My conclusions come from far more than that one study. My point is that AT NO TIME did these folks stop losing fat. Which is what was claimed by metabolic damage, that magically fat loss stopped and FAST WAS REGAINED despite low calories. That’s what metabolic damage meant originally. And it’s bullshit.

Yeah, no you don’t. No human can eat that lttle consistently. Like most, with 99% certainty you are misreporting your food intake. And doing so much activity that your cortisol is through the roof. Less cardio, track your food. Stop being crazy.

I found this post as I was looking for an answer to the question proposed here.

I have a friend (actually.) that crash dieted to lose weight, and she now struggles with precisely this permanent metabolic damage. She exercises regularly and only consumes 600 to 1000 Calories a day. This, I assume, is before exercise, but even so, this is far less than a normal person needs for internal energy demand.

I really just wanted to clarify that such a condition exists.

Have a nice day.

I have read, and please tell me if I am wrong, that ketosis is horrible because after coming off ketosis the body’s ability to use carbs correctly is severely effected. It often leads to quick, massive weight gains larger than the previous weight loss. The body also is less efficient at losing weight now and that water, lean mass and fat are all lost. I know personally losing lean mass does lead to future fat loss reductions.

Beyond that, your answer is too vague to get an answer beyond: A duck.