how low in calories is unhealthy
mikebelljr68
Posts: 7 Member
ok, so I'm not going to sugarcoat it i need to lose a whole person, I'm very tall but weigh 436lbs, ikr shocking, so I wanted to be a bit more extreme in losing weight because I have an injury that is keeping me from working out, so I looked at calorie calculator. com to see how many calories to lose weight with very little workouts,2600 was the a recommendation to lose 2lbs a week, so I decided to go lower to 2000 flat.. but I don't want to put my health at risk, how drastic have some of you gone and with what success?
0
Replies
-
He who eats eats the most and still loses! Winner, winner! Chicken dinner!8
-
I wouldn't go too crazy low. You need to still feel satisfied, or else you'll just end up gaining the weight back again because you'll start bingeing. At least, that's what happened to me. If you wanted to drop, I would drop it down to maybe 2300-2400 and see how you feel with that first. You just want to make sure what you're doing will sustain you for the long run, not just for a "quick fix." Because, trust me, gaining your weight back sucks.3
-
Hi, Mike, it always is a big help to get your doctor involved too. He or she can help guide you to proper calorie consumption/restriction. Also, try to see if your insurance covers you working alongside a registered dietitian. Some insurance companies or doctors can refer you to programs that can connect you with one.2
-
By the way, I'm proud of you, Mike!2
-
thanks i appreciate the feedback, i need to check into getting a dietician, recently found out that I'm pre-diabetic and need to get my weight under control fast
0 -
No one should go lower than BMR.3
-
I second the recommendation to get your Dr involved in helping you find a dietician. I also recommend gaining access to a pool for exercise. My mom, who was well over 300 lbs at 5'2", lost a lot of weight by swimming. It's easier on the joints.3
-
It doesn't seem like 2000 would cause a problem in the short term, when you've got a lot to lose and have health issues, the priority is probably to get the weight off. But of course you have to ensure you have to do what's right for your health, and as others as have suggested it would be wise to get some good advice that's specific to you.2
-
the heavier obese people can go in a much bigger deficit. When you eat healthy you have the nutrition side covered so i would say go for it!1
-
On the face of it it doesn't seem too drastic at your current size. But be mindful that long term compliance is a factor too, cutting so much so fast can lead people to just feeling plain over hungry and then bingeing. 2lbs and perhaps more should be safe for you but don't be too hard on yourself, being hungry is miserable and trying to figure out what works for you satiety wise can take some time to figure out. So there's no harm in slowly coming down to 2000 as you experiment and get used to your new normal intake.
Good luck!3 -
SherryTeach wrote: »No one should go lower than BMR.
Nonsense. At 5'10", 151.2 lbs, my BMR comes out at 1648, off of the calculator. You know what happens when I eat at 1648? I maintain. Hell, I've been maintaining this weight at 1650-1700 kcals for well over a month now. I have to cut to at most, 1500 to see any notable loss.2 -
At your weight I would speak to your doctor about undertaking something along the lines of Rapid Fat Loss by Lyle McDonald which is a VLCD and is ideal for hugely obese people.1
-
2000 should be ok if it doesn't leave you too hungry, as you have a lot to lose. losing 1% of your weight per week is fine.1
-
When you decide on your calories, remember that it's not a fixed number forever. Perhaps start at 2200 and see how you feel. If you are doing well and feel you could go a little lower, then adjust. You will make adjustments throughout your journey. You don't have to be starving hungry to do this.1
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SherryTeach wrote: »No one should go lower than BMR.
Nonsense. At 5'10", 151.2 lbs, my BMR comes out at 1648, off of the calculator. You know what happens when I eat at 1648? I maintain. Hell, I've been maintaining this weight at 1650-1700 kcals for well over a month now. I have to cut to at most, 1500 to see any notable loss.
While I agree that the original advice of not eating below BMR is nonsense, I have to point out that if you are maintaining your weight then you obviously are not eating below your BMR, so your example isn't a good one. All it shows is that the estimate of your BMR or TDEE was not a good one.3 -
I am a fan of being aggressive in the beginning when your enthusiasm is high and you are least likely to do any damage, (especially if you have health concerns), tapering off to a more sustainable level as time goes by. Be prepared psychologically for stellar results, followed by what you may think of as disappointing results (revisiting old numbers, aka regaining a little) as you start increasing calories. If you find yourself getting irritated by being hungry or by not being able to have ANY treats during this initial phase, slow it down right away. Sticking with this is far more important than rate of loss.
Eta: I do agree with the concept that the winner is he who eats the most and still loses, but imo, that's for later on in your journey.2 -
I would look at out much you are currently eating. If you are eating 5000 kc / day, you will probably be really noticing any cut, even the 2600 kc one. A few hundred calories probably won't make much difference. If you are eating around 3600 kc / day, then cutting back to 2600 probably is going to be a lot easier than cutting to 2000 kc / day. You just have to find what works for you.
As far as health, it really depends on what you eat. You probably should be taking a daily multi-vitamin or doing something to make sure you get the vitamins and minerals you need. This is where a dietician probably could really help.
I was pre-diabetic at 232 lbs. That was over 4 years ago and I'm about 196 lbs now. I went really slow and didn't even start with a calorie deficit. I started just by working out and modifying my diet to healthier foods. In a year I was down about 15 pounds and my blood sugar was normal. I was out of shape so I started with 4 exercise HIIT workouts, I could only do 8 minutes a day for the first few months. Every year my weight has been dropping but now I can workout hard for more than an hour if I drink some water during the workout.
Since you can't workout, that isn't an option for you. Hopefully that will improve for you in the future. Working out isn't so great for just losing weight but it does improve your health, burn fat and allow you to eat a little more and still maintain a calorie deficit if that is your goal.1 -
The general recommendation is it's safe to lose up to 1% of total body weight per week.
At your current size you can and should be losing more. Roughly 4.3 pounds a week.
However, at your current size i would recommend to undergo medical supervision as you lose. You'll want someone in your corner to make sure you're staying on track.4 -
At your size, you can sustain a bigger deficit than most and it's hard to tell what your loss per week will be. So if anything, aim for 2000-2400, eat foods higher in protein and fiber to satiate you, and then monitor progress over an extended period of time. And at some point, when you can, start doing some resistance training to help mitigate lean body mass loss and metabolic reductions.
In the end, it comes down to dietary adherence. So don't cut calories so much that you can't adhere, but cut it enough that you are losing at a comfortable pace. I would also recommend doing doctors visits so they can monitor progress and do additional blood test to look for deficiencies.1 -
mikebelljr68 wrote: »ok, so I'm not going to sugarcoat it i need to lose a whole person, I'm very tall but weigh 436lbs, ikr shocking, so I wanted to be a bit more extreme in losing weight because I have an injury that is keeping me from working out, so I looked at calorie calculator. com to see how many calories to lose weight with very little workouts,2600 was the a recommendation to lose 2lbs a week, so I decided to go lower to 2000 flat.. but I don't want to put my health at risk, how drastic have some of you gone and with what success?
I started at 360, in the same boat about wanting to lose quick for my health. I am told 2500 cal a day to lose 2 pounds a week. I set my goal at 2000, and most days only eat 1750 and im doing great, 65 days in and im 35 pounds down, way motivated still, walking more, more energized. I used to drink most of my calories, now i only drink creamer with coffee calories (70 cal a day). Good luck man, you can do it, add me if you want help, im doing the same thing.6 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SherryTeach wrote: »No one should go lower than BMR.
Nonsense. At 5'10", 151.2 lbs, my BMR comes out at 1648, off of the calculator. You know what happens when I eat at 1648? I maintain. Hell, I've been maintaining this weight at 1650-1700 kcals for well over a month now. I have to cut to at most, 1500 to see any notable loss.
While I agree that the original advice of not eating below BMR is nonsense, I have to point out that if you are maintaining your weight then you obviously are not eating below your BMR, so your example isn't a good one. All it shows is that the estimate of your BMR or TDEE was not a good one.
Right, someone who is not bedridden would not maintain at BMR level calories.0 -
mikebelljr68 wrote: »ok, so I'm not going to sugarcoat it i need to lose a whole person, I'm very tall but weigh 436lbs, ikr shocking, so I wanted to be a bit more extreme in losing weight because I have an injury that is keeping me from working out, so I looked at calorie calculator. com to see how many calories to lose weight with very little workouts,2600 was the a recommendation to lose 2lbs a week, so I decided to go lower to 2000 flat.. but I don't want to put my health at risk, how drastic have some of you gone and with what success?
I would say ..consult your Dr. first..with that out of the way..I'd say 2000 would be fine..short term..you should drop weight fairly quickly. Watch your body for signs that you need more fuel. Irritation, quick to anger, sluggishness, feeling tired...etc
I weighed 308# on Feb 29th and was pre-diabetic and am 57 years old. I put myself on 1200-1300 calories a day..and added exercise..I did that for perhaps 3 months(I'd have to go look) when your body needs more fuel..it'll tell you..I slowly upped the calories to 1500-1800..and jusy recently have upped them to 1800-2100..but I also have increased exercise.
I weighed in Monday after 5 months...71 pounds lighter..down to 237.0 My Dr. also gave me a pretty clean bill of health and was amazed at the results. I am on no Meds..for diabetes..My last 2 A1C tests were 5.4 and 5.5
My Blood Pressure 111/71..
It all depends on YOUR willpower and desire. Just stay in touch with your Dr. I did and he was very supportive of what I was doing.2 -
Relating to what BiggDaddy said, another reason to get your Dr. on board is so that you can be monitored periodically as you lose weight and get any medications you're on adjusted as necessary. This is very important if you're taking meds for mood disorders, blood pressure, cholesterol, or diabetes. As you lose weight these numbers will typically improve so you'll need less. Not to mention that the feeling of seeing these numbers drop is amazing.0
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SherryTeach wrote: »No one should go lower than BMR.
Nonsense. At 5'10", 151.2 lbs, my BMR comes out at 1648, off of the calculator. You know what happens when I eat at 1648? I maintain. Hell, I've been maintaining this weight at 1650-1700 kcals for well over a month now. I have to cut to at most, 1500 to see any notable loss.
While I agree that the original advice of not eating below BMR is nonsense, I have to point out that if you are maintaining your weight then you obviously are not eating below your BMR, so your example isn't a good one. All it shows is that the estimate of your BMR or TDEE was not a good one.
That's actually my point. Every calculator I have come across spits out a number that is much higher for BMR than what I am actually at. When most see "don't eat below BMR", then run a BMR calc, and get a number that's too high, they're going to wonder what the hell is going on, and why aren't they losing weight. We know this. Many do not. I am pretty sure that's part of the reason we keep getting so many "zomg what's wrong with me?" threads over the years.0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SherryTeach wrote: »No one should go lower than BMR.
Nonsense. At 5'10", 151.2 lbs, my BMR comes out at 1648, off of the calculator. You know what happens when I eat at 1648? I maintain. Hell, I've been maintaining this weight at 1650-1700 kcals for well over a month now. I have to cut to at most, 1500 to see any notable loss.
While I agree that the original advice of not eating below BMR is nonsense, I have to point out that if you are maintaining your weight then you obviously are not eating below your BMR, so your example isn't a good one. All it shows is that the estimate of your BMR or TDEE was not a good one.
That's actually my point. Every calculator I have come across spits out a number that is much higher for BMR than what I am actually at. When most see "don't eat below BMR", then run a BMR calc, and get a number that's too high, they're going to wonder what the hell is going on, and why aren't they losing weight. We know this. Many do not. I am pretty sure that's part of the reason we keep getting so many "zomg what's wrong with me?" threads over the years.
That is kind of scares me with the big CICO pushes I see. Cut back too far and one's body just might adjust to the new lower level and kind of get stuck there. My brain likes to think it is a lot easier to lower your BMR than to raise it.0 -
At your weight, it's possible to get into a medically supervised program that has you eating very low calories while monitoring your health and making sure you get the essential nutrients, which would help you drop the weight fast until your pre-diabetes is under control. After you have lost some weight on such a program, you could increase your calories again for a slower healthier self-monitored loss. You may want to ask your doctor next time and have them refer you to a professional. At your weight it's possible to go low on calories with fewer side effects than if you were leaner.0
-
I started at 320, currently around 190, and I found that at around 1900 calories/day on average I was losing about 1% body weight per week, which was my targeted goal. As I've gotten leaner, the natural reduction in my TDEE has slowed my weight loss on about the right trajectory to keep me on track, so I haven't adjusted it much, only by a bit here and there.
2000 seems reasonable and wouldn't be unhealthy for someone of your size - certainly nowhere near as unhealthy as being your current size is.1 -
I started at 292. I've dropped 30 pounds in 13 weeks at 2200 calories per day. I do lightly to moderately active work, but haven't been exercising apart from that. The exercise I have just started is for mobility in my lower back and hips due to some mild degenerative changes in my lumbar region, so I'm not really burning extra calories with it. I'm also diabetic and am controlling my blood sugar with a lower carb diet. I aim to keep my carbs under 20% of calories consumed (comes out to 110 net grams per day for my calorie goal). I also try for 25% or more from protein in an effort to minimize lean tissue loss. The remaining 55% fat is a floating number that just falls where it falls, not a target. I bring up the ratios 1. because you mentioned pre-diabetes and this is how I'm controlling my blood sugar when 850mg metformin 2x/day and 2mg glimeperide 1x/day are otherwise accomplishing next to nothing, and 2. these macro percentages keep me from feeling excessively hungry, and therefore it is easier to stick to my daily target. So far, my rate of loss is greater than 2# per week.0
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SherryTeach wrote: »No one should go lower than BMR.
Nonsense. At 5'10", 151.2 lbs, my BMR comes out at 1648, off of the calculator. You know what happens when I eat at 1648? I maintain. Hell, I've been maintaining this weight at 1650-1700 kcals for well over a month now. I have to cut to at most, 1500 to see any notable loss.
While I agree that the original advice of not eating below BMR is nonsense, I have to point out that if you are maintaining your weight then you obviously are not eating below your BMR, so your example isn't a good one. All it shows is that the estimate of your BMR or TDEE was not a good one.
That's actually my point. Every calculator I have come across spits out a number that is much higher for BMR than what I am actually at. When most see "don't eat below BMR", then run a BMR calc, and get a number that's too high, they're going to wonder what the hell is going on, and why aren't they losing weight. We know this. Many do not. I am pretty sure that's part of the reason we keep getting so many "zomg what's wrong with me?" threads over the years.
Do you have any medical conditions? Because those numbers are crazy low for a male. I am almost exactly the same stats as you (34, 5'11, 175, desk job and 5-6 hours of exercise) and maintain at 3k.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions