If you are on a low calorie diet, READ THIS!!!

Options
1356

Replies

  • Lichent
    Lichent Posts: 157 Member
    Options
    Not eating can do as much damage as eating to much , so we were told by our Doctor. Worse thing to do is eat to little food and crash the pounds off. Sooner of later it will all come back on. Me and my buddy we don't want to have lose the same weight over and over and over again. We have been told a slow weight loss even if it is an itty bitty some weeks is the best path to travel Most important is to keep eating clean and healthy. No nasty sweet stuff in our diets now. We took it to the trash bin and thru it out.
  • init2fitit
    init2fitit Posts: 168 Member
    Options
    Actually, 4'10 and under is the legal height at which one is termed a dwarf. So yeah... She is.
    http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/dwarfism.html

    The question is, why doesn't your friend just eat the extra 50 calories to meet the standard minimum? Like, she could eat an extra teaspoon of jam and be there. Also, she is not what is considered a "normal height" so what she does would not represent even someone of normal height...

    This is not a good sample to base caloric intake off of.
  • ElliottTN
    ElliottTN Posts: 1,614 Member
    Options
    Actually, 4'10 and under is the legal height at which one is termed a dwarf. So yeah... She is.
    http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/dwarfism.html

    The question is, why doesn't your friend just eat the extra 50 calories to meet the standard minimum? Like, she could eat an extra teaspoon of jam and be there. Also, she is not what is considered a "normal height" so what she does would not represent even someone of normal height...

    This is not a good sample to base caloric intake off of.

    No. That is the problem here. Why would she have to eat 50 calories other than for the sake of meeting this standard min that doesn't even apply to her except according to you? Why would it be the standard min for her? That's the whole issue here. You are saying that THIS IS THE CONCRETE TRUTH without ever taking any specifics of the person into consideration.

    So if that really is the concrete truth that you are preaching for EVERYONE than tell me why she wouldn't be doing fine eating above her BMR but under 1200?

    Also, there is no legal limit for a coined medical condition and dwarfism is anyone below 4'10, not 4'10 itself.
  • LiminalAscendance
    LiminalAscendance Posts: 489 Member
    Options
    Actually, 4'10 and under is the legal height at which one is termed a dwarf. So yeah... She is.
    http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/dwarfism.html

    I don't have a dog in this race, but unless your link (which I could care less about looking at) says people with dwarfism are "midgets," you didn't make your point.

    Just pointing out a logical fallacy (which may be lost without a kitty gif to back it up).
  • ChrisM8971
    ChrisM8971 Posts: 1,067 Member
    Options
    Actually, 4'10 and under is the legal height at which one is termed a dwarf. So yeah... She is.
    http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/dwarfism.html

    The question is, why doesn't your friend just eat the extra 50 calories to meet the standard minimum? Like, she could eat an extra teaspoon of jam and be there. Also, she is not what is considered a "normal height" so what she does would not represent even someone of normal height...

    This is not a good sample to base caloric intake off of.

    No. That is the problem here. Why would she have to eat 50 calories other than for the sake of meeting this standard min that doesn't even apply to her? Why would it be the standard min for her? That's the whole issue here. You are saying that THIS IS THE CONCRETE TRUTH without ever taking any specifics of the person into consideration.

    So if that really is the concrete truth that you are preaching for EVERYONE than tell me why she wouldn't be doing fine eating above her BMR but under 1200?

    If 1200 is above BMR then I cannot see an issue with that but I don't think the OP nor the post he was quoting mentioned 1200 calories. I do think an ED is different to a low calorie diet and those trying to lose fast. However there are quite a few who's diaries are set at 700 or sometimes even less and these are the ones that I believe this is aimed at.

    Lets be sensible and not argue about the odd 50 or 100 calories nor argue about the people that are of this or that height and weight and think about those this post is really aimed at
  • init2fitit
    init2fitit Posts: 168 Member
    Options
    You're getting way too engrossed about 50 calories. I told you it's a negligible difference.

    1. These numbers are based on average human bodies.
    2. Your friend does not have an average human body.
    3. You're using someone outside of the average statistical norm, which doesn't prove anything except that your friend is the outlier that she already is because of her height. Her body is different.
    4. I don't know if she even exists or is actually doing fine in the first place. She could be fake.
    5. I don't even know how accurate this calorie count is. Does she literally weight everything and account for the possible 20% calorie discrepancy. Does she graze and not count those calories? There's literally no way to prove that she is literally eating that many calories because of the nature of calorie reports. It is a negligible amount after all.

    But what you want me to say is your friend is a special snowflake who can live off even 900 cals a day and lift a burning building off a toddler. Most of the people on this site aren't under 4'10 so there's no need to bring it up. The average is for the average, not the legal dwarf.

    Because quite frankly, I'd be a little concerned if someone that was 6'8 was only eating 1800 calories, though that is the minimum suggested for a man, because being that tall represents significant diet change.
  • donyellemoniquex3
    donyellemoniquex3 Posts: 2,384 Member
    Options
    0_0
  • ElliottTN
    ElliottTN Posts: 1,614 Member
    Options
    You're getting way too engrossed about 50 calories. I told you it's a negligible difference.

    1. These numbers are based on average human bodies.
    2. Your friend does not have an average human body.
    3. You're using someone outside of the average statistical norm, which doesn't prove anything except that your friend is the outlier that she already is because of her height. Her body is different.
    4. I don't know if she even exists or is actually doing fine in the first place. She could be fake.
    5. I don't even know how accurate this calorie count is. Does she literally weight everything and account for the possible 20% calorie discrepancy. Does she graze and not count those calories? There's literally no way to prove that she is literally eating that many calories because of the nature of calorie reports. It is a negligible amount after all.

    But what you want me to say is your friend is a special snowflake who can live off even 900 cals a day and lift a burning building off a toddler. Most of the people on this site aren't under 4'10 so there's no need to bring it up. The average is for the average, not the legal dwarf.

    Because quite frankly, I'd be a little concerned if someone that was 6'8 was only eating 1800 calories, though that is the minimum suggested for a man, because being that tall represents significant diet change.

    You are missing the point completely. I don't want you to tell me my friend is a special snowflake. I want you to stop talking because trying to have this conversation with you is the equivalent of just slamming my head against brick wall until I pass out.
  • kyleekay10
    kyleekay10 Posts: 1,812 Member
    Options
    Tagging. Everyone should read this.
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    Options
    You are missing the point completely. I don't want you to tell me my friend is a special snowflake. I want you to stop talking because trying to have this conversation with you is the equivalent of just slamming my head against brick wall until I pass out.

    And ladies and gentlemen, above we see the reason for the phrase "consider the source."

    You're calling people trolls?? Lawlz.
  • mbar12
    mbar12 Posts: 125 Member
    Options
    I'm not sure that its true that most people eating less than 1500 cal/day do so only for a short while. I ate approx 1200-1350 calories for 8 months with only very occasional times that I went outside that box. Unfortunately I gained it all back, so I am not sure its a good idea to go that low. Right now I am starting an eating plan of 2 days low carb and 5 days of 1500 calories /wk, and think it is much healthier than eating lower. Anyone care to comment?
  • ironanimal
    ironanimal Posts: 5,922 Member
    Options
    People should read this.
  • init2fitit
    init2fitit Posts: 168 Member
    Options
    You are missing the point completely. I don't want you to tell me my friend is a special snowflake. I want you to stop talking because trying to have this conversation with you is the equivalent of just slamming my head against brick wall until I pass out.

    You've done nothing to prove that your friend represents the average population... which is what the calorie min. is aimed at. So why would she do anything but prove the rule that someone of an average weight and height would need this minimum?

    Also, semantically, I'm not talking. I'm typing.
  • init2fitit
    init2fitit Posts: 168 Member
    Options
    You are missing the point completely. I don't want you to tell me my friend is a special snowflake. I want you to stop talking because trying to have this conversation with you is the equivalent of just slamming my head against brick wall until I pass out.

    And ladies and gentlemen, above we see the reason for the phrase "consider the source."

    You're calling people trolls?? Lawlz.

    You have a nice shirt, Mr. delicious_cocktail
  • geekyjock76
    geekyjock76 Posts: 2,720 Member
    Options
    Say a 35 year old woman who is 4'9 and 120 lbs (hardly a midget)
    For a person with her stats, it all depends on her actual TDEE and weight loss goal. Regardless of TDEE, if she wanted to lose 20 lbs, ideally a deficit of about 300 calories would suffice. Anything greater would be unnecessary for already having low body fat. Chances are, despite being petite, that her TDEE is a bit higher than 1450 calories - especially if she's exercising.

    From my perspective, a person's restrictive intake should be based on their actual TDEE - which ideally is obtained by eating the maximum amount of calories to achieve relative weight homeostasis for a period of several months prior to any weight loss intervention. Unfortunately, most people don't know what their actual TDEE is and use some random approximation instead. Additionally, people should lose weight following a maximal caloric intake approach as opposed to meeting the minimal requirements.
  • NonnyMary
    NonnyMary Posts: 982 Member
    Options
    STARVATION - A slow and painful death.

    Thank you for giving us an example of the above.
  • Fullsterkur_woman
    Fullsterkur_woman Posts: 2,712 Member
    Options
    I have some friends that need to see this, so bumping to my FL.
  • Jaided35
    Jaided35 Posts: 24
    Options
    I'm not sure that its true that most people eating less than 1500 cal/day do so only for a short while. I ate approx 1200-1350 calories for 8 months with only very occasional times that I went outside that box. Unfortunately I gained it all back, so I am not sure its a good idea to go that low. Right now I am starting an eating plan of 2 days low carb and 5 days of 1500 calories /wk, and think it is much healthier than eating lower. Anyone care to comment?

    I eat no less than 1400 per day. As told to me by my trainer who is fully educated in nutrition etc. I think your way is pretty good.
  • purple180
    purple180 Posts: 130 Member
    Options
    Bumping for my friends list...hopefully it will help someone.
  • Alliwan
    Alliwan Posts: 1,245 Member
    Options
    Tagging.

    Much hugs to the OP and I hope people really take the experience to heart.


    agreed

Categories