Why is it so bad to eat only 1200 calories a day if you're working out?

[xxxgbp]

....but it's okay to lose 2 lbs a week?

According to caloriesperhour.com I burn about 2,127 daily doing "moderate exercise or sports 3-5 days a week"...2,127-1200=927...
A calorie deficit of 1000 calories a day is losing 2 lbs a week.....So eating 1200 should be okay, if losing 2 lbs a week is okay..

[TomEst]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[Roniboney]

good luck wiht your metabolism when it tries to bring itself down to that level of calories.If you decide to bulk ever your going to gain a lot of fat

[clash101]

good luck wiht your metabolism when it tries to bring itself down to that level of calories.If you decide to bulk ever your going to gain a lot of fat

What? Try giving reasons for your comments.

[AlwaysTryin]

You will kill your metabolism eating such low calories that when you increase them to bulk you will put on a lot of weight and fat quickly.

Eat at a gradual deficit, not so severe

even better read the stickies at the top of the page

[Doubt.Less]

You will kill your metabolism eating such low calories that when you increase them to bulk you will put on a lot of weight and fat quickly.

Eat at a gradual deficit, not so severe

even better read the stickies at the top of the page

thiiisss

[zpm]

....but it's okay to lose 2 lbs a week?

According to caloriesperhour.com I burn about 2,127 daily doing "moderate exercise or sports 3-5 days a week"...2,127-1200=927...
A calorie deficit of 1000 calories a day is losing 2 lbs a week.....So eating 1200 should be okay, if losing 2 lbs a week is okay..

OP,if you want to go that low,consider only 4-6 straight days followed by a refeed.

[MikeD4386]

for everyone who thinks "metabolism" will slow down from vlcd, i invite u to use ur common sense for a second. unless ur core temp drops to like 80, u r fine, and very clsoe to ur starting metabolism.

THere are many problems with very low calorie diets, but metabolism is not one of them

[Vietgoboi]

for everyone who thinks "metabolism" will slow down from vlcd, i invite u to use ur common sense for a second. unless ur core temp drops to like 80, u r fine, and very clsoe to ur starting metabolism.

THere are many problems with very low calorie diets, but metabolism is not one of them

I agree.

One of the reason why, Lyle Mcdonald recommend 10-14 days of eating at maintenance to regulate your hormones

[asto_86]

OP I eat at about 1300 cals but it is only 2 days a week.. Both non lifting days and non consecutive. I also have 2 days at about 2800 cals, bit those are heavy lifting and cardio days.. I see nothing wrong with it, but don't recommend trying to sustain for weeks at a time at it. Not gonna lie, those low days suck, bit the results are obvious the next morning. Major woosh effect takes place, haha..

[kusok]

Never understood the criticism of such threads. 1200 breakfast is perfectly ok.

[acrack35]

Never understood the criticism of such threads. 1200 breakfast is perfectly ok.

haha x2

[Reformed90]

Yes, if you have been eating 1,200 cals a day for awhile don't jump to something like 2,000 2,500, 3,000

your going to be so full all day, you will feel like throwing up

Slowly move yourself up 200 to 300 cals a day

[TunaShakes]

Ignore the broscience eat "A" amount of calories or your metabolism crashes comments. If your maint calories are ~2100 then yes you'll need to eat less until your getting the results you want. If you don't jack up your calories to stupid amounts like 3000 a day with a maint of 2100 then you wont magically gain 20lbs of bodyfat when you finish cutting. Check out this article by Lyle Mcdonald for help with setting a proper deficit.

**To answer your question about 2lbs / week of bodyfat its not that simple, it depends on how much bodyfat you currently have. The more bodyfat you have the bigger deficit you can create and have most of the losses come from fat and not a combination of fat/LBM. Find total amount of bodyfat in lbs multiply by 31 and that will give you a ballpark estimate of what your deficit should be.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...d-i-do-qa.html

[spicyprice]

OR just read through bodyrecomposition.com and have a total understanding of exactly how fat loss happens. I have really learned a TON after browsing through his articles. Thinking about buying 2.0 as well.

[hooked4life]

....but it's okay to lose 2 lbs a week?

According to caloriesperhour.com I burn about 2,127 daily doing "moderate exercise or sports 3-5 days a week"...2,127-1200=927...
A calorie deficit of 1000 calories a day is losing 2 lbs a week.....So eating 1200 should be okay, if losing 2 lbs a week is okay..

because your body uses calories for more things than "moderate exercise or sports"

[BigSnacks]

Ignore the broscience...


...Find total amount of bodyfat in lbs multiply by 31 and that will give you a ballpark estimate of what your deficit should be.

Is that supposed to be a 3.1? Because my "maintenance" is 2530 cal. A deficit of "bf in lbs x 31" is 2139. That allows me to eat a grand total of 391 calories/day...

[TunaShakes]

Is that supposed to be a 3.1? Because my "maintenance" is 2530 cal. A deficit of "bf in lbs x 31" is 2139. That allows me to eat a grand total of 391 calories/day...

Your not misreading , for example if your 180lbs at 15% bodyfat you'll have 27lbs of bodyfat, so

27 x 31 = 837 calories per day deficit which the body can sustain from bodyfat stores from a study that was done. This can vary with certain groups "bodybuilders" who do extra cardio, lifting, etc.

If the person had (180lbs at 15% bodyfat) and a maint of 2530 it would be 2530 - 837 = 1693cal / day.

Article you might find interesting: http://www.mindandmuscle.net/article...oss?page=0%2C2

**Note** People with higher bodyfat at much higher weights which is what you might be refering to, can sustain a large deficit which is where diets such as PSMF come into play.

[BigSnacks]

We fatties can sustain a higher deficit, sure, but refer back to my example (which uses me to get the numbers): 391cal daily intake. We can't get by on that, I don't care what anyone says.

I'm 230lbs at around 30%bf. That's a LBM of 161lb, or 73kg. Using the Katch-McArdle formula (370 + (21.6 * 73)), that gives me a BMR of 1946. Using a multiplier of 1.3 (3x/week workout, sit-on-my-butt IT job), that brings my TDEE up to 2530.

So at 230lb/30%, I'm looking at 69lb of body fat. 69 * 31 = 2139.

2530 - 2139 = 391

391 calories = Starvation

[TunaShakes]

We fatties can sustain a higher deficit, sure, but refer back to my example (which uses me to get the numbers): 391cal daily intake. We can't get by on that, I don't care what anyone says.

I'm 230lbs at around 30%bf. That's a LBM of 161lb, or 73kg. Using the Katch-McArdle formula (370 + (21.6 * 73)), that gives me a BMR of 1946. Using a multiplier of 1.3 (3x/week workout, sit-on-my-butt IT job), that brings my TDEE up to 2530.

So at 230lb/30%, I'm looking at 69lb of body fat. 69 * 31 = 2139.

2530 - 2139 = 391

391 calories = Starvation

Your right I was just quoting a study that was done, but you could have pretty substantial results on a PSMF diet with 1g protein per pound of lbm and the EFAs which comes out to ~750-800 cals / day on avg with minimal lbm loss. Theres exceptions to everything just have to make judgement calls.

[riaden]

trust me you dont want to go down to eating so little. i did and now im paying a HUGE price for it.
ended up in hospital, fluid around my heart and stomach. lost 10kg of muscle. i look very very sick. im not happy on what ive done to myself, but i know that i will learn from it. and hopefully never happen to me again. even on non training days you should eat normal, your body needs to recovery. i dont even have the strength at the moment to WALK for 30min. cause of how much muscle ive lost.

[Lovetodream]

i want to kill myself everytime someone on this forum says you'll gain a lot of fat after eating a low calorie diet and you bump it up to your maintenance

facepalm

[AlwaysTryin]

i want to kill myself everytime someone on this forum says you'll gain a lot of fat after eating a low calorie diet and you bump it up to your maintenance

facepalm

Are you saying eating at a 1200 calorie daily intake for 5 months then going straight back to 2300-2500 say won't put any weight on?

Does your body not alter it's maintainence level with time adapting?

[TunaShakes]

i want to kill myself everytime someone on this forum says you'll gain a lot of fat after eating a low calorie diet and you bump it up to your maintenance

While this is true to an extent it's also not quite how it works. When you simply say bumping it back up to maintenance are you accounting for metabolic slowdown that occurs with dieting, weight that might have been lost, and possible decreased activity from dieting?
Just because you started with a maintenance of 2500cal at 15%bodyfat doesnt mean your new maintenance wont be ~2200 at 10%bodyfat with a lower weight and metabolic adaptations.

Are you saying eating at a 1200 calorie daily intake for 5 months then going straight back to 2300-2500 say won't put any weight on?

Does your body not alter it's maintainence level with time adapting?

Lol, check out the minnesota semi-starvation study it has the largest drop in metabolic activity i've seen which was about ~40% below baseline. The men were put on 50% of their maint calories for 6 months and reached 5% bodyfat before the study was ended. Yes you'll gain some weight back afterwards, but if your at a low bodyfat and do it slowly *not straight back to your original maint* you have some room for slight increases in bodyfat.

[MikeD4386]

the reason people gain weight when returning to their "maintenance" is because people start freely eating or get careless after their cut. Example:

BMR used to be 2500, lost 50 lbs, now only 2000.

U aim to eat 2500/day,, but u dont really care, cuz hey, u r finally done cutting.

So u count up to 2500, well whats another 500??? Make it 3000+the few hundred extra from not being as rpecise as u used to, u are now eating about 3250 cals/ day.

since ur new maintenance is 2000 u r going over 1250 a day. That's 10 lbs a month, add in the five pound reobund from water.gylcogen, and u gain 15 lbs the month after ur diet.

If u just ate 2000cals like u were supposed to, u would still be at the same weight u were when ur diet ended.

There is no such thing as a metoabolic slowdow greater than a few %. it viollates the laws of physics, and if it happened ur pulse would be 25, ur core temp would be 70 degrees, and u wouldnt be able to remember ur own name.


/thread

[asto_86]

the reason people gain weight when returning to their "maintenance" is because people start freely eating or get careless after their cut. Example:

BMR used to be 2500, lost 50 lbs, now only 2000.

U aim to eat 2500/day,, but u dont really care, cuz hey, u r finally done cutting.

So u count up to 2500, well whats another 500??? Make it 3000+the few hundred extra from not being as rpecise as u used to, u are now eating about 3250 cals/ day.

since ur new maintenance is 2000 u r going over 1250 a day. That's 10 lbs a month, add in the five pound reobund from water.gylcogen, and u gain 15 lbs the month after ur diet.

If u just ate 2000cals like u were supposed to, u would still be at the same weight u were when ur diet ended.

There is no such thing as a metoabolic slowdow greater than a few %. it viollates the laws of physics, and if it happened ur pulse would be 25, ur core temp would be 70 degrees, and u wouldnt be able to remember ur own name.


/thread

Something that always made sense to me with regards to bmr dropping like yours after losing 50 lbs is the simple fact that 50 pounds is a lot of weight. dropping that weight makes it easier on the body to move, less weight for it to haul around making it more efficient thus reducing the amount of energy needed to perform.

[TunaShakes]

the reason people gain weight when returning to their "maintenance" is because people start freely eating or get careless after their cut. Example:

BMR used to be 2500, lost 50 lbs, now only 2000.

U aim to eat 2500/day,, but u dont really care, cuz hey, u r finally done cutting.

So u count up to 2500, well whats another 500??? Make it 3000+the few hundred extra from not being as rpecise as u used to, u are now eating about 3250 cals/ day.

since ur new maintenance is 2000 u r going over 1250 a day. That's 10 lbs a month, add in the five pound reobund from water.gylcogen, and u gain 15 lbs the month after ur diet.

If u just ate 2000cals like u were supposed to, u would still be at the same weight u were when ur diet ended.

There is no such thing as a metoabolic slowdow greater than a few %. it viollates the laws of physics, and if it happened ur pulse would be 25, ur core temp would be 70 degrees, and u wouldnt be able to remember ur own name.


/thread

You do realize BMR doesn't = maintenance right?

You have to factor in daily activities too including weights, cardio, daily routines, etc unless your comatose.

Also a metabolic slowdown of ~15% is quite common when dieting, and the 40% deficit I quoted from the study was drastic because of LBM loss and the fact that they were already lean and eating 50% maintenance.

[MikeD4386]

yes i know true BMR is not the actual calories u burn per day but people use that term interchangeably with maintenance calories. similar to how the "metabolism" does not mean maintenance calories, but people use it as such anyway. \


15% is not a common slowdown. even in the mss there was only about a 15% slowdown, and those people were LITERALLY starving. some of them were delusional or had very low core temps. THey were FAR FAR FAR beyonf "crash dieting"

[TunaShakes]

yes i know true BMR is not the actual calories u burn per day but people use that term interchangeably with maintenance calories. similar to how the "metabolism" does not mean maintenance calories, but people use it as such anyway. \


15% is not a common slowdown. even in the mss there was only about a 15% slowdown, and those people were LITERALLY starving. some of them were delusional or had very low core temps. THey were FAR FAR FAR beyonf "crash dieting"

Gotcha was just checking couldnt tell from your post, and yes the study was an extreme example of metabolic slowdown. The study is also useful for people that like to toss around terms such as *starvation mode* and blame it for not being able to lose bodyfat.

[riaden]

now since i got out of hospital, my bmr is 1568cals a day. so you can see how low that is and im 24.
ive got a recent test done and this is how i fared up.

metabloic age of 12- meaning of a 12year old.
52.1kg of muscle mass
wieght- 58kg
bone mass- 2.8
physique rating 7

just thought it up, of what your body does when on such low cals for a long period of time.