Less than 800 NET calories

Jbrfijefvibjdcejn
Jbrfijefvibjdcejn Posts: 16
in Health and Weight Loss
I workout about 5-6 times a week, burning 600-900 calories. I eat my BMR of 1500 and if I'm hungry ill eat some exercise calories. But I shy away from eating them all, in case of inaccuracies (I get my numbers from the machine at the gym). However, this often leaves me at a NET less than 800, although I'm eating about 1600 a day. Should I eat more or what? It's been 3 weeks of this exercise and I've gained 5 lbs. I'm confused, will eating them ALL back help? That's a lot of food, and I don't eat back calories until AFTER my 3pm workout, since I'm never 110% sure I will make it to the gym. (Although I almost always due, I'm afraid to eat more during the day and then NOT make it to the gym).
«1

Replies

  • Ninkyou
    Ninkyou Posts: 6,666 Member
    You should not be netting below 1200 calories. Up your calories.
  • trogalicious
    trogalicious Posts: 4,584 Member
    You should not be netting below 1200 calories. Up your calories.
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    Hi!
    18 y/o female; height and weight?

    It's really hard to say with the data you provided what is reasonable. Netting 800 sounds awfully low.

    If your BMR is truly 1500, then effectively that is what your body would use in a coma.

    And then you're taking away from that by burning calories exercising.

    While three weeks is hardly long enough to establish a trend, the information you've provided indicates that you should be eating substantially more food for health and survival, let alone weight loss.

    Don't waste your dedication of going to the gym and working so hard by robbing your body of the nutrients it needs to grow more healthy and burn fat.
  • Cranquistador
    Cranquistador Posts: 39,744 Member
    Didnt your other threads give you any helpful information?
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    Oh wow, that's disappointing; user has received several pages of feedback but spams the forums with the same OP.

    See, I try to be helpful, and it turns out I'm just talking to someone who doesn't listen.

    Hey kid - eat more food.
  • Ophidion
    Ophidion Posts: 2,065 Member
    Wow I will post these but by the sounds of it OP you are ignoring solid advice and maybe fishing for proana friends so I will be reporting you.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819925-the-basics-don-t-complicate-it

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/819055-setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets

    To show you the damage you are most probably causing yourself and your efforts at weight loss...

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html

    And just in case...

    http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/anorexia-nervosa/complications-of-anorexia.htm
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • FlaxMilk
    FlaxMilk Posts: 3,452 Member
    Based on info from other threads, I'm not sure you are burning as many calories as you think you are. I think you said you are 140 lbs and use the elliptical. You'd have to be going hard for quite awhile to burn that many calories.
  • redladywitch
    redladywitch Posts: 799 Member
    Eat. More. Food.

    Stop spamming the board.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Do not trust the numbers on the machines at the gym. They are not accurate.
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    Please see advice previously provided to your earlier questions.

    That advice remains unchanged.

    (And for the record, MFP will/should generally take issue with threads promoting <1200 net calories.)
  • Jbrfijefvibjdcejn
    Jbrfijefvibjdcejn Posts: 16
    Oh wow, that's disappointing; user has received several pages of feedback but spams the forums with the same OP.

    See, I try to be helpful, and it turns out I'm just talking to someone who doesn't listen.

    Hey kid - eat more food.

    1. Two posts is hardly a spam.
    2. You didn't even offer comments on my other thread.
    3. I don't know you.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    So you're eating 1500 ? If that's decent food (your diary is closed) then I don't see a need for any of the "eating too little" responses.

    Over-exercise can prevent weight loss, as per the links provided, so maybe back off a bit on the exercise. I don't subscribe to the hamster wheel psychology of exercising more and cancelling it out with extra food, so would be inclined to eat 1400 and do minimal exercise for a month to see what happens.

    "Net calories" is only a thing on here, you don't see it anywhere else. Biggest Loser relies on high exercise loads to get the results but those people have enough fat reserves to supply the energy they expend.

    If you only have say 20 lbs of fat it can only provide about 600 calories a day to fuel exercise. What are your stats ?
  • Jbrfijefvibjdcejn
    Jbrfijefvibjdcejn Posts: 16
    So you're eating 1500 ? If that's decent food (your diary is closed) then I don't see a need for any of the "eating too little" responses.

    Over-exercise can prevent weight loss, as per the links provided, so maybe back off a bit on the exercise. I don't subscribe to the hamster wheel psychology of exercising more and cancelling it out with extra food, so would be inclined to eat 1400 and do minimal exercise for a month to see what happens.

    "Net calories" is only a thing on here, you don't see it anywhere else. Biggest Loser relies on high exercise loads to get the results but those people have enough fat reserves to supply the energy they expend.

    If you only have say 20 lbs of fat it can only provide about 600 calories a day to fuel exercise. What are your stats ?

    Thank you! Finally, someone who understands that I am eating real food. I'm 5'8 142 lbs female. Student.
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    Oh wow, that's disappointing; user has received several pages of feedback but spams the forums with the same OP.

    See, I try to be helpful, and it turns out I'm just talking to someone who doesn't listen.

    Hey kid - eat more food.

    1. Two posts is hardly a spam.
    2. You didn't even offer comments on my other thread.
    3. I don't know you.

    1. a. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1099750-upped-calories-and-upped-weight
    b. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1099794-more-exercise-weight-gain
    c. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1100983-less-than-800-net-calories

    2. Darn. Although my advice was pretty much the same as everyone else's, which is to say that your body needs a certain amount of nutrition in order to adequately sustain life, a value referred to as your basal metabolic rate, and at your age and height, 800 calories per day is not enough to sustain you in a coma.

    3. Which is a good thing, because if we knew each other, I would talk to your parents and suggest they intervene before you do serious physical and psychological damage to yourself.

    Best of luck with your goal and congratulations, after three attempts, on finally finding someone who encourages this sort of behavior.
  • 4legsRbetterthan2
    4legsRbetterthan2 Posts: 19,590 MFP Moderator
    There have been alot of threads on here too about weight retention when you start a new vigorous exerise routine that is due to your muscles trying to heal. You might find those interesting. I think a net of 800 cals regularly sounds relaly low, if you are working out that much you need to make sure you are refueling properly afterwards so you dont lose muscle mass.

    I do see a red flag in your mindset that you are afraid to eat because maybe you wont make it to the gym. I realize losing weight is important but that looks like early signs of an eating disorder to me, so please make sure you are taking care of yourself.
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    By the way - the poster who is encouraging you? This is what's under the words on his avatar:

    18022302_5177.jpglegg1.jpg

    Think twice.
  • LiminalAscendance
    LiminalAscendance Posts: 489 Member
    By the way - the poster who is encouraging you? This is what's under the words on his avatar:

    18022302_5177.jpglegg1.jpg

    Think twice.

    Are you trying to imply that the OP should be concerned about looking like the individual in the pic?
  • Ninkyou
    Ninkyou Posts: 6,666 Member

    Thank you! Finally, someone who understands that I am eating real food. I'm 5'8 142 lbs female. Student.

    Really? Everyone eats REAL food. It's not WHAT you're eating, it's HOW MUCH. The calories you're consuming is not enough to sustain your life functions. No one, ever, unless advised by a doctor (and even then I'd question it), should NET below 1200 calories. Therefor, you either need to up your calories, or cut your exercise... either will bring you back up to 1200. I'm assuming you don't want to cut your exercise though, so I advised to up your calories.

    You should really listen to the advice given instead of picking the stuff you "want to hear." Some of us have had experience with similar situations, myself included. I used to have a 1200 calorie goal, I'd eat 1000 calories, and I'd exercise for 350. Yeah, that didn't last too long. Such a waste of my time and wasn't worth it. Now I eat a good amount of food, eat back my exercise calories, lose weight, and I'm happy.
  • rowrunyoga
    rowrunyoga Posts: 65 Member
    By the way - the poster who is encouraging you? This is what's under the words on his avatar:

    18022302_5177.jpglegg1.jpg

    Think twice.

    Are you trying to imply that the OP should be concerned about looking like the individual in the pic?

    Darn right the OP should be concerned about looking like that.
    We ALL should!!!





    (sarcasm.)

    Netting 800 calories a day just may do that... if your heart doesn't give out first.

    I smell a troll.
  • LumpySpacePrincess1
    LumpySpacePrincess1 Posts: 388 Member
    delicious - I'll be forced to like you less if you don't stop being troll feed.
    If this troll was a pigeon, you'd be bread crumbs. Stahp!
  • LiminalAscendance
    LiminalAscendance Posts: 489 Member
    By the way - the poster who is encouraging you? This is what's under the words on his avatar:

    18022302_5177.jpglegg1.jpg

    Think twice.

    Are you trying to imply that the OP should be concerned about looking like the individual in the pic?

    Darn right the OP should be concerned about looking like that.
    We ALL should!!!





    (sarcasm.)

    Netting 800 calories a day just may do that... if your heart doesn't give out first.

    I smell a troll.

    Someone else posted the pic, with the caption "Think twice," which seemed to imply the OP (who I believe is over 100 kilos) should be concerned about looking like the pictured individual. There was no mention of heart (or any other physical) problems.

    I asked what he meant, but I'm the troll?

    I think you must be smelling something else.
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    By the way - the poster who is encouraging you? This is what's under the words on his avatar:

    [images redacted]

    Think twice.

    Are you trying to imply that the OP should be concerned about looking like the individual in the pic?

    No. I'm stating that the original poster should think twice before taking advice from a user who uses that as his avatar.

    Edited to add: I don't think Lump was calling you a troll.
  • rowrunyoga
    rowrunyoga Posts: 65 Member
    By the way - the poster who is encouraging you? This is what's under the words on his avatar:

    18022302_5177.jpglegg1.jpg

    Think twice.

    Are you trying to imply that the OP should be concerned about looking like the individual in the pic?

    Darn right the OP should be concerned about looking like that.
    We ALL should!!!





    (sarcasm.)

    Netting 800 calories a day just may do that... if your heart doesn't give out first.

    I smell a troll.

    Someone else posted the pic, with the caption "Think twice," which seemed to imply the OP (who I believe is over 100 kilos) should be concerned about looking like the pictured individual. There was no mention of heart (or any other physical) problems.

    I asked what he meant, but I'm the troll?

    I think you must be smelling something else.


    My nose is working quite well, thank you.
    Not implying you are the troll.

    OP.
    Possible troll.
  • lonnieart
    lonnieart Posts: 24 Member
    1. Net calories IS a thing. Whoever says it's not has no idea what they're talking about. Calories=energy. Burn more energy, take in more fuel. It's not a hard concept. Try driving your car twice as much and filling up the tank the same as you normally do. Tell me how that works out for you.

    2. Yes, 1500 might be how much you'd need if you never moved. You're likely burning more than that each day without touching the gym.

    3. If you're only going to listen to the people who make you feel like what you're doing is healthy, what's the point in asking if it's healthy?
  • _HeartsOnFire_
    _HeartsOnFire_ Posts: 5,304 Member
    1. Net calories IS a thing. Whoever says it's not has no idea what they're talking about. Calories=energy. Burn more energy, take in more fuel. It's not a hard concept. Try driving your car twice as much and filling up the tank the same as you normally do. Tell me how that works out for you.

    2. Yes, 1500 might be how much you'd need if you never moved. You're likely burning more than that each day without touching the gym.

    3. If you're only going to listen to the people who make you feel like what you're doing is healthy, what's the point in asking if it's healthy?

    Because OP wants justification for their unhealthy behavior. They don't want to hear eat more food! That's logical...

    By the way...OP...you eat real food...did you once eat fake food or something?
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    Are you trying to imply that the OP should be concerned about looking like the individual in the pic?

    And another thing! (:bigsmile: )

    The individual in the photograph is Sam Legg. He was a subject in the Minnesota Starvation Experiment conducted in the 1940s by the US Government.

    The experiment held four phases - a 12 week control period with 3,200 calories per day, a 24 week "semi-starvation" period, a restricted rehabilitation period lasting 12 weeks to renourish the subjects and an unrestricted rehabilitation period where food could be consumed ad libitum.

    The semi-starvation period was the most restrictive. It was described as (emphasis mine):
    Semi-Starvation Period (24 weeks): During the 6-month semi-starvation period, each subject’s dietary intake was cut to approximately 1,560 calories per day. Their meals were composed of foods that were expected to typify the diets of people in Europe during the latter stages of the war: potatoes, rutabagas, turnips, bread and macaroni.

    So do whatever you want.
  • Hildy_J
    Hildy_J Posts: 1,050 Member
    Hey there,

    If you were netting under 800 calories you wouldn't have gained weight over the last few weeks. That's just not possible.

    SO.... (putting my deerstalker on) if you're measuring your food accurately then that MUST mean you're overestimating the calorie loss from your workouts?

    Just a case of tweaking the numbers here and there. :smile:
  • AmyRhubarb
    AmyRhubarb Posts: 6,890 Member
    Either up your calories or back off on the workouts so your net is higher. Netting that low is no bueno.

    I'm your height, twice your age, and I lose eating 1800-2000 cals a day, with far lower workout burns.

    Eat your calories and give it time. Take measurements, too.
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    Are you trying to imply that the OP should be concerned about looking like the individual in the pic?

    And another thing! (:bigsmile: )

    The individual in the photograph is Sam Legg. He was a subject in the Minnesota Starvation Experiment conducted in the 1940s by the US Government.

    The experiment held four phases - a 12 week control period with 3,200 calories per day, a 24 week "semi-starvation" period, a restricted rehabilitation period lasting 12 weeks to renourish the subjects and an unrestricted rehabilitation period where food could be consumed ad libitum.

    The semi-starvation period was the most restrictive. It was described as (emphasis mine):
    Semi-Starvation Period (24 weeks): During the 6-month semi-starvation period, each subject’s dietary intake was cut to approximately 1,560 calories per day. Their meals were composed of foods that were expected to typify the diets of people in Europe during the latter stages of the war: potatoes, rutabagas, turnips, bread and macaroni.

    So do whatever you want.

    If I remember correctly, that study did not go well for many of the participants. Also, I believe the focus of that study was not primarily on the "starvation" specifically, but on the rehabilitation or "refeed". This is the concern of many of the "eat more/enough food" people...not only just the "starvation" time, but also the subsequent "refeed" where things can really get dicey.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories