Doctor suggest 1200 Calories

Annr

1Nana2many wrote: »

I am 5'4" and I began eating 1200 calories per day in January. I don't trust myself not to eat all calories back, so I have chosen not to input my physical activity, just so it's not there to tempt me. I too was a serious snacker, mostly out of boredom (I resently retired). I read a blog by a woman who, when tempted to snack, gives herself 30 minutes, drinks some water, then if she's actually still wanting the snack will fix one serving of it and eat it. I have tried to incorporate this philosophy into my snacking habits. It has helped me hold out until the next meal quite often. One thing, once you start eating proper servings and following your calorie intake, it feels like you are over eating when you eat a large meal so your body does adapt if you give it the opportunity. Now, when I start feeling really empty, it's usually a few minutes until my next meal time. And a little hunger never hurt anyone.

I do have some snacks but they are part of the mindset of mine that every meal is a snack and every snack is a meal. Its just fuel to run this body of mine. I also try to stop eating and close the kitchen down at 7 PM. It works for me, and my innards are happier. I think its important to eat to feeling somewhat satisfied, but never to feeling totally stuffed, and uncomfortable.

AnnPT77

herlove4fit wrote: »

My doctor told me that all women should eat 1200 calories to lose weight. And I asked her, "Even if you workout," and she said yes.She believes 1200 calories is the magic number. I've gained back 18 pounds because I have been eating way too much about (2500-2800 cal). According, to my fitbit my tdee is (2200-2300). I'm a 5'3 female, 29 yrs and 160 pounds. I find that my biggest problem is snacking out of boredom because I'm home alone. However, I can't see myself eating 1200 calories I believe it's too low for me. My husband thinks I should listen to the doctor and try a 1200 calorie diet. I don't know if I'm over thinking it, I just don't know what's right. I really can't say how I lost weight any other time because I always zig zag my calories. What would you suggest?

Wha? I tried 1200 for a bit, but it was just unnecessary. I got fatigued. And that was 1200 net, so I was typically eating 1400-1500 or more.

I wanted to step in just to give a variant data point, since you're hearing from so many who can lose only at pretty low calories. We're not all identical, and you do want to lose at a conservative rate so you stay strong & healthy throughout the process, and find it sustainable over the long haul.

I'm 60 y/o, 5'5", sedentary lifestyle but frequent exerciser, so I use the MFP 'net calories' method, eating back all my exercise calories (which I estimate carefully). April 2015 SW 183, CW 118, trying to zero in on my maintenance calories. I lost most of that weight at 1400-1500 net (1600-1800 eaten). I was still losing slowly at 1700 net, have recently gone to 1800, and may have to increase further.

IMO, since you have a Fitbit and a TDEE estimate, you could simply eat at 500(ish) below your TDEE, and expect to lose about a pound a week, which seems reasonable since you don't have a huge amount to lose.

Or, start with what MFP recommends for you at the 1 pound per week rate, and eat back 50% or more of exercise (probably more, since you're using the Fitbit).

If you're consistently eating at that calorie goal, while weighing food & logging meticulously, and lose less than a pound a week then go down 100 a day or so for a couple of weeks and see how that goes.

It's definitely not the case that all women need to (or should) eat 1200 calories to lose weight!

no_day_but_2day

shadow2soul wrote: »

My suggestion:
-Plug your stats into MFP
-Pick a reasonable weight loss per week
- sync your fitbit to MFP
- enable negative adjustments (your calories will be adjusted up or down based on your activity for the day)


1200 is not right for everyone.

This. Enable negative adjustments is my new favorite thing. The only time I don't like it is when I do a swim workout since I have to take my fitbit off for that.

pvju

pvju wrote: »

TeaBea wrote: »

The problem with dropping pounds quickly is that you will drop a higher % of lean muscle mass than those with moderate calorie deficits.

Back in the day - my goal was a number on the scale. But, I'm not going to be wearing that number on my forehead. Losing muscle+fat makes me a smaller version of the current me. I don't want to be "just" a smaller version, I want to be a healthier version. I don't want to still look "fluffy" when I get to goal.

I wouldn't say I'm dropping pounds "quickly" by any stretch. I've lost approximately 8-10lbs in 6 weeks. I'm in my fifties. I lift heavy weights to build and maintain muscle. At my activity level, age and size - I30lbs - it doesn't take a lot of calories to keep me going, so I'm not seeing any muscle loss.

MegSchuy16

I'm 26, 5'6", and weigh 210.5lbs. I have my calorie goal set to 1300 calories a day, but I usually only wind up eating between 1150-1200 calories because I've been eating so many veggies and eating healthier that I don't find myself getting that hungry anymore and I don't want to force myself to eat. Once I start working out more though... depending on how many calories I burn... I imagine my appetite will pick up. I'd say, and heard from many people, that it's good to at least eat back half of what you burn... So if I have my goal set to 1300 calories and I burn 500 calories my daily calorie intake would be 1550 calories...