My 1200 kcal experiment

BennyCH wrote: »

missiontofitness wrote: »

BennyCH wrote: »

rosebette wrote: »

I think you're underestimating what you're missing for nutrition. Nutrition is more than just taking vitamins. As a male, you can't possibly hitting your macros for fats and proteins on 1200 calories a day. I know because as a petite female who is moderately active, I often am below on protein at 1200 calories (an my goal is around 80 grams). So, how as a 200+ lb. male can you be meeting those macros?

Why does a 200+ male have to be on a VLCD diet to make up for a couple of days of going over calories after a fast day?

I aim for 90g protein and 90g fat each day, I'm fat adapted with a body fat of around 16-19%, my current weight is 95kg i.e. I carry around 17 kg of fat (17x9'000= 153'000kcal),

so I also want to find out what happens being fat adapted with a lot body fat stored and at the same reduce my calorie intake to 1200 kcal / day

Seasoned MFP vets, please correct me if I'm wrong. But given that fat contains 9 calories per gram, and protein 4 calories per gram....

90g of fat = 810 calories.
90g of protein = 360 calories.

---

1,170 calories each day are used up by just these two macros? That doesn't seem very balanced, and isn't leaving you many calories of wiggle room for other macro/micronutrients. How long do you intend to do this? I'm still not jazzed on the 1,200 intake for a male....I'm sure you could still be in ketosis while upping your cals to a healthier level.

please read my first post, but to summarize: 2 weeks on low carb diet and I have around 16...19% body fat. Your body only need fat and protein, glucose it can create itself (there is no such thing as essential carbohydrates)

and for the xth time (which people does not seems to understand)_
- this is NOT a long term thing
- normally I would not go below my BMR in calories

So what I found out so far - one week now (which is not very surprising):
- I had to cut down on my exercises
- I'm tired, i.e. slept more (+ 1...2 h per day)
- Some cravings but manageable
- Felt in general quite ok, not depraved or anything
- It's easier during the week when working, weekend will be tough though

Day 1 96.6 kg 1207 kcal
Day 2 95.9 kg 1241 kcal
Day 3 95.4 kg 1249 kcal
Day 4 94.9 kg 1258 kcal
Day 5 94.6 kg 1379 kcal
Day 6 95.2 kg 1709 kcal
Day 7 93.6 kg

=> -3 kg in one week (some fat/water and LBM)

On day 5 my wife bought me a snack (kebab), which prob reflected the day 6 weight increase

and as you see I failed the experiment on day 6 when I ate 500 kcal above my target, to peoples distress I will continue though ;-)

This is one of those instances where correct spelling is important...

BennyCH wrote: »

erickirb wrote: »

Pretty close to fasting it is 50% of your daily requirements to maintain, yikes.
If you are doing Keto, why are you also throwing in IF? Neither of which is required for weight/fat loss.

with only your 40ish lbs to lose your goal should have been to lose 1 lb/week, and down to 0.5 for the last 10 or so.

That said, since you are only looking at such a large deficit over two weeks, the worst that will happen is a large % of the 2-5 lbs will come from lean muscle, not just fat. If you are okay with that, have at it.

IF comes more or less natural to me since I cannot eat breakfast...

After more than 15 years of testing different diet lifestyles, keto/low carb is the only that works for me, my willpower is simple not strong enough to eat in moderation on a carb-based diet, i.e. it always end up in a glorious binge...

See, THIS is what's troubling to me. You WILL need to figure out a way to eat some carbs if you love them. Long-term deprivation will never work!

Krystle1984 wrote: »

I only pointed it out as I assumed you meant deprived, which means something very different to depraved...

I dunno, I can get pretty depraved when I'm deprived...

BennyCH wrote: »

rabbitjb wrote: »

maybe I expected a little more "scientific" discussions, but so far mostly empty statements which are supposed to be based on "conventional wisdom" and "common sense".

I think the reason there is not much "scientific" discussion is because there is nothing scientific about this. It's one person doing a short term diet of fairly random parameters, with no control comparison, no blood tests or independently tested health markers recorded, and utilizing self-reported conformity and results. Whether over these two weeks you lose or gain weight, feel awesome or awful, get rushed to the hospital or grow a third eye on the back of your head, doesn't tell us anything. I'm not even sure you will be able to draw any meaningful conclusions about yourself from it. Other than your ability to stick to a 2 week eating plan that most people using "conventional wisdom" and "common sense" believe is unhealthy.

TBH I don't really care if it is healthy for a grown man to eat 1200 cals a day for two weeks. It sounds unpleasant and unnecessarily difficult to me. If I can eat more food with more calories and more nutrients and be a healthy weight, I'll go with that. There are plenty of things that are difficult about life, I don't want to add something as basic and pleasurable as eating to that list. In all sincerity, good luck, I hope you get whatever it is you are trying to get out of this.

hrtchoco wrote: »

I was scrolling through and I think I accidentally clicked "abuse" on someone's post...oops

Go back and unclick it

He ded.