starting slow metabolic rate after months of low cal intake

Options
Saraha1984
Saraha1984 Posts: 3
in Health and Weight Loss
Hi,

I was wondering if anyone had any advice on kick starting your metabolism. I was following a healthy, yet low calorie diet since October 2013 and unknown to me at the time I was often consuming less than 1,000 cals per day. This has basically led to a complete weight loss stand still at this point even though I exercise three times per week. By doing what I thought was the right thing at the time, I have managed to put my body into starvation mode which is obviously one of the worst things I could possibly do!

So my question is this, how do I get back on track and start my metabolism off again? I'm not 100% sure how many cals I should be having per day (at the moment it's about 1200) and do I need to replace the calories I've used after exercise so I don't leave a huge deficit? I'm 168lb at the moment and want to lose 28lb in the next 8 months which I think is an achievable and realistic goal for healthy weight loss.

Any help would be really appreciated as I'm new to My Fitness Pal and calorie counting in general (I've always done the SW diet but have struggled this time as I moved to Australia - hence the reason I avoided some foods as I didn't know the syn value and haven't been eating enough!)

My diary is open (although I've only just joined) and any advice on what to eat or avoid and exercise or tips to get things moving again would be fantastic!

Thanks!
«1

Replies

  • hiyomi
    hiyomi Posts: 906 Member
    Options
    30 pounds in 8 months?! Gurl, up those calories!!!! Try for 1500-1700 a day instead!
  • Dewymorning
    Dewymorning Posts: 762 Member
    Options
    You can use http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/ to work out how many calories your body needs to maintain its weight normally (called TDEE)

    Then reduce that number by about 20%, and that is a good place to start. You can enter your 3 times a week exercise in too, that way you don't need to worry about calculating your exercise calories.

    Make sure you weigh your food to ensure you are eating the amount you think you are.

    If you are eating too little and exercising you could be putting your body under chronic stress, which can slow down weight loss.
  • David_AUS
    David_AUS Posts: 298 Member
    Options
    Hi Saraha - this is my advice. Get a good meal or two into you. Have a day of high calories - when I mean high something like 1,700 - 2,000 or so calories (if you can balance out the F/C/P as a guide overall but don't worry too much for this day). Your body will thank you for it and it see this as break in the drought - The major hormone you are triggering here is Leptin - it will increase dramatically in a short period and will help with fat burning. You can just go back to "standard calories" - IE: the level you have decided to stick to for a normal day or you can do a fast by delaying your meal to later the following day ( and eat a normal dinner so this would be like 1/3 of the calories for the following day ) and then the day after go to your normal plan indicatively 1,600 cal. As I said just what I would do.

    Exercise wise - really whatever you want to do. Cardio with strength training - whether this is gym work or "body weight" exercises or dancing or skiing or snow boarding or surfing or kite boarding or jogging the options are vast and various. The only exercise that probably won't help much is your thumb on the TV remote control.
  • mulecanter
    mulecanter Posts: 1,792 Member
    Options
    I'm sorry, your story doesn't add up. Someone who is 168 pounds and truly eating a 1000 calories a day will lose weight. This is why prisoners in concentration camps get skinny. By your logic their slow metabolism should sustain them. I think you need to revisit your calorie intake log and your exercise log. I think you are not accurate in your measurements. The physics involved require that when you burn more than you take in your mass will decrease. Unless you are on 24-hour a day bed rest your calorie expenditures are far above 1000. You are obviously new to calorie counting. Get a scale and try it--you will see results.
  • Saraha1984
    Saraha1984 Posts: 3
    Options
    Hi mule canter,

    Thanks for your reply, I forgot to mention that if already lost over 25lb so far since October and I agree, sometimes I haven't counted the odd cheeky glass of wine but on some days I've been so busy I've only eaten around 900 calories which I think has helped stuff up my metabolism and my weight has seemed to plateau.

    I've only recently started to exercise too (last four weeks) so maybe this might have something to do with it too?

    Thanks!

    Sarah
  • reneemosley
    reneemosley Posts: 95 Member
    Options
    I will only share my experience with you. I lost a significant amount of weight on a VLC diet. After a year I stopped losing. I ran 15 miles a week minimum and my numbers would have me losing alot fast, but I didn't. Infact I had not lost in over 4 months, but I did not give up. I am methodical about weighing and measuring my food. I choose mostly whole organic and healthy foods.

    A month ago on advice of a nutritionist I increased my calories by a few hundred a day and increased my protein intake. In the first two weeks I gained and lost 5 lbs.I have been on a steady losing streak since.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is you are not broken. There is an easy recovery if you are patient. Don't beleive all that you hear, try and see what works for you and your body. The only right answer is what works for your body because not all bodies are created equal, contrary to popular belief.
  • reneemosley
    reneemosley Posts: 95 Member
    Options
    Mulecanter
    I think you are not accurate in your assumptions. Living proof here.
  • Saraha1984
    Saraha1984 Posts: 3
    Options
    Thanks everyone for your replies, there is some really good advice that I'll start putting into practice!

    Thanks again!:smile:
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    ...I was often consuming less than 1,000 cals per day. This has basically led to a complete weight loss stand still....

    I know it's not going to be what you want to hear, but those two sentences are incompatible with each other.

    You were almost certainly eating more than you thought, the first step should be to figure out what went wrong in the tracking.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    I'm sorry, your story doesn't add up. Someone who is 168 pounds and truly eating a 1000 calories a day will lose weight. This is why prisoners in concentration camps get skinny. By your logic their slow metabolism should sustain them. I think you need to revisit your calorie intake log and your exercise log. I think you are not accurate in your measurements. The physics involved require that when you burn more than you take in your mass will decrease. Unless you are on 24-hour a day bed rest your calorie expenditures are far above 1000. You are obviously new to calorie counting. Get a scale and try it--you will see results.
    I agree.

    OP, at 168 pounds there is no way you were in starvation mode. Log all your food and exercise, stay within you calorie goals, and you will lose weight.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    Mulecanter
    I think you are not accurate in your assumptions. Living proof here.
    If he's inaccurate, then so is half the posters here with their replies. Eating more simply fuels you body properly, it does not help you lose weight. Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight.
  • steve0820
    steve0820 Posts: 510 Member
    Options
    Mulecanter
    I think you are not accurate in your assumptions. Living proof here.
    If he's inaccurate, then so is half the posters here with their replies. Eating more simply fuels you body properly, it does not help you lose weight. Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight.

    Eating more does a lot more then simply fuel your body, it does help with weight loss. Keeps your body burning and working like a well oiled machine.
    I really don't like hearing constantly, just "eat under your calories, and you'll loose weight", there are many factors that can make or break that concept.
  • DamePiglet
    DamePiglet Posts: 3,730 Member
    Options
    Mulecanter
    I think you are not accurate in your assumptions. Living proof here.
    If he's inaccurate, then so is half the posters here with their replies. Eating more simply fuels you body properly, it does not help you lose weight. Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight.

    Eating more does a lot more then simply fuel your body, it does help with weight loss. Keeps your body burning and working like a well oiled machine.
    I really don't like hearing constantly, just "eat under your calories, and you'll loose weight", there are many factors that can make or break that concept.

    He actually said "eating more simply fuels your body PROPERLY"... Meaning nutrition.
    Calories matter for weight loss, nutrition for health & well-being.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    Mulecanter
    I think you are not accurate in your assumptions. Living proof here.
    If he's inaccurate, then so is half the posters here with their replies. Eating more simply fuels you body properly, it does not help you lose weight. Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight.

    Eating more does a lot more then simply fuel your body, it does help with weight loss. Keeps your body burning and working like a well oiled machine.
    I really don't like hearing constantly, just "eat under your calories, and you'll loose weight", there are many factors that can make or break that concept.

    He actually said "eating more simply fuels your body PROPERLY"... Meaning nutrition.
    Calories matter for weight loss, nutrition for health & well-being.

    Exactly. Weight loss is calories in/calories out.

    If eating more helped us lose weight then we would not have an overweight society because...well...we all love to eat! :bigsmile:
  • Toblave
    Toblave Posts: 244 Member
    Options
    I've found this helpful.

    http://www.leighpeele.com/starvation-mode
  • eddiesmith1
    eddiesmith1 Posts: 1,550 Member
    Options
    Hi mule canter,

    Thanks for your reply, I forgot to mention that if already lost over 25lb so far since October and I agree, sometimes I haven't counted the odd cheeky glass of wine but on some days I've been so busy I've only eaten around 900 calories which I think has helped stuff up my metabolism and my weight has seemed to plateau.

    I've only recently started to exercise too (last four weeks) so maybe this might have something to do with it too?

    Thanks!

    Sarah

    It may well be that you are converting some loss to muscle while losing the fat at the moment. muscle weighs more so it can look like you've stalled . Measurements are also an indicator. . As Mule Canter pointed out there is no way to stall at sub 1000 calories (if they are sodium rich maybe there is water retention hiding the loss as well - without an open diary it's going to be difficult to see any issues like this )
  • Toblave
    Toblave Posts: 244 Member
    Options
    Hi mule canter,

    Thanks for your reply, I forgot to mention that if already lost over 25lb so far since October and I agree, sometimes I haven't counted the odd cheeky glass of wine but on some days I've been so busy I've only eaten around 900 calories which I think has helped stuff up my metabolism and my weight has seemed to plateau.

    I've only recently started to exercise too (last four weeks) so maybe this might have something to do with it too?

    Thanks!

    Sarah

    It may well be that you are converting some loss to muscle while losing the fat at the moment. muscle weighs more so it can look like you've stalled . Measurements are also an indicator. . As Mule Canter pointed out there is no way to stall at sub 1000 calories (if they are sodium rich maybe there is water retention hiding the loss as well - without an open diary it's going to be difficult to see any issues like this )

    A pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat. Unless the OP is lifting regularly and getting newbie gains, then this is unlikely.

    ETA: In any event, no muscle gains are going to occur at that large of a deficit.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    I've found this helpful.

    http://www.leighpeele.com/starvation-mode
    Well, aside from the fact that the first thing you see at that site is her books and "become a client", that woman is grossly misinformed on what starvation mode really is. Overweight people don't go into starvation mode, and it's not based on the amount of calories your eat.

    THIS is starvation: http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/6/1347.full

    F2.medium.gif
  • Toblave
    Toblave Posts: 244 Member
    Options
    I've found this helpful.

    http://www.leighpeele.com/starvation-mode
    Well, aside from the fact that the first thing you see at that site is her books and "become a client", that woman is grossly misinformed on what starvation mode really is. Overweight people don't go into starvation mode, and it's not based on the amount of calories your eat.

    THIS is starvation: http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/6/1347.full

    Well no they don't go into "starvation mode" in the sense that you see in the pics you've posted but they do have metabolic adaptations that make weight loss more difficult after prolonged deficits which can cause plateaus. And given that her research has between 200 and 300 research and study citations validating her article and book, I lend her opinion weight. (pun intended)
  • reneemosley
    reneemosley Posts: 95 Member
    Options
    Mulecanter
    I think you are not accurate in your assumptions. Living proof here.
    If he's inaccurate, then so is half the posters here with their replies. Eating more simply fuels you body properly, it does not help you lose weight. Eating less than you burn is how you lose weight.
    I actually agree with you....half of the posters are not correct in every situation of weight loss. Simply eating less than you burn does not work in every situation. It certainly works at first but the body adapts. There is more than one simple direction when losing weight. There are many things to consider over and above "just eat less". I can't tell you what OP is or is not doing but I can tell you from personal experience it is not "just eat less" 100% of the time. You must consider other factors. I'm not saying eat more and lose weight, I'm saying don't automatically assume if weight loss has stalled or is slow the dieter is just eating too much, there are other factors to consider.

Categories