What is the female obsession with a 1200 calorie diet?

estielouise

I actually feel better now that I am eating around 1200 calories a day! I used to feel sluggish and bloated ALL the time and so tired. not sure how many calories i was eating before. I am around 2 stone overweight and nothing was shifting and I was doing zumba on the wii three times a week. Now I am less tired and sluggish and bloated, I have more energy, and I am not even exercising at the moment as I have an injury (damaged by foot ligaments, been out of action for 6 weeks).

nvpixie

When I put my stats and goals in MFP, they give me a goal of 1200 a day to lose weight. No way. They tried to starve me to death. I'm not insanely active, but I don't sit on the couch all day either.

I bumped my calories up to nearly 1700 because 1200 is much too low. Not only was I hungry all the time, but it's really hard to stay under 1200 for me. I'd have to eat three 400 calorie meals a day or two 600 calorie meals a day. BORING.

So, I think a lot of it has to do with MFP's settings and recommendations. I would bet MFP recommends 1200 to a lot of women, and when they don't see results past the first few weeks, they freak out and then ask for help in the forums on why they're not losing weight with that low calorie amount.

I love MFP for the forums and food diary, but I don't agree with their calculators.

ItsCasey

There is an epidemic of undereating on this site, among women AND men. There are men on my FL who eat way less than I do, and some of them are nearly twice my size. I don't understand it at all. People need to figure out that all the crap they are asking their bodies to do can not be done indefinitely if they aren't going to feed themselves properly.

You know what's odd. You're pretty close to my calorie net.

Uh huh. And I'm losing nearly a pound per week!

brooklyn030

Well Im definatley not for it. I love to eat and stay in shape, however, MFP pushes it. When you enter in your stats when beinging on site it pulled up I needed to eat 1260 cals a day thats IT! I tryed everything to make it go up other than putting on a pound a week. Im not trying to loose weight I want muscle. So thats my answer to your question. I would much rather eat 1500-2000, which would probably be harder than what I think if your eatting healthy.

LibertyBelle89

It's a governmental guideline - a minimum intake to maintain reasonable health.

Most websites and magazines won't advocate lower for fear of being sued.

People are impatient, ala, push it to the max regardless of individual needs.

^^good point

brower47

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

I didn't. I want to lose it slowly because all the times I tried to do it fast in the past, I burned out and gave up. 30 lbs and 1.5 years later, I'm still going strong.

Why do you think everyone went for 2 lbs a week?

metacognition

I think a lot of inactive women see it as a way for quick weight loss. It's often touted by diet websites as the magic number, the one that you can't go under. My question is why would a person want to eat at the bare minimum anyway? That's not much of a window for treats or hitting protein macros.

1200 calories did work for me at first but I was worn out a lot of the time. I also didn't lift weights back then.

Now I have to eat 1900 just to maintain my 97 - lb frame. If I eat 1200 and exercise it feels like I've hit into a brick wall. My workouts suffer so I burn far fewer calories AND lose muscle mass with the fat.

BajaDreamin333

Based on my stats and goals, (SW 177, GW 145, 5'7" Female) MFP suggested 1280. I generally NET that, with a burn of about 500 daily . I'm certainly not starving myself or underfed. So maybe they're obsessed because that's what the software tells them they need to be successful?

But in defense of the 1200 cal diet, it isn't hard to hit if A) you excercise and eat a lot of veggies and lean protein. So it comes down to the same old common sense "secret" of diet and excercise.

csheltra26

Went to a dietician years ago - told her I run 4X a week, 1 of those was a long run more than an hour. Kickboxing 2-3X a week for an hour, plus 4 hours of weight lifting. She put me on a 1200 a day calorie diet.

I lost tons of weight, and gained it all back. Lucky me.

Not sure where it comes from but it needs to stop. Now.

bcattoes

Went to a dietician years ago - told her I run 4X a week, 1 of those was a long run more than an hour. Kickboxing 2-3X a week for an hour, plus 4 hours of weight lifting. She put me on a 1200 a day calorie diet.

I lost tons of weight, and gained it all back. Lucky me.

Not sure where it comes from but it needs to stop. Now.

But, to be fair, you didn't gain it back by eating 1200 calories per day, did you?

Raeontherun

in...for the 1200 debate and for 1200 is starvation mode, and all the other crap this thread will spawn....

Dr Watson is in too!!

glovepuppet

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

i selected 0 pounds per week.

toutmonpossible

What obsession? 1200 is what MFP recommends for anyone who is trying to lose weight fairly aggressively. Some people, including smaller women, can't eat much over 1200 and lose weight unless they're exercising like an elite athlete. It simply is not true that dragging out weight loss is desirable or that people can't learn new habits over a fairly short period.

bcattoes

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

i selected 0 pounds per week.

I selected 1 lb per week, but I was very near goal when I joined.

toutmonpossible

Went to a dietician years ago - told her I run 4X a week, 1 of those was a long run more than an hour. Kickboxing 2-3X a week for an hour, plus 4 hours of weight lifting. She put me on a 1200 a day calorie diet.

I lost tons of weight, and gained it all back. Lucky me.

Not sure where it comes from but it needs to stop. Now.

But, to be fair, you didn't gain it back by eating 1200 calories per day, did you?

:flowerforyou:

msjames1999

Who know how some things like that get started?

rainbowbow

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

i selected 0 pounds per week.

I selected 1 lb per week, but I was very near goal when I joined.

I would definitely say you guys are the exception. When you are ignorant, know nothing about weight loss, calories, micro and macro nutrients, and overall uneducated why wouldn't you be like "Lose MORE weight? Of course! That sounds awesome!". I know I did and I know PLENTY of other people who did as well.

All i'm saying is this is why it's important to set reasonable goals and an accurate activity level.

Vailara

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

I didn't. I want to lose it slowly because all the times I tried to do it fast in the past, I burned out and gave up. 30 lbs and 1.5 years later, I'm still going strong.

Why do you think everyone went for 2 lbs a week?

I went for 1lb a week. When I started 1lb a week gave me a little more than 1200, but now it's 1200. We don't need to select 2lb a week to get 1200 calories.

bcattoes

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

i selected 0 pounds per week.

I selected 1 lb per week, but I was very near goal when I joined.

I would definitely say you guys are the exception. When you are ignorant, know nothing about weight loss, calories, micro and macro nutrients, and overall uneducated why wouldn't you be like "Lose MORE weight? Of course! That sounds awesome!". I know I did and I know PLENTY of other people who did as well.

All i'm saying is this is why it's important to set reasonable goals and an accurate activity level.

If I had more than 40-50 lbs to lose I would select 2 lbs per week. And follow the MFP plan.

1200 really isn't so bad, especially if you follow the MFP plan and eat back exercise calories, and allow for "cheat days" or "splurge days" to whatever catchy name you prefer for occasional high calories days.

KAS0917

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

I didn't. I want to lose it slowly because all the times I tried to do it fast in the past, I burned out and gave up. 30 lbs and 1.5 years later, I'm still going strong.

Why do you think everyone went for 2 lbs a week?

I didn't either. I manually adjusted my calories b/c I think MFP was too low, and it now says I should lose 1.3 a week. I'm ok with that #. I'd like for it to consistently happen, but I'm good with it. Slow and steady lifestyle changes are more practical to me.

Valtishia

I think its because 1200 is the minimum that is recommended.... and people just assume because its the minimum, that is the number where they get the best results. This is not always the case though.

Graelwyn75

Good luck to the 1200 brigade, I am quite content to workout and consume 2200-3000 calories a day, and in truth, even without being really active, most females, unless over a particular age, can maintain on between 1700-1800 calories. I find it laughable when I see people eating 1000-1200 calories. Ridiculous. And many of them will end up crawling back here with their tails between their legs, having regained the weight, or hit a plateau or gone on a massive weeks long binge. That and many lose a good amount of lean mass and end up looking crap anyway, then have to work hard to get where they want to be, mirrorwise.

lithezebra

now who DIDN'T select 2 pounds per week? Anyone?

I didn't. I want to lose it slowly because all the times I tried to do it fast in the past, I burned out and gave up. 30 lbs and 1.5 years later, I'm still going strong.

Why do you think everyone went for 2 lbs a week?

I didn't select 2 pounds per week. I was happy the way I was, only wanted to lose 5 pounds anyway, and eating 1200 calories a day was only a 0.8 pound per week loss. I opted for a long, slow, fat loss, combined with building muscle. Actually, I let myself eat at maintenance any time I felt tired or had an exam, which slowed my weight loss down a little more.

Now I'm at 0 pounds per week.

kuuhristin

I try to AT LEAST eat 1200 calories keeping as close as possible, and then up to half of whatever I burn with exercise.

bostonwolf

What obsession? 1200 is what MFP recommends for anyone who is trying to lose weight fairly aggressively. Some people, including smaller women, can't eat much over 1200 and lose weight unless they're exercising like an elite athlete. It simply is not true that dragging out weight loss is desirable or that people can't learn new habits over a fairly short period.

talk to the 97 lbs metacognition above who is eating 1900 to maintain, please.

toutmonpossible

What obsession? 1200 is what MFP recommends for anyone who is trying to lose weight fairly aggressively. Some people, including smaller women, can't eat much over 1200 and lose weight unless they're exercising like an elite athlete. It simply is not true that dragging out weight loss is desirable or that people can't learn new habits over a fairly short period.

talk to the 97 lbs metacognition above who is eating 1900 to maintain, please.

Everyone is different. A lot of people here seem to have problems losing weight. I've never been overweight, which I've achieved because I've adjusted my eating to my metabolism and circumstances of the time. I'm 101, 18% bf today and I could not eat 1900 calories regularly without gaining.

Is "metacognition" a typo? Otherwise, I have no idea what you're talking about.

m0jk

The diet i started and mfp gave me 1200 cal target.. for my height body frame cw and no exercise my body needs 1800 plus cals to sustain a healthy body function estimated i lose up to 2.2lb per week... i didnt request to lose 2.2lb per week and i dont see a problem with losing 6lb a week??? why is it too much?????

im new at this and this is the targets ive been given

Lochlyn_D

What is your obsession with degrading it?

FlaxMilk

What obsession? 1200 is what MFP recommends for anyone who is trying to lose weight fairly aggressively. Some people, including smaller women, can't eat much over 1200 and lose weight unless they're exercising like an elite athlete. It simply is not true that dragging out weight loss is desirable or that people can't learn new habits over a fairly short period.

talk to the 97 lbs metacognition above who is eating 1900 to maintain, please.

And if she wanted to lose 1 lb a week (not that she should), she would need eat around 1400, and if she didn't work out, probably 1200. There are many women who are not able or willing to be as active. Her health and fitness is probably better than their's. Should they not lose weight if they need to or want to and will still be healthy because they would rather do so through diet?

FlaxMilk

Good luck to the 1200 brigade, I am quite content to workout and consume 2200-3000 calories a day, and in truth, even without being really active, most females, unless over a particular age, can maintain on between 1700-1800 calories. I find it laughable when I see people eating 1000-1200 calories. Ridiculous. And many of them will end up crawling back here with their tails between their legs, having regained the weight, or hit a plateau or gone on a massive weeks long binge. That and many lose a good amount of lean mass and end up looking crap anyway, then have to work hard to get where they want to be, mirrorwise.

Many people trying to lose weight, regardless of calorie goal, will come crawling back with their tails between their legs, having regained weight, hit plateau, or gone on a massive week's long binge. The statistics for maintaining weight loss are terrible. The USA's problem is not that we are living diets of deprivation. People who gain too much weight may try 1200 for some time, but this isn't the cause of their obesity. When does the factor contributing to weight gain stop being that they ate at 1200 for a little while? When they re-gain five pounds? Ten? Fifty?

People here talk about that like it's fact, but they ignore the statistics for regain overall. The pool here (people who are fit and eat more) is pretty far from the average population. Yes, they eat more and exercise more and don't regain. Many of them are more motivated, for whatever reason, than the general public. Correlation does not equal causation. The homicide rate goes up with the ice cream consumption rate. Using MFP logic on the 1200 calorie debate, we should all avoid SarauK (sorry can't remember spelling), Johnnythan, and Magerum if we value our lives. But it's more likely that people manage their tempers less well in hotter weather.