How low is too low?

Beverly wrote:
"Ignoramus24200" wrote in
message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:33:46 +1100, Darkfalz

wrote:
"Jeri" wrote in message
...
Darkfalz wrote:
I'm on about 2000-3000 kj (500-750 kcal) per day at the moment.
Am I
going to have any problems with this? I have a lot of weight to
lose,
so this is something I'll have to be doing for months. There's
no
"empty" calories in what I am eating, it's pretty much all
stuff I
feel I need.
snip

Yes it's too low unless you're under direct medical supervision.
And by
that
I don't mean going to the doctor once a year. There's no way to
get all
the
nutrition your body needs unless you're on one of those
medically
supervised
liquid diets.

You should not be eating below your BMR (basal metabolic rate).
If you
don't
eat enough calories to sustain basic metabolic processes your
body will
start to break down muscle for the protein it needs among other
things.
Since it takes less energy to break down protein than fat your
body
will
choose to use muscle rather than your fat stores for energy it
needs.
So
not
only is it unhealthy and dangerous, it won't even get you where
you
want
to
be, which should be more lean muscle and less fat.

This is the problem though. If I am only eating healthy
(vegetables,
salads, bit of meat, fruit, cereal, maybe a bit of bread) then I
have to eat an insane amount of this crap to get up to even 2000
calories. But I don't want to eat anything too calorie dense... I
don't have time to prepare and eat 10 meals a day.

2,000 calories is two sandwiches in the morning, a pint sized
lunch,
and two sandwiches and a piece of meat in the evening, plus some
vegs. I used to eat this way when I was losing weight, so I know
how
much it is.

--
223/173.0/180

The actual calorie content could widely vary for people based on
their
choice of bread, sandwich filling, meat, vegetables, condiments, etc.
Just
using volume to gauge calories doesn't work unless you know the
calorie
content of the food. What the hell is a pint size lunch and how many
calories does it containg

Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote in message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example, depending on how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar quantity fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.

Jenn

In article .com, JMA
wrote:

Beverly wrote:
"Ignoramus24200" wrote in
message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:33:46 +1100, Darkfalz

wrote:
"Jeri" wrote in message
...
Darkfalz wrote:
I'm on about 2000-3000 kj (500-750 kcal) per day at the moment.
Am I
going to have any problems with this? I have a lot of weight to
lose,
so this is something I'll have to be doing for months. There's
no
"empty" calories in what I am eating, it's pretty much all
stuff I
feel I need.
snip

Yes it's too low unless you're under direct medical supervision.
And by
that
I don't mean going to the doctor once a year. There's no way to
get all
the
nutrition your body needs unless you're on one of those
medically
supervised
liquid diets.

You should not be eating below your BMR (basal metabolic rate).
If you
don't
eat enough calories to sustain basic metabolic processes your
body will
start to break down muscle for the protein it needs among other
things.
Since it takes less energy to break down protein than fat your
body
will
choose to use muscle rather than your fat stores for energy it
needs.
So
not
only is it unhealthy and dangerous, it won't even get you where
you
want
to
be, which should be more lean muscle and less fat.

This is the problem though. If I am only eating healthy
(vegetables,
salads, bit of meat, fruit, cereal, maybe a bit of bread) then I
have to eat an insane amount of this crap to get up to even 2000
calories. But I don't want to eat anything too calorie dense... I
don't have time to prepare and eat 10 meals a day.

2,000 calories is two sandwiches in the morning, a pint sized
lunch,
and two sandwiches and a piece of meat in the evening, plus some
vegs. I used to eat this way when I was losing weight, so I know
how
much it is.

--
223/173.0/180

The actual calorie content could widely vary for people based on
their
choice of bread, sandwich filling, meat, vegetables, condiments, etc.
Just
using volume to gauge calories doesn't work unless you know the
calorie
content of the food. What the hell is a pint size lunch and how many
calories does it containg

Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote in message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example, depending on how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar quantity fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.


Most of my refernces on Diet Sleuth and Fitday list breads at around
70-90 calories or more per slice. I don't know what Iggy's perception
of caloric value of bread is so must assume you may be making an
assumption too.

--
Diva
******
There is no substitute for the right food

Carol Frilegh wrote:
In article .com,
JMA
wrote:
Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote in
message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example, depending on
how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar quantity fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.


Most of my refernces on Diet Sleuth and Fitday list breads at around
70-90 calories or more per slice. I don't know what Iggy's perception
of caloric value of bread is so must assume you may be making an
assumption too.


I cited his exact words from his post. No assumptions there.

Jenn

Ignoramus24200 wrote:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:14:22 -0500, Carol Frilegh
wrote:
In article .com,
JMA
wrote:
Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote in
message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example, depending
on how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar quantity
fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.


Most of my refernces on Diet Sleuth and Fitday list breads at
around
70-90 calories or more per slice. I don't know what Iggy's
perception
of caloric value of bread is so must assume you may be making an
assumption too.


Rather than mistakenly foam at the mouth again, Jennifer Austin
should
check "bread sticks, plain", which is what I used to get the number I
got. There are different kinds of bread products with different
calorie density. Some are more dense than others.

And when it comes to dense, you must know best. Your words were what I
cited and nowhere did you say sticks or plain. Face it, you were wrong
- plain and simple. No way you can twist this and stay honest.

oh, and Igor Chudov, you need to respect people's privacy on the
usenet. For someone who claims to be so all-knowing of usenet
convention, your manners are sorely lacking. It might come back to
bite you in the ass if you aren't careful.

Jenn

"Ignoramus24200" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:14:22 -0500, Carol Frilegh
wrote:
In article .com, JMA
wrote:

Beverly wrote:
"Ignoramus24200" wrote in
message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:33:46 +1100, Darkfalz

wrote:
"Jeri" wrote in message
...
Darkfalz wrote:
I'm on about 2000-3000 kj (500-750 kcal) per day at the moment.
Am I
going to have any problems with this? I have a lot of weight to
lose,
so this is something I'll have to be doing for months. There's
no
"empty" calories in what I am eating, it's pretty much all
stuff I
feel I need.
snip

Yes it's too low unless you're under direct medical supervision.
And by
that
I don't mean going to the doctor once a year. There's no way to
get all
the
nutrition your body needs unless you're on one of those
medically
supervised
liquid diets.

You should not be eating below your BMR (basal metabolic rate).
If you
don't
eat enough calories to sustain basic metabolic processes your
body will
start to break down muscle for the protein it needs among other
things.
Since it takes less energy to break down protein than fat your
body
will
choose to use muscle rather than your fat stores for energy it
needs.
So
not
only is it unhealthy and dangerous, it won't even get you where
you
want
to
be, which should be more lean muscle and less fat.

This is the problem though. If I am only eating healthy
(vegetables,
salads, bit of meat, fruit, cereal, maybe a bit of bread) then I
have to eat an insane amount of this crap to get up to even 2000
calories. But I don't want to eat anything too calorie dense... I
don't have time to prepare and eat 10 meals a day.

2,000 calories is two sandwiches in the morning, a pint sized
lunch,
and two sandwiches and a piece of meat in the evening, plus some
vegs. I used to eat this way when I was losing weight, so I know
how
much it is.


The actual calorie content could widely vary for people based on
their
choice of bread, sandwich filling, meat, vegetables, condiments, etc.
Just
using volume to gauge calories doesn't work unless you know the
calorie
content of the food. What the hell is a pint size lunch and how many
calories does it containg

Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote in message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example, depending on how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar quantity fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.


Most of my refernces on Diet Sleuth and Fitday list breads at around
70-90 calories or more per slice. I don't know what Iggy's perception
of caloric value of bread is so must assume you may be making an
assumption too.


Rather than mistakenly foam at the mouth again, Jennifer Austin should
check "bread sticks, plain", which is what I used to get the number I
got. There are different kinds of bread products with different
calorie density. Some are more dense than others.

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts-001-02s03rl.html

Now, is there someone here who is telling us to use fat free milk to
get Vitamin D? ;-)

--
223/173.0/180

http://www.dairyland-ca.com/faq.htm

In article .com, JMA
wrote:

Carol Frilegh wrote:
In article .com,
JMA
wrote:
Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote in
message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example, depending on
how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar quantity fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.


Most of my refernces on Diet Sleuth and Fitday list breads at around
70-90 calories or more per slice. I don't know what Iggy's perception
of caloric value of bread is so must assume you may be making an
assumption too.


I cited his exact words from his post. No assumptions there.

Jenn

I see 24 calroies for a single breadstick and 3 single slices of
regular bread would be max 240.

And one cheat would make the hair splitting pretty irrelvant :-)

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man For The Job Is A Woman

In article .com, JMA
wrote:

Carol Frilegh wrote:
In article .com,
JMA
wrote:
Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote in
message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example, depending on
how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar quantity fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.


Most of my refernces on Diet Sleuth and Fitday list breads at around
70-90 calories or more per slice. I don't know what Iggy's perception
of caloric value of bread is so must assume you may be making an
assumption too.


I cited his exact words from his post. No assumptions there.

Jenn

I see 24 calroies for a single breadstick and 3 single slices of
regular bread would be max 240.

And one cheat would make the hair splitting pretty irrelvant :-)

--
Diva
*****
The Best Man For The Job Is A Woman

Ignoramus24200 wrote:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:53:22 -0500, Carol Frilegh
wrote:
In article .com,
JMA
wrote:

Carol Frilegh wrote:
In article
.com,
JMA
wrote:
Don't forget that in his world 3 oz. of bread is 351 calories:

"Ignoramus17472" wrote
in
message

...
It also depends on the cut. Tenderloin, for example,
depending on
how
fat is trimmed, can be 185 calories per 3 oz. Similar
quantity fo
bread is 351 calories.
Not the most reliable source of information.


Most of my refernces on Diet Sleuth and Fitday list breads at
around
70-90 calories or more per slice. I don't know what Iggy's
perception
of caloric value of bread is so must assume you may be making an
assumption too.


I cited his exact words from his post. No assumptions there.

Jenn

I see 24 calroies for a single breadstick and 3 single slices of
regular bread would be max 240.

And one cheat would make the hair splitting pretty irrelvant :-)


Carol, try looking up "bread sticks, plain" in www.nutritiondata.com.
That's what I used in my original post on the subject.

--
223/173.0/180

Yes, that's your story NOW. Not what you said in your original post
though. It's quite pathetic of you to backpedal like this - but most
people don't expect anything else from you these days.

Jenn

"Darkfalz" wrote in message ...
"Chris Braun" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:33:46 +1100, "Darkfalz"
wrote:

This is the problem though. If I am only eating healthy (vegetables,
salads,
bit of meat, fruit, cereal, maybe a bit of bread) then I have to eat an
insane amount of this crap to get up to even 2000 calories. But I don't
want
to eat anything too calorie dense... I don't have time to prepare and eat
10
meals a day.

Calorie density isn't a bad thing in and of itself, and will help you
fill up on healthy calories. There are healthy foods that are quite
calorie dense, for example, nuts. They are very good for you, and
have roughly 170 calories per ounce. Also, try adding more meat and
fish to your diet. You shouldn't have trouble eating healthy food and
getting sufficient calories.

I'm aiming to have a proper piece of fish every week (rather than just
canned tuna), maybe twice a week.

Anyway, I'm more than happy to eat things like nuts more meat etc once the
weight is gone. But eating like that at the moment just doesn't seem like a
good idea.

Why not? What's important is to consumer fewer calories than you
burn, and to eat foods that provide proper nutrition and satiety.
You've said you have trouble getting sufficient calories if you eat
healthy foods. These are healthy foods that will help you do that. I
lost 126 lbs. eating things like that pretty regularly.


Chris
262/136/ (135-145)

136 lbs? How tall are you?

I'm just under 5'6". I'm also female. I believe you are male, which
makes a difference.

If I weighed 136 lbs I'd look like a concentration camp survivor!

Quite possible. I don't. If you like, see pictures:

http://www.mill-creek-systems.com/ch..._and_after.htm

Chris
262/136/ (135-145)

"Darkfalz" wrote in message
...
You should not be eating below your BMR (basal metabolic rate). If you
don't
eat enough calories to sustain basic metabolic processes your body will
start to break down muscle for the protein it needs among other things.
Since it takes less energy to break down protein than fat your body will
choose to use muscle rather than your fat stores for energy it needs. So
not
only is it unhealthy and dangerous, it won't even get you where you want
to
be, which should be more lean muscle and less fat.

By the way, I simply don't believe this.

If this was the case, why does gastric bypass surgery work (more or less
indefinitely) and not kill people instead?

Recommended postop gastric bypass diets run about 1000-1500 calories/day
(e.g., following the advise everyone else is giving you, which is to not go
below your BMR). Not 500-700. Even so, gastric bypass sugery does entail a
significant risk for nutritional deficiencies. I've also read that gastric
bypass (alone) works well at reducing 60-70% of excess weight--typically
taking the patient from "morbidly obese" to "garden variety overweight" and
then stabilizing.