Losing 0.5 to 1 pound per day...Health Risks?

Options
123578

Replies

  • ApexLeader
    ApexLeader Posts: 580 Member
    Options
    Honestly? If you starve yourself to potentially lose 5 pounds a week then most likely you will find yourself back in the same place you are after your first huge weight loss in a few years. Eating at such a deficit screws with your metabolism and will cause you more problems when your older and trying to keep yourself on track. Why do you feel it's good to rush it the way you plan to? Listen to the podcasts for Fat 2 fit radio (fat2fitradio.com), they really adress the health aspects, healthy ways to lose weight, and the reality of eating healthy at a healthy calorie range.

    for obese people, it really doesn't screw with their metabolism

    False.
    The obese women in this study lost, on average, 2.1kg of their FFM (fat-free mass, also known as lean body mass or LBM) on a very low calorie diet.
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002604950900122X
    (don't really know if you guys will be able to access it, but I can because I'm on my university campus and hooked up to the university WiFi)

    yeah, and what was their resting metabolic rate after the study compared to others average in the same mass range?
  • poopieslippers
    poopieslippers Posts: 25
    Options

    If this was for me, it was not intended as a negative post - you mentioned getting a refund on your biochem class. I underlined that the info was not correct.

    The rest was intended in a more joking manner after your post - I apologise if my post is seen as being negative - my intent is to provide you with the info you requested - the health risk and a very light smatter of the science behind protein synthesis.

    I meant to put negative in quotation marks....Referring to the post that I didn't see that detailed a negative experience. Not sure if it was yours.
  • flutterbye811
    flutterbye811 Posts: 86 Member
    Options
    Honestly? If you starve yourself to potentially lose 5 pounds a week then most likely you will find yourself back in the same place you are after your first huge weight loss in a few years. Eating at such a deficit screws with your metabolism and will cause you more problems when your older and trying to keep yourself on track. Why do you feel it's good to rush it the way you plan to? Listen to the podcasts for Fat 2 fit radio (fat2fitradio.com), they really adress the health aspects, healthy ways to lose weight, and the reality of eating healthy at a healthy calorie range.

    for obese people, it really doesn't screw with their metabolism

    False.
    The obese women in this study lost, on average, 2.1kg of their FFM (fat-free mass, also known as lean body mass or LBM) on a very low calorie diet.
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002604950900122X
    (don't really know if you guys will be able to access it, but I can because I'm on my university campus and hooked up to the university WiFi)

    yeah, and what was their resting metabolic rate after the study compared to others average in the same mass range?

    Where is your study/proof that "for obese people, it really doesn't screw with their metabolism,"?
  • PetulantOne
    PetulantOne Posts: 2,131 Member
    Options
    Well, you answered your own question in a way. How did it work out for you last time? You gained all the weight back. What do you think is going to happen this time?

    Why not take a sensible approach and more importantly - use that approach on a PERMANENT basis so you're not gaining and losing weight constantly. If you "felt great" on 1200 calories then why did you regain all the weight? Because you didn't feel great on 1200, you needed (and wanted) to eat a lot more. And you did, resulting in the destruction of your previous losses.

    Moderate deficit, lots of time. Give yourself a year at least. Even better - two.

    QFT
  • haroon_awan
    haroon_awan Posts: 1,208 Member
    Options
    One part of me wants to be helpful and say this:
    You know the answer to this already. How? You've done it before:
    "College came, and I gained all of that weight back."
    If you don't learn from your mistakes, you are bound to repeat them.

    The other half of me wants to say:
    How can someone so stupid graduate from college?

    Good luck.
  • now_or_never13
    now_or_never13 Posts: 1,575 Member
    Options
    My bet is that you aren't going to listen to any of the advice here and continue down your dangerous and unhealthy path. It is not a smart way to lose weight.

    There have been so many people who have given you examples of what can/could/will happen to you should you continue down this path yet you do not want to listen or take their advice.

    Since you are young you should be thinking about your health and how what you do now will affect you in years to come.
  • rummyqueen
    rummyqueen Posts: 163 Member
    Options
    You need to eat the right fats and calories and the right carbohydrates to lose weight and keep it off and build lean strong muscles.you cant starve yourself,ya you will lose weight like that and lose muscles but then it will all come back.
  • ApexLeader
    ApexLeader Posts: 580 Member
    Options

    yeah, and what was their resting metabolic rate after the study compared to others average in the same mass range?

    Where is your study/proof that "for obese people, it really doesn't screw with their metabolism," sociopath?

    i'm refuting the minnesota starvation experiment as it applies to obese people since that experiment followed people at or near their ideal weight ranges who were on calorie restricted diets for 6 months. it only applies to people in an ideal weight range on a restricted diet for a long time.

    if people are going to say that obese people restricting their diets is going to screw up their metabolism, they need to provide proof. the entire point of the starvation experiment was to show the effects of starvation AFTER the body's fat and glycogen stores were already used up. obese people don't have that problem. so why would their metabolism slow significantly if their bodies still have energy stores?
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Options

    If this was for me, it was not intended as a negative post - you mentioned getting a refund on your biochem class. I underlined that the info was not correct.

    The rest was intended in a more joking manner after your post - I apologise if my post is seen as being negative - my intent is to provide you with the info you requested - the health risk and a very light smatter of the science behind protein synthesis.

    I meant to put negative in quotation marks....Referring to the post that I didn't see that detailed a negative experience. Not sure if it was yours.
    ah, no. Carry on. :)
  • poopieslippers
    poopieslippers Posts: 25
    Options
    Well, you answered your own question in a way. How did it work out for you last time? You gained all the weight back. What do you think is going to happen this time?

    Why not take a sensible approach and more importantly - use that approach on a PERMANENT basis so you're not gaining and losing weight constantly. If you "felt great" on 1200 calories then why did you regain all the weight? Because you didn't feel great on 1200, you needed (and wanted) to eat a lot more. And you did, resulting in the destruction of your previous losses.

    Moderate deficit, lots of time. Give yourself a year at least. Even better - two.

    QFT

    I think I regained it because I stopped exercising and was eating pizza for dinner every day because the food in my cafeteria was disgusting. (I'm being honest here.) I stopped exercising because there was 'not enough time' with all of my studying (I had a full credit load ever semester - chem/bio double major). I also really started playing video games. That distracted me when I wasn't focused on school.

    I could have kept it off, but essentially I was lazy and failed to do that. I have a pretty stable life now, so maintaining my goal weight should not be as much of a problem (I mean, I did it for about a year or so before).





    At any rate, at the suggestion of most of the community, I will increase my daily intake (to about 2,000). Does that sound more reasonable?
  • purpleipod
    purpleipod Posts: 1,147 Member
    Options
    Yes, by far.
  • flutterbye811
    flutterbye811 Posts: 86 Member
    Options
    Well, you answered your own question in a way. How did it work out for you last time? You gained all the weight back. What do you think is going to happen this time?

    Why not take a sensible approach and more importantly - use that approach on a PERMANENT basis so you're not gaining and losing weight constantly. If you "felt great" on 1200 calories then why did you regain all the weight? Because you didn't feel great on 1200, you needed (and wanted) to eat a lot more. And you did, resulting in the destruction of your previous losses.

    Moderate deficit, lots of time. Give yourself a year at least. Even better - two.

    QFT

    I think I regained it because I stopped exercising and was eating pizza for dinner every day because the food in my cafeteria was disgusting. (I'm being honest here.) I stopped exercising because there was 'not enough time' with all of my studying (I had a full credit load ever semester - chem/bio double major). I also really started playing video games. That distracted me when I wasn't focused on school.

    I could have kept it off, but essentially I was lazy and failed to do that. I have a pretty stable life now, so maintaining my goal weight should not be as much of a problem (I mean, I did it for about a year or so before).





    At any rate, at the suggestion of most of the community, I will increase my daily intake (to about 2,000). Does that sound more reasonable?

    http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bmr/
  • now_or_never13
    now_or_never13 Posts: 1,575 Member
    Options


    I think I regained it because I stopped exercising and was eating pizza for dinner every day because the food in my cafeteria was disgusting. (I'm being honest here.) I stopped exercising because there was 'not enough time' with all of my studying (I had a full credit load ever semester - chem/bio double major). I also really started playing video games. That distracted me when I wasn't focused on school.

    I could have kept it off, but essentially I was lazy and failed to do that. I have a pretty stable life now, so maintaining my goal weight should not be as much of a problem (I mean, I did it for about a year or so before).





    At any rate, at the suggestion of most of the community, I will increase my daily intake (to about 2,000). Does that sound more reasonable?

    2,000 is a much more sustainable start. As you lose you need to lower your calories every so often to continue losing... starting at 1200 cals a day gives you no where to go.

    2,000 will not give you the fast weight loss you want but it will give you the nutrition your body needs, the fuel it needs to function, etc.

    Find out your BMR and TDEE. You should be eating at about a 20-25% cut from your TDEE but always netting above your BMR.
  • MFPfriend
    MFPfriend Posts: 1,121 Member
    Options

    yeah, and what was their resting metabolic rate after the study compared to others average in the same mass range?

    Where is your study/proof that "for obese people, it really doesn't screw with their metabolism," sociopath?

    i'm refuting the minnesota starvation experiment as it applies to obese people since that experiment followed people at or near their ideal weight ranges who were on calorie restricted diets for 6 months. it only applies to people in an ideal weight range on a restricted diet for a long time.

    if people are going to say that obese people restricting their diets is going to screw up their metabolism, they need to provide proof. the entire point of the starvation experiment was to show the effects of starvation AFTER the body's fat and glycogen stores were already used up. obese people don't have that problem. so why would their metabolism slow significantly if their bodies still have energy stores?

    The man in question on this forum is obese. The study I posted followed obese people. Why on earth would we be worried about normal people?
  • PosterGuy1
    PosterGuy1 Posts: 163 Member
    Options
    Honestly? If you starve yourself to potentially lose 5 pounds a week then most likely you will find yourself back in the same place you are after your first huge weight loss in a few years. Eating at such a deficit screws with your metabolism and will cause you more problems when your older and trying to keep yourself on track. Why do you feel it's good to rush it the way you plan to? Listen to the podcasts for Fat 2 fit radio (fat2fitradio.com), they really adress the health aspects, healthy ways to lose weight, and the reality of eating healthy at a healthy calorie range.

    for obese people, it really doesn't screw with their metabolism

    That's good to know. I began my journey on 1/1 and lost 10 pounds the first week. I've averaged 4 the rest.
  • MissAnya88
    MissAnya88 Posts: 2
    Options
    MFP isn't really the forum to expect a response that supports your idea as the site promotes up to 2lb weight loss per week. Asnyou've said, people have been programmed to believe that in a one-size-fits-all way that losing any more than 2lb will "screw up" your metabolism. Scientific evidence please. Aiming for such a high weight loss goal isn't sustainable that said at your size, losing more than 2lb a week is very likely. Whilst a long-term VLCD isn't advisable, short-term, medically-supervised diets have been shown to reduce weight (granted some of that was LBM). A short-term crash, followed by a more sensible long-term diet is probably healthier than morbid obesity don't you think? I mean, medical professionals do prescribe balanced and supervised VLCDs in the short term as benefits outweigh costs. I wouldn't suggest 1200kcal/day though; a 500-1000kcal deficit plus moderate activity 3-5 times a week (and maybe 2 strength sessions) might be easier to do.
    Good luck
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Options
    At any rate, at the suggestion of most of the community, I will increase my daily intake (to about 2,000). Does that sound more reasonable?

    Absolutely - keep at that for 3-4 weeks - track your loss and see how it is going, you can adjust from there on.

    Good luck!!
  • xRedHeaterx
    xRedHeaterx Posts: 37 Member
    Options
    I haven't read it all, I'll just say that the jury is still out on what the best amount of weight to lose is. Have a look at the myths here, 'Slow, gradual weight loss is better than large, rapid weight loss' is given as one of the ideas that have not been proven (as yet).

    http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_133570.html


    FWIW I would be delighted with 2 pounds per week loss and wouldn't want to try for more. I'd be worried about losing lean tissue, being hungry all the time and so on. Still, there are no doubt going to be circumstances where losing quicker is preferable, for example somebody that is very morbidly obese and their life in grave danger due to it. Good luck anyway!
  • poopieslippers
    poopieslippers Posts: 25
    Options
    Thanks for all of the on-topic posts.

    I'm not going to post to this thread anymore. Anyone who wants to follow my progress is welcome to add me as a friend.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    At any rate, at the suggestion of most of the community, I will increase my daily intake (to about 2,000). Does that sound more reasonable?

    Absolutely - keep at that for 3-4 weeks - track your loss and see how it is going, you can adjust from there on.

    Good luck!!

    Seems like you have..but in case you second guess yourself, listen to this guy.

Categories