Drawbacks of eating too few calories??

This content has been removed.

Just don't let it become an every day thing. A couple of days a week where you eat less because you're not hungry is NOT a big deal. It gives you wiggle room later in the week.

I have days where I eat a ton of vegetables and feel full, then I have days where I want a big cheeseburger and ice cream. Look at your weekly average and make sure it's safe, and don't sweat the lows and highs. This is how we learn to moderate.

Over the long term, under eating can cause hair loss, lean muscle loss, menstrual cycle disruptions, and gallstones to name a few. If it isn't a consistent thing then little worries. If you are consistently under eating it is considered a disorder.

A couple of days a week of lower calories is fine, especially if you go over on other days. Look at your week as a whole. That's really just banking calories and it's a pretty good way to lose and still have some indulgences. However, if this lasts, you're going to need to eat more calorie-dense foods to ensure you're getting proper nutrition or just suck it up and eat when you don't want to eat. Personally, I'd add calories and stay with less food, but that's me.

I've been on a doctor-supervised starvation diet for 10 months. It was either let the doctor starve me or die of a heart attack from the weight. Beyond weight loss, there's been muscle loss and severe stress on my kidneys and liver. The accompanying weekly bloodwork is pretty extensive, so I look like a damn drug addict with all the track marks. There's skin damage -it dries, bleeds, and cracks- and some permanent scarring on my neck and face from two of the skin fissures that wouldn't heal. I have nail damage that may or may not be permanent, because they dry and crack too. So far, about 70% of my hair fell out and it looks like I'll have some permanent bald spots.

Now granted, getting to this point took 3 solid months of starvation. That's less than 500 net calories a day, in my case. Many days, my calorie net was actually negative. However, you don't know what your starvation point will be. You don't know when you'll hit the point when your body freaks out. So don't do it. Stay as far away from it as possible. Stay at your calorie goal on a weekly basis.

Eat. Seriously. Because you don't want to go down the road I'm on. You don't.

The "at least 1000 calories" is net calories.

tincanonastring wrote: »

Thanks for sharing that. I think it's important people see the effects of severe restriction. How long until your doctor says you can increase calories to a normal level?

There's no glory in losing fast. It's not worth it. Feels good now isn't worth the utter destruction of the only body you have. That's true for becoming obese and it's true for losing.

February 19th, I can raise my calories to 1200, although I should still stay in the 1000-1200 range to continue losing. Right now, an optimum day is 600-800, although if I go to 1200, that's ok. On the higher days, I have fewer bouts of muscle spasms and cramping, but I have to lose, so those high calorie days are pretty rare. I didn't go into that, but it's a special 20-45 minutes of hell. Imagine a charlie horse all over your entire body. Yep, special.

I had bariatric surgery, so I don't absorb about 30% of the calories I eat. My levels are still too low for safety without direct supervision, but I'm getting to a healthy place slowly but surely. With luck, I'll be up to 1500 in a year and I can live there safely. I'm 5', mostly sedentary with a small frame, and my goal weight is 106-120lbs. I'm at 175 and things are looking really good. My cardiologist is convinced I'll actually make it to 50. At 43, he wasn't convinced I'd make it to 45. I did and I'm making it to 50 too.

Try more calorie dense foods. Nuts, nut butters, avocados etc.

The drawback is that you will be deficient in many vitamins and minerals. There is very hard to get all the nutrients that your body needs with that little amount of calories unless you are a tiny, 12 year old, midget, fairy. If you can menage that then there are no drawbacks. But it will require very extensive nutrition planning and research and/or tons of supplements. If you don't get all the nutrients your body needs many health problems, including death eventually if you do this for long enough, could happen.

ainarsraciks wrote: »

The drawback is that you will be deficient in many vitamins and minerals. There is very hard to get all the nutrients that your body needs with that little amount of calories unless you are a tiny, 12 year old, midget, fairy. If you can menage that then there are no drawbacks. But it will require very extensive nutrition planning and research and/or tons of supplements. If you don't get all the nutrients your body needs many health problems, including death eventually if you do this for long enough, could happen.

Where are you getting any number of calorie intake to assume that OP isn't getting enough nutrition? She only said she was 200 calories below goal, and never said what her goal is. Verify hard numbers before saying things like this.

Jubee13 wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies. The reason I haven't been hungry is because I've been having inner ear problems which makes me feel pretty nauseated. I usually have no problem reaching my calorie goal. Hopefully this will resolve, but I didn't know if going under was ok or if I should make myself eat a little more.

I had vertigo for a solid month once. It was awful. Taking ginger caplets did help with the nausea part, so that might be an option as well.