New attempt at weight loss, trying a very low calorie (VLC) diet.

[kindoflazy]

I'm new to Fitbit and hoping to have success with a very low calorie (VLC) diet in conjuction with increased exercise.  I am logging food on Fitbit.com, counting steps with a Versa, and checking weight daily with an Aria.  My plan is to keep caloric intake consistently less than 800 kcal/d while getting at least 10k steps per day.

I am aware that studies don't show better long-term results with VLC diets compared with conventional low calorie diets and such diets can variably reduce resting metabolic rate, thus impacting weight loss success in the long run.  But I'm not at all patient, and I think seeing quicker results is something I need to stay motivated.

I am male and started the program on December 9th with a weight of 258.6 lbs, height 5'11" (BMI 36.1).  I think this is probably the heaviest I have ever been.  My Aria tells me that my starting body fat percentage was 35%, though I understand that is not very accurate.  For what it's worth, I am not muscular or athletic.

I'll journal my progress in this thread and would love to hear from others.  Has anyone here had more than a year or two of sustained weight loss after starting out with a VLC diet?

[DMFan]

I'm not able to address your question of experience if that's all you're looking for so feel free to stop reading here.  

Gosh, 800 Calories for a male could lead to some pretty detrimental results and may not have the immediate effects that you were hoping for as the body will fight to preserve what it can. 

If I were you, I'd look into keto. This tends to give people immediate results, due to the quick loss of water weight in the beginning, but then a lower but steady rate of loss after the first couple weeks. There would also be a lot less hunger and would likely be more sustainable than eating only 800 Calories. 

Good luck whichever path you take!

[kindoflazy]

Thanks for your reply, DMFan.  I appreciate any comments, including ones which state that I am going about this the wrong way.

I'm on day 3 of this diet and already note that my appetite is much less than it was before the diet.  I have read that low appetite is expected with a VLC diet.  The other change I've noticed is that my hands are freezing, which I also understand is expected with very low caloric intake.

My wife has been telling me for years to drink more water, and I'm finally giving it a try.  It helps a lot more than I thought it would.

"800 Calories for a male could lead to some pretty detrimental results..."

I understand that there are risks involved.  But I'm thinking that if this doesn't lead to success, I will probably pursue bariatric surgery, which would also put me on a less than 800 calorie diet, albeit with a smaller stomach and more medical supervision.

[Esya]

@kindoflazyI think it is great that you try another option before considering surgery. However, 800 calories is so low, that I would advice seeing a doctor while you do this. As you pointed out, when doing the surgery you would also be on a very low calorie intake after that, but you would be supervised by doctors. I don't have enough expertise to inform you properly, but don't take unnecessary risks.

Please be aware that you won't be done with just a diet. You will have to make changes for the rest of your life and while this diet might be the approach for the short run, you will also have to look ahead and plan for the long run at some point. Dietitians should be able to help with that. We are a creature of habbit and food can be our addiction, so try to set yourself up for success and get all the help that you can get.

[kindoflazy]

Hi Esya,

Thank you for your kind reply!  I am definitely going to establish care with a doctor to supervise me during this diet, and I realize that even if this works in the short run, it is going to be very difficult to transition from this to something that is sustainable.

I definitely see food as an addiction in my case.  I am not saying it is that way for everyone or even a lot of people, but it is that way for me.

All best,

KoL

[kindoflazy]

I'm only on day 4 of this diet, but so far it hasn't been nearly as bad as I thought it would be.  My appetite is much lower than it was before the diet, so the food seems to be plenty.  For example, below is 400 calories of food which I brought with me to work to cover breakfast, lunch, and snacks for today.  It's 4oz of chicken breast, 6 oz broccoli, 3 boiled eggs.  

 

Between that and water, I'm not hungry.  When I get home in the evening, I still have up to 400 calories left to eat.  My doctor told me to take a multivitamin twice daily and regularly scheduled blood tests.

I'm getting 3000 steps on the treadmill when I wake up, another 2000 at work, then at least 5000 more in the evening.

As of this morning, my weight is down from 258.6 (December 7) to 251.0 .  BMI went from 36.1 to 35.0.  I realize that it's mostly water I've lost and a long way to go, but I am encouraged by the early returns and am going to try to stay the course.

[writergal28]

800 calories?  Wow, that's really low.  How long do you plan to do this?  I'd do 5:2 intermittent fasting instead.  Five days of regular eating and two fasting (you'd still be eating, just much smaller portions).  

[kindoflazy]

I was planning to try to do this until I lose about 30-40 lbs.

[kindoflazy]

Today is day 7.  Here are 6 days of data collected so far:

It's easy to see that the first 6-7 lbs were water/glycogen.  Now I'm losing much slower.

I'm guessing that the Fitbit is overestimating my "Cals Out", but I'm hoping to lose at least 2-3 lbs per week that I continue this diet.  So far it hasn't been difficult to restrict my diet to less than 800 cals/day.

My doctor has me taking vitamins twice daily as well as ursodiol (prescription) twice daily to prevent gallstones.  Please note that I am not giving medical advice here.  I recommend that anyone considering a VLC diet consult with their own health care professional.

[bikerhiker]

In my experience, Fitbit has been accurate in estimating my cals out  "ONLY" if you have a healthy and well functioning body.  Fitbit can only estimate cals out based on certain parameters; and those parameters mean that our human body is operating at top efficiencies.  Nevertheless, the majority of people do not have their bodies operate at top efficiencies and therefore Fitbit app can not accurately estimate with people who have bodies that need healing.  The body is a reflection of the state of mind the person is in.  If the body holds a lot of weight; that usually translates to the mind holding on to a certain amount of lack, fear and joy.  If you heal the mind through modern therapies like EFT, hypnosis and counselling, this can go a LONG way in permanently reducing one's body fat and weight.  That's what I did.

VLC has a very low success rate namely because you can not sustain at this low carbohydrate rate for very long due to vitamins, minerals and nutrients deficient.  Yes, you can somewhat supplement that via pills, but these pills are supplement.  They are called supplements, because they expect you to get some of that naturally from your diet.  They are NOT a replacement to naturally occurring vitamins, minerals and nutrients which you can only get from nature -- plant or animal based.  The danger with VLC is with the deficiencies of these minerals and nutrients and what will they do to your internal organs.  You also have to take in bile acid to help with your digestion to prevent gallstones.  

All I'm saying is that; current medical science is too focused on resolving the physical symptoms as the means to resolve all ailments.  Nevertheless, the physical body is only the end point of a problem that stemmed from the mind.  Even if you reduced your weight to a manageable level, the cause of the weight gain is still not resolved.  Weight loss needs a permanent guaranteed solution, because if this doesn't work, then if you damaged your internal organs in the quest to further your weight loss, there is nothing in medical science to repair your organs to fully functioning state like brand new. 

[DMFan]

---

@bikerhiker wrote:

VLC has a very low success rate namely because you can not sustain at this low carbohydrate rate for very long due to vitamins, minerals and nutrients deficient. 

---

I believe OP is using VLC as very low calorie, not carbohydrate. I would also like to point out that a low carbohydrate diet is complete and not deficient in any nutrients. I am unsure what nutrients you believe sugary and starchy foods have that a wide range of  proteins and low starch veggies are missing. 

If you had meant deficiencies due to low calorie intake, then yes. 

[kindoflazy]

"I believe OP is using VLC as very low calorie, not carbohydrate."

That's right, I'm using VLC as an abbreviation for very low calorie.  It just so happens that I am also eating very little carb as well.

"You also have to take in bile acid to help with your digestion to prevent gallstones."

I mentioned that my doctor is prescribing that for me.

"Nevertheless, the physical body is only the end point of a problem that stemmed from the mind."

I agree with that, at least somewhat.  In my case, I definitely see food, or at least certain kinds of foods, as an addiction.  When I get to my weight goal, I will think of it as being "in recovery".  And I know that I use certain types of foods to quell anxiety, low mood, stress, etc.  I am definitely trying to address the root of those simultaneously.

"The danger with VLC is with the deficiencies of these minerals and nutrients and what will they do to your internal organs."

Do you have any references for this?  I've been looking but haven't been able to come up with very much.

[bikerhiker]

---

@DMFan wrote:

---

@bikerhiker wrote:

VLC has a very low success rate namely because you can not sustain at this low carbohydrate rate for very long due to vitamins, minerals and nutrients deficient. 

---

I believe OP is using VLC as very low calorie, not carbohydrate. I would also like to point out that a low carbohydrate diet is complete and not deficient in any nutrients. I am unsure what nutrients you believe sugary and starchy foods have that a wide range of  proteins and low starch veggies are missing. 

If you had meant deficiencies due to low calorie intake, then yes. 

---

---

@DMFan wrote:

---

@bikerhiker wrote:

VLC has a very low success rate namely because you can not sustain at this low carbohydrate rate for very long due to vitamins, minerals and nutrients deficient. 

---

I believe OP is using VLC as very low calorie, not carbohydrate. I would also like to point out that a low carbohydrate diet is complete and not deficient in any nutrients. I am unsure what nutrients you believe sugary and starchy foods have that a wide range of  proteins and low starch veggies are missing. 

If you had meant deficiencies due to low calorie intake, then yes. 

---

Pot

---

@DMFan wrote:

---

@bikerhiker wrote:

VLC has a very low success rate namely because you can not sustain at this low carbohydrate rate for very long due to vitamins, minerals and nutrients deficient. 

---

I believe OP is using VLC as very low calorie, not carbohydrate. I would also like to point out that a low carbohydrate diet is complete and not deficient in any nutrients. I am unsure what nutrients you believe sugary and starchy foods have that a wide range of  proteins and low starch veggies are missing. 

If you had meant deficiencies due to low calorie intake, then yes. 

---

Potassium.  A person requires 4700mg of Potassium / per day and North Americans with a normal diet is deficient in that.  In fact, when I was in the low caloric diet a few years ago, I went into E.R basically with Potassium deficiency and low carbs; which caused muscle cramping in a catatonic state (can't move any limbs, can not even breath like a big steel anchor just crushed your lungs and complete black out).  It happened to me three times in a row despite the assurances from medical professionals which include my GP saying that low caloric diet is safe and without nutrients deficient.  I was trying to break the 142lbs plateau and reduce my BFS below 5 (Blood Fasting Sugar).  Like the OP, I was desperate and read all kinds of books and that was how I got into medical trouble.  I even ran a 10k in 35min, do ultramarathon and despite all that, the weight just wouldn't budge below 142lbs. Today, I broke the 142lb barrier not by extreme dieting, but by working my own trauma and problems from childhood that actually kept the weight on.  I mean, I went on a cruise and eat bread, ice cream, and anything people say are enemies of the belly.  I even attended a conference this year with food that are generally not even the healthy kind.  Guess what, look at my Trend weight and see those things when taken in moderation will not raise body weight.  Only when I resolved my childhood trauma those through psychotherapy and hypnotherapy when the weight just naturally came off.  It's still coming off today with a normal balanced diet not even low in carbs or calories.   The problem with modern food is that, they too are nutrient deficient, especially the soil that they were cultivated on.  The same vegetables you eat today, unless it is farmed organically with the best soil, have MUCH LESS nutrients and minerals, so you ended up having to eat more to make up the nutritional daily requirements.  If the soil doesn't have much in nutrients to begin with, how do you expect the things that grow on them have more?!?

Secondly, our brain functions can only be sustained by carbohydrates!  I know the internet is full of information saying that it is not true, that the brain can be fueled by fat.  In my experience, this is "bull".  If you want to find out how far your brain can sustain you with only fat; be my guess.  Sometimes we find out the hard way only when we visit E.R and the doctor there told you everything you believed in is all a bunch of B.S.  This was my experience.  Now, I am not stopping anyone from being in a VLC; but from my experience that 3 visits to E.R is more than enough.

[Glenda · Accepted solution]

Kindoflazy,  I went on a 500 calorie diet for a month or so, I can't remember exactly how long.  But I used  protein meal drinks which were of course full of vitamins and minerals.  I stayed on the diet until I was at my perfect weight.  You should know that your metabolism will slow and you must not MUST NOT jump back to a "normal" amount of calories all at once or you will gain all the weight back.  You have to add 200 calories for several days and make sure you don't gain, then add 200 more for several days etc.  Until you get up to a normal amount.     On the TV shows 600 pound life that doctor puts every one on 1,200 calories.  But those are big people.  I would gain weight with that amount as I am small.   Protein is more satisfying than eating just carbs .  You would do well to eat vegetables and fruit with the lowest number of carbs and calories if you go that way.   Baked chicken, fish, cantaloupe strawberries etc  avoid sugar and flour like the plague.  Best wishes.   Glenda

[kindoflazy]

---

@bikerhiker wrote:

---

I was trying to break the 142lbs plateau and reduce my BFS below 5 (Blood Fasting Sugar).  Like the OP, I was desperate and read all kinds of books and that was how I got into medical trouble.  I even ran a 10k in 35min, do ultramarathon and despite all that, the weight just wouldn't budge below 142lbs. Today, I broke the 142lb barrier not by extreme dieting, but by working my own trauma and problems from childhood that actually kept the weight on. 

I'm thinking your situation is very different than mine. What is your BMI at 142 lbs? I would not even consider a VLC diet without a starting BMI > 30 and a high body fat percentage.

[kindoflazy]

---

@Glenda wrote:

Kindoflazy,  I went on a 500 calorie diet for a month or so, I can't remember exactly how long.  But I used  protein meal drinks which were of course full of vitamins and minerals.  I stayed on the diet until I was at my perfect weight.  You should know that your metabolism will slow and you must not MUST NOT jump back to a "normal" amount of calories all at once or you will gain all the weight back.  You have to add 200 calories for several days and make sure you don't gain, then add 200 more for several days etc.  Until you get up to a normal amount.     On the TV shows 600 pound life that doctor puts every one on 1,200 calories.  But those are big people.  I would gain weight with that amount as I am small.   Protein is more satisfying than eating just carbs .  You would do well to eat vegetables and fruit with the lowest number of carbs and calories if you go that way.   Baked chicken, fish, cantaloupe strawberries etc  avoid sugar and flour like the plague.  Best wishes.   Glenda

---

Hi Glenda, thanks so much.  It's really helpful to hear from someone who had success with a VLCD.  I know that my resting metabolism will slow as a result of this process, and I will make sure to titrate my caloric intake cautiously and while monitoring my weight as you have described!

[bikerhiker]

---

@kindoflazy wrote:

---

@bikerhiker wrote:

---

I was trying to break the 142lbs plateau and reduce my BFS below 5 (Blood Fasting Sugar).  Like the OP, I was desperate and read all kinds of books and that was how I got into medical trouble.  I even ran a 10k in 35min, do ultramarathon and despite all that, the weight just wouldn't budge below 142lbs. Today, I broke the 142lb barrier not by extreme dieting, but by working my own trauma and problems from childhood that actually kept the weight on. 

I'm thinking your situation is very different than mine. What is your BMI at 142 lbs? I would not even consider a VLC diet without a starting BMI > 30 and a high body fat percentage.

---

My BMI @ 142lbs was lower than 30 and my body fat percentage was about 21.9%.  If you look at most marathon runners in general, they are very thin with some as thin as sticks.  I wasn't.  Even now when I run to catch the bus, I really noticed a big difference in my launching speed compared to in the past with now being @ 133lb weight!  I was MORE nimble and I felt so much lighter.  So there is a difference carrying an excess of 10 to 20lbs over your competition especially up the hills and on the flat.  That weight stays with you for the duration of the run.  So basically, when we run that long, we create a huge caloric deficit and athletes would sometimes consume protein and little carbs enough to encourage the body to burn mainly body fat and maintain a very very low thin weight profile.  So in a way, it's very similar to your situation, except you are creating the caloric deficit through very low calories.  Some ultramarathon runners consume nothing but protein shakes and of little carbs to give them the edge.  Some manage to do it without I guess causing any harm to their bodies.  I simply, at that time, just couldn't.  Of course, at that time, it was common to say that the reason I couldn't do it was, to them, all my fault, because the people who did then said it worked for them so it should work for me.  And that it didn't work for me and having me in E.R got absolutely zero sympathy from the people who did get it to work and that it was my fault because I just didn't do this or that right.  

Having said that, I am achieving the weight loss now without doing extreme sports and starving myself either.  I still swim 3x a week for 30min, do 10,000 steps but all these are very low intensity with 2 HIIT intervals.  Nothing compared to 50km / day running.  So it was an interesting revelation to me that I solved my pre-diabetes issues and weight issues through healing the mind.  Other than that, I simply can't explain why I am achieving great weight loss while enjoying moderate amounts of carbs that are labelled EVIL.  Even my GP, after seeing my blood work, had no explanation other than to say continue what I'm doing.

[Glenda]

Kindoflazy,  I don't know your age or weight but I had another thought I think you should consider.  I didn't have much weight to lose in the 80s when I did that and I was about 40 something.  My husband lost 100 pounds over the period of a year when he was 65 and he had no excess skin.  I have a friend who had weight loss surgery and lost weight fast, older than that, (70 something) and she had lots of loose excess skin..  Depending on how much you need to lose etc.  it might be better not to lose too fast.  Skin removal is expensive and very painful I hear.    On a slightly different subject.....On the 5 - 2 diet ,since everyone eats 500 or 600 calories, 2 non-consecutive days a week and eat intelligently the other days,  their metabolism doesn't drop as it does if you eat low calorie every day.   Just something to consider. 

[kindoflazy]

---

@Glenda wrote:

Kindoflazy,  I don't know your age or weight but I had another thought I think you should consider.  I didn't have much weight to lose in the 80s when I did that and I was about 40 something.  My husband lost 100 pounds over the period of a year when he was 65 and he had no excess skin.  I have a friend who had weight loss surgery and lost weight fast, older than that, (70 something) and she had lots of loose excess skin..  Depending on how much you need to lose etc.  it might be better not to lose too fast.  Skin removal is expensive and very painful I hear.    On a slightly different subject.....On the 5 - 2 diet ,since everyone eats 500 or 600 calories, 2 non-consecutive days a week and eat intelligently the other days,  their metabolism doesn't drop as it does if you eat low calorie every day.   Just something to consider. 

---

Hi Glenda, I hadn’t considered the loose skin issue at all.  Thanks for bringing that up.  So loosing weight slower means less loose skin to deal with?

I am 44 years old, 5’11”.  Ultimately I’d like to get to 180 lbs, which would be an 80 lb weight loss, but I don’t plan to lose all the weight via VLCD. 

[Glenda]

Kindoflazy,  Here on "The Learning channel" TV they have shows sometimes about people who lost lots of weight and had LOTS of horrible excess skin.  It is not life threatening like all the excess fat, but would be extremely depressing.  You definitely would NOT enjoy having any of it and there seems no way to get rid of it except to gain the weight back and loose slower.???  But I don't know all about that.  If you can keep up your motivation  losing slow enough to avoid that I think I would if you don't have an urgent health issue.  Maybe if you have never seen one of those programs you might be able to watch one on "TV on demand"?   I don't know how fast is too fast for a bigger person either.   Maybe you could find out on duckduckgo???  I think I'll check.  They answer everything else.  If you lost 3 pound a week it would take 6 months to lose 80 pounds.   You could plan 3 months at 3 pounds a week and see the result and then decide???