500 calories??
Options
Replies
-
Yesterday I was talking with a friend and I was telling about how I change my eating habits and I am exercising now ( according to myfitnesspal I should consume 1200 calories a day to lose weight) She told me she lose 20 lbs and expect to lose 20 lb more to reach her goal with a diet a DOCTOR told her but she only can eat 500 calories a days, don't seem to healthy to me but she was looking a little upset when I told her that, what you guys think about that 500 calories diet???
Not good. I agree that the doctor needs his/her license revoked.0 -
If she is being medically supervised, then they are the qualified ones. Its called a very low calorie diet the key is she is being monitored. What do the guys here know about a medically supervised low calorie diet? Pray tell.
You are kidding, right? That person has a goal to lose 40 pounds.0 -
sheldonklein wrote: »500 calories for someone 40 lbs overweight is not an appropriate VLCD, with our without medical supervision.
It doesnt say she had 40lb to lose, what her starting weight or other details are either. I would take what the OP says with a pinch of salt tbh. Im not the Dr and you dont have all the information.
What? Read the bold part above.She told me she lose 20 lbs and expect to lose 20 lb more to reach her goal with a diet a DOCTOR told her but she only can eat 500 calories a days
That equals 40 pounds.
However, you are correct, we don't have all the information, but there is enough to know that 500 calories a day is not safe.0 -
Nope, it does not completely disappear.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
Even if you are not diabetic, a severely low Intake can be dangerous. Most people realize this when they get lightheaded or dizzy, but others continue to push through. Would you like to know what happens if your blood glucose drops? You become altered and confused. As it continues to drop, you risk passing out and/or becoming unresponsive. You can even die if it drops too low. No, BGL is NOt just a concern for diabetics. Anyones BGL can drop. Glucose level chnaged through out the day so just having a blood test every few weeks would not be sufficient monitoring. Potassium is not the only thing to worry about.
Your body can continue to regulate blood sugar through gluconeogenesis. In healthy people, it wouldn't be an issue. I work as a chemist for a pharmaceutical company. I'm pretty sure I know how hypoglycemia works considering I work with insulin every day.
I said nothing about how the body regulates blood sugar, or what kind of macros one needs to consume. If you are getting a dangerously low amount of calories, regardless of the macro makeup, there is going to come a point where your body can no longer perform those functions and your BGL will drop.
Yes, this is still a risk for healthy people (which, if you are obese, not really sure you fit into the "healthy" category. Vlcd are dangerous.0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
On 500 calories a day you wouldn't even have the option of eating cookies without skipping lunch.
The RDA for a non-active person is 65 grams of fat = 585 calories and 50 grams of protein = 200.
That's almost 700 calories and you haven't eaten any veggies or fruit yet to get vitamins and minerals.0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
So eat nothing in a day but 300 grams of skinless boneless roasted chicken breast, for 495 calories and 93g of protein? Mmmm k.
This sort of thing makes me glad that people usually underestimate how much they’re eating. I can’t believe someone would advise this caloric restriction.
Edit: Also, what stevencloser said.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
On 500 calories a day you wouldn't even have the option of eating cookies without skipping lunch.
The RDA for a non-active person is 65 grams of fat = 585 calories and 50 grams of protein = 200.
That's almost 700 calories and you haven't eaten any veggies or fruit yet to get vitamins and minerals.
I tried a VLCD once, and I think I lasted about a day.0 -
Nope, it does not completely disappear.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
Even if you are not diabetic, a severely low Intake can be dangerous. Most people realize this when they get lightheaded or dizzy, but others continue to push through. Would you like to know what happens if your blood glucose drops? You become altered and confused. As it continues to drop, you risk passing out and/or becoming unresponsive. You can even die if it drops too low. No, BGL is NOt just a concern for diabetics. Anyones BGL can drop. Glucose level chnaged through out the day so just having a blood test every few weeks would not be sufficient monitoring. Potassium is not the only thing to worry about.
Your body can continue to regulate blood sugar through gluconeogenesis. In healthy people, it wouldn't be an issue. I work as a chemist for a pharmaceutical company. I'm pretty sure I know how hypoglycemia works considering I work with insulin every day.
I said nothing about how the body regulates blood sugar, or what kind of macros one needs to consume. If you are getting a dangerously low amount of calories, regardless of the macro makeup, there is going to come a point where your body can no longer perform those functions and your BGL will drop.
Yes, this is still a risk for healthy people (which, if you are obese, not really sure you fit into the "healthy" category. Vlcd are dangerous.
Actually your body would start breaking down your muscle and turning it into glucose if you stopped consuming anything at all. Gluconeogenesis can actually cause your blood glucose to increase beyond what is normal.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
On 500 calories a day you wouldn't even have the option of eating cookies without skipping lunch.
The RDA for a non-active person is 65 grams of fat = 585 calories and 50 grams of protein = 200.
That's almost 700 calories and you haven't eaten any veggies or fruit yet to get vitamins and minerals.
RDA isn't the same as what is necessary to survive. It's the optimal amount based on current knowledge. Someone could theoretically eat near 0 calories under medical supervision to lose weight. It wouldn't be optimal, but if the person was sufficiently obese, it may be preferable.0 -
People lie
All the time
0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
So eat nothing in a day but 300 grams of skinless boneless roasted chicken breast, for 495 calories and 93g of protein? Mmmm k.
This sort of thing makes me glad that people usually underestimate how much they’re eating. I can’t believe someone would advise this caloric restriction.
Edit: Also, what stevencloser said.
Except you don't need 93g of protein. Half of that would be sufficient.0 -
Yes doctors can recommend vlcd
But I don't know anymore than that0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
So eat nothing in a day but 300 grams of skinless boneless roasted chicken breast, for 495 calories and 93g of protein? Mmmm k.
This sort of thing makes me glad that people usually underestimate how much they’re eating. I can’t believe someone would advise this caloric restriction.
Edit: Also, what stevencloser said.
Except you don't need 93g of protein. Half of that would be sufficient.
How do you know how much protein is sufficient, particularly without any weight stats? And sufficient for what?
Maybe I’m just overly fond of my muscle mass, but I eat almost three times what you suggest. I’m just puzzled and don’t see how this could feasible work for anyone, ever.0 -
Lol. You have no clue what you're talking about. Now you're talking about cookies. Right, I'm sure the person doing 500 calories is eating cookies.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
Cookies is optimistic. I would eat one giant Starbucks cookie every day
. 0 -
Lol. You have no clue what you're talking about. Now you're talking about cookies. Right, I'm sure the person doing 500 calories is eating cookies.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
Yeah because it's completely unheard of for someone to be eating nothing but junk when on a diet. And the fact that her hair was falling out and she had a couple of symptoms of dehydration must mean she was eating nothing but nutrient dense foods, huh?0 -
Lol. You have no clue what you're talking about. Now you're talking about cookies. Right, I'm sure the person doing 500 calories is eating cookies.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
Yeah because it's completely unheard of for someone to be eating nothing but junk when on a diet. And the fact that her hair was falling out and she had a couple of symptoms of dehydration must mean she was eating nothing but nutrient dense foods, huh?
Fainting also happens to be a symptom of low blood glucose.
Nope, it does not completely disappear.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
Even if you are not diabetic, a severely low Intake can be dangerous. Most people realize this when they get lightheaded or dizzy, but others continue to push through. Would you like to know what happens if your blood glucose drops? You become altered and confused. As it continues to drop, you risk passing out and/or becoming unresponsive. You can even die if it drops too low. No, BGL is NOt just a concern for diabetics. Anyones BGL can drop. Glucose level chnaged through out the day so just having a blood test every few weeks would not be sufficient monitoring. Potassium is not the only thing to worry about.
Your body can continue to regulate blood sugar through gluconeogenesis. In healthy people, it wouldn't be an issue. I work as a chemist for a pharmaceutical company. I'm pretty sure I know how hypoglycemia works considering I work with insulin every day.
I said nothing about how the body regulates blood sugar, or what kind of macros one needs to consume. If you are getting a dangerously low amount of calories, regardless of the macro makeup, there is going to come a point where your body can no longer perform those functions and your BGL will drop.
Yes, this is still a risk for healthy people (which, if you are obese, not really sure you fit into the "healthy" category. Vlcd are dangerous.
Actually your body would start breaking down your muscle and turning it into glucose if you stopped consuming anything at all. Gluconeogenesis can actually cause your blood glucose to increase beyond what is normal.
You do realize that your heart is muscle right?0 -
stevencloser wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.
A medically supervised 500 calorie diet is arguably less dangerous than an unsupervised 1200 calorie diet. You can still be malnourished eating more calories. Again, it's not the calories that matter here. it's the nutrients. One of the reasons people on unsupervised VLCDs end up dying is because their heart stops from having a potassium deficiency. This is easily remedied when you're being supervised by a doctor and getting blood tests every couple weeks.
I'm not sure if you have a reading comprehension problem or what, but since I added the qualifier "if" in the statement "500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised" that implies that it is dangerous if done alone, but the risk disappears if you're being supervised. And that is absolutely true.
That is completely false. Just because a doctor puts you on that diet doesn't eliminate the risks. You think no doctor has ever made the wrong decision, diagnosis, maybe given the wrong medication? Just because you have MD in the title doesn't mean anything you tell a patient to so is correct or safe. So you are 100% wrong.
You went ahead and said someone has a reading comprehension issue but then you said something like that. Just mind blowing.UltimateRBF wrote: »500 calories is not dangerous if you're medically supervised. The reason people say don't go below 800 or 1200 or 1500 calories isn't because you need a certain number of calories while losing weight. It's because it's easier to get enough nutrients in that amount of food.
If the doctor is supervising, making sure she's not deficient in any nutrients, providing supplements, and making sure she's not doing any strenuous activities, then a 500 calorie diet isn't that big of a deal.
Her biggest issue is going to be keeping the weight off because she didn't learn to eat properly.
Yes it is, that's why they have to be medically supervised. Please don't make statements like the bolded ones.roselover58 wrote: »it could be the Hcg injections - the doctor does them. While on the injections, you eat 500 to 1000 calories a day (depends on several factors); the Hcg causes the body to burn about 2,500 to 3,000 calories. You can be on it for no more than 40 days, and then the following 21 days, you continue to not eat starch and sugar, but your caloric intake is back to 1,500 to 1,800 calories.
...and I not a doctor (MD), but I am a nutritionist.
Where did you recieve your qualifications as a nutritionist? Because holy crap.
+1 did you read my post? But hey yeah no big deal, hair falling out, fainting and landing up in a heap on the floor no big deal, oh and I forgot palpitations too
All of which have nothing to do with calories and everything to do with being malnourished. Lack of protein = hair falling out. Heart palpitations = most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Fainting = also most likely electrolyte imbalance/dehydration. Some protein, calcium, potassium, sodium, and increase water intake would have solved all of your problems. None of which require increasing calories.
Just because you had a bad doctor who didn't adequately supervise you doesn't mean that no doctor would adequately supervise someone.
You said a doctor supervising eliminates the risk and now you admit a doctor can be bad. Right, not about calories. Lack of protein requires no need to increase calories in order to increase protein. Wow.
Lack of protein doesn't require a caloric increase. It just may mean you need to eat chicken instead of cookies.
On 500 calories a day you wouldn't even have the option of eating cookies without skipping lunch.
The RDA for a non-active person is 65 grams of fat = 585 calories and 50 grams of protein = 200.
That's almost 700 calories and you haven't eaten any veggies or fruit yet to get vitamins and minerals.
RDA isn't the same as what is necessary to survive. It's the optimal amount based on current knowledge. Someone could theoretically eat near 0 calories under medical supervision to lose weight. It wouldn't be optimal, but if the person was sufficiently obese, it may be preferable.
Oh sorry, I thought we were talking about safe ways to lose weight over here. I must've misread. Hey OP, just drink water and throw in a protein shake and a multivitamin.0 -
The minimum calories a female should consume daily is 1200, anything less and there is a good chance they are not getting enough of the nutrients they need.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions