Tuesday, June 1, 2021

Ultra low calorie diets halt weight loss?

I just read a puzzling article in "Eat This Not That" about how too-low calorie diets halt metabolism and weight loss. When dieters over-restrict calories it sends a message to the body to conserve fat. The conclusion is that you should only lose weight at a rate of 1-2 pounds a week. It didn't specify what too few calories was. It's probably somewhere between an 800 calorie diet and the "My 600-lb Life" gastric bypass diet of 1,200 calories. 

If we should only lose 1- 2lbs a week, why does a bariatric surgeon and expert on obesity, expect obese patients to lose 30 or more in a month before gastric bypass? Why does the "My 600-lb Life" doc put bariatric surgery patients on an 1,200 calorie diet? And why do Dr. Now's methods work? The issue seems to be how overweight someone is. 

My early experience with weight loss proves the "My 600-lb Life" bariatric surgeon correct. But my later experience affirms "Eat This Not That." Part of how I lost 100 pounds a few years ago was with a 1,200 calorie diet (or actually more like an 800 calorie diet). Now I'm trying to lose weight again, but I'm not that overweight. I'm using the same method and weight loss is slower, barely one pound a week. Am I undereating and screwing up my metabolism?

Dr. Now pushes gastric bypass patients to lose weight fast, because their obesity is out of control. And it's very doable. When I lost 100 pounds, the first 75 pounds came off easily and quickly. But weight loss stalled as I neared goal weight. Why did the 1,200 calorie diet work when I was obese, but not just overweight? 

 If "Eat This Not That" is correct, my body is just taking care of itself. My metabolism is slowing and retaining fat because I have been restricting calories for too long. Maybe it's time to move to a maintenance diet? That should probably be the complete 1,200 or maybe even 1,500 calories instead of the 800 calorie diet I've been following. Maybe how I lost 100 pounds should not be how I attempt to lose 20?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive