Posts by AjithGunawardana


User's Posts | User's Topics


Forum Topic Date Replies
Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
17:29 (UTC)
3

How much weight did you lose ?

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
09:58 (UTC)
5
Cool. Whatever works for you. Best of luck with your goals.
Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
08:20 (UTC)
7

Melkor provided a sound reason for not using the limit of fat mobilization. Or in other words why you should not have too high a deficit. Which as I pointed out before should have been your question. Which again as I said before is why you were not accepting the answer given to your question as per heading on original post.

May I point out to you that you can eat below your BMR and not push the limit of fat mobilization. Just don't. If you want to know why read the answers posted for that question as opposed to the question you meant to ask. 

Either ways if you idealy don't eat below your BMR and don't create a deficit that would cause a weight loss of max 1% of your body weight (preferably 2/3 of max) per week. You are good to go. Healthy n sustainable long term.

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
05:44 (UTC)
9

Increased weigh training prevents loss of muscle mass even while on a deficit. If you are on an excess deficit then your loss would not be from muscle it would be from internal organs, bone density etc.

I am not just saying this. There are studies.

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
05:36 (UTC)
10

"untill my wife got pregnant" LOL That's a first.

Eat at low calorie level or higher than advisable deficit causes metabolism to slow down. This can be countered by exercise. And anyways going back to eating properly brings back your metabolic rate if you haven't had too much muscle loss. Read some of the studies about adaptive thermogenisis. You kept low calories for 5 months so "starvation mode" is not what you need worry about. That is for those who try to keep their weight down and / or lose weight over long periods by reducing their consumption.

What you need to worry about is "how much of some particular nutrient someone thinks I need" You say you ate enough nutrients and know more than people educated in the field of nutrition. So look at it this way. Let's say the one item you missed was Vitamin D. Do you know you could end up with osteoporosis. (brittle bones) You see you would have taken enough calcium but your body cannot use it without vitamin D. You would not know your bones were getting weak untill the day you strained them and they broke on you. Do NOT be arrogant. A friend of mine has cancer. They say it has something to do with her nutrition.

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
05:00 (UTC)
15

@machgogogo

BMR by definition is the amount of energy / calories used by your body if you were to lay in bed whole day so if you did that you would not lose weight. If you got up from bed and went about your day to day life you would burn more calories n would lose weight. There is no way you can gain weight eating less calories than you burn.

Thereby obvious conclusion - The number you are using as your BMR is wrong.

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
04:53 (UTC)
17
Original Post by armandounc:

Original Post by machgogogo:

I gain weight if I eat my BMR *sigh*

Physiologically impossible. That's as far as I will entertain that silly statement.

LOL. One of these days armandounc you really must consider becoming a nice chap.

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 15 2012
02:57 (UTC)
20

@lamasshu

Funny how you got your justification for BMR from a post that never once says the term BMR. Like I said in my previous post your question is actually about deficit. Melkor's post explains why you should not take your deficit too high. 

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 14 2012
11:08 (UTC)
27

Seems to me you have understood perfectly the BMR issue. How nutrition n calorie are not exactly related but you eat at BMR as a rule of thumb to have a sustainable, easy to handle way of getting required nutrients. If you don't get your nutrients only does it become unhealthy.

There are heaps of studies about slowing metabolism "adaptive thermogenesis" Eat a little less than you should slow down happens over a period of time. Eat a lot less n it happens faster. Start eating enough n it reverses fast enough.

Seems to me since you are bringing up the topic of body cells not mobilizing fat your quetion should be about what deficit level your body can handle. If you ate at 80%, 100%, or 120% of your BMR speed of fat mobilization becomes an issue only if your deficit is too high for you body to mobilize fat. ?????

Weight Loss 13 Day diet Jun 14 2012
09:39 (UTC)
2

A diet that you cannot do more than once in a year. Point 9. That's where I stopped reading. 

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 14 2012
08:31 (UTC)
29

As for the "bad style" you are probably right in a sense. I wondered if it sounded rude. But you are really not listening when you get an answer. If you are looking for somebody to tell you specifically that it is OK to eat less, you are not likely to get that on this forum. So I won't speculate on your motivation but I'll tell you that you have got answers above from some of the better, more read posters on this forum and that is the best you are going to get. 

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 14 2012
08:23 (UTC)
30

The CC forum has a specific requirement that nobody advocate eating low calorie or diet pills or not eating any specific food group. That is it is a requirement that people recomend eating a healthy diet. If you try otherwise, your post could / will get deleted. So this is a forum where the "urban legend" will thrive.

As for sound scientific basis. Lets look at it like this. There are diet pills, low carb diets, low fat diets, high protien diets etc etc etc. You will find scientific studies claiming they work (usually funded by vested interest parties) and studies saying they are not good for you. There will be no studies to say that eating a balanced diet without overeating is bad for you. The only number you will find for the minimum you should not go below is 1,200 / 1,500 for female / male issued by the American College of Sports Medicine. This we can assume has some scientific basis ? The CC calculators will recomend up to that minimum when you set your weight loss targets. But think for yourself, would the 1,200 be correct if you were a six footer and if you were four feet tall. So you put in some easy variables n get your BMR as a "rule of thumb" number. Nobody above has said this is the exact correct number. It is being continously said to be the good enough number to be on the safe side of not risking malnutrition.

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 14 2012
04:05 (UTC)
32

@lamasshu

It seems to me you are refusing to get the point as you are looking for a reason to justify eating at low calorie levels. 

The BMR number is not just a random number. 1,200 for women n 1,500 for men as defined by the American College of Sports Medicine sounds random to me but probably has some reasoning. Then you put in further varaibles n you come up with BMR. There are further variables that could be taken into account such as fat %. But BMR is considered good enough. "Rule of thumb" As a number of people tried to explain there are factors such as slowing of metabolism by eating at low levels n required nutrition for body functions. If you want to go into detail, required nutrition percentages change based on say if you have a body building target or maintainance etc. So unless you want to spend hours figuring out what to eat to ensure you get all required nutrition known and unknown to, you take the easy way. Use the "rule of thumb". Don't eat below your BMR.

Weight Loss Confidence low and need advice. Jun 13 2012
18:32 (UTC)
4

School means you are young so don't stress too much. Young skin repairs fast. Try using "strech mark cream" or moisturising creams should be a reasonable substitie.

Weight Loss Help Please?! Jun 13 2012
18:26 (UTC)
4

Give it another couple of weeks. Drink enough water. You should see a "catch up" extra weight loss week soon. I had this irritating way of having a daily deficit n not loosing weight for 6 days then on the 7th day. Whoosh n there goes the 1.5 lbs. 

Hang in there !

Weight Loss Eating below BMR: why not? Jun 13 2012
18:15 (UTC)
41

Your BMR is the number of calories you would need if you lay in bed whole day. When saying this the unsaid part is that this consumption should be from a balanced diet so this many calories would give your body the requored nutrients. Eating at your BMR getting all ypur calories from say sugar would not acheive the purpose of eating at your BMR.

Secann above has a valid point. If you can eat below your BMR n get ypur full nutrition requirement you should be fine BUT you cannot possibly be counting every single nutrient you require so room for not getting some required nutrients eating too low is not a risk worth taking. For example if you were counting n getting your required calcium but not getting your required vitamin D you would have calcium deficiency as your body needs Vitamin D to use the calcium. This is why you are also advised not to try to get all you nutrients taking supplements. Eat a balanced diet diet of healthy foods at your BMR n you leave far less room for error. It would be even better if you ate above your BMR n maintained a deficit. Malnutrition causes damage slowly from inside n can be too late by the time you realise it.

Weight Loss Help Please?! Jun 13 2012
17:43 (UTC)
6

Weight loss or gain during the first couple of weeks of changing diet n starting exercise does not seem to mach with the 3,500 calories = 1lbs rule. Something to do with water retention, bowel movement, type of change. So don't stress.

But do double check the calorie consumption calculations are accurate. You eat some calorie dense food like nut and think it was so little and don't count it your numbers go out dramatically. 100 gms peanuts = 600 calories.

Wouldn't it have been nicer if you had been one of those 3,500 calorie deficit 4lbs lost in first week type of people ? :-D

Weight Loss If not BMI then...what? Jun 13 2012
17:28 (UTC)
4

BMI is flawed to the extent that it does not take body composition into account. What that means is that if you had a high weight consisting of muscle your BMI would be flawed. Or if you were a very skinny person with fat it would be flawed. So unless you feel you have those problems, work on your BMI that is a good enough indicator. It's like the BMR number. Flawed on account of taking body composition and being an average of people of same stats. But good enough for our purpose.

Weight Loss Starting. 30 lbs by June Jun 13 2012
04:48 (UTC)
1
Brilliant ! Way to go !!!
Weight Loss stuck again.... May 28 2012
11:51 (UTC)
1
Looking good ! Happy you are happy. Stay healthy.
Advertisement
Advertisement