Those who claim to be "full" off less than 1200 cals per day

Source: http://www.webmd.com/diet/guide/low-calorie-diets

Obesity, Weight Loss, and Very Low-Calorie Diets (VLCDs)

Traditional weight loss methods include low-calorie diets that allow between 800 to 1,500 calories a day and encourage regular exercise. However, an alternative method that moderately to severely obese people may consider for significant, short-term weight loss is the very low-calorie diet (VLCD).

Many VLCDs are commercially prepared formulas of 800 calories or less that replace all usual food intake. Others, such as the well-known grapefruit diet (also called the Hollywood Diet), rely on eating a lot of the same low-calorie food or foods. VLCDs are not the same as over-the-counter meal replacements, which are substituted for one or two meals a day.
How Effective Are Very Low-Calorie Diets?

A very low-calorie diet may allow a severely to moderately obese person to lose about 3 to 5 pounds per week, for an average total weight loss of 44 pounds over 12 weeks. Such a weight loss can improve obesity-related medical conditions, including diabetes, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol. However, VLCDs are no more effective than more modest dietary restrictions in the long-term maintenance of reduced weight. Combining a VLCD with behavioral therapy and exercise may increase weight loss and help keep it off for the long-term. Behavioral therapy helps you to recognize what causes you to overeat so that you can consciously change those behaviors.
Are Very Low-Calorie Diets Safe?

Very low-calorie diets are generally safe when used under proper medical supervision in people with a body mass index (BMI) greater than 30. Use of VLCDs in people with a BMI of 27 to 30 should be reserved for those who have medical complications resulting from their obesity.

VLCDs are not suitable for everyone. Doctors generally recommend them on a case-by-case basis and your doctor will decide whether or not such a diet is appropriate for you. VLCDs are not recommended for pregnant or breastfeeding women, and are not appropriate for children or adolescents except in specialized treatment programs. Due to the potential need for other medications for preexisting conditions, as well as the possibility of side effects, these types of diets may not be suitable for people over 50, either.
What Are the Side Effects of Very Low-Calorie Diets?

Many people on a very low-calorie diet for four to 16 weeks report minor side effects such as fatigue, constipation, nausea, and diarrhea, but these conditions usually improve within a few weeks and rarely prevent people from completing the program.

The most common serious side effect seen with VLCDs is gallstone formation. Gallstones, which frequently develop in obese people (especially women), are even more common during rapid weight loss. The reason for this may be that rapid weight loss appears to decrease the gallbladder's ability to contract bile. But, it is unclear whether VLCDs directly cause gallstones or whether the amount of weight loss is responsible for the formation of gallstones.
What Are the Other Drawbacks of Very Low-Calorie Diets?

To be healthy, we need a balance of foods from different food groups. It's quite difficult to get good nutrition in as few as 800 calories (even a dietitian would have trouble doing this), especially if one eats the same foods day after day.

Also, once you go off the diet, you will likely regain your weight unless you change your lifestyle and commit to healthy eating, regular physical activity, and an improved outlook about food. By sticking to a long-term commitment, you can prevent your weight from drifting back up the scale.

I will also throw in that I rest my case concerning people fiercely defend starving themselves.

This post was not offensive...but it will be taken offensively to people who are doing it.

I had to comment on this as I do feel offended!!!! I eat 900-1000 cals a day. I have my daily routine of food which in fact, does fill me up!!! Everyday for breakfast I have porridge with milk which is 183 cals and a banana which certainly fills me up. Then at lunch I have a huge salad or soup, which also fills me up. For dinner I usually have a healthy home cooked meal around 300 cals. A lot of the time I can't even finish my meals!!! I definitely do not 'starve' myself. I enjoy food and love eating healthy salads and low fat meals which I can have a lot of, rather than small portions of high cal food.

I am 157cm, so for my height, to just maintain my weight I can only eat 1200 cals a day. Am I supposed to just eat 1200 cals because people think I'm starving myself if I don't, and never lose weight?? Even though I have weight to lose?!

I really think it's unfair to judge people in my situation who eat less than 1200, as each person is different. If when I'm maintaining rather than losing, I ate the recommended 2000cals a woman should eat, I'd be setting myself up for a weight gain each week!!
I have had a checkup with my doctor and I am doing everything right. For someones body to be in starvation mode it's actually under 800 cals, not 1200!!

For the amount of cals I eat a day I have more than enough food and am always satisfied, because I make the right food choices. I consistently lose 2lbs a week, and this week am due to have lost 51lbs so far. I have been losing the weight for 5 months now and I am fitter and healthier than I have ever been. So I do have to completely disagree with this post.

I think you are misinformed.

Your BMR is probably 1200...that's not maintenance cals...that's how many cals your body uses to function. This is the prime example. You are at a proper weight...and NEED 1200 to function correctly. So unless you lay in your bed all day...you need more than that to maintain your weight....especially if you exercise regularly.

I would be skeptical of ANY doctor who encourages a consistent diet of less than 1200 calories to anyone at a proper weight (ie, not needing to lose a huge chunk of weight quickly). That's simply bad practice...and frankly, if (God forbid) you end up with any health issues from your restrictive diet...I would sue for malpractice.

I'm sorry you're offended. That wasn't my intention and I do wish you health.

Please do not patronise me. I fully understand how it works!!!!!!!!!!
My diet is not as restrictive as you think- I even ate a chocolate bar today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My point is, I eat a lot of low cal foods. Just because I choose to snack on cucumber and peppers and not a bag of crisps doesn't mean I starve myself. You are accusing people who eat 1000 cals like me of starving myself, and I'm telling you I do not starve myself. That is what has offended me. I do not want to argue about this, just wanted to give my input

Oh geez.

I am not patronizing you...but I can see that you're simply not going to listen to what I am saying.

I guess you could start a post about 1500 cals being fat and greedy....I'm thinking that won't go over too well though...try it.

I eat anywhere from 1200-2000 cals a day depending on activities and exercise. My weight loss is consistent 2lbs per week and I feel great. Never hungry...and I don't deprive myself. So, technically...am I still fat at 233 lbs? Yes. Am I greedy for wanting to eat? Well...yes I am! I will say this though....none of my nutrient requirements are in the negative at the end of the day

Fat and greedy. ABSOLUTELY! Go ahead and start that post. :laugh: (Now that WAS patronizing.)

You're taking this way too personally. I did not say "Rea_K, you're starving yourself"...you assumed that all by yourself.

You're both right in some aspects.

Rea...Your BMR according to Harris Benedict is 1396 before any multipliers are added.

Sedentary ... 1675
Sed. With 500 deficit ... 1175
Sed. With 700 deficit ... 975

Moderate activity ... 1919 (this is the 2000 RDA you mentioned)
With 500 deficit ... 1419
With 700 deficit ... 1219

I think that deficit may "work" as a weight loss tool if you're sedentary, but factoring in that you're quite close to goal, you may be at a point of re-evaluation of your caloric needs, especially if you're active or see stalling.

Again, that's just my two cents.

Thank you, I appreciate posts like this as you have taken the time go see why I eat 1000 cals, & don't just judge without knowing th facts first!!!!

I am very sedentary. My jobs means getting up at 5am, sitting in a car for 2 hours then sitting at my desk all day until U leave at 5:00pm, only to sit in the car for another 2 hours. I then get home at 7pm, make dinner, sit & eat. Let my food digest, then go to bed. I manage to get to the gym 3 days a week for an hour where I burn 600cals. Sometimes I eat all of these cals, sometimes I don't. I have one cheat day a week, sometimes I have 2.

People should take the time to find out these details before judging and assuming they k ow more about the persons diet than they do.

I know what I'm doing is right, that's why I've been successful.

Each week I review my cals intake. Next week they will probably increase. Also, when I'm maintaining I will follow the coerce steps to ensure I maintain.

You see we're not all dumb people who think that undereating is a good thing.

This is the point I was trying to make.

Honey, if you had read the entire thread...it was made clear that I was referring to people who had a CONSISTENT diet of less than 1200 per day. If you are eating back exercise cals...you don't happen to be one of those people. Unless of course you're taking in less than 1000 cals even after eating back exercise cals.

I am not going to start a post saying this, it was an example of the what you have done, just the other way round!! I do not have a problem with however many cals people choose to eat, and do not make it my business. I honestly don't care either. I care about my own weightloss journey and succeeding in that journey.

I do not and would not go out of my way on a supportive site where we are all for some reason or another in the same situation to make other people feel bad about themselves.

I don't care whether I fall in the category of people you are talking about or not, why categorise in the first place??


I will happily let you try and patronise me and be as sarcastic as you want, as I have a different agenda to you. I'm here to offer support to people, not try and prove people wrong.

So continue to say what you like, at least I know I do not offend people for no particular reason in the first place. Good luck to you in your weight loss journey, I hope nobody steps in your way.

Most people weren't offended.

I worry about people. I suppose I could mind my own business, but then...what's the point of being on this forum? What's the point of tickers and telling people everything in your journey? I'm not going to support something that is physically damaging to someones body...that's not being a friend, or supportive in any way shape or form.

If I started a post talking about how eating 4000 cals a day is the best way to lose weight...would people not try to prove me wrong? I'm thinking a whole lot of them would...and would have the best intentions at heart.

I am not going to start a post saying this, it was an example of the what you have done, just the other way round!! I do not have a problem with however many cals people choose to eat, and do not make it my business. I honestly don't care either. I care about my own weightloss journey and succeeding in that journey.

I do not and would not go out of my way on a supportive site where we are all for some reason or another in the same situation to make other people feel bad about themselves.

I don't care whether I fall in the category of people you are talking about or not, why categorise in the first place??


I will happily let you try and patronise me and be as sarcastic as you want, as I have a different agenda to you. I'm here to offer support to people, not try and prove people wrong.

So continue to say what you like, at least I know I do not offend people for no particular reason in the first place. Good luck to you in your weight loss journey, I hope nobody steps in your way.

Most people weren't offended.

I worry about people. I suppose I could mind my own business, but then...what's the point of being on this forum? What's the point of tickers and telling people everything in your journey? I'm not going to support something that is physically damaging to someones body...that's not being a friend, or supportive in any way shape or form.

If I started a post talking about how eating 4000 cals a day is the best way to lose weight...would people not try to prove me wrong? I'm thinking a whole lot of them would...and would have the best intentions at heart.

Just because someone is consistantly eating 1200cal a day does not mean they are doing physical damage to themselves. For the most part, the way I am eating now is the way I have eaten my whole life and I've never had a weight problem. I'm not over weight now, my BMI is 21.8, I just want to be at the weight I was at before I had my last child. As I said before not every "body" is the same, not everyone's situation is the same. When I was younger and more active I could comsume more calories because I was burning them off. Now my lifestyle has changed and I need to make a few small adjustment to my diet and be a little more mindful of food choices that I make, which is why I'm here. And no I have not starved myself my whole life, I have always been at a healthy weight, not underweight. So for "me" at this point in my life eating 1300 or so calories a day has lead me to gain 10lbs, to be where I want I need to make adjustments.

I never said anyone consistently eating 1200 cals is hurting your body. I said consistently eating considerably LESS than 1200 cals is damaging, and/or taxing on your body.

I'm also not sure how it's possible to gain weight eating 1300 cals a day. Your body uses that much by itself to simply function....not to mention whatever else you burn off during the day with normal activity (and believe it or not...BMR and maintenance are NOT the same thing) It takes 3500 calories surplus to gain 1lb. The math doesn't add up. Your body would have to use less than 300 cals a day by itself.