5ft - 5ft3 ladies?! Anyone else eating 1200
MichelleNicole93
Posts: 89 Member
Anyone find success with 1200 cals a day and exercise? Any short girls know which cal is maintaining for you?
0
Replies
-
Considering that a toddler's calorie needs're 1,000 ~ 1,400 daily (depending upon activity levels), being taller you should be consuming a lot more than 1,200 calories; if/when you exercise! That 1,200 calorie minimum, doesn't include exercise calories!
I am 5' 3" & have a disability Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), that varies in intensity (caloric needs) daily. When I am bedridden I consume 1,200 minimum, housebound 1,300 & 1,400 when I am able to leave the house + on any of those days I consume an extra 100 calories, when menstruation symptoms begin; since the body is doing more work. If/when I exercise, I only consume half of those calories because most of the time, the calorie burns're highly inaccurate!0 -
I cannot see how tall she is, but I am assuming between 5' and 5'3".
I am definitely not a toddler; they are still growing so their caloric needs are not the same as a full grown adult.
I hover around 1200. I am short, older and relatively sedentary. How much one should consume is highly subjective to their life style.2 -
I assume this also!I cannot see how tall she is, but I am assuming between 5' and 5'3".
Which is why their calorie needs're 400 in range but still valid that someone nearly twice as tall, should be consuming significantly more; even while losing weight instead of growing (gaining weight)!I am definitely not a toddler; they are still growing so their caloric needs are not the same as a full grown adult.
As 1 ages, their metabolism; naturally lowers but in another thread, she mentions that she binges; which is a clear indication that she isn't consuming enough! Unless she has Binge Eating Disorder (BED).I hover around 1200. I am short, older and relatively sedentary. How much one should consume is highly subjective to their life style.0 -
I'm about 5ft2! I found though that with 1200 calories I lose a steady 1-2lbs weekly. If I go up to 1500csls I'm only losing .5 every two or so weeks. Doesn't work well for me. Not sure why but my body seems to like 12000
-
MichelleNicole93 wrote: »I'm about 5ft2! I found though that with 1200 calories I lose a steady 1-2lbs weekly. If I go up to 1500csls I'm only losing .5 every two or so weeks. Doesn't work well for me. Not sure why but my body seems to like 1200
The 1,200 might be fine without exercising but exercise requires, more calorie consumption!
Also are you using a food scale? I ate a Hot Pocket last week & the box said it was approximately 300 calories but when I weighed it, it was over 500 calories. Therefore you might be consuming, a lot more; than you believe!0 -
DeficitDuchess wrote: »
I assume this also!I cannot see how tall she is, but I am assuming between 5' and 5'3".
Which is why their calorie needs're 400 in range but still valid that someone nearly twice as tall, should be consuming significantly more; even while losing weight instead of growing (gaining weight)!I am definitely not a toddler; they are still growing so their caloric needs are not the same as a full grown adult.
As 1 ages, their metabolism; naturally lowers but in another thread, she mentions that she binges; which is a clear indication that she isn't consuming enough! Unless she has Binge Eating Disorder (BED).I hover around 1200. I am short, older and relatively sedentary. How much one should consume is highly subjective to their life style.
I see you edited your initial response to add more details.
The whole toddler analogy is comparing apples and oranges. However, I do not follow her around and have no idea what her other threads look like. I cannot make a judgment of BED based solely on what I read on this thread. Just responding to how much I eat while losing; which is suitable for my life situation at the moment.
She is also asking about success which I took to mean losing weight, then asked about maintaining. I lose at 1200ish and would maintain at 1500.
0 -
MichelleNicole93 wrote: »I'm about 5ft2! I found though that with 1200 calories I lose a steady 1-2lbs weekly. If I go up to 1500csls I'm only losing .5 every two or so weeks. Doesn't work well for me. Not sure why but my body seems to like 1200
How much are you looking to lose? What is your age? How much do you weigh now?0 -
I'm 5'4 ish. Currently at 63kg.
I'm starting at 1200, clean eating (paleo template, but not quite paleo). This has worked for me in the past but is much harder and slower with some medications on board.
I'm day 3 back at it. Wish me luck. My pre medication weight was always 53-56kg with similar exercise and caloric intake.
I'm aiming to get back to 56kg for now.1 -
5'4" and usually taking in 1000-1200, however my lifestyle is exceptionally sedentary. I'm a student and spend a lot of time sitting down reading. I 'top up' a little if I have a particularly active day. For example, today I have to walk across town to attend lectures and back again, so I'll eat a little more today.
I'm finding it's working (20lbs+ so far, and probably a little too quickly) but if I were exercising every day on that number of calories, I think I would probably feel very ill and tired after a week or so. If I don't have time to top up on days where I am more active, I get really cold and irritable, and can get headaches.
If you're trying to maintain, I would play around with far higher numbers than that. I've seen the ever-elusive 2100 quoted as being for an active woman who's around 5'7" (not sure how accurate this is though). It might be worth trying that for a month (as it takes time for metabolism to adjust) and seeing how it impacts you. If you gain, tune the calories down a little. If you lose, bring them up a little. Find out what works for you.0 -
DeficitDuchess wrote: »
I assume this also!I cannot see how tall she is, but I am assuming between 5' and 5'3".
Which is why their calorie needs're 400 in range but still valid that someone nearly twice as tall, should be consuming significantly more; even while losing weight instead of growing (gaining weight)!I am definitely not a toddler; they are still growing so their caloric needs are not the same as a full grown adult.
As 1 ages, their metabolism; naturally lowers but in another thread, she mentions that she binges; which is a clear indication that she isn't consuming enough! Unless she has Binge Eating Disorder (BED).I hover around 1200. I am short, older and relatively sedentary. How much one should consume is highly subjective to their life style.
I see you edited your initial response to add more details.
The whole toddler analogy is comparing apples and oranges. However, I do not follow her around and have no idea what her other threads look like. I cannot make a judgment of BED based solely on what I read on this thread. Just responding to how much I eat while losing; which is suitable for my life situation at the moment.
She is also asking about success which I took to mean losing weight, then asked about maintaining. I lose at 1200ish and would maintain at 1500.
I am only aware of her other thread because it was posted, around the same time; as this 1 & within the same section. Since she didn't mention how she determines, her food calories; I suspect that she might be slightly overeating & possibly the binging might be a result of comfort, for not achieving her weight loss goal; rather than actual hunger.1 -
5'4" and usually taking in 1000-1200, however my lifestyle is exceptionally sedentary. I'm a student and spend a lot of time sitting down reading. I 'top up' a little if I have a particularly active day. For example, today I have to walk across town to attend lectures and back again, so I'll eat a little more today.
I'm finding it's working (20lbs+ so far, and probably a little too quickly) but if I were exercising every day on that number of calories, I think I would probably feel very ill and tired after a week or so. If I don't have time to top up on days where I am more active, I get really cold and irritable, and can get headaches.
If you're trying to maintain, I would play around with far higher numbers than that. I've seen the ever-elusive 2100 quoted as being for an active woman who's around 5'7" (not sure how accurate this is though). It might be worth trying that for a month (as it takes time for metabolism to adjust) and seeing how it impacts you. If you gain, tune the calories down a little. If you lose, bring them up a little. Find out what works for you.
When consuming at an extreme deficit, your metabolism also lowers; making it increasingly difficult to lose weight & then maintain what was lost!1 -
DeficitDuchess wrote: »When consuming at an extreme deficit, your metabolism also lowers; making it increasingly difficult to lose weight & then maintain what was lost!
Agreed, and I wouldn't recommend what I'm doing to everyone. It works for me at the moment because I'm pretty overweight. Over time, it's quite likely I'll have to change how I acquire my deficit and actually tune my calories up for a while to continue losing. I may actually have to leave my desk once in a while *gasps with horror*.2 -
I find restricting my calories all day everyday really daunting. I lost 3 stone in the past, but situations change.. People change.. Y'know. I've found the 5:2 diet helping a lot with it. I feel Like I'm only dieting 2 days a week. And it's helped my appetite immensely.
I'd suggest trying it. The health benefits are unreal
EDIT: I'm also 5ft2 and needing to lose 40lbs! have lost 5lbs in the last 3 weeks using this method!0 -
I'm 5'3" and have lost about 30 pounds so far eating around 1,750/day. I don't do much deliberate exercise (yet), but I do consider myself lightly active. I spend my days chasing a 4 year old and working at his preschool (so chasing lots of 4 year olds).
I am happily losing about .5 pound per week. Every time I restricted more I found myself thinking about food constantly, and I was miserable. I always fell off the wagon, binged, hated myself for failing, said *kitten* it, and stopped logging for months. This time I've stuck with it as well as I've wanted to, and lost more than I ever did when I restricted more.1 -
Me! I am not quite 5'2'', if I calculate out my maintenance at a sedentary activity level (I have a desk job), I am around 1500. Based on non-exercise days, this seems about right. I usually eat about 1200 a day. Sometimes a bit lower. Generally not lower than 1100. I do sometimes consume more (usually on special occasions or there are days that I just need to eat more!). I try to keep that below maintenance and not too often. I find that it really is not too hard, but you have to get used to eating a lot of veggies if you want your plate to look full. Good thing I love veggies!
A lot of people seem to think that anything below 1200 will suddenly put you in this starvation mode where you can no longer lose weight and are ruining your metabolism. Which may be true over time for the average person that has maintenance between 2000-2500. For me, 1200 is only a 300 calorie deficit and working out would increase that to more. That is not even a pound a week and by no means unsafe. If I were to start eating around 1500 a day, it would take weeks to lose one pound. To tell someone that they need to eat at their maintenance level because an amount slightly below that will put them in a phantom "starvation mode" is silly. If you were to tell someone with an average height and average activity to eat 2000 a day to lose weight, they would laugh at you. To lose weight, you need a deficit. If you are small, you are probably going to fall into a territory that would would be unsafe for average people. It takes less to feed someone that is 5'2'' than someone that is 5'7''. To have one flat number that is considered starving yourself for everyone, just doesn't make sense. Also, comparing the calorie needs of a toddler to a women who is done growing and less active is silly. They have much different needs.1 -
Me! I am not quite 5'2'', if I calculate out my maintenance at a sedentary activity level (I have a desk job), I am around 1500. Based on non-exercise days, this seems about right. I usually eat about 1200 a day. Sometimes a bit lower. Generally not lower than 1100. I do sometimes consume more (usually on special occasions or there are days that I just need to eat more!). I try to keep that below maintenance and not too often. I find that it really is not too hard, but you have to get used to eating a lot of veggies if you want your plate to look full. Good thing I love veggies!
A lot of people seem to think that anything below 1200 will suddenly put you in this starvation mode where you can no longer lose weight and are ruining your metabolism. Which may be true over time for the average person that has maintenance between 2000-2500. For me, 1200 is only a 300 calorie deficit and working out would increase that to more. That is not even a pound a week and by no means unsafe. If I were to start eating around 1500 a day, it would take weeks to lose one pound. To tell someone that they need to eat at their maintenance level because an amount slightly below that will put them in a phantom "starvation mode" is silly. If you were to tell someone with an average height and average activity to eat 2000 a day to lose weight, they would laugh at you. To lose weight, you need a deficit. If you are small, you are probably going to fall into a territory that would would be unsafe for average people. It takes less to feed someone that is 5'2'' than someone that is 5'7''. To have one flat number that is considered starving yourself for everyone, just doesn't make sense. Also, comparing the calorie needs of a toddler to a women who is done growing and less active is silly. They have much different needs.
1st lower metabolism & starvation mode're 2 completely separate things because 1 of them's a myth (starvation mode) 2nd 1,200 calories're typically fine without exercise, not so with exercising! The problem is that if 1 unnecessarily lowers their metabolism, they also lower; how much they're able to consume. If you'd like to consume as much as possible & without having to exercise, solely to compensate a lower metabolism; then why not consume as much as possible & still be in an appropriate deficit, to lose or level, to maintain?0 -
I'm 5'1" but no 1200 cals here... I tried it years ago when I was an MFP noob, lost weight quickly and still looked.... not at all how I thought 105 lbs should look... Because bye bye lean muscle mass
I maintain on about 1700-1750 calories and eat 1400 when cutting. (Ok, I *try* to eat 1400... It can be tough.)2 -
DeficitDuchess wrote: »Me! I am not quite 5'2'', if I calculate out my maintenance at a sedentary activity level (I have a desk job), I am around 1500. Based on non-exercise days, this seems about right. I usually eat about 1200 a day. Sometimes a bit lower. Generally not lower than 1100. I do sometimes consume more (usually on special occasions or there are days that I just need to eat more!). I try to keep that below maintenance and not too often. I find that it really is not too hard, but you have to get used to eating a lot of veggies if you want your plate to look full. Good thing I love veggies!
A lot of people seem to think that anything below 1200 will suddenly put you in this starvation mode where you can no longer lose weight and are ruining your metabolism. Which may be true over time for the average person that has maintenance between 2000-2500. For me, 1200 is only a 300 calorie deficit and working out would increase that to more. That is not even a pound a week and by no means unsafe. If I were to start eating around 1500 a day, it would take weeks to lose one pound. To tell someone that they need to eat at their maintenance level because an amount slightly below that will put them in a phantom "starvation mode" is silly. If you were to tell someone with an average height and average activity to eat 2000 a day to lose weight, they would laugh at you. To lose weight, you need a deficit. If you are small, you are probably going to fall into a territory that would would be unsafe for average people. It takes less to feed someone that is 5'2'' than someone that is 5'7''. To have one flat number that is considered starving yourself for everyone, just doesn't make sense. Also, comparing the calorie needs of a toddler to a women who is done growing and less active is silly. They have much different needs.
1st lower metabolism & starvation mode're 2 completely separate things because 1 of them's a myth (starvation mode) 2nd 1,200 calories're typically fine without exercise, not so with exercising! The problem is that if 1 unnecessarily lowers their metabolism, they also lower; how much they're able to consume. If you'd like to consume as much as possible & without having to exercise, solely to compensate a lower metabolism; then why not consume as much as possible & still be in an appropriate deficit, to lose or level, to maintain?
The problem with that is that the 1200 number came from subtracting 1000 calories from the average TDEE. The 1000 calorie floor comes from various studies about how much is a safe amount to lose. The 1200 net is for an average person. It may work for you, but it certainly would be painstakingly slow for me. Saying that a 5' woman has the same floor as a 6' woman is silly.0 -
I am 5'2" and successfully lost about a pound a week eating 1320/day in the past. Unfortunately, I did not maintain that loss. I am back (as of today) and plan to try 1400. If any other short ladies are looking for MFP friends, please add me.0
-
DeficitDuchess wrote: »Me! I am not quite 5'2'', if I calculate out my maintenance at a sedentary activity level (I have a desk job), I am around 1500. Based on non-exercise days, this seems about right. I usually eat about 1200 a day. Sometimes a bit lower. Generally not lower than 1100. I do sometimes consume more (usually on special occasions or there are days that I just need to eat more!). I try to keep that below maintenance and not too often. I find that it really is not too hard, but you have to get used to eating a lot of veggies if you want your plate to look full. Good thing I love veggies!
A lot of people seem to think that anything below 1200 will suddenly put you in this starvation mode where you can no longer lose weight and are ruining your metabolism. Which may be true over time for the average person that has maintenance between 2000-2500. For me, 1200 is only a 300 calorie deficit and working out would increase that to more. That is not even a pound a week and by no means unsafe. If I were to start eating around 1500 a day, it would take weeks to lose one pound. To tell someone that they need to eat at their maintenance level because an amount slightly below that will put them in a phantom "starvation mode" is silly. If you were to tell someone with an average height and average activity to eat 2000 a day to lose weight, they would laugh at you. To lose weight, you need a deficit. If you are small, you are probably going to fall into a territory that would would be unsafe for average people. It takes less to feed someone that is 5'2'' than someone that is 5'7''. To have one flat number that is considered starving yourself for everyone, just doesn't make sense. Also, comparing the calorie needs of a toddler to a women who is done growing and less active is silly. They have much different needs.
1st lower metabolism & starvation mode're 2 completely separate things because 1 of them's a myth (starvation mode) 2nd 1,200 calories're typically fine without exercise, not so with exercising! The problem is that if 1 unnecessarily lowers their metabolism, they also lower; how much they're able to consume. If you'd like to consume as much as possible & without having to exercise, solely to compensate a lower metabolism; then why not consume as much as possible & still be in an appropriate deficit, to lose or level, to maintain?
The problem with that is that the 1200 number came from subtracting 1000 calories from the average TDEE. The 1000 calorie floor comes from various studies about how much is a safe amount to lose. The 1200 net is for an average person. It may work for you, but it certainly would be painstakingly slow for me. Saying that a 5' woman has the same floor as a 6' woman is silly.
That 1,200 calorie minimum, also includes gender + various ages, weights & activity levels, that aren't additional exercise! Height's only 1/5th, of the equation!0 -
I'm 5'1 and towards the end of my loss journey I set myself to lose .5lb. To lose that I was at a net of about 1400 calories a day. I just started maintaining, so I'm not 100% sure of the number, but going by my previous numbers I'm starting at 1850 cals and going to make adjustments depending on what happens with my body. Now, I do exercise about 4-6 times a week.
But I started at 160lbs and now I'm down to 127-128lbs. I never had to eat at 1200 calories b/c I made sure to exercise and eat back half of those calories.
If you are sedentary, I could definitely see 1200 calories being necessary to losing weight.0 -
DeficitDuchess wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »Me! I am not quite 5'2'', if I calculate out my maintenance at a sedentary activity level (I have a desk job), I am around 1500. Based on non-exercise days, this seems about right. I usually eat about 1200 a day. Sometimes a bit lower. Generally not lower than 1100. I do sometimes consume more (usually on special occasions or there are days that I just need to eat more!). I try to keep that below maintenance and not too often. I find that it really is not too hard, but you have to get used to eating a lot of veggies if you want your plate to look full. Good thing I love veggies!
A lot of people seem to think that anything below 1200 will suddenly put you in this starvation mode where you can no longer lose weight and are ruining your metabolism. Which may be true over time for the average person that has maintenance between 2000-2500. For me, 1200 is only a 300 calorie deficit and working out would increase that to more. That is not even a pound a week and by no means unsafe. If I were to start eating around 1500 a day, it would take weeks to lose one pound. To tell someone that they need to eat at their maintenance level because an amount slightly below that will put them in a phantom "starvation mode" is silly. If you were to tell someone with an average height and average activity to eat 2000 a day to lose weight, they would laugh at you. To lose weight, you need a deficit. If you are small, you are probably going to fall into a territory that would would be unsafe for average people. It takes less to feed someone that is 5'2'' than someone that is 5'7''. To have one flat number that is considered starving yourself for everyone, just doesn't make sense. Also, comparing the calorie needs of a toddler to a women who is done growing and less active is silly. They have much different needs.
1st lower metabolism & starvation mode're 2 completely separate things because 1 of them's a myth (starvation mode) 2nd 1,200 calories're typically fine without exercise, not so with exercising! The problem is that if 1 unnecessarily lowers their metabolism, they also lower; how much they're able to consume. If you'd like to consume as much as possible & without having to exercise, solely to compensate a lower metabolism; then why not consume as much as possible & still be in an appropriate deficit, to lose or level, to maintain?
The problem with that is that the 1200 number came from subtracting 1000 calories from the average TDEE. The 1000 calorie floor comes from various studies about how much is a safe amount to lose. The 1200 net is for an average person. It may work for you, but it certainly would be painstakingly slow for me. Saying that a 5' woman has the same floor as a 6' woman is silly.
That 1,200 calorie minimum, also includes various weight & activity levels, that aren't additional exercise! Height's only 1/3rd, of the equation!
Exactly! For the average person 1200 is probably close to correct. I am almost 5'2'', I only have about 10 pounds to lose so I weigh less than the average woman and have a sedentary life (I do work out to make up for it, so maybe you could argue that I have an average activity level, but since I am short and not too weighty, it takes way more for me to work off the same amount of calories)0 -
I'm 5'1", 124 lbs and maintain on ~1750. When I was actively losing weight, I averaged a loss of about 1/2 lb a week (with 40 lbs to lose) and it slowed to 1/4 lb a week once I got to a "healthy weight" of 132 lbs. I could only do 1200 when I was mostly sedentary.
I'm currently at my goal weight and working on recomp. My job is sedentary, but I'm lightly active otherwise and get 2-3 hours of exercise a week (hiking, running, yoga, strength training, etc.) I'm currently trying to up my activity level/steps. When I want to cut, I typically go down to 1400-1500 with no eating back exercise calories. I'll lose about 1/4 lb a week. (I can't do less than 1400 or my runs suffer.)
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I'm 5'3" and have lost about 30 pounds so far eating around 1,750/day. I don't do much deliberate exercise (yet), but I do consider myself lightly active. I spend my days chasing a 4 year old and working at his preschool (so chasing lots of 4 year olds).
I am happily losing about .5 pound per week. Every time I restricted more I found myself thinking about food constantly, and I was miserable. I always fell off the wagon, binged, hated myself for failing, said *kitten* it, and stopped logging for months. This time I've stuck with it as well as I've wanted to, and lost more than I ever did when I restricted more.
I'm in the same boat. If I restrict myself too much, I'm just over it after a few weeks. For me the thing that has seemed to work best is iifym.com to calculate. Currently I'm not adding to my calorie intake due to excersice. Not till I'm comfortable with tracking. I don't think thereally is any one number fits all for this situation, it should be different for everyone. Imo0 -
I'm 5'3 and average between 1200-1500 depending on my activity level. I usually get in at least 100g of protein daily though and focus on getting my carbs from veggies.0
-
I am 5'4" and cutting at 1200 calories a day or so. I weigh 119lbs right now. Weight falls off slowly. Hope this helps! Feel free to add!0
-
Hi. I'm 5'3". 45 yrs old. I was just diagnosed with sleep apnea and they think I've had it since my 20s. Always had to exercise constantly and eat very little to keep weight off. So now we know why. I've just now been able to start losing weight again but I notice I have to stick between 1200-1500 to lose. I have about 85 lbs to lose. I have an office job, but I walk 40-45 minutes at least 6 times per week right now and getting well over 10,000 steps per day. Closer to 1500 calories I'm lucky to lose 1/2 pound per week. At 1200 I'm losing 2-4. But the 1200 is tough right now. Slowly working my way down. I also have food allergies including a lot of grains so it can make things interesting.0
-
Not to throw a wrench in here, but I have a question. I use MFP and WW. I've noticed that my points with WW are typically less than1200. How do people lose/maintain on that?0
-
Trying to stick to 1200 calories. Eating loads of cauliflower rice. Using Slimming World recipes.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions