exactly IS a points plus anyway, right?!) and i'm still learning.

    Thanks EVERYONE for this feedback!
  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,228 Member
    If you are within 50 lbs of a healthy weight, then you should, at the very least, eat back your exercise calories. If you have your goal settings on 2 lbs a week loss, I would suggest raising it to 1 lb a week, or even 0.5 lbs a week. If you are within 50 lbs of goal, your health isn't really being compromised by your weight so there is no need to rush. However, if you are within 50 lbs of goal, eating too few calories can compromise your progress.
  • hsacksy
    hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
    If you are within 50 lbs of a healthy weight, then you should, at the very least, eat back your exercise calories. If you have your goal settings on 2 lbs a week loss, I would suggest raising it to 1 lb a week, or even 0.5 lbs a week. If you are within 50 lbs of goal, your health isn't really being compromised by your weight so there is no need to rush. However, if you are within 50 lbs of goal, eating too few calories can compromise your progress.

    i'm about 20lb from my goal, and i have my settings at 1lb per week. I'm not in a major rush, and i don't want to force it. I really do want to do it the right way. I haven't lost hope or anything... there's been no "why isn't this woooooorrrrking" whining.

    I literally posting because MFP is telling me i'm eating too few calories, and i wanted to hear other users thoughts on that. So far it sounds like i'm not really compromising my progress with how i'm currently eating, but i should probably plan better on my gym days.
  • metaphoria
    metaphoria Posts: 1,432 Member
    Mfp tends to overestimate your calories burned, as well. I love my hrm. I got one for $28 and it is accurate. Don't need the latest pretty coloured Polar to get a good result. :)
  • dawlschic007
    dawlschic007 Posts: 636 Member
    Since you are within 20 pounds of your goal weight, it would probably be a good idea to change your settings to 0.5 lb per week loss and then eat back the majority, if not all, of your exercise calories since that is the way MFP is designed. Also, you might want to look into changing your macros settings as well since MFP tends to set it for higher carbs and lower protein/fats. A good place to start is with 40% carbs/30% protein/30% fats (healthy).
  • hsacksy
    hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
    Don't need the latest pretty coloured Polar to get a good result. :)

    oh but that pink 4t was calling my name! haha :wink:
  • metaphoria
    metaphoria Posts: 1,432 Member
    Don't need the latest pretty coloured Polar to get a good result. :)

    oh but that pink 4t was calling my name! haha :wink:

    :laugh: I really like the pink, too. My lil ol Pyle hrm is a plain ol black. I should paint some glittery nail polish over it or something.
  • mgalsf12
    mgalsf12 Posts: 350 Member
    Good work! My only comment is where are the fresh fruits and vegetables in your diet?
  • hsacksy
    hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
    Good work! My only comment is where are the fresh fruits and vegetables in your diet?

    :blushing: been missing lately. now THERE'S a good new years resolution... more fruit and veg!
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    In my humble opinion 1200 is too few for most younger women. A few hundred below 1200 hundred (ie a few hundred below TOO FEW) is really too low.

    If you're really EATING more and it's your net that's too low, that's one thing...

    personally I try to EAT the same number (more or less) every day, and then not eat back. But I'm older (thus have a lower BMR) and still eating more.
  • healthylife56
    healthylife56 Posts: 32
    Yes you are. Up the calories
  • castell5
    castell5 Posts: 234 Member
    Don't just watch your calories, watch your protein and fat intake as well as fiber. If you are working out alot, make sure you aren't under eating protein.
    Everyone knows to go low fat to lose weight, but not so low that you are starving your body of needed fat.
    Also, to make sure you hit the necessary fat intake levels, make sure it's the "good" fats, not butter, not garbage, but peanuts, cashews, almonds, olive oil or some kind of fat like that.
  • katevarner
    katevarner Posts: 884 Member
    Please eat more. You need to NET 1200 per day. Eat back your exercise calories. You have several days under 1000. You need more than that.
  • thelovelyLIZ
    thelovelyLIZ Posts: 1,227 Member
    Yes, you need to eat more. 1200 is not some magic number, and for most people, especially active people 1200 still isn't enough for optimal health.
  • notenoughspeed
    notenoughspeed Posts: 290 Member
    If you're only 20 pounds away, I would say bump it down to .5 a week, and see how it goes. If you accurately log, and gain, no worries, bump it back down. I highly doubt you'll gain at .5 a week deficit. You can put yourself into a mode where your metabolism will slow down. Consider eating some of those calories it gives you back. Happy training. :)
  • Firefox7275
    Firefox7275 Posts: 2,040 Member
    I'm as concerned about the (lack of) quality of your diet as the quantity. Not enough fruit and veggies, tiny servings of fish (why?), 'meals' of 100 calories, few to no mineral rich foods, little to no dairy, high percentage of calories as processed junk .... IMO go back to basics and make sure you are consuming sufficient servings of all the food groups or an appropriate alternative. Forget calories, you are going to end up malnourished if not already.
  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,228 Member
    If you are within 50 lbs of a healthy weight, then you should, at the very least, eat back your exercise calories. If you have your goal settings on 2 lbs a week loss, I would suggest raising it to 1 lb a week, or even 0.5 lbs a week. If you are within 50 lbs of goal, your health isn't really being compromised by your weight so there is no need to rush. However, if you are within 50 lbs of goal, eating too few calories can compromise your progress.

    i'm about 20lb from my goal, and i have my settings at 1lb per week. I'm not in a major rush, and i don't want to force it. I really do want to do it the right way. I haven't lost hope or anything... there's been no "why isn't this woooooorrrrking" whining.

    I literally posting because MFP is telling me i'm eating too few calories, and i wanted to hear other users thoughts on that. So far it sounds like i'm not really compromising my progress with how i'm currently eating, but i should probably plan better on my gym days.

    You haven't compromised anything yet. But if your BMR is greater than 1200 calories, then you are not allowing yourself enough calories to get sufficient nutrition. This will be a problem eventually. The closer you are to your goal, the more likely it will be sooner than later.

    I'm sorry if that isn't the answer that you wanted, but it is the answer. Nutrition is a science, and despite popular belief, the human body generally responds to nutrients and nutrient defeciencies the same way. Many have posted here supporting the advice that I gave. With my advice, I included knowledge that I have obtained to support it. The statements that I made are documented facts. You could do some of your own research, and will likely learn the same things. Best of luck to you. I hope your progress continues.
  • hsacksy
    hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
    Thanks to everyone's feedback, i've realized that while i've been focusing on calories, i've been forgetting about quality. i am lactose-intolerant (fyi for those of you who have noted a lack of dairy in my diet) and i avoid red meat (i don't digest it well), but i love all fruit and veggies... I have just gotten lazy with my food shopping.

    So I think now, instead of worrying about my calorie intake (well, i mean, i'll still be tracking and sticking to a goal...) i'll try to focus more on what exactly i'm eating. I think i was mistaking eating "carefully" for eating well. and while i was making ok choices, what i am choosing from maybe isn't ideal.

    thanks for not attacking me and calling me an idiot, by the way. this is my first time participating in a message board community, and i was a little nervous!
  • zhiking
    zhiking Posts: 161 Member
    Since your lactose intolerant have you considered protein shakes you could add it to soy milk, rice or almond milk? this might also be an easy way to get some extra calories at least on your workout days -oh and since you said you were low on fruits why not add bananas, frozen berries etc to smoothie?
    This was an interesting thread. Not eating enough calories is not a problem with me!- but as a vegetarian I also need to think more about getting enough protein. I also like tofurky (soy based) it also has a lot of protein.
  • hsacksy
    hsacksy Posts: 15 Member
    The shake idea is a good one, for my workout days anyway. Silk makes a delish, premade fruit and protein shake that i really like. its a little expensive, which is why i don't keep it in the house regularly.

    I don't know much about protein powders, only that whey protein is really popular, and i can't have that since whey is a dairy ingredient.

Categories