Has anyone met there goal weight eating 1200 calories??
Options
Replies
-
im down from 250 to 202 right now eating 1200 calories (since february), my bf % went from 24% to 15% so far, with lifting and doing cardio
You are claiming to have lost 48 lbs in 6 weeks, or 8 lbs per week, which is not realistic or healthy.
Consider that you started at 190 lbs of lean mass. You now have 171.7 lbs of it. You've lost 18.3 lbs of muscle. Your "fat" loss is actually over 38% muscle loss.
Good luck with that.
0 -
I'm on 1200 calories a day & have lost 23lbs! :-)0
-
I tried eating 1200 calories years ago, cause I too once believed that was the magic number for women to lose weight. I'm 5'8 and was around 185 at the time, and ran every day.
It worked for a week and a half, til I started feeling tired and sick, and then i binged on everything that wasn't nailed down. No bueno. Didn't work for me. I'm eating around 2000 and still losing, which is alot better I think.
0 -
im down from 250 to 202 right now eating 1200 calories (since february), my bf % went from 24% to 15% so far, with lifting and doing cardio
You are claiming to have lost 48 lbs in 6 weeks, or 8 lbs per week, which is not realistic or healthy.
Consider that you started at 190 lbs of lean mass. You now have 171.7 lbs of it. You've lost 18.3 lbs of muscle. Your "fat" loss is actually over 38% muscle loss.
Good luck with that.
Look at the date that was written. From feb-July there are 24 weeks, that is 2lbs a week. Also this thread was started in 2013.0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »A post from July 2014 and your bumping it. I think the OP has moved on.
If the OP kept insisting on undereating, they're probably back after yo-yoing back up.
Seriously people. If you aren't a wee tiny sedentary woman over 50, 1200 is too low.0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »A post from July 2014 and your bumping it. I think the OP has moved on.
If the OP kept insisting on undereating, they're probably back after yo-yoing back up.
Seriously people. If you aren't a wee tiny sedentary woman over 50, 1200 is too low.
Speaking as a wee sedentary woman over 50, I have to say... I was reading some of the initial posts in this thread and was floored by some of the people doing 1200 calories. How young they were... how much they had to lose... MEN, even!!!!
Some very short younger women with very small frames might need to do 1200 as well if they want to get their weight down the last few pounds, so there's another category for you, but they're in the margins.
I was also struck by something else in a lot of the posts I read, skimming along.
How many of those people saying they lost on 1200 and gained it back.
Food for thought for people who want to go the fast route who don't NEED to eat 1200.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »_Terrapin_ wrote: »A post from July 2014 and your bumping it. I think the OP has moved on.
If the OP kept insisting on undereating, they're probably back after yo-yoing back up.
Seriously people. If you aren't a wee tiny sedentary woman over 50, 1200 is too low.
Speaking as a wee sedentary woman over 50, I have to say... I was reading some of the initial posts in this thread and was floored by some of the people doing 1200 calories. How young they were... how much they had to lose... MEN, even!!!!
Some very short younger women with very small frames might need to do 1200 as well if they want to get their weight down the last few pounds, so there's another category for you, but they're in the margins.
I was also struck by something else in a lot of the posts I read, skimming along.
How many of those people saying they lost on 1200 and gained it back.
Food for thought for people who want to go the fast route who don't NEED to eat 1200.
I'm a wee fairly sedentary woman of 45 and I haven't gone below 1350. Been losing steadily, and lately, I notice...TOO FAST. I raised it to 1500 to keep up.
I kind of wish MFP would gray out the "2 pounds a week" option for anyone not signing up with a BMI of under a certain level. People have got to stop rushing, they're setting themselves up for disaster.0 -
That's often considered a diet myth these days.
I kind of wish MFP would gray out the "2 pounds a week" option for anyone not signing up with a BMI of under a certain level. People have got to stop rushing, they're setting themselves up for disaster.mamapeach910 wrote: »_Terrapin_ wrote: »A post from July 2014 and your bumping it. I think the OP has moved on.
If the OP kept insisting on undereating, they're probably back after yo-yoing back up.
Seriously people. If you aren't a wee tiny sedentary woman over 50, 1200 is too low.
Speaking as a wee sedentary woman over 50, I have to say... I was reading some of the initial posts in this thread and was floored by some of the people doing 1200 calories. How young they were... how much they had to lose... MEN, even!!!!
Some very short younger women with very small frames might need to do 1200 as well if they want to get their weight down the last few pounds, so there's another category for you, but they're in the margins.
I was also struck by something else in a lot of the posts I read, skimming along.
How many of those people saying they lost on 1200 and gained it back.
Food for thought for people who want to go the fast route who don't NEED to eat 1200.
2. It’s not important to set realistic weight loss goals to avoid frustration. Be ambitious instead. Two studies, the authors say, actually show that interventions designed to improve weight-loss by setting more realistic goals did not lead patients to lose more weight, and several studies show more weight loss with aggressive goals.
3. There’s no reason to think that slow, gradual weight loss is better over the long-term compared to losing lots of weight fast. A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials that compared rapid weight loss and slow weight loss (or, to be more precise, extreme diets and less grueling ones) found that though the extreme diets resulted in the loss of 66% more weight (16% of body weight versus 10% for the regular diets), there was no difference at the end of a year.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/01/31/seven-dangerous-myths-about-weight-loss-or-are-they-little-white-lies/
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
That's often considered a diet myth these days.
I kind of wish MFP would gray out the "2 pounds a week" option for anyone not signing up with a BMI of under a certain level. People have got to stop rushing, they're setting themselves up for disaster.mamapeach910 wrote: »_Terrapin_ wrote: »A post from July 2014 and your bumping it. I think the OP has moved on.
If the OP kept insisting on undereating, they're probably back after yo-yoing back up.
Seriously people. If you aren't a wee tiny sedentary woman over 50, 1200 is too low.
Speaking as a wee sedentary woman over 50, I have to say... I was reading some of the initial posts in this thread and was floored by some of the people doing 1200 calories. How young they were... how much they had to lose... MEN, even!!!!
Some very short younger women with very small frames might need to do 1200 as well if they want to get their weight down the last few pounds, so there's another category for you, but they're in the margins.
I was also struck by something else in a lot of the posts I read, skimming along.
How many of those people saying they lost on 1200 and gained it back.
Food for thought for people who want to go the fast route who don't NEED to eat 1200.
2. It’s not important to set realistic weight loss goals to avoid frustration. Be ambitious instead. Two studies, the authors say, actually show that interventions designed to improve weight-loss by setting more realistic goals did not lead patients to lose more weight, and several studies show more weight loss with aggressive goals.
3. There’s no reason to think that slow, gradual weight loss is better over the long-term compared to losing lots of weight fast. A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials that compared rapid weight loss and slow weight loss (or, to be more precise, extreme diets and less grueling ones) found that though the extreme diets resulted in the loss of 66% more weight (16% of body weight versus 10% for the regular diets), there was no difference at the end of a year.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/01/31/seven-dangerous-myths-about-weight-loss-or-are-they-little-white-lies/
So, two useless studies that give the circular logic that, over the same period of time, people who lose weight fast will lose a larger number of pounds than those who lost slower.
That's like saying that a fast runner will cover more ground than a slow runner if they are our for the same period of time.
0 -
But it also pertains to maintenance. Fast losers are not found to regain more weight than slow losers, over the long term.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141015190832.htm
Before that study, there were many others that showed similar or even more surprising results-- that the more aggressive the diet, the better the long term maintenance results.
It's pretty hard to find an authoritative body that considers a goal of 2 lbs. a week dangerously aggressive, for anyone. That's why all the weight loss apps use it. It's widely considered a reasonable goal.0 -
I'm a sedentary woman of 40 (5ft 3"). My BMR is 1412 and my TDEE is 1694. I've been eating 1200 calories since September of last year and have lost 45 lbs, but it has slowed down a lot lately. In fact, I hit a plateau for a month, which was so discouraging. I'm still a long way off my goal weight (about 40 lbs to go). I went very low carb for two weeks just to shift the scales and it worked, but when I went back to eating normal carbs, I put on 6lbs in three days! I feel so deflated at the moment. The thought of eating more than 1200 calories scares me, given how low my BMR and TDEE is already. I still have a long way to go and I'm worried upping my calories at this stage will just stop the weight loss altogether. MFP won't up my calories anyway, even if I reset my weight loss to 1/2 lb a week, it still lists me as 1200 calories. Why is it so much harder to lose now after doing so well up till last month?0
-
Kimberlyann21 wrote: »my question is how much is everyone weighing to eat 1200 calories what if your over 250 lbs can that make your body go into starvation mode? when i typed my information in on mfp i did slightly active because i am working out...and it set me at 1510 calories..
I have been told you need more calories when in that weight range. My g'daughter has list 160# eating 1500 cald. When you loose down to 200 lower it to 1200 cals.0 -
I'm a sedentary woman of 40 (5ft 3"). My BMR is 1412 and my TDEE is 1694. I've been eating 1200 calories since September of last year and have lost 45 lbs, but it has slowed down a lot lately. In fact, I hit a plateau for a month, which was so discouraging. I'm still a long way off my goal weight (about 40 lbs to go). I went very low carb for two weeks just to shift the scales and it worked, but when I went back to eating normal carbs, I put on 6lbs in three days! I feel so deflated at the moment. The thought of eating more than 1200 calories scares me, given how low my BMR and TDEE is already. I still have a long way to go and I'm worried upping my calories at this stage will just stop the weight loss altogether. MFP won't up my calories anyway, even if I reset my weight loss to 1/2 lb a week, it still lists me as 1200 calories. Why is it so much harder to lose now after doing so well up till last month?
Upping your exercise will help, if you're capable. I'm an inch shorter than you, I had a 4 day stall where I gained 4lbs scale weight. Then it slowly went back down and now I weigh less than I did before the stall.
However, I weigh quite a bit, 204, and it's a guarantee that weight loss slows the closer you get to your goal weight because you require less engery as time goes on.0 -
im down from 250 to 202 right now eating 1200 calories (since february), my bf % went from 24% to 15% so far, with lifting and doing cardio
wow... 24 to 15% on 1200 calories?
yup, i'm trying to get to like 7%, and i see no reason why i won't get there continuing this way. I also lift for like 2 hours a day and do atleast an hour of cardio, and i certainly don't re-eat those calories that i burn.
Yup, this is it for me too? Averaging about 1200 a day and not eating back calories. Leaned out easy...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 934 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions