Is there a risk of too few calories?

#1

I’ve just finished week two of keto and it is going well. The scale is going in the right direction and I am not craving carbs. I’m not particularity hungry either(I used to have insatiable cravings). I’m getting good at getting 70%Fat, 25%protein, and <5%carbs.

I’m just a little concerned that my calorie count at the end of the day is pretty low @ 1100-1450cal/day(using carb manager).

My energy level is fantastic with no highs/lows and have no problem excising which is usually 1.5 hours of tennis(cardio tennis w/coach).

is there any risk for eating so few calories?

Thanks everyone!

(Carl Keller) #2

Listen to your body. Right now it’s telling you that it feels great. So why change anything? In Keto we don’t count calories, We eat to satiety and we keep our carbs low.

Welcome to the forum. :wink:

#3

Your appetite will move around a bit but it’s pretty normal to see it reduce for a while once you begin to adapt. If you have a lot of body fat to spare then you have plenty of onboard fuel to burn. As long as you are not deliberately calorie restricting or eating very little for long periods of time your body will give you the clues.

(Omar) #4

I do not believe in irreversible metabolic slow down

People doing extended fasting for thousands of years with very little intake of calories as doctor Fung said.

What happened with the “big looser” participants is something very extreme in it’s intensity and duration and does not happen in ordinary people.

Even then I am not sure that what happened with the big losers has scientifically concluded that it is irreversible damage. I only heard Dr Phinney opinion but did not see a scientific report to prove that the damage is irreversible.

#5

I think everything they did on The Biggest Loser was wrong. They took already metabolically challenged or damaged people & basically compounded their issues with unsustainable/unhealthy diets & unsustainable/unhealthy levels of exercise. I hope you’re right & that they can recover but I have my doubts.

(Robert C) #6

If your calorie count is a bit low some days - I think you just want to ensure your insulin is low a lot of the time so your body can pull the extra energy it needs from your fat stores.

OMAD or 16:8 IF or something like that is probably keep your insulin low enough for longer periods (along with eating keto foods).

But, if you are having 3 meals and 1 or 2 snacks to get 1450 calories - keeping insulin a little higher more of the day - your body won’t want to go for the fat stores as much (insulin being “the fat storage hormone”).

Then, you might get metabolic slowdown - the body thinks “I’m getting fewer calories from food and I can’t get it from my body fat - I guess I’ll slow down”.

I am not a doctor - this is just my understanding up to this time.

(Jane) #7

Why wouldn’t they be able to recover if they went full keto? Lots of folks here (me included) wrecked their metabolism with yo-yo dieting, severe calorie restriction, etc and keto has gone a long way to undo the damage.

I can’t say “cured” because I don’t think I will ever be able to eat like my skinny friends or how I did before I got fat. But I am happy with keto so it doesn’t matter. And I have not gained my weight back.

#8

I suppose if they went keto they might recover to some degree depending on how damaged they were going in but the damage to their metabolisms was by all accounts beyond what you’d see in a regular yo yo dieter. Some metabolic slow down is inevitable from low calorie dieting but how much we’re able to recover would depend on how low, how long & what state we’re in generally. As I understand it methods other than diet & exercise (drugs or “supplements” ) were also encouraged - whether or not that played a role in the apparently over-the-top metabolic slowdown is another question.

(Running from stupidity) #9

It’s also not anything to do with fasting, it’s all about calorie restriction, which is verbotten.

#10

Hi Chris,

I’m a firm believer in CICO, so my advice may be a little different to most here.

Firstly, you are doing well as you are. I would think carefully about why, what and how you change.
Don’t be afraid of calorie counting. Try upping it for 2 weeks (and change nothing else), and see what happens. Next, try reducing it to below where you are currently, and see what happens. Bare in mind, you should be eating until you are full, or better still, just before you are full (as it takes around 20 mins for your brain to register that you’re full).

There are people who blindly believe that if you eat until you’re full, you will have eaten exactly the right amount of food to lose weight. They also believe that if you eat until you’re full, you will have eaten exactly the right amount of food to maintain weight. I’m not sure how that works if calories don’t matter!

Back to the question. Metabolic slow down is a real phenomenon (keto or non keto). If you don’t want it to slow down, you should be careful. However, metabolic slow down, is something that should concern the minority of people wanting to lose weight, not the majority.

The first paragraph is the most important here. Try it yourself and see what happens with YOUR BODY when you alter your calorific intake.

(Janelle) #11

I agree with you. My obesity doc follows Dr. Westman’s protocol, which is generally a no counting, eat healthy fatty foods to satiety, don’t supplement fat and it’ll all work out. He doesn’t even worry much about macros. I just don’t buy it. A lot of us got to where we are by over or under doing it in some way. I’ve started tracking again and seeing some more success this week. Half a pound here and there is better than nothing for several weeks. I’m going to track and continue grumbling every time someone on here gleefully proclaims they don’t track and the weight just falls off them.

(squirrel-kissing paper tamer) #12

Wait. I don’t track calories daily and I’m losing. If I had a problem, I’d look into it and track, but why if I don’t need to?

(Janelle) #13

Because it works for you doesn’t mean it works for everyone. I would love to have a variety of foods and never track. It’s working better for me when I do.

(squirrel-kissing paper tamer) #14

Right, I’m not telling people not to track or to do it like me. I’m just saying, in my experience, I don’t track calories (unless I had a problem then I would look at everything closely) but I believe everyone is different and some people DO lose without tracking, and others do better when they do.

#15

Didn’t want to start a war!

Some people will DEFINATELY lose weight without tracking calories. But that’s not the same as ‘calories don’t count’. Which is the message that some people hear.

(Robert C) #16

On the “to track or not to track” topic, I’d like to throw in my $0.02.

If you are really eating whole foods (fatty meat, vegetables with butter, eggs and bacon breakfasts etc.) then I think it is very easy to hit satiation and know it (if your diet history is not too messed up).

But, if you are eating keto fat bombs, a couple of butter coffees in the morning, scoops of peanut butter as a snack, any “keto” snack bars, fat head pizzas - anything that is hyper-palatable and/or pre-made - then I would monitor calories because combinations of these could easily put enough into you that you would likely not start burning stored fat (if weight loss is your goal).

(Omar) #17

Calories restriction vs IF impact is on insulin secretion and therefore weight loss.

What happened with me few months back when I first got into ketosis and fat adopted is I felt so un-hungry like never before .

So I ended up IF/calories restriction at the same time.

I got panicked from so much energy burst while basically not eating. It was so hard to be able to eat my designeated calories again to the point i quit qeto for few days.

So I searched a lot and my conclusion is an irreversible metabolic slow down is a myth.

Conclusion : eat whatever diet you want and your metabolism might slow down but it will come back if you reset whatever you did.

I am only talking about my observations on myself

#18

Thanks everyone for their response.

I don’t watch TV so I’m not familiar with what happened to the Biggest Looser.

I guess I didn’t know it existed, but yes, I am a little concerned with a slowdown. However, what I’m doing seems to be working.

Again- thanks for the words and encouragement!

(Carl Keller) #19

Dr. Jung talks about what happened to the Biggest Losers in this video. It’s quite interesting. He does show some science as to why they were doomed to fail. In short, they lowered their metabolism as it’s the body’s response to burning massive amounts of energy and fat. Once they stopped the extreme calorie burning, their metabolism stayed at a lower level than before they started. Therefore it was easier to gain weight on fewer calories.

(bulkbiker) #20

Well that will completely depend on if you have weight to lose or not surely?
Attuning your appetite to your body is exactly how you maintain (if required) or lose (if required) weight… you let the body decide. If of course your body has decided that it doesn’t like the weight you want to be then you may find it harder and need to rely on alternative therapies.
Thats’ what happened to me I had a lot of weight to lose… ate to satiety and lost just over 100 pounds. Now I want to lose a bit more but my body doesn’t want to so I’ve been stuck here for about 2 years. I’m now going to try some extra fasting regimes to see if I can readjust my body’s weight level.