Eating 1,200 calories and putting on weight
Options
Replies
-
Vegplotter wrote: »Calorie consumption is much more linked to weight than it is to height. I stand by my advice.
But without knowing her height, you have no idea if her ~110 lbs is a healthy weight for her. She's already been eating VLCD of 800-900 cals and thinks 1200 is her maintenance. Unless she's 4'6 that's probably not the case, so suggesting that she eats 1000 is also below the recommended minimum amount....
We don't have enough info to give proper advice which is why I asked clarifying questions.6 -
I'm betting your leaving out important info when logging your calories.... In other words, I bet you are eating more then you think.0
-
IF the OP is taller than 5'5'', she is underweight by BMI standards right now. She would be at the top of the normal range even if she were 4'6''.
She ate a VERY low calorie diet to reach her goal. She said she lost 5/pounds per/month, implying that she ate 800-900 calories for multiple month.
I DO NOT think it's responsible to recommend she lower her calories below 1200 to lose more weight without knowing her height.
1 -
I don't think it appropriate to recommend anyone at a healthy weight eat under 1200, even coming off extreme and dangerous calorie restriction. The priority must be to meet nutritional needs with some immediate urgency, water weight scale increases be damned. Anything else is irresponsible.0
-
Well, at very low calorie levels over a long time, combined with a small person with a low maintenance, the whole "starvation mode doesn't mean you won't lose weight!" thing breaks down.
If you're lightly active and 30 years old you need about 1800 calories to maintain a weight of 115.
She was eating approximately half that - which is the actual % cut in calories that the Minnesota Starvation Experiment used.
Studies have shown reductions in RMR of 25% or more due to large calorie deficits.
(The Minnesota subjects averaged a 40% drop in RMR).
1800-25% = 1350. That's a few small logging errors away from not losing on what she thinks is 1200.
1800-40% = 1080. That's actually low enough she'd be regaining on 1200.
She actually could have brutalized her own metabolism so much that its gaining on 1200 calories a day.1 -
Okay, if MFP is saying her maintenance is 1800, that's about right for a 30 year old lightly active woman weighing 115.
But she's been on a VLCD for probably months.
Studies have found drops in RMR of 25% or more with prolonged VLCD.
The Minnesota Starvation Experiment subjects averaged a 40% drop in RMR.
1800-25% = 1350. That's close enough to 1200 that a few logging errors coudl make the difference.
1800-40%= 1080. That's low enough that you'd regain on 1200.
The Minnesota experiment put those men on 50% of their maintenance calories. That's exactly what she did to herself in going as low as 800-900. So yeah, I think the 40% number is definitely possible. In which case she's damaged her metabolism to the point that she can barely eat without regaining.2 -
Okay, if MFP is saying her maintenance is 1800, that's about right for a 30 year old lightly active woman weighing 115.
But she's been on a VLCD for probably months.
Studies have found drops in RMR of 25% or more with prolonged VLCD.
The Minnesota Experiment subjects averaged a 40% drop in RMR.
1800-25% = 1350. That's close enough to 1200 that a few logging errors coudl make the difference.
1800-40%= 1080. That's low enough that you'd regain on 1200.
The Minnesota experiment put those men on 50% of their maintenance calories. That's exactly what she did to herself in going as low as 800-900. So yeah, I think the 40% number is definitely possible. In which case she's brutalized her metabolism to the point that she can barely eat without regaining.0 -
Okay, if MFP is saying her maintenance is 1800, that's about right for a 30 year old lightly active woman weighing 115.
But she's been on 800-900 for weeks to months. RMR has been found to drop 25% or more with prolonged VLCD. The Minnesota Experiment subjects averaged a 40% drop in RMR.
1800-25% = 1350. That's close enough to 1200 that a few logging errors could make the difference.
1800-40%= 1080. That's low enough that you'd regain on 1200.
The Minnesota experiment put those men on 50% of their maintenance calories. That's exactly what she did to herself in going as low as 800-900. So yeah, I think the 40% number is definitely possible. In which case she's brutalized her metabolism to the point that she can barely eat without regaining.0 -
From another post, OP is 5'4''.
Her BMI at 111 is 19.1. It was NOT outside the normal range when she started losing weight. Yet she ate 800-900 calories per/day for ~four months.
She started a thread earlier that inspired a large number of people to urge her to seek professional help. After reading that thread, my sense is that this is likely the best advice any of us could offer.
Going back down to 1000 calories is not something anyone should suggest.7 -
VintageFeline wrote: »I don't think it appropriate to recommend anyone at a healthy weight eat under 1200, even coming off extreme and dangerous calorie restriction. The priority must be to meet nutritional needs with some immediate urgency, water weight scale increases be damned. Anything else is irresponsible.
Actually, it is ok if you're under 5 feet. I am not, but users here have said that they need to eat around 1k calories to lose weight at that height. Not everyone's TDEE is the same.1 -
Okay, maintenance of 1800, that's about right for a 30 year old lightly active woman weighing 115. Whether that's an appropriate weight for her height is another question.
RMR has been found to drop 25% or more with prolonged VLCD.
The Minnesota Starvation Experiment subjects averaged a 40% drop in RMR.
1800-25% = 1350. That's close enough to 1200 that a few logging errors could make the difference.
1800-40%= 1080. That's low enough that she would regain on 1200.
0 -
If she really did eat 50% of her TDEE for months, she could have caused the 40% drop in RMR that they found in the MN experiments.
If so, 1800-40% = 1080
0 -
Colorscheme wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »I don't think it appropriate to recommend anyone at a healthy weight eat under 1200, even coming off extreme and dangerous calorie restriction. The priority must be to meet nutritional needs with some immediate urgency, water weight scale increases be damned. Anything else is irresponsible.
Actually, it is ok if you're under 5 feet. I am not, but users here have said that they need to eat around 1k calories to lose weight at that height. Not everyone's TDEE is the same.
Okay, I will add a small caveat of "unless under 5' and ensuring nutritional needs are being met". I still think it's not advice to be giving to someone who has managed to drop 5lbs per month for more than one month (we don't know how many) eating 800-900 calories per day. They need nutrition and sharpish.
And in light of further investigations above, I'll reiterate my views.0 -
Thanks. I am 5ft 4 and a petite build. I go the gym every other day to use the elliptical trainer and bike for 30mins. I also walk no less than 5,000 steps a day and swim for 60mins once a week. I measure my food very precisely and still do. I got a quote of 1,800 from TDEE.WinoGelato wrote: »How tall are you OP? What's your activity level like? Were you weighing your food and logging accurately when losing? Are you still?
Maintenance is a range, not a set weight. Most people, myself included, have a 3-5 lb range in which weight naturally fluctuated. Additionally, when transitioning to maintenance, especially after being at such an aggressive deficit, people often see a temporary spike due to water retention from glycogen stores being replenished. That usually settles back down.
Also where did the 1800 cal maintenance level estimate come from? Was that MFP or a TDEE calculator? Answering the questions I asked above will help determine if that is appropriate but I would be more likely to believe a TDEE of 1800 than 1200...
0 -
Thank you for all you're replies! When I wrote my last post I was in a completely different state of mind and VERY unhappy with my body. However each day I have become happier with it and have recently become determined to build muscle and maybe even that number on the scales. However I was very worried to see the number building on the scales as soon as I started to eat more without properly building any muscle yet. I understand what some of you say about water retention and I think that may be the case, particularly as I do feel slightly more bloated than usual. Thank you all for you're helpful comments and different view points!0
-
From another post, OP is 5'4''.
Her BMI at 111 is 19.1. It was NOT outside the normal range when she started losing weight. Yet she ate 800-900 calories per/day for ~four months.
She started a thread earlier that inspired a large number of people to urge her to seek professional help. After reading that thread, my sense is that this is likely the best advice any of us could offer.
Going back down to 1000 calories is not something anyone should suggest.
Good catch. OP, you have a very skewed understanding of calories and your body's needs. Professional help should be your first step before you go any further. Even with the help in MFP, you still should seek help to prevent these "bad points" to cause restriction.0 -
MommyL2015 wrote: »My goal is actually about 5 pounds less than what I want my maintenance weight to be, because I usually gain a few pounds whenever I up my calories to maintenance levels. It's mostly just water that was lost. That's why all these fad diets say you can lose 5 pounds your first week or whatever. It's all water.
I did the same thing. My original goal was 190 so I hit my goal and kept going until I hit 185 before ramping back up slowly to maintenance calories over a month or so. After being at maintenance for a while now I bounce between 185 and 189 which is still exactly where I want to be (I'm 6'2). I've been working on recomp since then but notice that sodium, digestion, activity, exercise, water intake, all fluctuate my weight. The OP didn't say how tall they were but my guess is the increased calories will simply increase water retention for a while plus increase waste (gross but true). Many factors can increase your weight, especially if you are a woman. I wouldn't panic at any sudden 5lb gains, hell I've lost more than 4 lbs in one day many times just by drinking a ton of water (by flushing high sodium intake out of my system). I say keep on with the extra calories, don't quit on any exercise you're doing, and increase your water intake if it's not sufficient and don't sweat it. Muscle gain really take a long time, so don't assume that it's causing weight gain that fast, it takes months to gain just a little unless you're very aggressive with weight training and increase your calories.
Consider also going over to IIFYM and use their calculator to figure your BMR and TDEE both by entering your exercise and by leaving it blank (sedimentary) so you know where you should be.1 -
It is either water weight or you weren't counting accurately and were actually eating over 1200. Don't listen to people who say a low calorie diet has slowed your metabolism. It will not slow enough to keep you from losing weight. That is only a myth!0
-
OP How did you feel eating 800-900 calories a day? Were you constantly hungry, did you have much if any energy, how was your nutrition, were you getting adequate amounts of protein/fats and vitamins/minerals?0
-
ellamroberts873 wrote: »Thank you for all you're replies! When I wrote my last post I was in a completely different state of mind and VERY unhappy with my body. However each day I have become happier with it and have recently become determined to build muscle and maybe even that number on the scales. However I was very worried to see the number building on the scales as soon as I started to eat more without properly building any muscle yet. I understand what some of you say about water retention and I think that may be the case, particularly as I do feel slightly more bloated than usual. Thank you all for you're helpful comments and different view points!
Where are you in your menstrual cycle? I gain at ovulation and right before my TOM.
Have you been having regular periods?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 931 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions