Why is a big deficit bad?
jelleigh
Posts: 743 Member
So I get needing to make a lifestyle change that is sustainable. You don't want to deprive yourself , fall off the wagon, and gain it all back . But I've been tracking for over 8 months and feel like I could comfortably eat less. My TDEE is somewhere between 2000-2300 depending on exercise. If I can comfortably eat 1400 calories and exercise another 200 calories off without being hungry (and it doesn't put me below the dreaded 1200 limit) is that such a big deal? Or even if I could eat 1200 and do some light exercise - are there actually any dangers to it? Instructions here tell me to eat 1500-1800 cal and I just figure what's the harm in eating a bit less as long as it's enough nutrition? It's not going to make me drop more than 1.5-2 lbs per week - if anything it will just upkeep my 1 lb per week goal instead of having to drop it to 0.5 lbs. (Stats 5"8, SW 215, CW 185 , GW 140)
0
Replies
-
Net 1200? Check
Comfy? Check
Nutritionally sufficient? Check
1% loss per week? Check
Enjoy the journey.6 -
While you are in a good position, there general issues with large deficits is it can lead to a host of problems; malnutrition (leads to hair loss, brittle nails, skin issues - especially when eating low fat), gallstones, increased muscle loss (means slower metabolism), increases adaptive thermogenesis (metabolic slowdown), low energy (which makes it harder to workout and burn more calories throughout the day) and more.
What people don't realize, is you really don't need to eat a low calorie diet. In fact, many of us have lost more weight by increasing calories (and before people jump the gun let me explain why). TDEE or your maintenance levels are a non static number. When you suppress calories your body may reach to it by a variety of ways. With me (when I was eating 1800 calories), I found out that I wasn't generally active in daily activities (lower NEAT) and my workouts where OK (lower TEA). When I increased my calories to 2300, I also increased my TDEE. So I saw steadier loses as a result. I was willing to walk more, my workouts were better quality and was able to push harder. Additionally, there are some small transient increases in TEF (calories burned through digestion) with increase in food consumption.
So realistically, it's about finding a good balance of eating adequate calories and burning adequate calories to include daily activities and exercise.14 -
Possible muscle loss is the biggest concern, make sure to keep your protein levels up and do some sort of weight training to keep the muscle. Also watch your fatigue levels. Fatigue could be a sign you are too low in your calories.0
-
What @psuLemon said is correct. We are, however, all different. This app is a tool and should be used that way. We can choose how much and how slow or fast we need to lose weight. Personally, I chose to lose 2 pounds/ week. That was 1200 calories. I did not experience the bad side effects of malnutrition, gallstones, increased muscle loss, metabolic slowdown, or low energy. I kept my protein levels up by eating lean meats and grilled fish. I wasn't big on fruits and veggies ( I'm enjoying them more now) so I took a multivitamin. As I lost weight I increased my exercise which started as walking ( I can now run a 10K.) I think the biggest factor in my success was eating all of my exercise calories. They gave me loads of energy to move more throughout the day, meaning I burnt more calories.
If you can comfortably eat less, maintain proper nutrition, and still feel energetic you should give it a try for a week or two. If you find yourself dragging through the day, get headaches, or are always hungry go back to eating more. It's important to find what works for you.
(Stats: 5'5", SW 245, CW 140, GW 140)2 -
CaptainJoy wrote: »What @psuLemon said is correct. We are, however, all different. This app is a tool and should be used that way. We can choose how much and how slow or fast we need to lose weight. Personally, I chose to lose 2 pounds/ week. That was 1200 calories. I did not experience the bad side effects of malnutrition, gallstones, increased muscle loss, metabolic slowdown, or low energy. I kept my protein levels up by eating lean meats and grilled fish. I wasn't big on fruits and veggies ( I'm enjoying them more now) so I took a multivitamin. As I lost weight I increased my exercise which started as walking ( I can now run a 10K.) I think the biggest factor in my success was eating all of my exercise calories. They gave me loads of energy to move more throughout the day, meaning I burnt more calories.
If you can comfortably eat less, maintain proper nutrition, and still feel energetic you should give it a try for a week or two. If you find yourself dragging through the day, get headaches, or are always hungry go back to eating more. It's important to find what works for you.
(Stats: 5'5", SW 245, CW 140, GW 140)
In all honesty, even with higher protein and weight training, adaptive thermogenesis will occur, as well lose of lean body mass. It's largely because you don't need the same level of muscle to sustain a 140 lb body as a 240 lb body, and when you weigh more, you naturally burn more calories. So I wouldn't go as far as saying you didn't have any metabolic slow down, unless you have done multiple RMR test to confirm, and DEXA's to confirm alterations in lean body mass. With that said, as long as you like the results, the semantics don't really matter. You can easily increase EE by increasing activities to offset any muscle loss and changes in metabolic rate.1 -
So I get needing to make a lifestyle change that is sustainable. You don't want to deprive yourself , fall off the wagon, and gain it all back . But I've been tracking for over 8 months and feel like I could comfortably eat less. My TDEE is somewhere between 2000-2300 depending on exercise. If I can comfortably eat 1400 calories and exercise another 200 calories off without being hungry (and it doesn't put me below the dreaded 1200 limit) is that such a big deal? Or even if I could eat 1200 and do some light exercise - are there actually any dangers to it? Instructions here tell me to eat 1500-1800 cal and I just figure what's the harm in eating a bit less as long as it's enough nutrition? It's not going to make me drop more than 1.5-2 lbs per week - if anything it will just upkeep my 1 lb per week goal instead of having to drop it to 0.5 lbs. (Stats 5"8, SW 215, CW 185 , GW 140)
I think losing about 1%/week unless you are pretty close to close (or already or close to normal, healthy fat % depending on your sex) is perfectly reasonable. I even was a little more aggressive and kept losing 2 lbs (on the basis that I was over weight) until around 150 (I am 5'3), which I wouldn't recommend but didn't hurt me.
Drawbacks, though, are if it makes you more apt to go off plan or lose it when you do eat a bit more (not everyone does this) or if it interferes with exercise goals (I found this when I started to gain for more challenging things like (for me) a marathon), and I expect it would be the case if you had lifting goals.
Other drawbacks, and the ones I am most concerned about are that it can lead to more muscle loss than is necessary. I think my steeper than needed deficit probably did (I continued to gain strength, but did lose some muscle based on a DEXA, not as much as many do, true), and as a 40-something woman I am really concerned about maintaining muscle, especially once one is in the healthy weight range.
All that said, I'm not following your numbers.
You seem to be saying TDEE is 2000 without exercise, 2300 with, so eating 1400 and exercising 200 would be a deficit of about 600? Or that you would be doing an additional 200 calories of exercise beyond current TDEE so aiming for a deficit of about 800-1100? (Mixing up TDEE and exercise calories is what is confusing me, I guess.)
Same question with the 1200 -- are you aiming for a deficit of about 1000 or what?
You say instructions here say 1500-1800, with a one lb goal, but of course that's because you sensibly put in a one lb goal when you could do 1.5 or even 2. (I think 1.5 would be perfectly reasonable, if you wanted to lose faster, but that 1 is reasonable too.)
If exercise isn't that strenuous, like 0-300 per day realistically (not only because you are cutting calories significantly) and you are actually currently losing about 1 lb/week, one thing could be just not eating back exercise.
That aside -- if what you are going now is working I'd probably not mess with it, as you may need to change it up at some point later and cutting lower may effect you more than you think. But I don't think being a little more aggressive would hurt you if you really want to be and have no particular reason not to.3 -
In all honesty, even with higher protein and weight training, adaptive thermogenesis will occur, as well lose of lean body mass. It's largely because you don't need the same level of muscle to sustain a 140 lb body as a 240 lb body, and when you weigh more, you naturally burn more calories. So I wouldn't go as far as saying you didn't have any metabolic slow down, unless you have done multiple RMR test to confirm, and DEXA's to confirm alterations in lean body mass. With that said, as long as you like the results, the semantics don't really matter. You can easily increase EE by increasing activities to offset any muscle loss and changes in metabolic rate.
This is an article in layman's terms, but if you google "adaptive thermogenesis and refeeding" you'll get all the relevant studies, if that's your thing - http://superhumanradio.com/blog/metabolic-adaptation-to-caloric-restriction-and-subsequent-refeeding.html
"Interestingly, the lag-period also suggests that any metabolic adaptations will not occur if someone cycles between low and high calorie days." Essentially, studies on adaptive thermogenesis suggest that days of higher-calorie consumption interspersed among calorie defecit days combats the effects of metabolic slowdown.0 -
So while every one has covered the big deficit thing, I'd like to point out a different take and one that gets argued here so much...is the CICO balance.
You seem to be running a perfectly sustainable calorie deficit, despite the equation saying otherwise. Now it's hard to say exactly what factors that's attributed to, but it doesn't really matter. The point that should be taken away is that the mfp (or whoever) calculated equation should be a starting point, and if needed, adjust to the individual up or down. It's not that CICO doesn't work, it's that the equations used aren't always spot on and set in stone.3 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »So I get needing to make a lifestyle change that is sustainable. You don't want to deprive yourself , fall off the wagon, and gain it all back . But I've been tracking for over 8 months and feel like I could comfortably eat less. My TDEE is somewhere between 2000-2300 depending on exercise. If I can comfortably eat 1400 calories and exercise another 200 calories off without being hungry (and it doesn't put me below the dreaded 1200 limit) is that such a big deal? Or even if I could eat 1200 and do some light exercise - are there actually any dangers to it? Instructions here tell me to eat 1500-1800 cal and I just figure what's the harm in eating a bit less as long as it's enough nutrition? It's not going to make me drop more than 1.5-2 lbs per week - if anything it will just upkeep my 1 lb per week goal instead of having to drop it to 0.5 lbs. (Stats 5"8, SW 215, CW 185 , GW 140)
I think losing about 1%/week unless you are pretty close to close (or already or close to normal, healthy fat % depending on your sex) is perfectly reasonable. I even was a little more aggressive and kept losing 2 lbs (on the basis that I was over weight) until around 150 (I am 5'3), which I wouldn't recommend but didn't hurt me.
Drawbacks, though, are if it makes you more apt to go off plan or lose it when you do eat a bit more (not everyone does this) or if it interferes with exercise goals (I found this when I started to gain for more challenging things like (for me) a marathon), and I expect it would be the case if you had lifting goals.
Other drawbacks, and the ones I am most concerned about are that it can lead to more muscle loss than is necessary. I think my steeper than needed deficit probably did (I continued to gain strength, but did lose some muscle based on a DEXA, not as much as many do, true), and as a 40-something woman I am really concerned about maintaining muscle, especially once one is in the healthy weight range.
All that said, I'm not following your numbers.
You seem to be saying TDEE is 2000 without exercise, 2300 with, so eating 1400 and exercising 200 would be a deficit of about 600? Or that you would be doing an additional 200 calories of exercise beyond current TDEE so aiming for a deficit of about 800-1100? (Mixing up TDEE and exercise calories is what is confusing me, I guess.)
Same question with the 1200 -- are you aiming for a deficit of about 1000 or what?
You say instructions here say 1500-1800, with a one lb goal, but of course that's because you sensibly put in a one lb goal when you could do 1.5 or even 2. (I think 1.5 would be perfectly reasonable, if you wanted to lose faster, but that 1 is reasonable too.)
If exercise isn't that strenuous, like 0-300 per day realistically (not only because you are cutting calories significantly) and you are actually currently losing about 1 lb/week, one thing could be just not eating back exercise.
That aside -- if what you are going now is working I'd probably not mess with it, as you may need to change it up at some point later and cutting lower may effect you more than you think. But I don't think being a little more aggressive would hurt you if you really want to be and have no particular reason not to.
Ya sorry I did say things confusingly. I meant doing extra exercise, effectively raising my TDEE to something more like 2500. The problem is that I'm HORRIBLE at consistent exercise. I just can't seem to get into a routine. So in reality, my TDEE is a bit all over the place . Also my day to day activities vary a lot. Some days I barely leave the apartment and when I do I drive everywhere. Other days I'm walking all day long, climbing hills (I do volunteer work up in mountain villages in Thailand) and have no realistic idea how much I burn. So I'm mostly just watching my weekly nutrition goal and what my weight does and trying to adjust accordingly. Things were going great for 7 months (lost a lb per week like clockwork) and then last month I inexplicably gained 10 lbs. It's starting to come off now but it feels like this huge set back and I want to get things going again . Just thinking maybe I could increase my Deficit and not "lose time"0 -
Thanks for the reply everyone. Good point on the protein and weight bearing exercises. I recently started Stronglifts but kinda hurt my back doing deadlifts cause my form sucked a d I didn't know what I was doing. Gonna try to get back to that (maybe I will skip the deadlifts till I can figure it out better)
Edited for spelling
0 -
Thanks for the reply everyone. Good point on the protein and weight bearing exercises. I recently started Stronglifts but kinda hurt my back doing deadlifts cause my form sucked a d I didn't know what I was doing. Gonna try to get back to that (maybe I will skip the deadlifts till I can figure it out better)
Edited for spelling
You can always start with body weight or dumbbell programs until you learn how to do the form. Or you can always ask a training to look at your form or even post a video and we can give feedback. At the very least, I'd recommend looking at the videos in the below thread
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10332083/which-lifting-program-is-the-best-for-you/p10 -
Thanks @psuLemon . I will watch some more videos (I have been watching the instructional ones online and I did look through the linked post before). My problem is actually a silly one - I think I know technically HOW to do the lift, but I believe the bar is supposed to be mid calf to begin with. But since I'm just starting I'm using such a light weight, and thus such a small plate, that the bar is too low for me to reach while in proper form. So I have to round my back to reach it. Plus they want you to out it down between lifts. So I was trying to figure out how to do this all and ended up tweaking my back (it's a problem area for me anyhow). I think I've seen someone suggest to out it up on plates that are stacked? Or someone else said i just need to work on my flexibility so that I can reach the bar in proper form? I can't ask the trainers here cause I don't speak the language and there haven't been any other foreigners in the gym when I have gone. Anyhow - other than the deadlifts I really enjoyed the Stronglifts program! What exercises can I do to replace the deadlift?0
-
Thanks @psuLemon . I will watch some more videos (I have been watching the instructional ones online and I did look through the linked post before). My problem is actually a silly one - I think I know technically HOW to do the lift, but I believe the bar is supposed to be mid calf to begin with. But since I'm just starting I'm using such a light weight, and thus such a small plate, that the bar is too low for me to reach while in proper form. So I have to round my back to reach it. Plus they want you to out it down between lifts. So I was trying to figure out how to do this all and ended up tweaking my back (it's a problem area for me anyhow). I think I've seen someone suggest to out it up on plates that are stacked? Or someone else said i just need to work on my flexibility so that I can reach the bar in proper form? I can't ask the trainers here cause I don't speak the language and there haven't been any other foreigners in the gym when I have gone. Anyhow - other than the deadlifts I really enjoyed the Stronglifts program! What exercises can I do to replace the deadlift?
So there are a few things that you can do.. 1. put a 45 lb plate so it can be mid shin, 2. see if your gym has bumper plates (they look like 45s but are the weight of a smaller weight) or 3. if your gym has a squat cage, you can set it up so the bar so the safety bar is at the low setting which will allow you to start with the bar being slightly elevated until you hit 45 lbs on each side.1 -
Ah okay thanks @psuLemon I hadn't heard about the bumper plates and hadn't thought of using the squat cage (my gym rat friend made this big deal out of not using the squat cage for curls so I thought gym etiquette was not to use it for anything other than squats. ). I'll try that!0
-
Ah okay thanks @psuLemon I hadn't heard about the bumper plates and hadn't thought of using the squat cage (my gym rat friend made this big deal out of not using the squat cage for curls so I thought gym etiquette was not to use it for anything other than squats. ). I'll try that!
I can understand not using it for curls. But if you need a bumper, I don't think it would be in appropriate to use a cage for deadlift. Alternatively, you can use a 45lb plate and then put a yoga mat on top (adds a bit of grip).0 -
People at my gym use the squat cage (there are two) for deadlifts pretty commonly. I think it depends on how many people are there, too -- when I go there's rarely a line or a situation where both are being used, and you can work in pretty easily too -- one person can have a bar set up for squats and one for deads without them interfering with each other, so actually even easier than sharing for squats.
Bumper plates are great, but it depends what your gym has, not all will have them. You also might be able to find lighter bars--my old gym had a 15 lb starter bar in addition to 35 and 45 lb bars, current one only has the 45 lb bars.
I was scared to start with deads and got someone to show me, since I never trust I am doing what I see in a video.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »So I get needing to make a lifestyle change that is sustainable. You don't want to deprive yourself , fall off the wagon, and gain it all back . But I've been tracking for over 8 months and feel like I could comfortably eat less. My TDEE is somewhere between 2000-2300 depending on exercise. If I can comfortably eat 1400 calories and exercise another 200 calories off without being hungry (and it doesn't put me below the dreaded 1200 limit) is that such a big deal? Or even if I could eat 1200 and do some light exercise - are there actually any dangers to it? Instructions here tell me to eat 1500-1800 cal and I just figure what's the harm in eating a bit less as long as it's enough nutrition? It's not going to make me drop more than 1.5-2 lbs per week - if anything it will just upkeep my 1 lb per week goal instead of having to drop it to 0.5 lbs. (Stats 5"8, SW 215, CW 185 , GW 140)
I think losing about 1%/week unless you are pretty close to close (or already or close to normal, healthy fat % depending on your sex) is perfectly reasonable. I even was a little more aggressive and kept losing 2 lbs (on the basis that I was over weight) until around 150 (I am 5'3), which I wouldn't recommend but didn't hurt me.
Drawbacks, though, are if it makes you more apt to go off plan or lose it when you do eat a bit more (not everyone does this) or if it interferes with exercise goals (I found this when I started to gain for more challenging things like (for me) a marathon), and I expect it would be the case if you had lifting goals.
Other drawbacks, and the ones I am most concerned about are that it can lead to more muscle loss than is necessary. I think my steeper than needed deficit probably did (I continued to gain strength, but did lose some muscle based on a DEXA, not as much as many do, true), and as a 40-something woman I am really concerned about maintaining muscle, especially once one is in the healthy weight range.
All that said, I'm not following your numbers.
You seem to be saying TDEE is 2000 without exercise, 2300 with, so eating 1400 and exercising 200 would be a deficit of about 600? Or that you would be doing an additional 200 calories of exercise beyond current TDEE so aiming for a deficit of about 800-1100? (Mixing up TDEE and exercise calories is what is confusing me, I guess.)
Same question with the 1200 -- are you aiming for a deficit of about 1000 or what?
You say instructions here say 1500-1800, with a one lb goal, but of course that's because you sensibly put in a one lb goal when you could do 1.5 or even 2. (I think 1.5 would be perfectly reasonable, if you wanted to lose faster, but that 1 is reasonable too.)
If exercise isn't that strenuous, like 0-300 per day realistically (not only because you are cutting calories significantly) and you are actually currently losing about 1 lb/week, one thing could be just not eating back exercise.
That aside -- if what you are going now is working I'd probably not mess with it, as you may need to change it up at some point later and cutting lower may effect you more than you think. But I don't think being a little more aggressive would hurt you if you really want to be and have no particular reason not to.
Ya sorry I did say things confusingly. I meant doing extra exercise, effectively raising my TDEE to something more like 2500. The problem is that I'm HORRIBLE at consistent exercise. I just can't seem to get into a routine. So in reality, my TDEE is a bit all over the place. Also my day to day activities vary a lot. Some days I barely leave the apartment and when I do I drive everywhere. Other days I'm walking all day long, climbing hills (I do volunteer work up in mountain villages in Thailand) and have no realistic idea how much I burn. So I'm mostly just watching my weekly nutrition goal and what my weight does and trying to adjust accordingly.
This makes sense. If you think it averages out over a week you could use TDEE, if not eating back might work better. I think setting it for 1 lb, but only eating back after you do more than 250-300 calories of exercise might be some kind of compromise, as that would be effectively 1.5, which I think would be a reasonable enough goal. Or one thing I did for a while was set my goal for 1.5 and active, if I was usually active, and then realizing I wouldn't always be (in that case I wasn't eating back, since the active covered my exercise).
But also if you were doing really well before, I'd say don't think about lost time and just get back to it. You get to goal faster by being consistent than by having a larger deficit that you struggle with or that ends up feeling less sustainable or leaves you feeling like you need a huge break.0 -
So I get needing to make a lifestyle change that is sustainable. You don't want to deprive yourself , fall off the wagon, and gain it all back . But I've been tracking for over 8 months and feel like I could comfortably eat less. My TDEE is somewhere between 2000-2300 depending on exercise. If I can comfortably eat 1400 calories and exercise another 200 calories off without being hungry (and it doesn't put me below the dreaded 1200 limit) is that such a big deal? Or even if I could eat 1200 and do some light exercise - are there actually any dangers to it? Instructions here tell me to eat 1500-1800 cal and I just figure what's the harm in eating a bit less as long as it's enough nutrition? It's not going to make me drop more than 1.5-2 lbs per week - if anything it will just upkeep my 1 lb per week goal instead of having to drop it to 0.5 lbs. (Stats 5"8, SW 215, CW 185 , GW 140)
What does your weekly average look like? What I mean by that is, what is your OVERALL deficit? A lot of people have a big deficit M-F then on the weekend they eat (literally) some of that deficit back giving them a smaller deficit. Your day-to-day isn't important; it's your average.
But, to answer your question... Lean body mass (muscle) needs to be fed to be retained so you don't want the weight your losing to be muscle.0 -
@joemac1988 I just checked my weekly averages for the last bit and it's gone like this :
1700
1500
1800
1400
1300
1100
1200
The last few weeks we had some big holidays here which took in eating some heavier foods than normal so I'm a bit higher. Plus after my random gain I was feeling discouraged and got a little off plan. So assuming an average TDEE of 2100, that's a Deficit of 32,900 calories over the last 7 weeks (or the equivalent of 9.5 lbs). But these number factor in exercise and I know the exercise numbers tend to be inflated here. If that makes sense?
I do try to pay attention to just my weekly averages in general because I find it keeps me more balanced. Then I don't sweat a high day here or there.0 -
So I get needing to make a lifestyle change that is sustainable. You don't want to deprive yourself , fall off the wagon, and gain it all back . But I've been tracking for over 8 months and feel like I could comfortably eat less. My TDEE is somewhere between 2000-2300 depending on exercise. If I can comfortably eat 1400 calories and exercise another 200 calories off without being hungry (and it doesn't put me below the dreaded 1200 limit) is that such a big deal? Or even if I could eat 1200 and do some light exercise - are there actually any dangers to it? Instructions here tell me to eat 1500-1800 cal and I just figure what's the harm in eating a bit less as long as it's enough nutrition? It's not going to make me drop more than 1.5-2 lbs per week - if anything it will just upkeep my 1 lb per week goal instead of having to drop it to 0.5 lbs. (Stats 5"8, SW 215, CW 185 , GW 140)
Sounds fine to me.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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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