Setting target to eat only 800 calories

[800cals]

I have decided to follow Dr Michael Mosley's 8 week sugar diet to lose weight and control my blood sugar. This is a diet with a sound medical basis (just in case anyone thinks it's a fad crash diet!) but it proscribes that you eat only 800 calories each day based on a mediterranean diet, concentrating on low carb meals. I tried to set my target calorie intake on my fitbit zip to 800 so that I could track what I eat, but the app tells me that I have to set a target of between 1000-1500 calories which is not what I require. Is there a way I can override this to enter only 800 calories?

[bcalvanese]

---

@divedragon wrote:

---

@bcalvanese wrote:

---

---

Most people fail at dieting alone even trying to lose 1 lb. a week. You think the success rate is better starving yourself?

The guidelines laid out by the CDC, doctors, and nuitritionists have always been pretty much correct. It's people that over eat. It's people that sit on their butts all day. Sounds like you are blaming the guidelins for what people do.

There are only two things you need to do to achieve nad maintain a healthy body weight.

1. Exercise enough to maintain a good fitness level.

2. Eat a variety of nuitritious food without over eating.

It's that simple, and should be done over a longer period of time to allow for developing good habits, and if you do more of number 1, you can have a little more of number 2.

The reason over 60% of Americans are over weight is because most people over eat and do not want to exercise, and has nothing to do with guidelines or studies.

I wish you luck on your radical new venture, but most people have a hard time sticking to a basic diet let alone something like this.

---

Much of what you say is true, but overly simplistic.  Overeating or over calorie indulgence.  Plus, too much empahsis on exercise for obestity.  I understand that stance as I shared it for many years.  Turns out that exercise only accounts for 10 to 15% influence on weight control.  That makes it 85 to 90% on diet alone. 

Now, our abilty to feed the world is fantastic, but unfortunately we do it with high carb, high calorie processed foods that strip the fiber from it.  This doesn't begin with manufacturing, but with our agrarian processes.  Wheat has gone from a dwarf plant to a plant 4 times its natural size.  Yeild has increased astronomically.  Fiber and nutrients has decreased significantly.  But with all this, the recommendations by the CDC and other is eat more grains.  It's just plain wrong!  (BTW, I have a degree in agriculture, so I know of what I speak).  I strongly disagree that the CDC, doctors and nutritionlist have it right.  I believe they have it exactly, 180 degrees wrong!

It is because of the recommendation people have such a difficult time sticking to a diet.  Protiens and fat trigger the satiation response which prevents us from getting hungry too quickly.  The whole low fat fad of the 70's through the 90's has caused the tendancy to overeat.  This continued recommendation in spite of the science to eat more whole grains and less meat and fat is what is driving the obestiy epidemic.

You're totally correct, we eat too much.  And we eat too much of the wrong foods.  If we eat less often and more fat's and protiens, we'll be healthier.  It's a difficult concept to grasp as it goes againt everything you've been told for years.  But the facts are, the science just doesn't support the current main stream postion.  Please, send me your email and I'll be glad to send you the clincial trials I've found that dispute this by proving the position of IF as a way of life.

---

I guess I agree with some of what you are saying except for exercise not being that important.

What I do know for a fact is that I lost 57 lbs. in a year by following these very basic guidelines. I did it with 80% exercise and 20% eating healthier. It was hard at first, but became easier and easier because it became part of my normal day.

I think exercise is more important because a fit body processes much better than an unfit body, and if you burn enough calories each day, over eating would be pretty hard. many days I have over 1,000 calories that I can't even eat.

I think people way over complicate these things, and get way to scientific with it, but that's just my opinion. But I do know that my simple basic approach works, because I am living proof.

I think the main problem is that many people just dont' want to suffer through the hard part of getting back in shape, so they think they can get healthy by under eating.

IMO, if a body is fit and healthy, weight will fall in line all by itself.

[Dominique]

---

@bcalvanese wrote:

---

I think people way over complicate these things, and get way too scientific with it

---

Very true. The "science" of weight loss is dead simple, just like the "science" of weight gain. People get overweight or obese not because of evil carbs (or evil fats), or of a conspiracy by the government or the food industry to mess with your hormones etc., but because they have been consistently eating more than they’ve burned over a longer period of time. It doesn’t matter what particular macronutrient(s) they were overeating (in fact, they most likely overate all macronutrients). One must do the opposite (eat less than you burn) in order to reverse the process. It doesn’t matter so much how one does it (eating low-carb, following intermittent fasting, exercising more etc.), as long as this results in a negative energy balance.

[bcalvanese]

---

@Dominique wrote:

---

@bcalvanese wrote:

---

I think people way over complicate these things, and get way too scientific with it

---

Very true. The "science" of weight loss is dead simple, just like the "science" of weight gain. People get overweight or obese not because of evil carbs (or evil fats), or of a conspiracy by the government or the food industry to mess with your hormones etc., but because they have been consistently eating more than they’ve burned over a longer period of time. It doesn’t matter what particular macronutrient(s) they were overeating (in fact, they most likely overate all macronutrients). One must do the opposite (eat less than you burn) in order to reverse the process. It doesn’t matter so much how one does it (eating low-carb, following intermittent fasting, exercising more etc.), as long as this results in a negative energy balance.

---

Yes but the opposite is not allways over eating. I became obese over a 20 year period because I went from a very physical life to a very sedentary life. I ate pretty much the same, but my activity level went fromm 100 to 0. The only thing that changed was my activity level. I allways ate a pretty well balanced and nuetritious diet. I just stopped being active.

The diet industry makes billions of dollars per year making people think they can lose weight by dieting.

How many of them actually work?

Sure there are folks who struggle through losing weight by dieting alone, but if you notice they have to weigh everything they eat down to the gram so they can get every single last calorie into themself, and their still hungry. And eventually they fail and wind up weighing more than they started at. It becomes a life long struggle, and is not the solution.

A person can raise their fitness to a good level in a matter of months. This will allow them to eat a well balanced and very satisfying diet without being hungry all the time, and if they do eat some junk food their fitness level will allow thier body to get rid of what it don't need much easier. Many people are at a healthy weight, yet are unhealthy too.

You MUST do both IMO to be successful long term. Its the difference between solving the problem and having to stuggle with the problem for a lifetime.

It is hard to do, but I would much rather struggle through 6 months to a year of raising my fitness level then a lifetime on the diet roller coaster. And that is why I feel that exercise is more important.

[Dominique]

---

@bcalvanese wrote:

---

Yes but the opposite is not allways over eating. I became obese over a 20 year period because I went from a very physical life to a very sedentary life. I ate pretty much the same, but my activity level went fromm 100 to 0. The only thing that changed was my activity level.

---

Yes, but you don’t overeat in absolute terms: you overeat in relation to your age, gender, size and activity level. For instance, 4000 calories would be overeating for me, but undereating for Michael Phelps (because he’s a younger guy, much bigger than me, and also more active).

In 20 years, it’s not only your activity level that changed: your BMR also declined. In fact, it’s a common way for people to gain weight: they keep eating the same as in their twenties, without realising that as they get older, they need less food, all things being equal. And things are seldom equal anyway: for instance, you tend to move more when you’re young, single and a student than when you are older, have a family and a job. You usually have more money to spend on food, use a car instead of public transportation etc. It all adds up.

[bcalvanese]

---

@Dominique wrote:

---

@bcalvanese wrote:

---

Yes but the opposite is not allways over eating. I became obese over a 20 year period because I went from a very physical life to a very sedentary life. I ate pretty much the same, but my activity level went fromm 100 to 0. The only thing that changed was my activity level.

---

Yes, but you don’t overeat in absolute terms: you overeat in relation to your age, gender, size and activity level. For instance, 4000 calories would be overeating for me, but undereating for Michael Phelps (because he’s a younger guy, much bigger than me, and also more active).

In 20 years, it’s not only your activity level that changed: your BMR also declined. In fact, it’s a common way for people to gain weight: they keep eating the same as in their twenties, without realising that as they get older, they need less food, all things being equal. And things are seldom equal anyway: for instance, you tend to move more when you’re young, single and a student than when you are older, have a family and a job. You usually have more money to spend on food, use a car instead of public transportation etc. It all adds up.

---

Which makes it even more important to exercise more when you get older.

And I'm not saying we shouldn't watch what we eat at all. I learned a lot about eating healthier since I started this, but my main focus was on getting my fitness level back. The weight pretty much fell in line all by itself. I do eat smarter, but I don't have to monitor calories all that closely, and I'm not always hungry like I would be if I just dieted.

We cant stop old age, but I plan on keeping my fitness level good for as long as I can.

[SunsetRunner]

. .

[Nicolala]

I don't normally get involved in Internet forum discussions but I feel compelled to comment as so many people are keen to rubbish Dr Mosely's diet without real knowledge and understanding of it other than the 800 kcal headline.

I first heard about the diet listening to the radio where it was being discussed as a strategy for reversing type 2 diabetes caused by diet and obesity. My 73 year old mum is just such a person, obese since her 30s and a type two diabetic, repeatedly attempting to lose weight, latterly at Slimmers World. She always successfully loses weight, eats healthily while she's following it but, it doesn't last and the weight goes back on. I too have been a yoyo dieter since my teens, I chose Weight Watchers and have been a gold member three times over. Always putting the weight back on over time to end up heavier than the time before.

I ordered two copies of Dr Mosely's book, one for my mum, one for me. I read it from cover to cover in a day and decided to do the diet for myself. My husband decided to do it too, his Dad is also type two diabetic so he's at risk of developing it too and also struggles to keep his weight down.

We've been doing the diet for 33 days, I have lost 21lbs, my husband has lost 15lbs (he hasn't stuck to it as rigidly as me). We eat incredibly healthily, the main change is that we've ditched the sugar packed low fat versions of foods, no longer eat bread, potatoes, rice or pasta and keep an eye on our portion sizes. And we also drink lots and lots of water.

We already exercise regularly, my husbands runs half marathons, I walk an average of 8 miles a day with our dog. But we have so much more energy now, no longer feel sluggish and have lost our bellies!

What I've learnt already is that we ate too much, everyday. That processed carbohydrates promote hunger - we're not hungry all the time anymore and food doesn't rule our lives. We still love food and I've found that there are foods I disliked before (celery) that I like now, probably because I've reconditioned my taste buds away from sweet and sugary. We really enjoy our meals, savour the taste and eat more slowly.

I truly believe everyone who has battled with their weight should give this diet a go. All of the objections people throw at it are entrenched in a food and diet industry rule book to keep the masses subscribing to their strategies and paying more and more. I thought about turning this diet into a club but it wouldn't make any money... There are  no products to sell other than the instruction book (£3.49 on Amazon) and there's no need to subscribe to a meeting as its so easy to do at home, once you start, it only takes a couple of days to get used to eating 800 kcals and the weight comes off steadily, just faster. Oh, and there's plenty of free support, recipes and advice on the website: https://thebloodsugardiet.com/

Two years ago I followed Weight Watchers, ran three times a week and used my Fitbit to track my diet and weight loss for my wedding... Looking back I took 4 months to shed 14lbs... This time I did it in 4 weeks. I won't relapse and put the weight back on because this diet has taught me what all of the others didn't want to - that reducing fat isn't the answer, it's sugar and carbs that are the problem. And we were eating too much. Dr Atkins was probably on to something but went too far by cutting out all carbs so no healthy vegetables allowed. Fitbit tells me my diet still comprises 41% carbs on average but they're from fruit and vegetables not bread or pasta.

What scientific basis is there for slamming the quantity of calories as being unhealthy? This diet is probably the only real and effective weight loss strategy grounded in medical trials and backing from GPs (there's a poster in our local surgery!), and it's virtually free of charge.

So rather than spout criticism, perhaps the doubters should do some research or even give it a try. I guarantee it'll change their lives and free them from diet slavery.

24/03

just a quick update on my original post:

I finished the diet in July 2016, after 3 months.  I lost 43lbs (just over 3 stone).  It came off steadily, 14lbs each 4 weeks.

my husband lost 2.5 stone, so far Mum has lost 2 stone 3lbs, she continues to follow it intermittently and her GP has reduced her diabetes medication by 50%.

We have not put the weight back on and continue to exercise as before - we both recently ran the Tunbridge Wells Half Marathon and my husband is to run the London Marathon next month.  We eat normal calorie amounts now but the knowledge of how much and what's best to eat has stayed with us.  There were no adverse effects, we did not starve ourselves or go into starvation mode, we did not develop Gaul stones.  If I did gain weight, I now know how to take it back off again, quickly and healthily.

[SunsetRunner]

It's a lot easier putting in more hours working out rather than sticking to an 800 calories diet.  Eventually you will go into starvation mode and start overeating.  

[Nicolala]

I'm sorry Duke I but simple statements like that are not backed up by proof or have no basis in science.

I'm not sure you have read my post fully.

I do exercise, as does my husband yet we have still put on weight much more easily than we have lost it.

We are not starving ourselves and what basis have you for saying we will go into starvation mode?

The U.K. is on the brink of a food and diet industry revolution - there are so many tv programmes and articles outing poor practice in selling us sugar laden foods and changing traditional recipes to make the food last for months.

The changes have started and this diet is part of that. The world is brainwashed to believe a set of false rules, perhaps as I said in my post, you should do some reading and real research before you pass such harsh judgement. At the end of the day, those of us who take the leap of faith will be the proof but I'm sure you'll still find some way to criticise.

[Nicolala]

Please do your research before you pass such harsh judgement. Dr Michael Mosley is the tv GP who has the ear of the media. He is presenting and promoting the work of Professor Roy Taylor, professor of Medicine and Metabolism at Newcastle University and head of the Diabetes Research Group. Dr Mosley also sights lots of other research findings from all over the world, in addition to by now several thousand case studies.

Brainwashing is difficult to reverse, I get that, but at least be prepared to find out the alternative view point before closing your mind to it.

[SunsetRunner]

---

@Nicolala wrote:
I'm sorry Duke I but simple statements like that are not backed up by proof or have no basis in science.

I'm not sure you have read my post fully.

I do exercise, as does my husband yet we have still put on weight much more easily than we have lost it.

We are not starving ourselves and what basis have you for saying we will go into starvation mode?

The U.K. is on the brink of a food and diet industry revolution - there are so many tv programmes and articles outing poor practice in selling us sugar laden foods and changing traditional recipes to make the food last for months.

The changes have started and this diet is part of that. The world is brainwashed to believe a set of false rules, perhaps as I said in my post, you should do some reading and real research before you pass such harsh judgement. At the end of the day, those of us who take the leap of faith will be the proof but I'm sure you'll still find some way to criticise.

---

If what's highlighted in red is occurruring  then you all are simply not eating the right type of food.  One does not have to go on a diet to lose weight.  The amount of sugar one intake has a greater affect than the amount of calories .    An 800 calories a day diet will not give one enough energy to have a good productive workout.  If one wants to lose weight one needs the energy to excercise 1- 2 hours 5-6 days a week.   Not willing to make that type of commitement one won't see much weight loss.   

[Berripity]

This is a ridiculous fad diet and any claims to the contrary are dangerously stupid.

Now, if this is PERSCRIBED BY A DOCTOR and MONITORED BY A DOCTOR to treat A SPECIFIC DISEASE, thats one thing. However, people should not be doing this at home on their own.

Eat a balanced diet of 500-1000 calories under your TDEE, and try to move more. No reason to overcomplicate things or shift from one extreme (drastically over eating) to another (starving yourself). The goal is long term, healthy habits. 

In order to lose weight one must consume fewer calories than the body requires. Thats it. 

[FitBeforeFifty]

---

@Nicolala wrote:
 of calories as being unhealthy? This diet is probably the only real and effective weight loss strategy grounded in medical trials and backing from GPs (there's a poster in our local surgery!), and it's virtually free of charge.

So rather than spout criticism, perhaps the doubters should do some research or even give it a try. I guarantee it'll change their lives and free them from diet slavery.

---

https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/eat/calories.htm

Quote: "Very low calorie diets of fewer than 800 calories per day should not be used unless you are being monitored by your doctor."

http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-topics/weight-control/myths/Pages/weight-loss-and...

Quote: "... losing more than 3 pounds a week after the first few weeks may increase your chances of developing gallstones (solid matter in the gallbladder that can cause pain). Being on a diet of fewer than 800 calories a day for a long time may lead to serious heart problems.."

[frogy8thefly]

Any diet advising 800 calories is BS.

Any.

Period.

[HelenaFitbit]

I'm going to agree with the other posters in the thread. Eating 800 calories a day is not sustainable and it is bound to rebound as soon as you're eating properly; also, bone density, tissue, blood and overall health is affected by compromising esencial calories to keep your body running. This is why 1,500 calories a day is the minimum for a woman and this increases when you burn additional calories from exercising. 

If additional diseases are present; the caloric amount changes but it must be verified consistently by a doctor. Doing it for the sake of it is detrimental to your health. I know about this because I did one of those extreme fad diets and not only I gained the weight back (plus 40 more) my gallbladder quit on me and I had to have surgery.

Just this week Vox News released the problems that the contestants on The Biggest Loser are currently facing after having such a dramatic caloric restriction and demanding workouts. Take a look. 

[SunsetRunner]

haha a fellow TBL watcher 😉

it is amazing what some people will do for attention and/or money

[KidsDogsBooks]

I think really, your best bet is to find a diet that is sustainable over the long haul.  My biggest concern, other than the massive calorie deficit, is what happens when you stop following this diet?  While losing a massive amount of weight in a short time sure does sound appealing, I question the soundness of the science.

[SunsetRunner]

from myfitnesspal

http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/why-undereating-wont-actually-help-you-lose-weight/

they have set the min for females 1200 and males 1500

going lower is not really recommended

my currently settings are to lose 2lbs per week and eat around 1550-1650 calories a day, although I eat around that, I'm losing slightly more than that, but I am exercising/burning more than the setting

best to go slow and steady, we all want to lose it asap

I love this bit about Trinh Le

She enjoys hiking, strength training, yoga, running and fidgeting.

[ingan]

Glad to hear someone else is using Dr. Mosely's Sugar Reversal Diet. Quite contrarily, one can eat quite healty on this diet. It is mainly Mediteranean. I had slightly elevated blood sugar ( not diabetic). In 5 days I went from 140 to 95. However, the main reason for choosing this is the hope of getting of blood pressure medication, which is adversely affecting my kidneys.

In 60 days with this diet I was able to reduce the medication to "as needed" (with my Dr's blessing) . My kidney function has improved. Still a long way to go.

I am tracking my food intake on Excel (very labor intensive). Sleep has improved also. Energy level has gone up too as well as lung function. 

In the 60 days on this diet I have lost 20 pounds.  Slowly, I am expanding my physical activity again.

In all seriousness, I have to tell you that I am 80 years old (female) with other age related ailments.  I am very grateful to have found Dr. Mosley's message. Following it has improved my quality of life- so has fitbit.

[ingan]

I am in agreement with you on this.  Very was active in my middle years, I probably underate for my physical level ( mountain climbing, walking 5 miles a day).  My metabolism is slow. ( I am 80 years old)

Back in the 70's, 80's there was no help from mainstream medical source. I have not had a softdrink in 40 years. I have used alternative sources since 1975.

Last year I tried 1200 calories - lost 25 pounds over 6 month; gained it back when placed on BP medication.  Loss had no effect on my bP- nor my sleep.

        Dr. Mosely's Sugar reversal diet works; It has lowered my bP, improved sleep and alertless.

I am 80 years old -I maintain a ration of 50Protein to 60 Carbohydrates - with 25 grams of sugar coming from plants and afew fruits. As time goes on I will increase my eating level,

Just wanted to let you know it work for older people.  

I agree, that younger people, working and having a busy life 800 will be to low unless they have a urgent medical reason.  It has to their decision.