Will eating too low of calories really kill your metabolism?

derekwhitaker · 03-03-2009, 10:06 AM

I cant find anywhere where a study was done that shows that eating sub 1,200 calories a day would make your metabolism slow down and make for sluggish weight loss. Is this another story spit out by women health mags that is pure bs?

gekkoboy14 · 03-03-2009, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by derekwhitaker

I cant find anywhere where a study was done that shows that eating sub 1,200 calories a day would make your metabolism slow down and make for sluggish weight loss. Is this another story spit out by women health mags that is pure bs?

less metabolically active tissue= less calories burned

RachelBringIt · 03-03-2009, 10:10 AM

Think of it this way.

Dont eat enough to support normal organ function...

In order to survive your body eats muscle tissue...

Having muscle tissue raises your metabolism....

Not to mention not eating enough causes a multitude of other health problems. Just ask the nearest person with an ED. Calcium leeching from bones, hair loss, skin dryness, etc

jdominic6 · 03-03-2009, 10:12 AM

You can read into "fasting," which for a period of time revs up your metabolism, but prolonged/sustained low calorie intake will reduce your metabolism. To better understand this read up on the hunter gatherer diet and how humans evolved to be as we are today.

derekwhitaker · 03-03-2009, 10:16 AM

I understand that not eating enough foods each day would lead to malnourishment that is obvious I understand that your body would not only use fat for energy but muscel as well when you are lower than mainteance but what I dont understand is why it would make your bmr drop down to 500 calories a day or whatever they claim. I think it is wrong. I still do not see any study I only see people trying to asssume how the body would work.

Grizvok · 03-03-2009, 10:24 AM

Your metabolism WOULD slow down, it's a fact. Would it slow down as much as some people seem to think? No it wouldn't.

The argument is a moot point though. Eating that many calories is simply incredibly catabolic, why the hell would you want that?

th3pwn3r · 03-03-2009, 10:26 AM

Oct 1st, 07-----400lbs You
June 1st,08-----365lbs Can
June 8th, 08----360lbs Not
June 15th,08--- 355lbs Stop
June 22nd,08----351lbs This
June 29th,08----345lbs Train
July 13th,08---- 338lbs !
July 22th,08-----334lbs !
July 28th,08-----331.2lbs !
July 31th,08------329.9lbs !
August 2nd,08----332.5lbs Okay it can be stopped
August 4th,08----327.00lbs There we go!
August 11th,08---322.6lbs
Sept 13th,08-----310.0lbs I wont give up
Feb 5th,09------330 I gave up but Im back!

Why would you give up? You were making such good progress. You have to understand you were 400 pounds, you're not going to fit in that size 0 bikini over night

gekkoboy14 · 03-03-2009, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grizvok

Your metabolism WOULD slow down, it's a fact. Would it slow down as much as some people seem to think? No it wouldn't.

The argument is a moot point though. Eating that many calories is simply incredibly catabolic, why the hell would you want that?

careful with that term

Grizvok · 03-03-2009, 10:28 AM

What term?

jdominic6 · 03-03-2009, 10:30 AM

eating that many calories for a very small/young/midget person may be incredibly anabolic

gekkoboy14 · 03-03-2009, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grizvok

What term?

catabolic

Grizvok · 03-03-2009, 10:34 AM

Should I say it's catabolic to your muscles or what? I understand what you are saying though, catabolic doesn't necessarily mean that muscle is being broken down. That was my point though, eating too few calories will cause your body to look for other fuel; some of it will be fat and some of it will be muscle.

gekkoboy14 · 03-03-2009, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grizvok

Should I say it's catabolic to your muscles or what? I understand what you are saying though, catabolic doesn't necessarily mean that muscle is being broken down. That was my point though, eating too few calories will cause your body to look for other fuel; some of it will be fat and some of it will be muscle.

correct. Many people dont know its a 2-day street

stormballer33 · 03-03-2009, 10:43 AM

so eating less than 500 calories under ur maintaining calories would cause your body to burn more muscle than fat? or a greater percentage of muscle than fat for energy?

jdominic6 · 03-03-2009, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stormballer33

so eating less than 500 calories under ur maintaining calories would cause your body to burn more muscle than fat? or a greater percentage of muscle than fat for energy?

There is alot more involved than to be able to say just this. But as a general rule of thumb, 500 calories less per day with spot on macros and a very dynamic workout routine should allow your body to slowly over time use its own adipose energy stores but at the same time leaving itself enough energy to repair. Now the preference by the body of where this energy is taken from is governed by many things such as proper macro intake, genetics, rest time, overall health status, and endocrine system function. Alan Aragon writes some pretty good articles about this backed up by credible studies which you can search the threads for and read.

Results_Driven · 03-03-2009, 11:35 AM

You can cut to 1200cal if you have a lot of bodyfat.

The lower the bodyfat the higher the calories needed to preserve muscle.

At 25-30%BF you can get away with insanely low cal cuts with little muscle loss.

th3pwn3r · 03-03-2009, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Results_Driven

You can cut to 1200cal if you have a lot of bodyfat.

The lower the bodyfat the higher the calories needed to preserve muscle.

At 25-30%BF you can get away with insanely low cal cuts with little muscle loss.

DO NOT listen to this guy.

Grizvok · 03-03-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by th3pwn3r

DO NOT listen to this guy.

Yea, he's basically retarded.

jdominic6 · 03-03-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Results_Driven

You can cut to 1200cal if you have a lot of bodyfat.

The lower the bodyfat the higher the calories needed to preserve muscle.

At 25-30%BF you can get away with insanely low cal cuts with little muscle loss.

bro science

4point6 · 03-03-2009, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Results_Driven

You can cut to 1200cal if you have a lot of bodyfat.

The lower the bodyfat the higher the calories needed to preserve muscle.

At 25-30%BF you can get away with insanely low cal cuts with little muscle loss.

imo you can only do what works for YOU. if a 1200 cal cut gives you enough energy and you are happily losing weight without medical side effects than who are we to say otherwise. the only fact i have come to realize from all the research i read is that everyone's body reacts differently and studies can only show us generalized trends that work for a majority.

i do agree at 1200 cal there will be some (probably a lot) muscle lose but coming down 400 i bet he would rather get down to 250 and work back up even it will be more work in the long run. depends on the individual goal.

Results_Driven · 03-03-2009, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdominic6

bro science

Why do you think Gastric Bypass patients are put on 800cal diets?

Fat=stored energy. If you have Fat you body has enough energy for processes. The little calories that are consumed are used to mobilize the fat.

You guys are a bunch of ecto's talking about cutting.

And im using bro sciencE?

Kiumarz · 03-03-2009, 01:13 PM

Dont believe the hype.

Results_Driven · 03-03-2009, 01:15 PM

Another reference is www.leangains.com

Inter Fasting - Proves muscle loss will not occur on NO CALORIE consumption for a brief period of time (few days even).

gbone74 · 03-03-2009, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Results_Driven

Why do you think Gastric Bypass patients are put on 800cal diets?

?

Ive always wondered about this too obviously more lbm is lost and there are health risks but according to gospel on here and starvation mode,body storing fat,reasons for plateauing etc etc etc why do these people not plateau at 300lbs or whatever they lose weight month after month after month living on meagre portions that clearly are in starvation mode territory

jdominic6 · 03-03-2009, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Results_Driven

Why do you think Gastric Bypass patients are put on 800cal diets?
Because their stomach can not hold the amount of food that it once was able to and they are warned that they could possibly rupture the surgery that was done by over feeding themselves.

Fat=stored energy. If you have Fat you body has enough energy for processes. The little calories that are consumed are used to mobilize the fat.
I never said otherwise, over a large period of time with restricted calories the body becomes accustomed to lowering its metabolism so it does not require the amount of energy that it was using before because food is scarce. This may for some people mean catabolizing muscle because muscle increases metabolism.

You guys are a bunch of ecto's talking about cutting.

And im using bro sciencE?

Inter Fasting - Proves muscle loss will not occur on NO CALORIE consumption for a brief period of time (few days even).
I believe I made reference to this in a previous post correct me if I'm wrong
[/QUOTE]

master3bs · 03-03-2009, 01:40 PM

Due to time, I only read the first third of the posts. Sorry if this has already been said.

My understanding is that dropping your calorie intake too low will make your body burn muscle rather than fat. Your body goes into survival mode.

So a metabolism drop doesn't directly occur, but the more muscle you have, the more calories you burn, so this would be an indirect result.

I think the 1200 mark might be different based on the individual's body but its a good rule of thumb.

gh0stlifter · 03-03-2009, 01:45 PM

Yes it's true, your body goes into starvation mode and will attempt to store everything you eat.

wlknier · 03-03-2009, 01:48 PM

we need a registered nutritionist ITT

but from my personal trainer handbook, 1,200 is the minimum a healthy male should eat before the body will start compromising vital systems to keep itself afloat...i wouldn't fast for long if you try it, i can't imagine a few days "killing" your metabolism, but a few weeks, yea, your body will enter survival mode

Tanulean · 03-03-2009, 02:03 PM

What the other guy said is semi-true. The more bodyfat a person has the less likely muscle will be burned for fuel ( or the less amount of muscle will be burned for fuel ). Just thought I'd throw that out there. However, I don't deal in absolutes like him.

Here's just an example of what I'm saying. The Biggest Loser. We are taking 5,000-10,000 daily calorie deficits easily. Do you really think they are losing as much muscle as they are fat? Absolutely not. Almost all of them get stronger. That's just an example of extremes.

ya dig.

gbone74 · 03-03-2009, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tanulean

Here's just an example of what I'm saying. The Biggest Loser. We are taking 5,000-10,000 daily calorie deficits easily. Do you really think they are losing as much muscle as they are fat? Absolutely not. Almost all of them get stronger. That's just an example of extremes.

ya dig.

some of the contestants come out pretty ripped,Jim and bill from season 4 esp did you see the arms and vascularity on those 2 at 170lbs so much for skinny fat,they dropped 50% of their bodyweight in 8 months