A question for 1200 calories per day consumers
Replies
-
To say my doc is a nutrition freak would be an understatement! She is very into health, exercise, eating right etc. She's the one that got me back onto MFP. She also checks my labs every 3 months. She's a great motivator
My Dr talked about diet with me and after 2-3 mins actually said "Sorry, your knowledge is much deeper than mine and I'm getting out of my depth".0 -
ncmedic201 - I'd only have you on 1200 if you didn't move around at all, housebound. I'd much rather see you at 1450. Only 250 cals more but thats actually 20% more calories almost. You'll be surprised at the difference, IMO.
I literally sit at the station all day...24-36 hours. When I started this my goals were to lose weight, improve my diet and lower my BP.At the time I had a hip injury and it was very painful to stand, let alone walk. I was afraid to go to the doctor because I couldn't afford to be out of work. I improved my diet, lost some weight and lowered my BP. I finally bit the bullet and went to PT. I'm now able to exercise, off all my BP meds and have upped my calories. I don't always meet my calorie intake but I try. I've got it set for 1700 now.
Posts like this are just so vague and they don't take into consideration that we are all individuals with different weights, heights, genders and physical abilities. Also, sometimes you have to weigh the risk to benefit assessment. For a morbidly obese person, the risk of sudden cardiac arrest may be greater than the risk of being on a low calorie diet. Many of us are being monitored by our doctor and the benefit of quick weight loss outweighs the risks.
I am a PT/nutritionist.
Your post that you NEED 1200 is not the counter. A counter argument from you would be you describing why aren't needing MORE calories because you've tried and this is the XYZ reason. Unless you are suggesting eating an bare minimum number of calories is better than eating a larger, more rounder number that will allow more good foods to be eaten.
Get your head on the right way around. You are thinking, backwards.
BAM!0 -
1200 is what MFP calculated based on my stats - I'm rubbish at maths so utterly unable to manipulate the statistics, sorry. I'm no more different than anyone else!
I roughly aim for 1200, but eat anything between just under that and about 1800 net - and I'm losing weight at a steady pace. Certainly not 2lb a week as was my huge ambition, but it's working. More like 1lb and not every week.
NO!
You DID manipulate the numbers because your "2lb a week huge amition" ........ MFP calculated based upon your GOAL .... stats were secondary.
1200 is merely as low as MFP is designed to go ........ this is why you are not losing 2 pounds every week .... because it's a "huge ambition" and not a realistic ambition.0 -
ncmedic201 - I'd only have you on 1200 if you didn't move around at all, housebound. I'd much rather see you at 1450. Only 250 cals more but thats actually 20% more calories almost. You'll be surprised at the difference, IMO.
I literally sit at the station all day...24-36 hours. When I started this my goals were to lose weight, improve my diet and lower my BP.At the time I had a hip injury and it was very painful to stand, let alone walk. I was afraid to go to the doctor because I couldn't afford to be out of work. I improved my diet, lost some weight and lowered my BP. I finally bit the bullet and went to PT. I'm now able to exercise, off all my BP meds and have upped my calories. I don't always meet my calorie intake but I try. I've got it set for 1700 now.
Posts like this are just so vague and they don't take into consideration that we are all individuals with different weights, heights, genders and physical abilities. Also, sometimes you have to weigh the risk to benefit assessment. For a morbidly obese person, the risk of sudden cardiac arrest may be greater than the risk of being on a low calorie diet. Many of us are being monitored by our doctor and the benefit of quick weight loss outweighs the risks.
I am a PT/nutritionist.
Your post that you NEED 1200 is not the counter. A counter argument from you would be you describing why aren't needing MORE calories because you've tried and this is the XYZ reason. Unless you are suggesting eating an bare minimum number of calories is better than eating a larger, more rounder number that will allow more good foods to be eaten.
Get your head on the right way around. You are thinking, backwards.
My need to get my BP down before I had a stroke was of greater importance than eating a higher calorie diet. My need to drop weight quickly and not be at high risk of stroke outweighed the potential risk of a short term low calorie diet.
You can't just look at one side or the other. It goes back to everyone is different. Their needs are different. We aren't all going to fit into the same mold all the time. Weight loss and diet have to be tailored to the individual. As a nutritionist, you're not going to put a diabetic on a high carb diet or tell a person with BP issues that are sodium sensitive to not monitor sodium. I'm guessing that you individualize meal planning for your clients.0 -
You can't just look at one side or the other. It goes back to everyone is different. Their needs are different. We aren't all going to fit into the same mold all the time. Weight loss and diet have to be tailored to the individual. As a nutritionist, you're not going to put a diabetic on a high carb diet or tell a person with BP issues that are sodium sensitive to not monitor sodium. I'm guessing that you individualize meal planning for your clients.
So to make yourself more healthy, you eat in an unhealthy manner below what is healthy for you to eat? Incredible logic.
Yes I do make individual meal plans etc.0 -
Riddle me this, Matt_Wild: I would truly appreciate your opinion.
Weight: 207
Ht: 61
BMR: 1589
SDA: 15
REE: 1747
ADL: 349
Total Caloric Requirements: 2096
If I wanted to lose 1.5 a week, it says to do 1362
2lbs: 1112 which, of course, is not recommended.
Your thoughts? I stick to 1330.
I don't know my TDEE because this is the info I got from my dietitian.0 -
Riddle me this, Matt_Wild: I would truly appreciate your opinion.
Weight: 207
Ht: 61
BMR: 1589
SDA: 15
REE: 1747
ADL: 349
Total Caloric Requirements: 2096
If I wanted to lose 1.5 a week, it says to do 1362
2lbs: 1112 which, of course, is not recommended.
Your thoughts? I stick to 1330.
I don't know my TDEE because this is the info I got from my dietitian.
Need your age/height/weight/sex/approx gym/cardio time and approx job type. You've not given me enough.0 -
Riddle me this, Matt_Wild: I would truly appreciate your opinion.
Weight: 207
Ht: 61
BMR: 1589
SDA: 15
REE: 1747
ADL: 349
Total Caloric Requirements: 2096
If I wanted to lose 1.5 a week, it says to do 1362
2lbs: 1112 which, of course, is not recommended.
Your thoughts? I stick to 1330.
I don't know my TDEE because this is the info I got from my dietitian.
Need your age/height/weight/sex/approx gym/cardio time and approx job type. You've not given me enough.
Sorry forgot to add age:
30yo F
low-cardio elliptical or Zumba 3 times a week since beginning of June. Days I workout, I eat half my calories back. so I could eat up to 1600-1800 calories those days.
Very, very sedentary job. I am stuck to a screen and phone all day except to go to the bathroom.0 -
61 inches or 6' 1"?0
-
For someone who says 1200 is there "number".... feel free to post here or message me your details (age/height/weight/sex/how much you do cardio/lift/how busy your job is) and lets see what the score really is
))
I am curious and interested. So here are my stats....
59 years old
5 ft. 5 in.
159. 6 pounds (as of this morning)
As for exercise, up until this week, l was doing one hour of cardio a week... about 500 calories. I don't work.
Your results?0 -
I'm eating more than that now because I'm much more active these days; however, I will say that in my experience, metabolism can dramatically change dependent upon a situation.
When I was in my teens I ate like a horse and was a string bean. In my early 20s I was active, then became more sedentary. However, because of some anxiety issues related to a death, a divorce, and living in Asia with no support system around (waking up from a dead sleep with a heart rate of 130 or so), I lost an incredible amount of weight all while eating a lot and not exercising.
I got healthy again, worked out again, ate "normally" (probably around 2,000 calories a day) and in my early 30s I gained a little. I exercised less and less frequently. Right about the time I turned 36, I gained 12 or so pounds in 2 weeks. My clothes wouldn't fit anymore - seriously only 1 pair of pants fit - my sister experienced the same thing a couple years later when she reached that age but it took place for her over the course of about 3 weeks. I kept gaining each year. When I joined MFP in May, I started off at the 1200. As a vegetarian (24 years and counting), a lot of the vegetables that I eat really don't have that many calories. It is the junky junk - soda, beer, white carbs, and the such. I cut a lot of those from my diet and felt pretty good. I did eat higher on Tuesdays and Saturdays. After I lost so dramatically the first three weeks (I was eating back exercise calories), I upped my calories a bit to 1450. I am now gaining instead of losing, but am going to start trying to offset that with even more exercise and hoping for the best.
Our energy requirements change dramatically over our lives. I have not changed heights in all this time, but weighed about 125 in my teens, between 105-145 in my 20s, 145-165 in my 30s and got up to 180 following the birth of my son at age 40. And, the kicker is that the last 10 pounds was after I delivered him and was while I was breastfeeding, which is suppose to increase metabolism. Pointing fingers does no good. I have no qualms with your trying to educate folks about the low amount, just think that it unnecessarily attacks people that are trying to do good things for themselves, which in turn may harden them to the information rather than "wake them up".
(Edited because I left out a word)0 -
For someone who says 1200 is there "number".... feel free to post here or message me your details (age/height/weight/sex/how much you do cardio/lift/how busy your job is) and lets see what the score really is))
I am curious and interested. So here are my stats....
59 years old
5 ft. 5 in.
159. 6 pounds (as of this morning)
As for exercise, up until this week, l was doing one hour of cardio a week... about 500 calories. I don't work.
Your results?
So you sit in the house and rock back and forth?0 -
Our energy requirements change dramatically over our lives. I have not changed heights in all this time, but weighed about 125 in my teens, between 105-145 in my 20s, 145-165 in my 30s and got up to 180 following the birth of my son at age 40. And, the kicker is that the last 10 pounds was after I delivered him and was while I was breastfeeding, which is suppose to increase metabolism. Pointing fingers does no good. I have no qualms with your trying to educate folks about the low amount, just think that it unnecessarily attacks people that are trying to do good things for themselves, which in turn may harden them to the information rather than "wake them up".
My calculations take in age and how busy people are to allow for metabolism and calorie expenditure....
...and a week or so doesn't allow for body to adjust to nutrient changes/incoming macros etc. You will hold water differently and look differently due to macros going thro you.
Its a long term change, not overnight/week.0 -
61 inches or 6' 1"?
61inches, my apologies.0 -
61 inches or 6' 1"?
61inches, my apolgies.
Personally I'd have have you around 1800 calories and work on your macros to be optimal. Then give it a 2-3 weeks to see weight change and adjust diet down perhaps 100 and repeat)) 0 -
For someone who says 1200 is there "number".... feel free to post here or message me your details (age/height/weight/sex/how much you do cardio/lift/how busy your job is) and lets see what the score really is))
I am curious and interested. So here are my stats....
59 years old
5 ft. 5 in.
159. 6 pounds (as of this morning)
As for exercise, up until this week, l was doing one hour of cardio a week... about 500 calories. I don't work.
Your results?
So you sit in the house and rock back and forth?
Actually you aren't far off. I am in the house more than out.
I gave my totally honest stats in good faith. If that's not good enough, nothing I can do for you.0 -
61 inches or 6' 1"?
61inches, my apolgies.
Personally I'd have have you around 1800 calories and work on your macros to be optimal. Then give it a 2-3 weeks to see weight change and adjust diet down perhaps 100 and repeat))
I am starting with a trainer next week and going to start adding resistance training and lifting. I am super excited and will most likely HAVE to uip my calories daily to build muscle. Dumb question but what's macros?0 -
Sorry, my reply was tongue in cheek. Sorry if not clear.
You don't actually do anything in the house at all? Interested to know what you are actually doing 24/7? Literally sitting at the PC? I can't calculate your needs if I don't know what you do, that all!)) 0 -
A dietitian is a pro. "Nutritionist" is a job title you can put on anybody's name tag. My doctor has a lot more training in nutrition than just 8 hours of coursework.Doctors take 8 hrs or less of nutritional courses. I'd take anything they say with a grain of salt, unless they're a nutritionist/dietician.
Not sure why picture isn't showing. You can see it and read more here:
The picture on this blog is of Connie Diekman, a Registered Dietitian with her dog, Eddie, who has a certificate calling him a nutritionist from the American Association of Nutritional Consultants. No education or experience was needed to apply for this certificate.
http://www.healthline.com/health-blogs/diet-diva/nutritionist-vs-dietitian0 -
"Net" is when you take the estimate of how many calories you burned and subtract it from the estimated number of calories you consumed. One line of thinking is that this rough estimate is what you should be trying to adjust by eating and/or working out to hit the number of calories for the day as your diet goal. It does work for a lot of people, but it is not the only way and the other methods are not doomed to failure.
1200 calories is the minimum amount recommended by dietitians because it is not difficult to get the proper mix of nutrients in a carefully constructed diet at that level. It has nothing to do with "net" calories. What you burn in day minus what you eat is your deficit. Your body fat can provide 31.4 calories per pound per day toward the deficit. Take your weight and your BF% to compute how much you have, multiply by 31.4 and you will get the maximum deficit your fat stores can support. After that it will come from lean body mass and you don't want that. Some will come from LBM even before that, but that can't be helped.
Some people refer to diets at or below 1200 as Very Low Calorie, VLC or VLCD. That is not correct. Dietitians use numbers in the 500-700 range as VLCD and they do sometimes recommend that for short periods for the very obese, but not without medical supervision.
Anyway, whatever is easiest for you to understand and implement to make sure you get a reasonable deficit will cause you to lose weight.0 -
Sorry, my reply was tongue in cheek. Sorry if not clear.
You don't actually do anything in the house at all? Interested to know what you are actually doing 24/7? Literally sitting at the PC? I can't calculate your needs if I don't know what you do, that all!))
Ok... fair enough.
Not a lot. I don't count cooking or running the vacuum as exercise. I have a very tiny condo (no stairs) that takes little upkeep and I can walk from one end to the other in about 3 seconds. I do spend a lot of time computing and crocheting and knitting.
Does that help?0 -
What is the purpose of this thread? Some people are quite content at 1200. Some are under medical supervision. Others are older with limited mobility. What difference does it make why they are choosing 1200?
People are SO irritated by this. I have no idea why. Why are you sitting thinking about someone else's calorie intake. Very puzzling to me. :huh:0 -
1200-1300 net works for me. 1200 FLAT works for others. Don't see the point of making a big deal out of what ppl eat. It's not a miracle spot, but if it works....don't fix it.
I agree, I have fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome and hypothyroidism.I am 50 yrs old I have been using mfp since july 2010 and lost 112 lbs eating 1250 cals a day and doing what exercise I can , r u really going to tell me that this isnt working for me ...hmmmmm0 -
I find it quite entertaining that some people, like PepperWorm, get so upset that people choose to eat a certain number of calories per day.
In my opinion, 1200 calories of clean eating is far better than an 1800 calorie diet that includes a lot of crap!
I eat 1350 calories a day. I eat clean. I get all my nutrients. I am always satisfied. I'm losing fat!0 -
For someone who says 1200 is there "number".... feel free to post here or message me your details (age/height/weight/sex/how much you do cardio/lift/how busy your job is) and lets see what the score really is))
If you're still around, I'll bite.
I am 5'5" female, age 27. Weight 181 lbs.
Sedentary desk job 8 hours a day. After work I may shop/house work. I sleep 8 hour average. MFP gives me 1200 but I don't like eating that low.
I just started lifting weights (heavy) 3 days a week for approx 30 minutes. I do cardio- intervals for ~20 minutes- once or twice a week.
Thanks for taking the time.
And edit just so I don't feel like I'm derailing the thread: I don't like eating 1200, even net, but some people manage. To each their own I guess.0 -
mfp says I should eat 1200 a day however I feel hungry still so i HAVE BEEN EATING 1400 MOST OF THE TIME BUT HAVE HAD AS HIGH AS 1700 THINKING 1400 is best for me since I SIT ON MY BUTT MOST OF THE TIME howeever I do wodner if I should drop these calories the more weight I loose kinda like how weight watchers lowers your points the more you loose the less you get speaking of weight watchers it doesnt work for me I used all my points on junk food0
-
People need to mind their own business to be honest.0
-
...and what does 1200 mean anyway? I start at 1240 set by MFP, then I log all my workout cals. At the end of the day after exercise I probably end up eating about 1500-1600, so is that still 1200 that seems to upset you so? I think we ought to put the energy we spend into being judgy back into taking care of our own bodies. Seems like a better plan. Just sayin'0
-
Would hell freeze over if we went one day with throwing a b**ch-fit over how many calories people eat? You think you care about their health? You don't or you would have been this persistently aggressive about how bad obesity is for a person. Get off your high horse and get to the gym.
Only quoted because it made me laugh ...:laugh: that said, I agree!0 -
We are ALL special snowflakes but some refuse to see that. Not sure why? We all lose differently because our system works that's way. IMO if we were all the same we'd all be fat or we'd all be skinny or we'd all have cancer or we'd all be nuts. Whatever. My lifestyle my way your lifestyle your way. Enjoy YOUR life and do what you got to do, but let others do the same.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions