The 1200 calorie limit is too high for me
Options
aislingeach
Posts: 9 Member
I have an issue with the minimum of 1200 calories per day and an absolute minimum of 1000 calories per day. I am a 54 yr old woman who is 5' 1.5" tall and have finally reached my goal of 115 pounds. The last 5 pounds were incredibly difficult to achieve and looking back I blame the calorie limits in MFP. I recently calculated my BMR and at 120 pounds it was 1212, while at 115 pounds it is 1190. In order to lose weight, you have to drop below your BMR x activity level (use 1.2 for light activity) by 500 calories per day to lose one pound per week. At 120 pounds that was 1455-500=954. It is no wonder that my last 5 pounds were incredibly difficult to reach. How am I supposed to use a tool that is so flawed? If someone is even shorter than me, and there are quite a few of us, they would have troubles using this tool even more than I do.
0
Replies
-
I'm 53 and half an inch shorter than you.
My goal is the same as yours, but I don't use MFP, I use my Fitbit to calculate my TDEE.
What's your real activity level? My maintenance calories should end up being somewhere around 1700-1800, but I'm pretty active.0 -
With only 5lbs to lose, you goal should have been set at .5lbs/week, giving you 1205 calories. So, the tool isn't flawed; you just set a goal that was too aggressive.
Also, as you get closer to your goal, strict logging plays a more important role and weigh loss usually slows due to inaccuracies in the estimation of CI or CO.
ETA: It's set with minimums because people can have a hard time meeting nutritional requirements if they are eating fewer than the 1,200 calorie baseline.0 -
At my height and weight, the limit set for me would have to be absolutely precise, and I would lose .08 lb per week.
This discussion, however, only netted me a warning when I brought it up. In reality, I just am not interested in weighing food. Just this week, I had a wedding to attend. I took a good guess at the calorie content of the wedding cake. When in doubt, I just overestimate.
Overestimating actually works OK for me.0 -
aislingeach wrote: »I have an issue with the minimum of 1200 calories per day and an absolute minimum of 1000 calories per day. I am a 54 yr old woman who is 5' 1.5" tall and have finally reached my goal of 115 pounds. The last 5 pounds were incredibly difficult to achieve and looking back I blame the calorie limits in MFP. I recently calculated my BMR and at 120 pounds it was 1212, while at 115 pounds it is 1190. In order to lose weight, you have to drop below your BMR x activity level (use 1.2 for light activity) by 500 calories per day to lose one pound per week. At 120 pounds that was 1455-500=954. It is no wonder that my last 5 pounds were incredibly difficult to reach. How am I supposed to use a tool that is so flawed? If someone is even shorter than me, and there are quite a few of us, they would have troubles using this tool even more than I do.
I think that, if you were to compare slower weight loss with a 255 calorie deficit (1455-1200) against faster weight loss with a 500 calorie deficit but only eat 954 calories, your difficulty may be put into perspective. That is, I do not think that eating only 954 calories per day would have been easy, or easier, than eating a bit more but losing more slowly.0 -
I think your expectations of 1 pound per week were unattainable due to your size and age. With such a little amount to lose and such a low TDEE, you'd have to shoot for .25-.5lb/week.0
-
a pound per week when you have very little to lose is pretty aggressive. losing those last 5-10 Lbs usually takes most people awhile for the same reason.0
-
1 lb a week is too aggressive a weight loss amount as a percentage of your body weight. 2 lbs a week is appropriate for tall and morbidly obese individuals. For short and normal BMI or slightly overweight individuals, even 1 lb a week is too aggressive.
The 1200 calorie floor for MFP is not always appropriate for everyone. It is viewed as a general floor that most people should not go below on a regular basis without medical guidance. Given your size, going a little below 1200 might be fine. However, one frequently mistaken number here is the difference between 1200 net and 1200 gross calories. The minimum for most women is somewhere over 1200 net calories. If you exercise or lead an active life, your gross calorie intake should be higher. 1200 net calories is too few for larger women and just right for smaller women. For those who are very short and thin, you might be able to go a little under 1200 net calories, but generally speaking it is not a good idea for an extended period.
The last few pounds should take a lot longer and the first several pounds. For most people, we can afford to lose 1+ lbs (maybe 2+ for large individuals) while obese. This number gets lowered when we are just overweight and lowered again when trying to reduce BMI in the normal range. MFP is not perfect and for some people the net calorie minimums might need tweaking. It sets its baseline at 1200 for women and 1500 for men because for most people, eating below these numbers for an extended period is unhealthy.0 -
I think you have a point that a set lower limit that doesn't vary with height isn't perfect. I'm a 5'6" 54 year old and have the same 1200 and 1000 lower limits. Which means that I can be more aggressive in my weight loss than you could if I wanted to. Luckily I don't. I think that being forced by MFP to lose that last bit of weight slowly was a GOOD thing. Hopefully it means it STAYS off.
PS Congrats on getting there!!!0 -
The MFP programme is not flawed. It is set up to give a safe deficit for the majority of the population.
1200 cal for women and 1500 cal for men has been set as the level at which an adult could reach all their daily nutrition.
If one has circumstances that require a lower calorie level it is recommended to lose weight under a doctor and dietician's guidance.
One does not have to drop below ones BMR to lose weight. I and many others didn't. One has to eat less than the energy one expends. CI<CO.
It is recommended and frequently posted on the forum that when one is down to the last 5-10 lb one should aim for, and expect to lose .5lb a week.
I. Am 62, 5'1 and maintain between 100-105 lb. yes, it took quite a few months to lose those last 5 lb, but they were vanity pounds, I was in no rush.
My BMR is between 950-960, sedentary maintenance 1200, every day winter TDEE 1400-1450.
I went from 130- 105 eating 1200 cal and 50% of my exercise constantly.
Cheers, h.0 -
I'm 4'11.5", and losing steadily on 1,800 calories a day, so idkwtf you're doing wrong, lol. You may be estimating your portions incorrectly.0
-
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »I'm 4'11.5", and losing steadily on 1,800 calories a day, so idkwtf you're doing wrong, lol. You may be estimating your portions incorrectly.
OP is also 24 years older than you and likely not as active. And she has also reached her goal, so Idkwtf you're loling about.0 -
I never understand these posts where people think their amount of calories is only to do with height. Even the weight I've lost.....15 lbs in 65 days is definitely slowing down now. I'm simply not burning as many calories now that I've lost weight as I was before. So I'm losing at a slower rate now, doing exactly the same as before.
For me, when it gets to that point where it's too big of a struggle to pull off the last 3 lbs or whatever, I'm sure I'll just say: "This is just fine. Done! lol"
0 -
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »I'm 4'11.5", and losing steadily on 1,800 calories a day, so idkwtf you're doing wrong, lol. You may be estimating your portions incorrectly.
OP is also 24 years older than you and likely not as active. And she has also reached her goal, so Idkwtf you're loling about.
Excellent.0 -
goldthistime wrote: »I think you have a point that a set lower limit that doesn't vary with height isn't perfect. I'm a 5'6" 54 year old and have the same 1200 and 1000 lower limits. Which means that I can be more aggressive in my weight loss than you could if I wanted to. Luckily I don't. I think that being forced by MFP to lose that last bit of weight slowly was a GOOD thing. Hopefully it means it STAYS off.
PS Congrats on getting there!!!
I can agree with this. What I tend to disagree with is the idea that MFP can force me to do anything. MFP can suggest a calorie limit based on my stats and my goals, but ultimately it is my decision to eat more or less than suggested. I *gasp* sometimes net under 1000 (although I always eat over 1400). For me, a 5'2" 34 y/o woman, I'm comfortable that I'm not starving myself, even if I leave a good bit of my exercise calories on the table. So far, the MFP police haven't come knocking on my door.
0 -
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »I'm 4'11.5", and losing steadily on 1,800 calories a day, so idkwtf you're doing wrong, lol. You may be estimating your portions incorrectly.
OP is also 24 years older than you and likely not as active. And she has also reached her goal, so Idkwtf you're loling about.
i was gonna reply similar but you did it for me.0 -
missblondi2u wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I think you have a point that a set lower limit that doesn't vary with height isn't perfect. I'm a 5'6" 54 year old and have the same 1200 and 1000 lower limits. Which means that I can be more aggressive in my weight loss than you could if I wanted to. Luckily I don't. I think that being forced by MFP to lose that last bit of weight slowly was a GOOD thing. Hopefully it means it STAYS off.
PS Congrats on getting there!!!
I can agree with this. What I tend to disagree with is the idea that MFP can force me to do anything. MFP can suggest a calorie limit based on my stats and my goals, but ultimately it is my decision to eat more or less than suggested. I *gasp* sometimes net under 1000 (although I always eat over 1400). For me, a 5'2" 34 y/o woman, I'm comfortable that I'm not starving myself, even if I leave a good bit of my exercise calories on the table. So far, the MFP police haven't come knocking on my door.
Agreed. I hesitated using the word "forced". Lots of ways around it.
0 -
Oh my!AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »I'm 4'11.5", and losing steadily on 1,800 calories a day, so idkwtf you're doing wrong, lol. You may be estimating your portions incorrectly.0 -
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »I'm 4'11.5", and losing steadily on 1,800 calories a day, so idkwtf you're doing wrong, lol. You may be estimating your portions incorrectly.
OP is also 24 years older than you and likely not as active. And she has also reached her goal, so Idkwtf you're loling about.
Excellent.
This...wish I had seen it before I was surprised...lol0 -
AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »I'm 4'11.5", and losing steadily on 1,800 calories a day, so idkwtf you're doing wrong, lol. You may be estimating your portions incorrectly.
OP is also 24 years older than you and likely not as active. And she has also reached her goal, so Idkwtf you're loling about.
Thank you!
54 myself and 1800 is more like maintenance (and I'm taller).0 -
They have to say certain things in order not to have people try to sue them for "promoting dangerous activities" or whatever. But you don't have to abide by those things. If yr an adult in sound mind, you can cut farther if you choose to.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions