• Upgrades have been completed! Including conversations, 😁😎🏀⚾⚽ Emojis and more.. Read more



Minimum calories??

Lynn_

On A Mission!
S: 17st9lb C: 10st9lb G: 10st7lb BMI: 23.3 Loss: 7st0lb(39.68%)
#2
Depends how you are going to do it. Some vlcds are 450 cals, cambridge i think. Exante is 600 cals.

Personally, I survived on between 450 cals to 600 cals a day for best part of 6 months and im still alive and well to tell the tale, but i wouldnt recommend it as a healthy way to lose weight.
 
#3
Thanks for the reply!

I was just considering a kickstart to weight loss then to follow weight watchers, but I have so much to lose!!!

I am considering doing exante but not sure if it's harder to maintain weight after or not xxx
 
#5
Nicola85 said:
Thanks for the reply!

I was just considering a kickstart to weight loss then to follow weight watchers, but I have so much to lose!!!

I am considering doing exante but not sure if it's harder to maintain weight after or not xxx
Exante is a fabulous diet. It's no harder to maintain after a VLCD than any other diet.
 

Aline

Gold Member
C: 7st9lb BMI: 19.6
#6
Unless you make a VLCD (where the shakes already have most vitamins and nutrients you need), the minimum for someone who eats normal food are 1200 cals;)
 

gina_b

Les Mills Fitness Freak
S: 10st0lb C: 8st13lb G: 8st3lb BMI: 20.2 Loss: 1st1lb(10.71%)
#7
for me 1200 isnt enough, im very active so i stick to 1600 and since i upped my intake ive lost it!
 
S: 92kg C: 61kg G: 55kg BMI: 24.4 Loss: 31kg(33.68%)
#8
don't make the mistake to eat too little calories to starting your diet. You will lose a lot of weight as a result of the shock, but it won't be FAT that you will lose, but MUSCLES and water. This is NOT healthy and on a long term it can stop your metabolism and prevent you from losing any weight in the future. You would get fed up about eating nothing and start eating like before, ending up putting all the weight back on, and even more. And because you would have lost muscles but gained fat in the end, when eating normal again, you would be in an even worse situation.

Don't let this vicious cycle suck you in. Start a diet like Weight Watchers propoints and don't feel that you have to lose 5 or 6 lbs a week. 2 or less is good enough, in 1 year of losing 2 lbs a week, you would have lost 104 lbs, and you would be happy, healthy and your muscle mass won't be decreased much.
 

cf70

Full Member
S: 13st4.0lb C: 11st0lb G: 10st0lb BMI: 23.4 Loss: 2st4lb(17.2%)
#9
I want weight loss quickly, I have to admit Im more bothered how I look on the outside than how its affecting me inside.
I try not to eat over 1200 and I do 30mins of excercise everyday. It's easier to maintain weight than to lose weight (I find anyway) so I just want to get to my target weight quickly and I find for me the best way to do this is to severely restrict my cals.
 
S: 92kg C: 61kg G: 55kg BMI: 24.4 Loss: 31kg(33.68%)
#10
Now... I understand your desire to look well, but do you want to look like this:


or like this:


If you want to look like the first image, go on a fad diet with 200/600 cal per day. If you want to look like the second, go on a PROPER diet and do exercise.
 
#11
Thanks for everyones advice!!

Iv decided to do exante for 4 weeks then to go on to join weight watchers! I don't want to b too thin, just healthy, my goal is 13st at the mo so got 5 1/2 st to lose!

Thanks again every1 xxx
 

cf70

Full Member
S: 13st4.0lb C: 11st0lb G: 10st0lb BMI: 23.4 Loss: 2st4lb(17.2%)
#12
I understand what you are saying, however I find extremely underweight images just as repulsive as the overweight equivalent. The images aren;t really a fair comparison unless the women in them are the same height and weight.
I do see what you mean, losing weight quickly means it goes back on quickly and won't make you toned or healthy.
But it really is the scales that motivate me and if I lose weight slowly I lose interest and give up.

Just wish I hadn't let myself even get to this stage in the first place.
 
S: 92kg C: 61kg G: 55kg BMI: 24.4 Loss: 31kg(33.68%)
#13
I understand what you are saying, however I find extremely underweight images just as repulsive as the overweight equivalent. The images aren;t really a fair comparison unless the women in them are the same height and weight.
I do see what you mean, losing weight quickly means it goes back on quickly and won't make you toned or healthy.
But it really is the scales that motivate me and if I lose weight slowly I lose interest and give up.

Just wish I hadn't let myself even get to this stage in the first place.
I'm glad you understand what I mean, and I do understand your fear of giving up if you see slow results. However, the scales are not the best indicators how slim you are. Can you believe that the two women in the photos, of which one is a model and the other one is actress Claudia Schiffer by the way, are around the same weight and height? But one has got more muscle mass and less fat (Claudia), the other one has got a lot of fat and very little muscle mass. Yes, a lot of fat, even if she's so bony.

If you lose weight quickly, you compromise not only our health (which in reality should be your first concern to be honest!) but also your appearance. Losing weight quickly will result in losing muscles rather than fat, which means that you will be left with a lot of horribly flabby and flaccid skin, bat wings and etc.

You should mostly take measurements of yourself and see how much inches you lose as well as lbs. inches are more important than lbs! Ad you really don't want to finish your diet and be a size 8 with a whole load of flaccid loose skin, skeleton-like arms and concave cheeks, or you won't look beautiful, no matter what clothes size you are!

But then, if you'd rather do yourself bad, both in your appearance and in your internal health, then it's your choice. Happy dieting...
 


Similar threads



Top