Hitting under your daily cal intake

cvlvft
cvlvft Posts: 8 Member
2300 cals my daily intake to hit my goal. Today I'm 500 cals short. Is it bad not to hit that 2300 everyday?

Replies

  • bsettle2014
    bsettle2014 Posts: 8 Member
    All depends on what you are looking for. If you are looking for weight loss then you would want a deficit in calories in vs calories out.
  • BinaryFu
    BinaryFu Posts: 240 Member
    Usually at 2000+ calories a day, I've noticed that being shy by up to 300c doesn't really hurt anything, but at around 400+ I notice that when I get up the next day I'm ready to eat the whole house and it takes a lot of will power to just fix up the normal breakfast. Of course, my goal is weight loss, if your goal is weight gain, you need to be closer to that number. 500c = roughly 1lb of weight, gain or loss per week.

    However, if you are trying to lose weight, when you hit beyond -2lbs a week, you're risking putting your body into metabolic shutdown where it begins to conserve calories and store them as much as possible (read as, helps you gain lots of fat!), so it's not a great idea.

    It all boils down to what your goal is and where you're at. For example, if you're set up with a goal of losing 1lb per week and you're 500c short of your goal, no sweat, if you did that daily, you'd lose 2lbs at the end of the week. But if you're already set to lose 2lbs per week, that extra pound could cost you weight loss if your metabolism shuts down. On the other hand, if you're set up to *gain* a pound a week, losing that 500c will put you right into limbo - no gain, no loss. If you're set up to *gain* two pounds a week, your results will slow to only one pound a week.

    In summary though, I have to say - if it's only once in awhile, it won't hurt you. You don't need to make it up, you don't need to panic. But if it's a daily trend, you need to rethink your plan to work in a few hundred more calories.

    I hope this helps.
  • CasperNaegle
    CasperNaegle Posts: 936 Member
    I rarely hit my calories intake goals.. I focus on getting my protein as much as possible and then end up quite a bit under on my carbs. It's more about your trend over time than anything. You don't want to be hugely under or your body will slow down it's fat burning. Now assuming you are trying to cut, if you want to gain or maintain you may want to eat more! :)
  • cvlvft
    cvlvft Posts: 8 Member
    Thanks @CasperNaegle
  • cvlvft
    cvlvft Posts: 8 Member
    Thanx @BinaryFu I'm trying to lean out from 180lbs. I'm set to lose a pound a week.
  • BinaryFu
    BinaryFu Posts: 240 Member
    cvlvft wrote: »
    Thanx @BinaryFu I'm trying to lean out from 180lbs. I'm set to lose a pound a week.

    Very welcome, keep up the awesome work - your profile pic looks fantastic! Not sure where you're going to lose much though..LoL!
  • trjjoy
    trjjoy Posts: 666 Member
    BinaryFu wrote: »

    However, if you are trying to lose weight, when you hit beyond -2lbs a week, you're risking putting your body into metabolic shutdown where it begins to conserve calories and store them as much as possible (read as, helps you gain lots of fat!), so it's not a great idea.

    ''Metabolic shutdown'' is BEE ESS
  • ScoobaChick
    ScoobaChick Posts: 186 Member
    I'm always 200-300 Calories short when I workout (which is most days). I still hit most of my macros and micros but I refuse to stuff myself if I am not hungry.
  • BinaryFu
    BinaryFu Posts: 240 Member
    trjjoy wrote: »
    ''Metabolic shutdown'' is BEE ESS

    Yep, it's also total BS that people here, on this very site, have plateaued even though they were seriously working out - until they ATE MORE CALORIES because they were DRASTICALLY under nourished.

    But that's just total BS too. As are the scientific studies that validate what I said.

    Sources:

    Livestrong
    Weight Loss Resources UK
    Bodybuilding.com
    WebMD

    You can claim BS all you want - until you experience it for yourself. There is a thin line between losing a couple of pounds a week and feeling great; losing fast and then plateauing because of metabolic slowdown; and starvation where you will continue to lose weight *even though* your metabolism is slowing down - because it can never slow down low enough to combat the calorie deficit.

    I've experienced all three - I'd highly recommend the first one and not the other two.
  • WendyLaubach
    WendyLaubach Posts: 518 Member
    "Metabolic shutdown'' is BEE ESS"

    I agree. I'm often below my target. So what? I go by how I feel, not by a calculation. The number is there to warn me if I get close to carelessly overeating. I know from experience--having tried it!--how little I can eat in a day before I start to feel bad.
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,573 Member
    edited March 2016
    Eat them, don't eat them. Save them for some fries or wine on Saturday.

    ETA: I do this, but only if the daily deficit is not too aggressive. I wouldn't suggest this to someone eating 1200 calories.
  • murp4069
    murp4069 Posts: 494 Member
    arditarose wrote: »
    Eat them, don't eat them. Save them for some fries or wine on Saturday.

    ETA: I do this, but only if the daily deficit is not too aggressive. I wouldn't suggest this to someone eating 1200 calories.

    This is how I do it. I save some of my earned exercise calories during the week for the weekend when I tend to eat more. As long as you are still sufficiently fueling your body and you are not experiencing any problems from eating too few calories, a few hundred on a 2300 cal/day goal shouldn't be a problem.
  • ClosetBayesian
    ClosetBayesian Posts: 836 Member
    BinaryFu wrote: »
    trjjoy wrote: »
    ''Metabolic shutdown'' is BEE ESS

    Yep, it's also total BS that people here, on this very site, have plateaued even though they were seriously working out - until they ATE MORE CALORIES because they were DRASTICALLY under nourished.

    But that's just total BS too. As are the scientific studies that validate what I said.

    Sources:

    Livestrong
    Weight Loss Resources UK
    Bodybuilding.com
    WebMD

    You can claim BS all you want - until you experience it for yourself. There is a thin line between losing a couple of pounds a week and feeling great; losing fast and then plateauing because of metabolic slowdown; and starvation where you will continue to lose weight *even though* your metabolism is slowing down - because it can never slow down low enough to combat the calorie deficit.

    I've experienced all three - I'd highly recommend the first one and not the other two.

    You said shutdown, not slowdown, and I'm reasonably certain the only time the metabolism shuts down is when someone dies.
  • BinaryFu
    BinaryFu Posts: 240 Member
    You said shutdown, not slowdown, and I'm reasonably certain the only time the metabolism shuts down is when someone dies.

    You're right, I did - typos happen. You're also right that the metabolism only shuts down in death. Everything else I said above however, is also accurate.

    The 2lb/week rule is a guideline. Below that, there *is* a risk. Don't believe me? Ignore my advice and see for yourself. Your limit might be at 3lbs, 4lbs, 5lbs. Whatever. There is a point however, where you will slow your metabolism down and your weight loss will slow down or stop.

    There's also a point beyond that where you will continue you lose weight like there's no tomorrow - most of it will be your muscles as you will be starving yourself to death and your body will cannibalize it's own muscle tissue to survive.
  • kgirlhart
    kgirlhart Posts: 5,166 Member
    At 2300 cals a day being under by 500 occasionally shouldn't be a problem as long as you feel ok. If you are a woman at 1200 or 1300 or a man at 1500 or 1600 then you want to be closer to your target. But going under occasionally shouldn't be a problem and you can bank those calories for the next day or so.