Why 1200 calorie goal is not a healthy choice?
Replies
-
DemoraFairy wrote: »
Really? I'm 5'4 (average height), 24 (not exactly old), office job, and my TDEE is 1535. People often used to say I was eating waaay too little when I said I ate 1200 a day... it's a 300 calorie deficit, not exactly starving myself.
I mean, I do agree with everything you've said, but you don't have to be that old or short to have a TDEE of around 1600.
I suspect you've miscalculated. I'm 5'4", much older than you, and my BMR is estimated to be around 1300 a day by the formulas. Factor in 20% for a sedentary TDEE, and it's more than your estimated TDEE. Given you are much younger, yours should be higher. I can also say that my actual BMR is quite a bit higher than the estimate (had it tested at the hospital). It's really between 1520 and 1600. So my actual TDEE for my very sedentary life is around 1850 a day.
Your point is correct though. For someone who is smaller and sedentary, the numbers are not in our favor. We operate on much smaller deficits and aiming for 1200 net calories a day is frequently very appropriate.
ETA: Eh...I take it back on your calculations. You're much younger than me, but possibly quite a bit lighter too based on your picture. So, your number could be correct.
0 -
Many people who end up on 1200 calories is because they chose too aggressive a goal for their needs. If I were to choose two pounds per week right now, that's where it would put me because the number I'd really need to be at to lose that much per week is below 1200 (in fact, it's just below 1000, which is worse). Plus I work a fairly active job, so I need more calories for that and regularly end up consuming 1800-2000.0
-
DemoraFairy wrote: »
Really? I'm 5'4 (average height), 24 (not exactly old), office job, and my TDEE is 1535. People often used to say I was eating waaay too little when I said I ate 1200 a day... it's a 300 calorie deficit, not exactly starving myself.
I mean, I do agree with everything you've said, but you don't have to be that old or short to have a TDEE of around 1600.
I suspect you've miscalculated. I'm 5'4", much older than you, and my BMR is estimated to be around 1300 a day by the formulas. Factor in 20% for a sedentary TDEE, and it's more than your estimated TDEE. Given you are much younger, yours should be higher. I can also say that my actual BMR is quite a bit higher than the estimate (had it tested at the hospital). It's really between 1520 and 1600. So my actual TDEE for my very sedentary life is around 1850 a day.
Your point is correct though. For someone who is smaller and sedentary, the numbers are not in our favor. We operate on much smaller deficits and aiming for 1200 net calories a day is frequently very appropriate.
ETA: Eh...I take it back on your calculations. You're much younger than me, but possibly quite a bit lighter too based on your picture. So, your number could be correct.
I used this calculator: http://thefastdiet.co.uk/how-many-calories-on-a-non-fast-day/
5'4, 24 years old, 120lbs, sedentary. Other calculators give different values (1600-1700), but I think 1500-1600 is about correct for me. Over several months I ate 1200 cals and lost on average 0.6lbs/week, so a deficit of 300 a day, means a TDEE of 1500.0 -
LiftAllThePizzas wrote: »LiftAllThePizzas wrote: »At 1 lb per 10 days you're eating about 350 calories below your TDEE and losing at a reasonable rate.
Yeah I am thinking I am not counting my calorie intake right anyway because per MFP I should be losing 2lbs per week. I am not.
What I am reading anyway is that I should up my calories and set my goal to lose .5lbs per week? This is the "healthier" way? But why?
Depending on how much you have to lose 2 pounds a week may be too agressive of a goal. You used to be able to go into your goals and it would tell you how much your maintenance calories were, how much of a deficit you had, and how much you would lose a week. I know when this was still available and I would change it to lose 2 pounds a week it would tell me that at 1200 calories I could only expect to lose 1.3 pounds a week. You might be able to go on another website like scooby's or IIFYM and find out how much of a deficit you really have at 1200 calories a day.
If she's logging accurately, she already has that data (350 calories/day) and there's no need for a calculator.
True. I just was just explaining why she wasn't losing the 2 pounds a week she expecting to when she chose that option.0 -
Ok so I am trying to set new goals.
What would my fitness levels be if I hit my 12k step goal everyday? I do this by either walking around, dancing or just walking in place while watching TV. Lightly active, active or very active (haha)?
Or maybe a compassionate soul may want to help me out figure it out? I am 5' 2.5 and currently 136 lbs hitting a 12k step goal everyday. My ideal weight is 120 lbs. I started at 144 lbs.0 -
DemoraFairy wrote: »
Really? I'm 5'4 (average height), 24 (not exactly old), office job, and my TDEE is 1535. People often used to say I was eating waaay too little when I said I ate 1200 a day... it's a 300 calorie deficit, not exactly starving myself.
I mean, I do agree with everything you've said, but you don't have to be that old or short to have a TDEE of around 1600.
It was just an example - not trying to say you have to be all those things to have a low TDEE, but that those are all contributing factors. You are not tall, I'm guessing you are not very overweight, and you are sedentary, so that's certainly enough of those factors to result in a fairly low TDEE.
I just wanted to point out you don't have to be short and old, which is what so many people seem to think. I'm average height, pretty young, and 1200 makes me lose about half a pound a week.0 -
Most people don't say 1200 is unhealthy. They say that anything under 1200 is unhealthy. It's like the magic number, separating healthy from unhealthy. There has to be some number or everyone will forever argue about what is and isn't a healthy amount. 1200 is the accepted number. Truth is that the number is different for everyone and 1500 could be more unhealthy for someone than 1200 for another.
If you can eat more than 1200 calories and still lose, you should. It gives you a better shot at getting all your nutrients in....and if you think that's an easy task, think again! When you start tracking micros, you find out how Not Easy it is! I did, anyway. I don't get all of them every single day, but there were a 4 or 5 that I was consistently low on. Like every day. If I ate 1500 a day, it would be a lot easier to squeeze them all in.
It's a really good idea to take in as many calories as you can while still losing. As you continue to lose, it gets harder. You're going to want to drop your total calorie intake later. When you begin at 1500 (or whatever number), it's a lot easier to drop your calories.
Obviously, the more you eat, the fuller you will be, especially if your dietary choices aren't all that filling.
1200 might be the right number for you and it might not. Try to eat as much as you can while still losing and eat a variety of healthy foods.
0 -
I aim for 1200 or slightly above on sedentary days and I feel fine (I'm 5'4). On days when I work out though, I eat up to 1300 or 1400 - even if I think I burned less than the calorie difference. Quite honestly, I've tried to stick to 1200 on workout days and I felt it.
I would say, unless you're exceptionally short (under 5'1), aiming under 1200 can be unhealthy, especially over a great length of time. And a lot of women who are on 1200/day often do aim below it because they probably like to see that little "was under her calorie goal" report pop up (like many of us do).
For the individual of average height and age, who, I would assume, is overweight (as they're here), anything lower than 1200 might result in some negative side effects over time. A daily intake under this limit could be potentially dangerous, depending on if they work out and how close they come to 1200.
1200, however, is a general limit imposed by MFP because they have to operate by the average, not by the outlier. It's excluding certain exceptional circumstances. If someone is shorter than 5'0, older, or has a medical issue that impairs movement, for example, then under 1200 might be okay.0 -
Most people don't say 1200 is unhealthy. They say that anything under 1200 is unhealthy. It's like the magic number, separating healthy from unhealthy. There has to be some number or everyone will forever argue about what is and isn't a healthy amount. 1200 is the accepted number. Truth is that the number is different for everyone and 1500 could be more unhealthy for someone than 1200 for another.
If you can eat more than 1200 calories and still lose, you should. It gives you a better shot at getting all your nutrients in....and if you think that's an easy task, think again! When you start tracking micros, you find out how Not Easy it is! I did, anyway. I don't get all of them every single day, but there were a 4 or 5 that I was consistently low on. Like every day. If I ate 1500 a day, it would be a lot easier to squeeze them all in.
It's a really good idea to take in as many calories as you can while still losing. As you continue to lose, it gets harder. You're going to want to drop your total calorie intake later. When you begin at 1500 (or whatever number), it's a lot easier to drop your calories.
Obviously, the more you eat, the fuller you will be, especially if your dietary choices aren't all that filling.
1200 might be the right number for you and it might not. Try to eat as much as you can while still losing and eat a variety of healthy foods.
Way back when, before I was fat (as I am now), after I had my babies and was overweight, I was doing 1,000 calories a day for five or six weeks until I snapped back in shape. I am much older now and fortunately not able to have babies any longer, but 1200 - 1500 calories a day is reasonable depending upon your size. More than that if you are obese, of course.0 -
Alright I went to this website http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator
Which gave me these based on the data that I inputted:
Daily Calorie Requirements:
Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) 1281
Daily calories to maintain weight (TDEE) 1986
Daily calories based on goal in step 6 1586
Projected Weight Loss:
.8 per week
3.22 per month
41.3 per year
I don't know why but I like more calories! I
food. 0 -
Alright I went to this website http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator
Which gave me these based on the data that I inputted:
Daily Calorie Requirements:
Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) 1281
Daily calories to maintain weight (TDEE) 1986
Daily calories based on goal in step 6 1586
Projected Weight Loss:
.8 per week
3.22 per month
41.3 per year
I don't know why but I like more calories! I food.
From what you've said, that seems about right. Just ensure that you're counting everything accurately if you want to get those results (weighing your solids, measuring your liquids, and including everything, even liquids, condiments, and cooking oils). If you aren't, you can be accidentally eating hundreds more calories than you intend and that will slow or even halt weight loss, especially if you have a smaller deficit (400 calories/day in your case).0 -
Alright I went to this website http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator
Which gave me these based on the data that I inputted:
Daily Calorie Requirements:
Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) 1281
Daily calories to maintain weight (TDEE) 1986
Daily calories based on goal in step 6 1586
Projected Weight Loss:
.8 per week
3.22 per month
41.3 per year
I don't know why but I like more calories! I food.
From what you've said, that seems about right. Just ensure that you're counting everything accurately if you want to get those results (weighing your solids, measuring your liquids, and including everything, even liquids, condiments, and cooking oils). If you aren't, you can be accidentally eating hundreds more calories than you intend and that will slow or even halt weight loss, especially if you have a smaller deficit (400 calories/day in your case).
Of course if you gain weight on this, it isn't working very well.0 -
I'll test it out! My suspicion though is that I have been underestimating my food intake anyway so I might as well have already been doing it.
0 -
My apple watch gives me a resting calorie estimate of about 1930 so it does sound about right.0
-
glassofroses wrote: »It's unhealthy because it's a blanket 1200. Like for example, I am a woman of 5ft9 height, and I'm expected to eat the same 1200 cals as a woman who is 5ft2. It's not taking into account all the variables. If you can safely eat at 1200, good for you, but for some of us, it's just isn't possible.
Wow I am five ft tall and they put me on a 1200 cal a day program too,. Its the same as the bmi not taking into account muscle mass.
This confuses me . . . and is a prime example of why BMI shouldn't be the end all be all of determining what your body needs. I'm 5'10 and I weigh ~250lbs. I'm obviously not small, but I'm a runner and I work out 6 days/week. Now, if we were assuming my caloric needs do not take into account my muscle mass and the fact that I am nearly a foot taller than you and I only "needed" to eat 1,200 calories/day my body would HATE me. And I'm not say starvation mode, I'm saying my body would just plain out hate me - my body wouldn't perform like I need it to, it wouldn't recover, my muscles wouldn't grow, nothing. There is no way that at the weight I'm at that nothing else needs to be taken into consideration. Everything needs to be taken into consideration - on Tuesdays when I do two classes from 6:30-8:30 I burn approx 950 cals . . . I need to eat more, I just do. I also need to be more aware of the nutritional value of the foods I consume.
So I'm not exactly sure what the bolded parts mean . . . because figuring out cals needed/day doesn't have a whole lot to do with your BMI (there probably is correlation between BMI and a range of calories, I'm not a doctor though) but more so with your body's needs and your own TDEE. Someone who weighs 200lbs with 30% BF vs. someone who weighs 200lbs with 20% body fat have drastically different needs. Granted their BMIs may be different - as in one is taller than the other - but still, you should figure out what's right for your body and your needs and what you do on a daily basis. Don't just go with the blanket 1,200 cals/day to lose weight program. Maybe you do need that much, maybe you need more . . . but do the research to figure that out before saying "they" put you on this "program"0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions