Is it possible to accidentally eat too little?

jelleigh wrote: »

This may sound like a silly question, especially from someone who ended up overweight by eating too much, but I'm alittle curious about this. Some diets focus on particularly satiating foods (for me this is Keto or low carb or whole 30) and I find I end up feeling full and satisfied on far less food than normal. Now I know the dangers of long term undereating, but I'm curious if it's possible to do that and not even notice? Like in theory, I would think that I would either a)feel hungry or b) low energy if I was consistently undereating. Is that true do you think? Or is it really possibly to eat too low for too long if you aren't paying attention ?

I didn't do it the way you are, but yes, I accidentally under-ate when I first started logging with MFP, several years back. I felt fine -energetic, workout intensity good, not especially hungry. Everything seemed fine.

Then, suddenly, I didn't feel good at all. I felt weak and fatigued. It took multiple weeks to recover, even though I corrected quickly.

Undereating is not a good plan. There are health risks. Some effects, like hair loss, tend to happen many weeks later, and that's one of the minor possibilities. At the other extreme, consider this: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10761904/under-1200-for-weight-loss/p1

It happened to me because I turned out to be one of the rare people for whom many calorie "calculators" (so called) materially under-estimate calorie needs. My sedentary maintenance now, at 5'5", 128-point-something pounds this morning, age 64, sedentary outside of exercise: It's estimated at about 1500 calories daily. It's actually something slightly over 2000 (before exercise). So, I was under-eating, at first, by accident. It wasn't intentional, but it had bad effects . . . fortunately not extremely severe ones. I was lucky.

Will terrible things for sure happen if you continue? Not for sure . . . but you're increasing the risks.

Here's the thing: How long have you been at this?

If you've been doing this for a 4-6 weeks, and you're averaging a loss substantially slower than 1% of your current body weight weekly, you're probably fine. It's actual weight loss rate that matters. MFP or any other calculator just gives you an estimate, and there's potential for offsetting errors in food/exercise logging that can mean we're eating more or burning less than we might log. Actual loss rate tells a true story about energy balance, when averaged over a many-weeks time.

But if you're new to calorie counting, and under-eating that much, then yes, it would be better to eat close to your estimated goal. You can add nutritious but less satiating foods to get there, if you like: Nuts, nut butter, avocados, full-fat dairy products instead of nonfat if you eat dairy, fatty cold-water fish (Omega 3s are good), more oil in or on veggies/salads (MUFAs & PUFAs are good for you), etc. Or, have a treat, if that doesn't trigger hard-to-handle appetite/cravings for you.

I'd suggest not starting things out on the risky side (under-eating). Start by believing the estimates, and trying to adhere to them. After that 4-6 weeks (full menstrual cycle, if that's relevant for you, so you can compare the same relative point in at least 2 different cycles), then you can adjust based on experience.

Best wishes!