1200 cal/day and exercise
ralostaz2000
Posts: 135 Member
I am on 1200 Calories/day and I still need 11 lbs to lose...
Is exercise a must to do with this very low calories count? Because if I exercise I won't eat back caloriws burned as per MFP ...more over...I am not a sports fan except rope skipping occasionally
Is exercise a must to do with this very low calories count? Because if I exercise I won't eat back caloriws burned as per MFP ...more over...I am not a sports fan except rope skipping occasionally
0
Replies
-
no, you don't need to exercise. but why sports? walking is exercise, and a very healthy exercise, too. i started losing weight by going to stores i know very well and shopping without stopping. my legs got stronger and looked better, too. casual biking is also exercise, either indoor exercise biking or riding a bike.1
-
That's exactly what I am doing but didnt mention it...I try to accompany anyone from the family who is going to the malls or supermarkets...and I walk alot...and actually what makes me not playing sports are my kids...I have toddlers and it's not safe to use my treadmil or elliptical....so when I have a plenty of time I do rope skipping and I am becoming a pro..itsbasschick wrote: »no, you don't need to exercise. but why sports? walking is exercise, and a very healthy exercise, too. i started losing weight by going to stores i know very well and shopping without stopping. my legs got stronger and looked better, too. casual biking is also exercise, either indoor exercise biking or riding a bike.0 -
Might want to consider throwing some strength training in there (bodyweight training is fine for muscle retention). Be a shame to end up skinny and flabby.0
-
I was about to ask about belly lose skin...I only have some lose skin in the belly area and I dont have it anywhere else ...will strength trainings ir lifting weights help with it? Otherwise. ..surgeries are the only solutionMight want to consider throwing some strength training in there (bodyweight training is fine for muscle retention). Be a shame to end up skinny and flabby.
0 -
MFP is designed for you to eat back a portion/all of your exercise calories. Especially when you're on such a low calorie goal. Your deficit is already built in so when you burn exercise you should eat back those calories burned.
I typically eat back 50% of my exercise calories and have been losing between 1-2lbs per week since January, 2 months of which was on 1200 goal.1 -
1200 calories is a bare minimum for losing weight while sitting on your butt all day. If you also move, you need to eat those calories back. And it's great motivation to exercise - I get to eat if I move more, and still lose weight. Win win. Skinny isn't healthy on its own.0
-
If you only have 11 lbs to lose you should be set to lose 0.5 lbs/week which is only a 250 cal deficit. I would imagine if you are getting 1200 cals you have a more aggressive goal than necessary.
Why wouldn't you eat back exercise calories if you understand that is how MFP is meant to work?2 -
I was on 1250 cal for my first 16 weeks here ... and you better believe I ate most of my exercise calories back. I ate anywhere from about 50-75% of them back.
And I successfully lost 15 kg in those 16 weeks.
I can't imagine not eating exercise calories back. Personally, I need the fuel.2 -
MFP is designed for you to eat back a portion/all of your exercise calories. Especially when you're on such a low calorie goal. Your deficit is already built in so when you burn exercise you should eat back those calories burned.
I typically eat back 50% of my exercise calories and have been losing between 1-2lbs per week since January, 2 months of which was on 1200 goal.
I dont kniw what is the problem with these 1200 calories...fornthe first two months i was losing pretty well and with a very good pace...but for 3 weeks now...tge scale isn't moving except every 10 to 14 days and with a decrease of a pound or a pound and a half...is this what happens when I am near my goal?WinoGelato wrote: »If you only have 11 lbs to lose you should be set to lose 0.5 lbs/week which is only a 250 cal deficit. I would imagine if you are getting 1200 cals you have a more aggressive goal than necessary.
Why wouldn't you eat back exercise calories if you understand that is how MFP is meant to work?
0 -
I was on 1250 cal for my first 16 weeks here ... and you better believe I ate most of my exercise calories back. I ate anywhere from about 50-75% of them back.
And I successfully lost 15 kg in those 16 weeks.
I can't imagine not eating exercise calories back. Personally, I need the fuel.
Good for u..sounds encouraging. .I don't exercise much..that's why I don't care for eating back after exercising If did so...0 -
Yes, typically weight loss is harder as you get within your ideal body weight. Sometimes your body tells you what weight is ideal that doesn't match what your "goal weight" is, BTW - I've seen this wieth people who have very controlled diets and they come to what their body determines is their ideal body weight.3
-
ralostaz2000 wrote: »
I was about to ask about belly lose skin...I only have some lose skin in the belly area and I dont have it anywhere else ...will strength trainings ir lifting weights help with it? Otherwise. ..surgeries are the only solutionMight want to consider throwing some strength training in there (bodyweight training is fine for muscle retention). Be a shame to end up skinny and flabby.
Yea you asked this question yesterday, I replied, so did someone else. You should go back and look at yesterday's thread you started.1 -
the problem is that I can't get lower than 1200 calories. ...so I am thinking to break the diet for 1 or two days...increase carbs to 200 gm aday..then back to 1200 again.Yes, typically weight loss is harder as you get within your ideal body weight. Sometimes your body tells you what weight is ideal that doesn't match what your "goal weight" is, BTW - I've seen this wieth people who have very controlled diets and they come to what their body determines is their ideal body weight.
0 -
You can't get a lower recommendation than 1200 calories because it's not safe to tell anyone to eat so little.1
-
If you aren't going to follow the MFP "eat back exercise calories" method then don't use MFP to set your calorie goal.1
-
If i am not earing back exercise calories...wouldn't that be a good thing to lose more weight? Because it means Not eating back exercise calories=more deficit regemin=more fat loss? ? Isn't it?If you aren't going to follow the MFP "eat back exercise calories" method then don't use MFP to set your calorie goal.
OR is it better not to play spirts while on 1200 aday? As I think losing weight secret lies in the kitchen..but tge gym and sports are only for overall well being.
0 -
ralostaz2000 wrote: »
If i am not earing back exercise calories...wouldn't that be a good thing to lose more weight? Because it means Not eating back exercise calories=more deficit regemin=more fat loss? ? Isn't it?If you aren't going to follow the MFP "eat back exercise calories" method then don't use MFP to set your calorie goal.
OR is it better not to play spirts while on 1200 aday? As I think losing weight secret lies in the kitchen..but tge gym and sports are only for overall well being.
Yes, not eating back would create a larger deficit, but if that deficit brings you under 1200, you most definitely should be eating back exercise calories. Eating less than 1200 increases the chances of malnutrition which leads to all kinds of medical problems.0 -
annacole94 wrote: »1200 calories is a bare minimum for losing weight while sitting on your butt all day. If you also move, you need to eat those calories back. And it's great motivation to exercise - I get to eat if I move more, and still lose weight. Win win. Skinny isn't healthy on its own.
Actually, no it isn't. It may be for YOU, or for other specific people, but it is certainly NOT the case for everyone. 1200 calories for ME is maintenance, WITH my daily exercise. I sit on my @ss all day in my job, so for me, my calorie requirement is far lower than someone that is on their feet most of the day. Add to that my age (60) and than just makes it even worse. THere are no broad "one-size-fits-all" calorie numbers that you can apply to every person. People do have to start somewhere, but then find what works for them.0 -
annacole94 wrote: »You can't get a lower recommendation than 1200 calories because it's not safe to tell anyone to eat so little.
PLEASE stop spreading this misinformation!1 -
"I have toddlers and it's not safe to use my treadmill or elliptical".........i could be thinking of something different, but these aren't "sports". these are exercise machines. and so why isn't it safe for you to use these machine because of your toddlers? are the machines in a place where your kids can get hurt by getting on them? if yes, then either move the machines to a place where the kids don't have access to them. or teach your kids to stay away from the machines.1
-
ralostaz2000 wrote: »
If i am not earing back exercise calories...wouldn't that be a good thing to lose more weight? Because it means Not eating back exercise calories=more deficit regemin=more fat loss? ? Isn't it?If you aren't going to follow the MFP "eat back exercise calories" method then don't use MFP to set your calorie goal.
OR is it better not to play spirts while on 1200 aday? As I think losing weight secret lies in the kitchen..but tge gym and sports are only for overall well being.
Why do you think eating a tiny amount of food and then making your deficit even bigger is a good thing?
Please read this then you may understand why if you are doing the TDEE method then do it properly and if you are doing the MFP method then do it properly. I really don't understand why you would trust the app and method in some things and not others.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p10 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »annacole94 wrote: »You can't get a lower recommendation than 1200 calories because it's not safe to tell anyone to eat so little.
PLEASE stop spreading this misinformation!
Are you seriously recommending that OP eat less than 1200 calories/day?
1 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »annacole94 wrote: »1200 calories is a bare minimum for losing weight while sitting on your butt all day. If you also move, you need to eat those calories back. And it's great motivation to exercise - I get to eat if I move more, and still lose weight. Win win. Skinny isn't healthy on its own.
Actually, no it isn't. It may be for YOU, or for other specific people, but it is certainly NOT the case for everyone. 1200 calories for ME is maintenance, WITH my daily exercise. I sit on my @ss all day in my job, so for me, my calorie requirement is far lower than someone that is on their feet most of the day. Add to that my age (60) and than just makes it even worse. THere are no broad "one-size-fits-all" calorie numbers that you can apply to every person. People do have to start somewhere, but then find what works for them.
You are saying your TDEE is 1200? You said you are 60, what is your height?0 -
Wicked_Seraph wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »annacole94 wrote: »You can't get a lower recommendation than 1200 calories because it's not safe to tell anyone to eat so little.
PLEASE stop spreading this misinformation!
Are you seriously recommending that OP eat less than 1200 calories/day?
I am seriously saying that the statement "it's not safe to tell anyone to eat so little" when talking about 1200 is untrue. Completely and total hogwash.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »annacole94 wrote: »1200 calories is a bare minimum for losing weight while sitting on your butt all day. If you also move, you need to eat those calories back. And it's great motivation to exercise - I get to eat if I move more, and still lose weight. Win win. Skinny isn't healthy on its own.
Actually, no it isn't. It may be for YOU, or for other specific people, but it is certainly NOT the case for everyone. 1200 calories for ME is maintenance, WITH my daily exercise. I sit on my @ss all day in my job, so for me, my calorie requirement is far lower than someone that is on their feet most of the day. Add to that my age (60) and than just makes it even worse. THere are no broad "one-size-fits-all" calorie numbers that you can apply to every person. People do have to start somewhere, but then find what works for them.
You are saying your TDEE is 1200? You said you are 60, what is your height?
I am 5'7". And in perfect health. Physical every year. My doc says whatever I am doing, I am doing right.
0 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »annacole94 wrote: »1200 calories is a bare minimum for losing weight while sitting on your butt all day. If you also move, you need to eat those calories back. And it's great motivation to exercise - I get to eat if I move more, and still lose weight. Win win. Skinny isn't healthy on its own.
Actually, no it isn't. It may be for YOU, or for other specific people, but it is certainly NOT the case for everyone. 1200 calories for ME is maintenance, WITH my daily exercise. I sit on my @ss all day in my job, so for me, my calorie requirement is far lower than someone that is on their feet most of the day. Add to that my age (60) and than just makes it even worse. THere are no broad "one-size-fits-all" calorie numbers that you can apply to every person. People do have to start somewhere, but then find what works for them.
You are saying your TDEE is 1200? You said you are 60, what is your height?
I am 5'7". And in perfect health. Physical every year. My doc says whatever I am doing, I am doing right.
I don't know what your weight is, but it is still very unlikely that your TDEE is 1200. The IIFYM calculator indicates that you'd have to be 110 lbs and completely sedentary (zero exercise at all) at a height of 5'7 in order to have a TDEE of 1200. Your doctor may be satisfied with your approach, and that's fine, but diminishing the concept of a minimum calorie level to address the needs of the majority of the population is irresponsible.
3 -
The scale may be measuring muscle loss as well as fat loss. You may want to consider adding a progressive weight lifting program to slim down. Look at inches not weight.1
-
WinoGelato wrote: »I don't know what your weight is, but it is still very unlikely that your TDEE is 1200. The IIFYM calculator indicates that you'd have to be 110 lbs and completely sedentary (zero exercise at all) at a height of 5'7 in order to have a TDEE of 1200. Your doctor may be satisfied with your approach, and that's fine, but diminishing the concept of a minimum calorie level to address the needs of the majority of the population is irresponsible.
It's an online calculator! Again, that online calculator does not measure MY body. It is nothing more than an average of results from many people. There will ALWAYS be those that fall at the extreme ends of either range. That is my point. You cannot use one *magic* number and say that it fits everyone. It does not. I'm a perfect example, as are many other women that I know (all of us older). Trying to apply an average, to every person, is the same as sticking your head in the sand. My earlier post was responding to THAT perspective.1 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I don't know what your weight is, but it is still very unlikely that your TDEE is 1200. The IIFYM calculator indicates that you'd have to be 110 lbs and completely sedentary (zero exercise at all) at a height of 5'7 in order to have a TDEE of 1200. Your doctor may be satisfied with your approach, and that's fine, but diminishing the concept of a minimum calorie level to address the needs of the majority of the population is irresponsible.
It's an online calculator! Again, that online calculator does not measure MY body. It is nothing more than an average of results from many people. There will ALWAYS be those that fall at the extreme ends of either range. That is my point. You cannot use one *magic* number and say that it fits everyone. It does not. I'm a perfect example, as are many other women that I know (all of us older). Trying to apply an average, to every person, is the same as sticking your head in the sand. My earlier post was responding to THAT perspective.
I fully understand how statistical analysis works. The 1200 calorie limit is not saying that it is smack dab in the middle of a healthy range of caloric intakes. It is saying that for the vast majority of people, 1200 is the minimum amount of calories needed to achieve an adequate amount of energy without sacrificing nutrients that would be hard to reach on a lower calorie threshold.
Telling people that that number is rubbish and they should disregard it is irrresponsible. Because you are older and perhaps have different caloric needs, and your doctor have agreed that something different works for you, doesn't mean that the minimum level wouldn't be a beneficial goal for the OP, for the lurkers that are reading along, or for a significant percentage of the population. There really aren't that many special snowflakes in the world.
2 -
The scale may be measuring muscle loss as well as fat loss. You may want to consider adding a progressive weight lifting program to slim down. Look at inches not weight.
This. Also, i'm 5'7" and if I had to survive on 1200 i'd eat my own leg. You are earning those exercise calories, at least eat some of them.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions