Eating less than 1200 calories a day and exercising at least a 1000 and not losing weight
Options
Replies
-
belgitude66 wrote: »stop eating junk food. control what you spend on K a day on a other way. I practice Hiit since mounths 300/400K par session 35min 3tim a week + your body needs rest between Hiit sessions so you will use the "after burn effect"
What "junk" food? How will changing the foods the OP eats help with his problem (which really seems to be centered around unrealistic expectations and not a good understanding of what healthy weight loss looks like)?6 -
andrebessa93 wrote: »Yesterday I burnt 1,445 calories whilst moving, according to the apple watch.
I went o the gym in the morning and done HIIT training on the treadmill and then done 20 mins in the pool. after that my partner and I went to the peak district and we walked one of the moderate walks (part of which under pouring rain) which was 4 miles long (meant to be 7.3 miles but it was far too wet to continue.
We then got home, showered and headed out to the cinema.
We're both losing weight, we're both active and doing so much more than we were doing. Although my partner is eating more than I am (c. 1600 calories per day). I have decided to up my calories to 1,500 a day based on the comments here.
1,500 a day net or gross? You're now 215 pounds and have lost 26 pounds since May 4th. This is way too fast for your weight.
What Are the Risks of Rapid Weight Loss?
Rapid weight loss creates physical demands on the body. Possible serious risks include:- Gallstones, which occur in 12% to 25% of people losing large amounts of weight over several months
- Dehydration, which can be avoided by drinking plenty of fluids
- Malnutrition, usually from not eating enough protein for weeks at a time
- Electrolyte imbalances, which rarely can be life threatening
Other side effects of rapid weight loss include:- Headaches
- Irritability
- Fatigue
- Dizziness
- Constipation
- Menstrual irregularities
- Hair loss
- Muscle loss
6 -
This is just nonsense. You say you're exercising 1000 kcal, plus you will be expending whatever your BMR is from merely existing - let's say around 2000 kcal as a conservative estimate. Even if you weren't exercising *at all* you would still get a big deficit if you're only eating 1200 a day.
One way you could be gaining weight is by gaining muscle, but that's not likely in such a short amount of time and with such little food. I think your measurements are wrong - either your food intake, exercise, or scales, or all of those are off.
As people have already repeated, a week isn't representative of your weight trend anyway.1 -
Coming from someone who has done the very low calorie with lots of workout thing...I can tell you this not a sustainable way to go. I lost a lot of weight, sure...BUT I started getting such bad headaches that it would blur my vision in the right eye, I started feeling sick and nauseous all the time, I was tired and wanted to just sleep all the time, I lost muscle, my hair became brittle and unhealthy...NOTHING about what I was doing to my body was ok. I didn't form a healthy relationship with food, so the minute I started eating normally I gained so much weight back.
When it comes to weight loss it is so important to go at a slower pace and do it in a sustainable way. The year that I dieted the way you are was miserable...I wouldn't wish it on anyone...I was sick, miserable, and so unhealthy.10 -
OP, there are many articles circulating right now that show that most fitness trackers are very inaccurate when it comes to calorie burnt.
https://9to5mac.com/2017/05/24/apple-watch-fitness-tracking-accuracy/
"The study found that while the Apple Watch offered the most consistent energy expenditure tracking, it wasn’t necessarily the most accurate. In fact, the study claims that the Fitbit Surge was the most accurate with energy expenditure tracking, with an error rate of around 27 percent. The Microsoft Band came in at around 33 percent, while Apple Watch reported an error rate near 40 percent, though it was consistent. In last place was the PulseOn, with a 92.6 percent error rate."
So you're definitely not burning as many calories as you think you are.
Now that that's addressed... the undereating thing is nothing to take lightly. You can damage your organs. You will lose muscles. You can even lose your hair.
You need to calculate your TDEE and eat at a reasonable deficit from it - around 500 calories a day will result in one pound lost per week. This is a healthy, sustainable amount of weight to lose per week.
Crash-dieting will results in health complications and a high likelihood of regaining the weight, because you haven't taught yourself a sustainable way of eating.
There are certainly errors present. Did you read the actual study that the article references? I think you might find that the conclusion you make: "So you're definitely not burning as many calories as you think you are. Now that that's addressed...." doesn't automatically follow from the data or conculsions in the study. There is nothing definitive there except that the measurements may not be trustworthy in an individual case. The only way to know is to be accurate on calories in and observe results over a long enough period of time.
You can use trusted calculations to back-check your tracker to see of the estimates make sense. In many cases they do, or for our purposes they can be close enough. Again, for individuals you can make adjustments over time.2 -
How are you still living?9
-
Silentpadna wrote: »OP, there are many articles circulating right now that show that most fitness trackers are very inaccurate when it comes to calorie burnt.
https://9to5mac.com/2017/05/24/apple-watch-fitness-tracking-accuracy/
"The study found that while the Apple Watch offered the most consistent energy expenditure tracking, it wasn’t necessarily the most accurate. In fact, the study claims that the Fitbit Surge was the most accurate with energy expenditure tracking, with an error rate of around 27 percent. The Microsoft Band came in at around 33 percent, while Apple Watch reported an error rate near 40 percent, though it was consistent. In last place was the PulseOn, with a 92.6 percent error rate."
So you're definitely not burning as many calories as you think you are.
Now that that's addressed... the undereating thing is nothing to take lightly. You can damage your organs. You will lose muscles. You can even lose your hair.
You need to calculate your TDEE and eat at a reasonable deficit from it - around 500 calories a day will result in one pound lost per week. This is a healthy, sustainable amount of weight to lose per week.
Crash-dieting will results in health complications and a high likelihood of regaining the weight, because you haven't taught yourself a sustainable way of eating.
There are certainly errors present. Did you read the actual study that the article references? I think you might find that the conclusion you make: "So you're definitely not burning as many calories as you think you are. Now that that's addressed...." doesn't automatically follow from the data or conculsions in the study. There is nothing definitive there except that the measurements may not be trustworthy in an individual case. The only way to know is to be accurate on calories in and observe results over a long enough period of time.
You can use trusted calculations to back-check your tracker to see of the estimates make sense. In many cases they do, or for our purposes they can be close enough. Again, for individuals you can make adjustments over time.
Sure, that's fair - OP just seemed very confident that his calorie burns were accurate. He's saying that he's burning upwards of 1500 calories a day through exercise, and that seems very high to me. Many people wouldn't even burn that many calories running a half-marathon.1 -
scarlett_k wrote: »This is just nonsense. You say you're exercising 1000 kcal, plus you will be expending whatever your BMR is from merely existing - let's say around 2000 kcal as a conservative estimate. Even if you weren't exercising *at all* you would still get a big deficit if you're only eating 1200 a day.
One way you could be gaining weight is by gaining muscle, but that's not likely in such a short amount of time and with such little food. I think your measurements are wrong - either your food intake, exercise, or scales, or all of those are off.
As people have already repeated, a week isn't representative of your weight trend anyway.
One thing is for absolute certain - if his counts are anywhere even remotely near accurate, he's not gaining muscle. He's losing it by the bucketful.
Starvation-level calorie intake, ultra-low protein intake, cardio only with no strength training - you couldn't hardly tailor a diet better suited for loss of lean body mass if you tried.24 -
andrebessa93 wrote: »Hi guys,
Thanks for all the comments above... I'm a bit concerned about some of the comments above.
I am indeed eating 1,200 calories per day (I will be upping this to 1,500 on the back of all your comments).
To clear things up, I am indeed burning 1000 calories, sometimes more per day by doing things like HIIT, Zumba and then after it 30 mins non-stop of swimming. I feel incredibly fit and full of energy. Therefore, 200 calories net, yes.
Could this diet really be doing me this much harm if all I want to do now is exercise, move, actually get on? Previously I was a total couch potato. Now I run a 5K with no issues - all of this in 1.5 months. training hard everyday.
Thanks for all of the advice above guys!
Are you using a "energy supplement" because at net 200. You're likely to hit a wall pretty quickly.1 -
I spent 60-75 minutes, 5 days a week, doing Crossfit. The other two days I spend 3+ hours riding horses which ends up about the same amount of calorie burn as an hour at Crossfit. Even that is only 300-400 calories. I cut my calories to only 1200 a day 6 weeks ago because my weight loss became stagnant and got obsessed with the scale (even though I knew better), and I ended up putting weight on... I have now gone up to 1550 a week ago, and have peeled 1.5lbs back off. He isn't eating enough. He should be in the 1700-1800 range minimum to stay healthy.1
-
2011rocket3touring wrote: »How are you still living?
It's only been a few weeks. Give it some time.
4 -
OP, none of your numbers make any sense, so I'm just going to tell you what I'm sure of:
- Losing 4-5 lbs per week, is crazy aggressively fast.
- You should be netting AT LEAST 1500 cals per day.
- It is totally normal to not lose weight every week, weight loss isn't linear, even if you are perfect (and no one is).
- Eating that little and losing that much almost guarantees you are losing a lot of muscle in the process.
- Get a food scale, and start using it for everything you possible can, including packaged foods and fruits. Log in grams. Commit to doing so for at least a couple of weeks to get a more accurate idea of how many cals you are really eating.
- Choose your database entries more carefully. Many entries were added by users and are flat out wrong. Use entries for each individual part of a meal, so don't log "1 sandwich", log 2 slices of bread, 150 grams of ham, 100 grams of cheese, 1 TBL light mayo.
No one is calling you a liar. But many many people who start using MFP simply don't know the correct way to log their food and exercise and end up with bad numbers. Read the stickies in each of the forums too, they are really helpful!5 -
andrebessa93 wrote: »Hi guys,
Thanks for all the comments above... I'm a bit concerned about some of the comments above.
I am indeed eating 1,200 calories per day (I will be upping this to 1,500 on the back of all your comments).
To clear things up, I am indeed burning 1000 calories, sometimes more per day by doing things like HIIT, Zumba and then after it 30 mins non-stop of swimming. I feel incredibly fit and full of energy. Therefore, 200 calories net, yes.
Could this diet really be doing me this much harm if all I want to do now is exercise, move, actually get on? Previously I was a total couch potato. Now I run a 5K with no issues - all of this in 1.5 months. training hard everyday.
Thanks for all of the advice above guys!
If your caloric count and calorie burns are indeed accurate, you are doing something incredibly dangerous, and I predict you'll crash and burn before long. You are risking your muscle tissue. You do realize that your heart is also a muscle?
You may feel okay now, but when you *do* start to feel the effects, sadly, it will be after the damage is already done.
I strongly urge you to reconsider.10 -
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this yet or not, but prior to upping to 1500 calories your body might have been in starvation mode. Meaning your body was protecting itself and storing the food it was receiving as fat. And importantly, the QUALITY of the calorie matters.
Also, do you keep track of inches lost? A pound of fat and muscle weigh the same, but the densities are much different.
Unfortunately, the body also likes to hit plateaus in the form of muscle memory. You might need to change up the exercise routine if it is looking too...well...routine.0 -
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this yet or not, but prior to upping to 1500 calories your body might have been in starvation mode. Meaning your body was protecting itself and storing the food it was receiving as fat. And importantly, the QUALITY of the calorie matters.
Also, do you keep track of inches lost? A pound of fat and muscle weigh the same, but the densities are much different.
Unfortunately, the body also likes to hit plateaus in the form of muscle memory. You might need to change up the exercise routine if it is looking too...well...routine.
No on both counts.
Starvation mode - as you've described it - does not exist. If it did, anorexics would gain or hold onto weight, which simply doesn't happen.
Also, for weight loss - which is completely separate from nutrition - a calorie is a calorie, and there is no difference between them, since a calorie is merely a unit of measurement.
14 -
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this yet or not, but prior to upping to 1500 calories your body might have been in starvation mode. Meaning your body was protecting itself and storing the food it was receiving as fat. And importantly, the QUALITY of the calorie matters.
Also, do you keep track of inches lost? A pound of fat and muscle weigh the same, but the densities are much different.
Unfortunately, the body also likes to hit plateaus in the form of muscle memory. You might need to change up the exercise routine if it is looking too...well...routine.
No one has mentioned it because starvation mode is a myth.17 -
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this yet or not, but prior to upping to 1500 calories your body might have been in starvation mode. Meaning your body was protecting itself and storing the food it was receiving as fat. And importantly, the QUALITY of the calorie matters.
Also, do you keep track of inches lost? A pound of fat and muscle weigh the same, but the densities are much different.
Unfortunately, the body also likes to hit plateaus in the form of muscle memory. You might need to change up the exercise routine if it is looking too...well...routine.
"Starvation mode" is a myth. The body does not "protect itself and store the food as fat".
"Muscle memory" is another myth. There is no need to change up the exercise routine other than progression/periodization and scheduled deloads. And it has nothing to do with the OP's situation.13 -
I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this yet or not, but prior to upping to 1500 calories your body might have been in starvation mode. Meaning your body was protecting itself and storing the food it was receiving as fat. And importantly, the QUALITY of the calorie matters.
No one has mentioned it because starvation mode is a myth.
And he's not suffering from a reduced metabolism, because "he's feeling great" with lots of energy.6 -
stanmann571 wrote: »I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this yet or not, but prior to upping to 1500 calories your body might have been in starvation mode. Meaning your body was protecting itself and storing the food it was receiving as fat. And importantly, the QUALITY of the calorie matters.
No one has mentioned it because starvation mode is a myth.
And he's not suffering from a reduced metabolism, because "he's feeling great" with lots of energy.
For now.9 -
andrebessa93 wrote: »I started my diet on the 04th of May 2017.
You started on May 4th and you have lost 20 pounds so far? Holy crap. Why are you saying that you are not losing???4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K 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
- 391 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
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions