should I eat more, and why

You seem quite convinced of this, and I can't speak for you. The reason I wouldn't do that (M, 36, 5'10" 164 lbs) is because I would fear losing muscle and setting up an unsustainable pattern that would lead to eventual weight regain.

I've actually gone that little, or about that on the Master Cleanse. When I was on it, it was the best idea ever. When I gained it all back, as about 95% do, not so much.

Malnutrition is why..some of the damage malnutrition can do is permanent and you will have to deal with the consequences.

In mild to moderate cases of malnutrition, no symptoms or signs may be evident; however, as the condition persists, the signs and symptoms will become more pronounced.

Oral Symptoms
Swollen and/or bleeding gums are the first oral symptoms of malnutrition. As the malnutrition continues, the teeth may begin to decay. When only the gums are affected, the oral effects of malnutrition can be reversed; however, once the teeth begin to decay, the damage is permanent.

Musculoskeletal Symptoms
Fragile bones, osteoporosis and muscle loss and/or weakness are symptoms of malnutrition. When calcium or vitamin D are the nutrients lacking, these symptoms may manifest shortly after the body becomes malnourished.

Mental Symptoms
Malnutrition can cause a slowed reaction time. However, in the elderly population, malnutrition may cause dementia and/or memory loss.

Decreased Organ Function
As malnutrition ravages the body, the organs may begin to function less efficiently. This can lead to heart problems, decreased liver function, kidney failure, decreased lung capacity, intestinal problems, stomach irregularities and abnormal menstrual cycles in females.

Abdominal Symptoms
Ascites, which manifests as a swollen or bloated abdomen, is a sign of malnutrition. This condition is exacerbated when the liver, kidneys or intestinal tract is affected.

Dry Skin
People with malnutrition may develop abnormally dry skin, despite the use of lotions and creams. In severe cases, the skin may begin to crack.

I have to agree with the folks above. If you're okay with the results, then go for it. Just make sure you understand the consequences. Personally, I think the scale is an overrated piece of equipment. As I began my fitness journey, I learned very quickly that I did not care about my weight, but how I looked and felt. In 6 months, you can lose 9 pounds but have sculpted your body with lean muscle and look amazing OR you could lose 25 pounds and just look okay, but thinner. It's all up to you and the work you want to put in. What are your end goals?

Crash diets rarely produce sustainable weight loss. Learning to eat appropriate portions for life is how you lose and keep weight off. I am a 51 year old female, 5'5", eat between 1500 - 1700 calories/day and have lost from 141 to 135 in about 6 weeks. Haven't starved myself, and I will be able to eat like this the rest of my life.

pinggolfer96 wrote: »

jmervine77 wrote: »

At the end of the day calories won't be as important as nutrients. I have days where I don't meet my calorie goals because I are a lot of lean proteins and veggies and fruit. You want to make sure you are eating at least 3 meals a day and drinking plenty of water. Focus on the healthy food instead of the calories. 600 is very low, so I would suggest maybe adding a protein shake

Sorry but this is horrible advice.

Adequate calories are required for optimum functions within the body. Even if you're not "dizzy" or "lightheaded" on 1000 cals, you can't provide your body with enough essential macro and micronutrients. Meal timing and count of meals Is irrelevant. Total macro/ calorie accumulation is what matters. Also 3lbs a week weight loss....equals you losing muscle....which is metabolically active. Have fun depriving yourself of nutrients and losing muscle mass. Losing weight doesn't always mean healthy, and right now your are doing something that is doing more harm than anything.

This

You can minimize muscle loss by keeping your calorie deficit within a reasonable range (i.e. a 20% reduction from your maintenance calorie needs) and lifting. There will always be some lean body mass (LBM) loss when losing weight - nature of the beast. Also, LBM (i.e. all the stuff other than fat in your body) makes up more than just the muscles you might be thinking of like biceps. It also makes up our organs - you know, like our heart. Significant loss of LBM can be detrimental to your health. Increasing your protein intake (really your overall intake is way too low) while lifting can help keep the loss of LBM lower.

Macronutrients - carbohydrates, fats, proteins
Micronutrients - everything else we need to be healthy (vitamins, minerals)

You're only going to get macronutrients through food. Most micronutrients can be supplemented with a pill (like One-a-Day), but you still can't get all of them that way. When you don't meet your body's needs for these macro and micronutrients over a period of time, you will become malnourished.

pinggolfer96 wrote: »

jmervine77 wrote: »

At the end of the day calories won't be as important as nutrients. I have days where I don't meet my calorie goals because I are a lot of lean proteins and veggies and fruit. You want to make sure you are eating at least 3 meals a day and drinking plenty of water. Focus on the healthy food instead of the calories. 600 is very low, so I would suggest maybe adding a protein shake

Sorry but this is horrible advice.

Adequate calories are required for optimum functions within the body. Even if you're not "dizzy" or "lightheaded" on 1000 cals, you can't provide your body with enough essential macro and micronutrients. Meal timing and count of meals Is irrelevant. Total macro/ calorie accumulation is what matters. Also 3lbs a week weight loss....equals you losing muscle....which is metabolically active. Have fun depriving yourself of nutrients and losing muscle mass. Losing weight doesn't always mean healthy, and right now your are doing something that is doing more harm than anything.

This.

Also, hunger cannot be what you base your needs off of. Many of us gained weight because we ate when we were "hungry." Turns out, it was stress, boredom, lack of control, and many other things that turned into bad habits.

When I first started here a few years ago, I set my goal to 1200. I wasn't hungry, so I thought it wasn't a problem. Not the case. I was getting weaker and more tired by the day. Upped the calories, and I still lost weight at a good, but healthy, pace.

The reason you want to up your calories is to save your health. While you might feel fine, it is not a good justification for eating at an unhealthy level. I know it can be a bit disheartening at first to slow down such an "amazing" loss, but that loss is costing much more than you can see. Nearly 3-4 lbs / week sounds impressive until you break it down and learn what you are losing to achieve that.

[/quote]

Also, hunger cannot be what you base your needs off of. Many of us gained weight because we ate when we were "hungry." Turns out, it was stress, boredom, lack of control, and many other things that turned into bad habits.

[/quote]

This is gold. I think a problem a lot of people have when they're trying to lose weight is that they think their experience of hunger is a clear and accurate reflection of exactly what is going on in their bodies. If I'm hungry, my metabolism must be going crazy and I will burn off this food easily! Our bodies are so adaptable though. You can think you're hungry when your body doesn't need food, and you can feel like you're not hungry when your body does need food. Hunger is one criterion, but it doesn't give the complete picture. Most people don't understand that.

mishkins3 wrote: »

won't I lose muscle mass no matter how small the deficit, isn't the loss of muscle linear with the weight loss

Maybe I should be lighting weights then... I tried treadmill and wieghts for a week but my weight keept going up (water retention I think). I know it won't make a difference on weight loss over time once it levels out but it was discouraging anyways.

If you did weights then maybe you could maintain muscle if you lost slower than I am.

Not one supporter, maybe I will increase another 200-300 calories, and do some weight lifting. I know about the muscle loss but I figured since I don't have much compared to fat I won't lose very much and can regain it later.

What about supplements? can I get maco nutrients that ways Is there a specific kind that has all of them?

Not even sure what maco and micro nutrients are... are we talking vitamins and minerals?

I don't want to take like 3 years to lose the weight i want to lose, if it took that long I would never do it. that has been a reason I havn't dieted seriously before.

Do you like your hair and nails, and want to keep them?
Then eat at LEAST 1200 a day (1200 NET if exercising.
Oh, you should probably eat more if you want to have a healthy heart, too. What you're doing is VERY dangerous. I'm sorry, but I'd rather NOT die of a heart failure if it means a slower weight loss. Fast weight loss is never the key to a happy life. The weight will come back on...fast.

Do not, and I repeat DO NOT start lifting if you're not going to eat adequately. Eat appropriately for health.

No matter how much you lift, if you eat so little, you'll lose muscle mass, and a lot of it. Oh, you're heart is a muscle, did I mention that? Supplements will do diddly squat if you're not going to feed your body properly. How is your body going to process the fat soluble vitamins if you're eating so little?

You're not a special snowflake. Lose weight the safe and proper way so he weight will stay off. Gah.

I highly doubt you are going to listen to any of this until you see some negative effects. Someone else said this in a different way, but it isn't just your show-off muscles that will diminish. The ones that we need to live such as your heart or respiratory muscles will also begin to lose strength and mass. If you are going to exercise, you will have to fuel your body for that exercise... Right now your body is barely getting enough to continue functioning-- especially at 600 kcal. You're eating less than half of your BMR (which is the amount of calories your body would use without any activity factored). The fact is you can't maintain this high of a deficit for the rest of your life. This is disordered eating and you will gain when you begin to eat more food again.

mishkins3 wrote: »

I didn't plan to do it the rest of my life, I was planning to do it for about 4 months more (total 7 months)

That's all it takes to do damage to the body. You say that you're not planning to do this for the rest of your life... What happens after the 7 months? I did what you did, and wish that I hadn't. Seriously. Slow IS the best, and it did take me a long time to realize that. Why the rush? The end result of a rushed weight loss often results in unwanted side effects, both physical, hormonal and mental.

Proper nutrition and fuel is essential to keep the body in optimal condition. Eating so little calories won't provide proper nutrition.

Kiss your gallbladder bye bye. Rapid weight loss = gall stones = surgery.

If you are are not willing to lift your *kitten* off the couch right now, a time period during which you temporarily have a more favourable muscle to fat ratio because you hopefully did lose more fat than lean mass, especially in the beginning, why on earth would you expect to be willing to lift your *kitten* off the couch down the road?

While you are/were obese you may have managed to escape with a favourable fat to lean mass loss ratio. The leaner you get and larger your deficit the more lean mass you will lose.

If you think that a 1:1 fat to lean mass ratio is good enough... the worse study I've seen had a 3:2 lean mass to fat lost ratio. That's right: losing more lean mass than fat. And yes, it was a very low calorie diet without extremely high protein... just like your diet.

You don't want to spend three years losing weight because you are engaged in an unsustainable eating and moving plan.

If your plan was sustainable and was teaching you the things you will need to know in order to maintain your weight, you wouldn't care how long it took for you to get to your "ultimate" target weight.

You know why? Because you would not be changing anything during your transition from weight loss to maintenance... except maybe adding an apple or banana a day to your food list.

Everyone I know who made "changes" in transitioning from weight loss to maintenance... didn't maintain.

25% deficit while obese. 20% deficit while overweight. Under 10% if trying to achieve maximum lean mass preservation while at a normal weight.

Let us know when your kidneys start shutting down. That will eventually happen if you don't reverse course and get enough calories.

Net higher. You are a tale male. I'm a female, a foot shorter, and 10 years older than you and I eat more than you do and still lose weight.