If you are on a low calorie diet, READ THIS!!!
Replies
-
Tagging for FL0
-
Thanks for reposting this OP. I'm glad it will have the chance to impact a broader audience.0
-
Such a good reminder of why I'm here. Thank you!0
-
When I was a teenager I could survive on as little as a bread roll a day and I wasn't hungry and I didn't feel like binging ever. It took me years to have a better relationship with food (I now actually enjoy eating and tasting the food)
To the people who keep beating the 1200 calorie horse for short people: I am short and near my goal weight so even if i choose the lowest amount of weight to lose and I choose sedentary, MFP will give me 1200 cals. I know that the people arguing against those sort of cals DO NOT mean me, they mean taller people with more weight to lose who work out more. For the love of ***, stop feeling offended every time someone speaks out against 1200 calorie diets. Its not bad advice even if it is not applicable to you.0 -
I think that the OP presented a very powerful and meaningful message. Starving one self is indeed frightening and dangerous. I believe what the OP shared was someone's experience with an eating disorder. Which isI a psychiatric condition that requires treatment.
I would never dismiss the message or the messenger, but perspective is necessary and needed here.0 -
I pulled this post from another thread (with the permission of the person who posted it). She didn't want to post it herself but didn't mind if I shared her story. So, here you go....
I have an eating disorder. I have to go to the doctor twice a week to watch my blood pressure, that runs around 70/50 because if it gets lower than that, something could go wrong with my heart and I could die. My pulse is also extremely low. My oxygen saturation is low. My body temperature runs around 96 (where a normal body temp is 98.6). I have to regularly get blood test to check and make sure that there is no damage to my kidneys or liver and a slew of other things (There is an order for blood work sitting right beside me right now, the orders on it are TSH, CBC, CMP (chem 14), ESR (Sed Rate), A1C) because what I have done to my body. How did I get said eating disorder? Eating less than 1000 calories a day. Dropping weight quickly. Deciding since I was dropping weight so quickly I would drop down more and more and more. Now my teeth are falling out, my hair is coming out in handfuls, and there is something wrong with my kidneys.
Also, trust and believe me when I say this; your body will get used to running on little to nothing. Just because you don't feel hungry does not mean that you're not doing damage to your body. If I want to, I can go days without food and feel fine. Have tons of energy, sleep well, and be in no pain. Because of that its a slippery slope. When I was at my lowest weight (73 pounds and I am 5'8") I was never hungry. Food had no appeal to me. I could sit there and be surrounded by delicious things that smelled and looked amazing to everyone else, and my attitude was basically "eh."
PLEASE, PLEASE think about the long term ramifications of what you might be doing to your body if you are not fueling it properly.
I think this is something everything should read. I was lurking in the original thread this was posted in and was hoping the original poster would re-post it. Kudos to you for getting permission to re-post it since she didn't want to. :drinker:0 -
Eating disorders are horrible and insidious things. I feel terrible for the person who developed this problem, but the person also is not being honest with themselves about the cause of their disorder. Thousands, probably millions of people use 1,200-calorie diets (or thereabouts) without developing eating disorders. Far from it. The biggest problem, as we all know, is that they go back to old eating habits and don't exercise and eat at maintenance calories and thus regain the weight.
Basically, this post, though sad, tells us nothing about low-calorie diets.0 -
So, we don't need to become alarmed by low-calorie diets, but only by those that are in the presence of an eating disorder.
I'm not sure I understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Personally, I think people *should* be alarmed by (or at least keenly aware of the potential ramifications of) low-calorie diets (depending, of course, on the definition of "low-calorie") regardless of whether or not there is an actual eating disorder.
Our definitions of low calorie are seemingly a bit different, which may be why you're confused by my post. I don't define any sort of drastic and disordered nutritional/food habits as 'low-calorie diets', and I prefer to use the term 'restriction/restricting' to describe them. If anything, I am 150% agreeing with you, when it comes to advertising the dangers of restictive diets, and the proper ways to go about weight loss (within reason that is).
By low calorie, I essentially meant a diet in which there was a healthy and reasonable calorie deficit. I realize the fact that people's experiences with food, exercise, calories, etc. are all very subjective. So, for somebody consuming 2,200 calories per day 1,800 calories may not be a big deal.....but for somebody consuming 4,000 calories per day, cutting their intake gradually down to 1,800 may feel like an incredible 'low calorie diet'. Do you see where I am coming from with this?
If you do a bit of research, you can easily find that while the line is blurred per say....there are distinct differences between a "diet gone wrong" and an eating disorder. If you would like, I can explain this further, or link you to a page that can do so more comprehensively.
0 -
Remember that study that showed that people who ate low calore/huge deficit amounts, they began to show the same symptoms of eating disordered people?
Also, the minimum is 1200 for women, and 1800 for men.
inb4 WELL MY FRIEND EATS THIS MANY CALORIES & IS DOING FINE.
Assuming you are referencing the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, It was NOT a low calorie/large caloric deficit diet. The men in this diet were quite literally STARVED under medical supervision, just as most anorectics do (minus the supervision, obviously). Those running the study wanted to conclude whether or not it was the physical conditions of starvation that 'cultivated' the Anoretic mindset, or whether the mindset was always the primary problem, with the nutritional deprivation, weight-loss, etc. being secondary results.
*I was not capitalizing to come off as snippy or rude. I just wanted to emphasize my response, since it was only different from your opinions by a few mere words. Why the heck does MFP not have the option of bolding text yet?!0 -
This content has been removed.
-
So, we don't need to become alarmed by low-calorie diets, but only by those that are in the presence of an eating disorder.
I'm not sure I understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Personally, I think people *should* be alarmed by (or at least keenly aware of the potential ramifications of) low-calorie diets (depending, of course, on the definition of "low-calorie") regardless of whether or not there is an actual eating disorder.
Our definitions of low calorie are seemingly a bit different, which may be why you're confused by my post. I don't define any sort of drastic and disordered nutritional/food habits as 'low-calorie diets', and I prefer to use the term 'restriction/restricting' to describe them. If anything, I am 150% agreeing with you, when it comes to advertising the dangers of restictive diets, and the proper ways to go about weight loss (within reason that is).
By low calorie, I essentially meant a diet in which there was a healthy and reasonable calorie deficit. I realize the fact that people's experiences with food, exercise, calories, etc. are all very subjective. So, for somebody consuming 2,200 calories per day 1,800 calories may not be a big deal.....but for somebody consuming 4,000 calories per day, cutting their intake gradually down to 1,800 may feel like an incredible 'low calorie diet'. Do you see where I am coming from with this?
If you do a bit of research, you can easily find that while the line is blurred per say....there are distinct differences between a "diet gone wrong" and an eating disorder. If you would like, I can explain this further, or link you to a page that can do so more comprehensively.
I believe a "low calorie" diet, whether defined in absolute or relative terms, is a potential problem regardless of whether or not there is an eating disorder. The topic is "low calorie diets", not specifically eating disorders (or at least I think it is...honestly, it seems like it's been a while since I read the OP and it seems like the topic veered a little off course recently).
I don't think I need you to explain any further because I don't believe the problem is in my understanding of what you are saying.
:huh:0 -
Agree... though generally if someone is restricting to 1000 calories it would set off alarm bells that there is an underlying psychological problem fueling such extreme restriction.
What about people just having a lack of understanding or belief about the physiological impact of a diet that is too restrictive?0 -
yes cause the problem we have in America is under eating 0
-
Remember that study that showed that people who ate low calore/huge deficit amounts, they began to show the same symptoms of eating disordered people?
Also, the minimum is 1200 for women, and 1800 for men.
inb4 WELL MY FRIEND EATS THIS MANY CALORIES & IS DOING FINE.
*I was not capitalizing to come off as snippy or rude. I just wanted to emphasize my response, since it was only different from your opinions by a few mere words. Why the heck does MFP not have the option of bolding text yet?!
Actually you can bold text on MFP. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/399087-how-can-i-bold-italicize-or-underline-text-in-the-forum
(Wish there was an option to preview post first to make sure I've not borked the code though.)0 -
I pulled this post from another thread (with the permission of the person who posted it). She didn't want to post it herself but didn't mind if I shared her story.
So sad... very brave of her to share her story publicly. I wish this lady all the very best for her recovery.0 -
yes cause the problem we have in America is under eating
At the country level? No doubt your point is valid.
On MFP? Yes, I honestly believe that too much of a deficit is the primary problem that ultimately leads to people giving up entirely.0 -
So, we don't need to become alarmed by low-calorie diets, but only by those that are in the presence of an eating disorder.
I'm not sure I understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Personally, I think people *should* be alarmed by (or at least keenly aware of the potential ramifications of) low-calorie diets (depending, of course, on the definition of "low-calorie") regardless of whether or not there is an actual eating disorder.
Our definitions of low calorie are seemingly a bit different, which may be why you're confused by my post. I don't define any sort of drastic and disordered nutritional/food habits as 'low-calorie diets', and I prefer to use the term 'restriction/restricting' to describe them. If anything, I am 150% agreeing with you, when it comes to advertising the dangers of restictive diets, and the proper ways to go about weight loss (within reason that is).
By low calorie, I essentially meant a diet in which there was a healthy and reasonable calorie deficit. I realize the fact that people's experiences with food, exercise, calories, etc. are all very subjective. So, for somebody consuming 2,200 calories per day 1,800 calories may not be a big deal.....but for somebody consuming 4,000 calories per day, cutting their intake gradually down to 1,800 may feel like an incredible 'low calorie diet'. Do you see where I am coming from with this?
If you do a bit of research, you can easily find that while the line is blurred per say....there are distinct differences between a "diet gone wrong" and an eating disorder. If you would like, I can explain this further, or link you to a page that can do so more comprehensively.
I believe a "low calorie" diet, whether defined in absolute or relative terms, is a potential problem regardless of whether or not there is an eating disorder. The topic is "low calorie diets", not specifically eating disorders (or at least I think it is...honestly, it seems like it's been a while since I read the OP and it seems like the topic veered a little off course recently).
I don't think I need you to explain any further because I don't believe the problem is in my understanding of what you are saying.
:huh:
I agree completely with you: I think all attempts at weight loss do hold the potential to be problematic. I never said that they didn't contain the potential to be problematic. I think that people can have problems in all types of diets, since the problems are never the actual food, and more so one's relationship with food. (:
Then what do you believe it is? A disagreement of opinion/theory then? If you have a different theory, I'd love to read some research from an organization like the NIMH, or something of the sort. I try to keep an open mind to all paradigms of psychology, and all theories of origin.0 -
Remember that study that showed that people who ate low calore/huge deficit amounts, they began to show the same symptoms of eating disordered people?
Also, the minimum is 1200 for women, and 1800 for men.
inb4 WELL MY FRIEND EATS THIS MANY CALORIES & IS DOING FINE.
*I was not capitalizing to come off as snippy or rude. I just wanted to emphasize my response, since it was only different from your opinions by a few mere words. Why the heck does MFP not have the option of bolding text yet?!
Actually you can bold text on MFP. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/399087-how-can-i-bold-italicize-or-underline-text-in-the-forum
(Wish there was an option to preview post first to make sure I've not borked the code though.)
I did not know this: thank you!! 0 -
This isn't going to apply to every person on here, only those who are severely underweight which is, dare I assume it, a minority on mfp.
EDIT: Just thought I'd mention a very important point I made on another thread just now, when I saw this thread was linked.being on a severe calorie deficit will cause a thousand symptoms but in most cases it won't be as serious as this girl's because her weight was at an almost unrealistic point for most mfp users. People here are looking to get to a goal weight of ~110 to ~180ish lbs, not 73lbs so a VCLD won't hurt most of us too much as long as we know when to get off it. Remember that she is 5'8 and was a mere 73lb or 5st 2lb or 33kg. Most of us don't have to worry about getting to the point she was at.0 -
Hugs and prayers to your friend0
-
Bump to share with my peeps....thank you for sharing.0
-
Bump to share with my peeps....thank you for sharing.0
-
Remember that study that showed that people who ate low calore/huge deficit amounts, they began to show the same symptoms of eating disordered people?
Also, the minimum is 1200 for women, and 1800 for men.
inb4 WELL MY FRIEND EATS THIS MANY CALORIES & IS DOING FINE.
Assuming you are referencing the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, It was NOT a low calorie/large caloric deficit diet. The men in this diet were quite literally STARVED under medical supervision, just as most anorectics do (minus the supervision, obviously). Those running the study wanted to conclude whether or not it was the physical conditions of starvation that 'cultivated' the Anoretic mindset, or whether the mindset was always the primary problem, with the nutritional deprivation, weight-loss, etc. being secondary results.
*I was not capitalizing to come off as snippy or rude. I just wanted to emphasize my response, since it was only different from your opinions by a few mere words. Why the heck does MFP not have the option of bolding text yet?!
Letter b in brackets to begin, and /b in brackets to end bold.
Minnesota experiment most rigorous phase entailed 1560cal/day and walking three miles per day. The other phases were control, controlled refeed and ad libitum refeed.
The 1560 cal phase was only 24 weeks and those men were in rough shape.
Just... For context.0 -
I want to know WHY is it that MFP seems to default to 1200 calories for so many people? I religiously stuck to that for 8 months - it worked, I lost 2 stone, but then hit a plateau. Now I'm eating 1500 net and losing again.
I changed because when I tried a range of TDEE calculators I got various numbers ranging from 1400 to 2100 - so I worked out the average and worked from that. Seems to be working for me.
But NONE came in as low as MFP - and whenever I changed my settings on MFP - whatever I changed - activity levels, how much I want to lose, etc - the most it did was add 40 calories to my daily allowance - 1240! :noway:
Is there some problem with MFP? Why? Why don't they sort it then?
There's no problem with MFP. In fact, it works great if you use it correctly. So many people get a 1200 calorie goal because:
1) 1200 is the minimum amount that MFP will assign anyone
2) Everyone goes crazy and puts in ridiculous goals (ie: losing 2lbs/week). This results in MFP giving a bottomed-out goal of 1200.
3) MFP adds back your exercise calories, unlike a TDEE-style approach. Too many people don't eat back their exercise calories resulting in a dangerously low intake.
Long story short, using the TDEE method or the MFP method should actually give you the same amount of overall calories if you're doing it right. I've calculated it both ways and it gives me the same amount. MFP only gives a too-low goal if you're choosing an unhealthy or unsustainable loss rate. This is the end-users fault, not MFP's.
The only thing I think MFP could be doing better is providing better guidelines around recommend loss rates depending on how much you have to lose. Although now that I think of it, I think it does do that to at least some degree - most people just ignore it and shoot for the moon.
Well, I started with a 2lb/week weight loss, and sedentary activity (according to the guidance, that was me), but that's my point, even when I changed to 1lb/week and raised my activity level it still only gave me a maximum of 1240 calories.
As for "doing it right" - what do you mean? I followed the guided settings when I started, told it my age/weight/activity etc and that's what I got. And there are cautions about using the manual options, don't do it without consulting medical etc practitioners etc etc. Given that I'd never even heard of TDEE or BMR before enrolling on this site, as I guess is true of lots of new users, what should I have done differently so that I wouldn't have been at fault? (I'm asking because I genuinely would like to know )
(Ed) BTW why do you think 2lb/week is "ridiculous"? This is what guidance the NHS gives:
http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/loseweight/Pages/start-losing-weight.aspxEvidence shows that the best way to lose weight is to make long-term changes to diet and physical activity that result in a steady rate of weight loss. Aim to lose weight at around 0.5kg to 1kg a week (1lb to 2lb), until you achieve a healthy BMI
so you can see why people think 2lb a week is reasonable not ridiculous. That's certainly what was in my head when I joined MFP.0 -
Thanks for this.. What are your thoughts about a 1,200 calorie diet? That's what was set for me by MFP. On days that I workout, I still try to stay at 1200 cals. Is that unhealthy? I've been losing 0.2 to 0.8 lbs a day, weighing myself every morning at the same time. And I'm currently obese at 181 lbs, and I'm 21. Is my calorie goal okay? Oh, and I'm 5'3".0
-
MFP set mine at 1200 calories per day also and I'm starting to question whether my activity level is too high for that amount of caloric intake per day. I walk my son to and from school everyday (30 minute walk each trip including to the school and back home). According to my log my weekly calorie burn should be 1270 but I surpass that in 5 days (around 2000 calorie burn). I've lost 3 lbs in a week. Should I tweak my calorie intake?0
-
Thanks for this.. What are your thoughts about a 1,200 calorie diet? That's what was set for me by MFP. On days that I workout, I still try to stay at 1200 cals. Is that unhealthy? I've been losing .2 - .8 lbs a day, weighing myself every morning at the same time. And I'm currently obese at 181 lbs, and I'm 21. Is my calorie goal okay?
How much have you lost per week for the last 4 weeks? I'd shoot for 1lbs/week with your current goal in mind. If you're losing more than that I'd scale the calories up a bit as you've probably got too extreme of a deficit going.
I just started being "serious" about my diet and exercising at the beginning of September. So it has almost been 3 weeks and I've lost around 6 lbs. I've been steadily losing, and I'm happy about it, but I want it to be healthy.
I didn't see where you ever got an answer to your question. IMHO 2 lbs per week is too aggressive. Reduce it to 1.5 or 1 lb per week and either up your activity level or eat back exercise calories. No damage done but what you are doing is not necessarily optimum for overall health. Too aggressive an approach.0 -
I read this on the original thread and the OP is a brave and helpful person.
I know this won't matter because it never does...but targets are dependent on a whole lotta factors - age, gender, weight, height, activity level....I'm 56, am trying to lose 25 pounds or so, and am 5'1" with a really petite build. My BMR is around 1250 and my TDEE somewhere around 1500 - but MFP put me at 1200. I bumped it to 1250 and have just bumped again to 1300 because I was feeling a little tired. I exercise when I can (have a connective tissue disorder). As long as I stick to the program, it comes off.
The craziness about super low calorie diets is damaging (per OP) - and based on unrealistic, impatient, instant gratification-driven, media-centered, uneducated assumptions about appearance and health. And that's the thing I really like about MFP - if you spend some with it - is that it's about HEALTH.0 -
<edit>0
-
MFP set mine at 1200 calories per day also and I'm starting to question whether my activity level is too high for that amount of caloric intake per day. I walk my son to and from school everyday (30 minute walk each trip including to the school and back home). According to my log my weekly calorie burn should be 1270 but I surpass that in 5 days (around 2000 calorie burn). I've lost 3 lbs in a week. Should I tweak my calorie intake?
Yes.
Keep in mind we can't give you more specific advice without info about age, current weight, height...recommend you go calculate your BMR and TDEE - there are plenty of calculators out there - (I use fitnessfrog.com as a "quickie") - you should eat above your BMR and under your TDEE. TDEE minus 10% or 15% if agressive is a rule of thumb; TDEE minus 20% if you're truly obese until you come down some.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions