I thought this was wrong??

Options
124»

Replies

  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    Merkavar wrote: »
    Wait so .9 or 1 pound a day? Isn't that like 3500 cal deficit a day? So he eats 1000. Burns say 2k just sitting around. Needs to burn another 2500?

    Would this not require several hours a day exercising?

    Is this diet aimed at normal people to follow or aimed at people who don't work much like people with trust funds or retired people?

    Or is he just showing it can be done.

    Actually plugging in the numbers, it seems spot on

    According to MFP A 5'11" 27 year old 320 lb sedentary man needs 3060 cals to maintain his weight.

    Other factors would include non exercise activity, intentional exercise, and also since he lost so much weight over a short period of time (I'm assuming .9 lbs per day was an average), a significant portion of it could have been water weight

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    cindyangotti wrote: »
    If you are eating healthy food I don't see anything wrong with 1000 to 1200 calories a day. Everyone loses weight differently. What works for one will not work for another therefore, do what works for you!

    Eating healthy food doesn't mean you won't lose excessive muscle mass if your deficit is too high.

    That probably matters more when you are losing vanity weight and less if you have an urgent health issue and somewhere in-between for others.
  • WeddedBliss1992
    WeddedBliss1992 Posts: 414 Member
    Options
    Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

    From my understanding, reading the article, he was under a doctor's supervision during this time and he was morbidly obese (or close to it). That's going to be much different than say someone trying to lose 50lbs.

    this is what i was thinking. i'm sure for the average person needing to lose a few, this method would not be recommended. my husband lost 50 pounds very quickly and very soon after had to have his gallbladder removed. the dr said he lost too much too fast.

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    kristenlarkin wrote: »
    kristenlarkin wrote: »
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
    kristenlarkin wrote: »
    If it isn't something you can stick to forever then there is no point in doing it.
    Why?
    Why must one plan to do something forever?
    If CICO is really how it all works, wouldn't it apply?

    By the same token, couldn't someone eat low carb (and create a deficit), get to their maintenance weight range, then eat moderate carb (not at a deficit) and maintain? No? Why not?

    I'm not advocating what Penn did. Just questioning the "do it forever" statement.

    If you can do low cal forever that is fine. You have to choose what you can do forever. It doesn't have to be low carb, I just chose low carb

    Sorry thought I was on another thread. If you can stick to close to 1000 calories a day for life you'll maintain. He isn't going to be able to go up to 2000 calories and a day and add back a lot of wheat and grains and not gain weight back is what I was saying. He will be able to up it a little. If this is a way to eat for life he will be fine as all diets. I don't know if he can eat that way for life though. I couldn't, but some people are different

    I'm skeptical about whether he's actually eating 1000 calories (although I suppose he could have someone prepping that for him). However, if he is, and losing as fast as he says, he could certainly go up to 2000 eventually. He's probably hurting his maintenance numbers somewhat, but that doesn't mean he'll be doomed to eat at 1000.

    I lost a bunch of weight at 1250, and so far as I can tell now I'm maintaining around 2000 or a bit more and right around what would be predicted for my stats and activity level. (I raised my calories before I got to maintenance, but Jillette could too.)
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    JaneiR36 wrote: »
    Merkavar wrote: »
    Wait so .9 or 1 pound a day? Isn't that like 3500 cal deficit a day? So he eats 1000. Burns say 2k just sitting around. Needs to burn another 2500?

    Would this not require several hours a day exercising?

    Is this diet aimed at normal people to follow or aimed at people who don't work much like people with trust funds or retired people?

    Or is he just showing it can be done.

    Actually plugging in the numbers, it seems spot on

    According to MFP A 5'11" 27 year old 320 lb sedentary man needs 3060 cals to maintain his weight.

    Other factors would include non exercise activity, intentional exercise, and also since he lost so much weight over a short period of time (I'm assuming .9 lbs per day was an average), a significant portion of it could have been water weight

    I have no idea if the 1 lb/day is realistic here, but to go along with this a 320 lb man can probably burn off a decent amount of calories without too much exercise (walking around and such--and he probably does do various physical things) just because being big means you burn a lot more calories with any activity.
  • looking_forward
    looking_forward Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    It appears that he's doing a combo of Dr. Fuhrman's Nutritarian food plan with Ray Cronise's Cold Therapy. Hmmm…
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Options
    The guy named his daughter "Moxie CrimeFighter" and that alone is enough to make me think twice before following his example.

    It was hilarious when he went to a hippie-type thing and got people to sign a petition to keep dihydrogen monoxide out of the pools. :)
  • Sunny_Bunny_
    Sunny_Bunny_ Posts: 7,140 Member
    Options
    My daily goal is 1100. Sometimes I go over (but still in deficit) and some days I've found that it's hard to even hit that number. I just cut myself some slack. But 90% of the time I'm under 1200.
  • honkytonks85
    honkytonks85 Posts: 669 Member
    Options
    A caloric deficit however big or small will lead to weight loss - I don't know why this is a difficult concept for people to grasp. 1200 isn't some magical number where if you go below it, suddenly your body just grinds to a halt. No - you can definitely lose weight at 1000 calories, in fact you will lose more weight at 1000 calories than 1200.

    THAT being said - a large deficit and fast weight loss may lead to increased lean muscle loss which will mean you may have a harder time maintaining that weight and may gain it back. Also it would be harder (but not impossible) to get in your bodies nutritional requirements such as vitamins, fibre, etc. However, if you ate 1000 calories of veggies and meat then you would probably be fine.
  • lemonsnowdrop
    lemonsnowdrop Posts: 1,298 Member
    Options
    The reason 1200 is generally recommended is because it's extremely difficult to get the proper nutrition (macronutrients and micronutrients) your body needs for survival. Go ahead and look up your daily macro goals, then convert them to calories. If you don't get enough protein, fat, carbs, plus your micros, your entire body can suffer. It's not worth it. (Also, it's shown that slow loss is the most sustainable.)
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    Options
    Have to chuckle: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0998876/

Categories