myfitnesspal added 500 extra calories to my diet? Why?

lostreaction · December 2013

"Also, here are some great links. It's a lot of reading, but I know they've helped me understand the ins and outs of things a lot better

"

This is great info, thanks.

WalkingAlong · December 2013

However, in my humble opinion, 1,200 calories is ludicrously low for a 250lb male. The odds of you falling off the wagon are ridiculously high and at best you're going to lose a ton of muscle mass.

Not at that weight and (assumed) physical condition. Assuming an already-sedentary lifestyle, there won't be much lean loss as there is a crap load of fat stores to draw energy from. For someone considerably leaner, and more athletic to begin with - absolutely yes, I would agree that LBM loss would be significant.

Worse, there is no evidence that falling off the wagon happens any less for slow-losers vs fast-losers - recidivism rates are extremely high for both camps.

Personally I would jump off a bridge trying to survive on 1200 calories a day, but hey, there are many paths to enlightenment...if it were me I'd raise it to 1500-1600 at least, assuming exercise calories will be eaten back as well.

I disagree, I think that he is more at risk of losing LBM due to being sedentary and eating so low. Eating 1,200 calories means he likely isn't getting adequate protein and if he isn't doing regular strength training, his body has no reason to hold on to the muscle mass he currently has.

I've seen you (or another) post that about slow-losers vs high-losers before. Do you have a study or anything backing it up? If so, could you PM it to me? It seems counter intuitive as I consider deprivation an increased factor in binging.

I'm not Mr. Knight but I was curious so I googled it. This was only the first thing I looked at but it's interesting and it's a meta-analysis of many studies, though it's a bit old and I just scanned it so I can't say much about it.

VLED is 'very low energy diet' (not sure how low) and HBD is 'hypoenergetic balance diet', which I'm guessing means a smaller deficit.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/74/5/579.long

"After VLEDs or after weight losses of ≥20 kg, individuals maintained a significantly greater weight loss at 5 y than after HBDs or weight losses of ≤10 kg. Our analysis suggest that individuals are more likely to sustain long-term weight losses of ≥5% of initial body weight if they participate in VLEDs or lose ≥20 kg initially. This is not consistent with the common recommendation that individuals lose weight slowly and set initial weight-loss goals of ≈5% of their body weight (3,6)."

wheird · December 2013

However, in my humble opinion, 1,200 calories is ludicrously low for a 250lb male. The odds of you falling off the wagon are ridiculously high and at best you're going to lose a ton of muscle mass.

Not at that weight and (assumed) physical condition. Assuming an already-sedentary lifestyle, there won't be much lean loss as there is a crap load of fat stores to draw energy from. For someone considerably leaner, and more athletic to begin with - absolutely yes, I would agree that LBM loss would be significant.

Worse, there is no evidence that falling off the wagon happens any less for slow-losers vs fast-losers - recidivism rates are extremely high for both camps.

Personally I would jump off a bridge trying to survive on 1200 calories a day, but hey, there are many paths to enlightenment...if it were me I'd raise it to 1500-1600 at least, assuming exercise calories will be eaten back as well.

I disagree, I think that he is more at risk of losing LBM due to being sedentary and eating so low. Eating 1,200 calories means he likely isn't getting adequate protein and if he isn't doing regular strength training, his body has no reason to hold on to the muscle mass he currently has.

I've seen you (or another) post that about slow-losers vs high-losers before. Do you have a study or anything backing it up? If so, could you PM it to me? It seems counter intuitive as I consider deprivation an increased factor in binging.

I'm not Mr. Knight but I was curious so I googled it. This was only the first thing I looked at but it's interesting and it's a meta-analysis of many studies, though it's a bit old and I just scanned it so I can't say much about it.

VLED is 'very low energy diet' (not sure how low) and HBD is 'hypoenergetic balance diet', which I'm guessing means a smaller deficit.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/74/5/579.long

"After VLEDs or after weight losses of ≥20 kg, individuals maintained a significantly greater weight loss at 5 y than after HBDs or weight losses of ≤10 kg. Our analysis suggest that individuals are more likely to sustain long-term weight losses of ≥5% of initial body weight if they participate in VLEDs or lose ≥20 kg initially. This is not consistent with the common recommendation that individuals lose weight slowly and set initial weight-loss goals of ≈5% of their body weight (3,6)."

That is interesting!! Though it was only 29 people. Still, it completely defies the anecdotal evidence we see around here.

stealthq · December 2013

...

im usually too tired to do anything after school and work in the evenings.

...

Hey OP, something else to consider. Eating less than you have to in order to drop the weight is not going to help you feel any more energetic. It will eventually make you feel even more tired than you already are - if not now, then when you lean out and don't have the fat reserves to draw on. Exercising on the other hand, and making sure you eat to fuel that exercise should increase your energy levels if you give it a few weeks.

Slrajr · December 2013

Lucky op! *jealous!*

suprzonic · December 2013

Hi. My real simple understanding is the body will eventually adjust to the lower cals of 1200 as normal. Metabolic set point will be low and you'll maintain at 1200 (plateau ?). Best to keep it as high as you can.

This could help you out: http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/

and this too:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/919536-get-your-metabolic-rate-tested-my-metabolic-reset-story

best of luck!

SuperCrsa · December 2013

Im a 6ft2 female, my calories when not exercising are 1750, when I am exercising I am eating 1900. And this is at the highest calorie deficit. Once Im closer to my goal my calories will move upwards.

You dont need to starve yourself to lose weight. I also started on here with 1200 calories and for the first month I was miserable. Since upping the calories Im seeing more weight loss and lot less grumpiness.

Good luck.

WalkingAlong · December 2013

That is interesting!! Though it was only 29 people. Still, it completely defies the anecdotal evidence we see around here.

I think it was 29 studies looked at, from 1970-1999, each with 6-508 people. This paragraph talks about a subset of the data with over 1100 people. Surprising too is it says most of the "VLEDs" used less than 800 calories.

"Four VLED-studies that included 578 participants provided follow-up data for 4 or 5 y. Eight HBD studies that included 448 participants provided follow-up data for 4 or 5 y. At an average of 4.5 y of follow-up, weight-loss maintenance, percentage weight-loss maintenance, and reduced weight were significantly lower with HBDs than VLEDs. These comparisons for VLEDs and HBDs, respectively, were as follows: weight-loss maintenance, 7.05 and 1.99 kg; percentage weight-loss maintenance, 29.40% and 17.80%; and reduced weight, 6.59% and 2.11%."

lisajsund · December 2013

Lostreaction - do you know what your basal metabolic rate is?

And, if you can get 30 minutes, 3 days a week in the gym to lift weights, you'll have energy to keep going back.

It's worth a shot.

But, yes, 1200 calories is way too low for you.

How tall are you?

myfitnesspal added 500 extra calories to my diet? Why?

Replies

Categories