Question about 1200 calorie minimum

debokadu

Hello! This is my first post to the community. I have been using MFP for a few weeks now and happily getting good results. I just got a Garmin Vivosmart a few days ago, and I appear to be burning more "active" calories than I thought (walking more steps than I realized, walking the dog, etc. - these are in addition to my actual 30 minutes of official "exercise" 5 days a week). Now, I know I can eat back some or all of my exercise calories, but want to know what the 1200 minimum calories per day means. Is it net calories, or is it calories actually eaten? Should I be eating back a portion of the "active" calories that Garmin is calculating (since it's more than expected and more than just "exercise"), or only eat back the "exercise" calories?

For example, I'm eating 1540 calories on weekdays and 1750 on weekends. If I eat my 1540, but then I'm active for 500 calories, I only net 1,040 calories. Is that okay, since I actually ate more than 1200 calories? I'm just not sure if that 1200 number is to ensure that I eat enough nutrients for health, or if I need to be eating back more of the "active" calories. I really want to hold off eating too many calories back until I can get a couple of more weeks in to see how much I am losing per week. Currently, it's been about 2 pounds per week, so I really don't think I'm doing too much, but I don't want to go overboard. (My stats are 5'6", was 203, now 187, trying to lose about 40-45 more pounds).

Thanks for any advice you have! I'm willing to take it down a notch (i.e. eat more), but I'm feeling great and having almost no issues with hunger, so it seems like I'm doing okay. Thoughts?

Ready2Rock206

Net. It's very hard to get adequate nutrition on less than 1200 calories. If you're losing 2 lbs a week or more that's pretty aggressive - you'll do fine to eat some back. Of course this is assuming you're logging accurately too.

MelanieCN77

1200 minimum means that MFP would not recommend eating any less to anyone for any reason. Yes that is eaten calories.

For your situation, you either have the choice of telling MFP you are sedentary and logging every dog walk as exercise, or tell it you are lightly active and only log deliberate exercise sessions.

Ninkyou

Net, which is after exercise.

dragon_girl26

For the purpose of MFP, the exercise calories (or at least a portion) are meant to be eaten back, so it is net calories.

Tacklewasher

I just explained this elsewhere, but you really need to think of 3 types of calories. Base, activity and exercise. Normally MFP gives you your base + activity (NEAT) - desired weight loss calories as your calorie goal. But if you underestimate your activity (which it sounds like you are doing) then MFP will add that to you goal. It also adds back your exercise calories. In theory, you should eat what MFP gives you, including exercise and activity.

So, in my case. I've set myself to Sedentary
MFP has my NEAT @ 1580. I also get ~100-200 calories from activities and ~ 450 from exercise.

So using Yesterday
MFP Base (NEAT estimate) 1580 for 2 lb per week loss
Activity over sedentary 179
Exercise 432
Total 2191

Now I know from ~ 4 month with this watch that these numbers are close to reality (based on my weight loss) so I ate ~2000.

Now, there is an issue. I had a Vivosmart HR. If you use the activity setting (pushing a button on the watch and selecting walk, then turning it off when you are done your walk), it may count calories from both the activity and the steps taken, in effect double counting them. Mine did this and it was the reason I gave it to my wife (who only tracks steps, not calories) and bought a VivoActive. Experiment with it to see if it is doing that.

In short, eat back most of your activity and exercise calories.

debokadu

Thanks for the replies - they are helpful while I get this figured out. I think the confusion is that Garmin is counting ALL active calories (exercise AND extra steps) and subtracting that from my calories in. But for whatever reason, MFP is only subtracting out the actual calories logged in Garmin as exercise/workouts. So, I'm getting two different "net" figures - a lower one from Garmin and a higher one from MFP. So according to MFP, I shouldn't be eating as much back as the totals from Garmin says I should. That's why I was a little worried - MFP has me still above 1200 net, but Garmin has me in the 1,000s net each day.

I have both set to "lightly active" and only count my actual exercise on Garmin as a workout/activity. But Garmin is adding my dog walks and extra steps and giving me more "active" calories. MFP is not. It's confusing, so I'll just see how my weight loss goes for the next two weeks.

I'm thinking this is not the worst problem to have, ha!

ETA: Tacklewasher, thanks for the detailed explanation. This is my first fitness tracker so I'm still working things out.

ashliedelgado

I don't consider the calories I get from just moving around - only those from intentional exercise. I eat back - if I'm hungry - what I earn from that. The 100 or so extra calories garmin gives me from moving around some days doesn't seem to make that big of a difference. I also do not look at the calories garmin connect gives me to eat - only those in MFP.

SusanMFindlay

ashliedelgado wrote: »

I don't consider the calories I get from just moving around - only those from intentional exercise. I eat back - if I'm hungry - what I earn from that. The 100 or so extra calories garmin gives me from moving around some days doesn't seem to make that big of a difference. I also do not look at the calories garmin connect gives me to eat - only those in MFP.

That works well when you're only talking about 100 calories difference. As someone who gets more than 1,000 calories/day of "just moving around", I can tell you that your approach won't work for more active people.

youdoyou2016

Tacklewasher wrote: »

I just explained this elsewhere, but you really need to think of 3 types of calories. Base, activity and exercise. Normally MFP gives you your base + activity (NEAT) - desired weight loss calories as your calorie goal. But if you underestimate your activity (which it sounds like you are doing) then MFP will add that to you goal. It also adds back your exercise calories. In theory, you should eat what MFP gives you, including exercise and activity.

So, in my case. I've set myself to Sedentary
MFP has my NEAT @ 1580. I also get ~100-200 calories from activities and ~ 450 from exercise.

So using Yesterday
MFP Base (NEAT estimate) 1580 for 2 lb per week loss
Activity over sedentary 179
Exercise 432
Total 2191

Now I know from ~ 4 month with this watch that these numbers are close to reality (based on my weight loss) so I ate ~2000.

Now, there is an issue. I had a Vivosmart HR. If you use the activity setting (pushing a button on the watch and selecting walk, then turning it off when you are done your walk), it may count calories from both the activity and the steps taken, in effect double counting them. Mine did this and it was the reason I gave it to my wife (who only tracks steps, not calories) and bought a VivoActive. Experiment with it to see if it is doing that.

In short, eat back most of your activity and exercise calories.

You mind explaining some things to me? (Hopefully an OK question since you're already talking about this here.)

I just got a Garmin viviosmart HR refurbished. Works great, got the manual online, but I cannot find answers to my other questions on Garmin's website, but it seems like you might know ...

MFP has me eating 1200 calories, and I've got them synced. So, how does all this work?

Today, I had 1275 calories, and Garmin is telling me I have 1196 active calories (what are those? how are they determined?). And it's telling me I have 919 calories remaining. Remaining from what?

It's telling me I've burned 2378 calories so far today. How is it getting that number?

I don't use the activity setting, even when I'm exercising. I just let it be. Should I? I have mine set to sedentary too.

Oh, shouldn't I be losing several lbs a week if I'm burning around 2400 calories a day but only eating 1200 (theoretically)? I certainly am not losing at that rate.

Thanks for any answers!

CattOfTheGarage

Actually the 1200 minimum for any given day is total, not net. I know this because on days when I have unusually strenuous exercise, I often don't eat all those calories back the same day - I eat them back over several days. So the day of the exercise I may be over 1200 total but under 1200 net. It doesn't give me a warning when I complete the diary, but if I go under 1200 total, it does.

However, that's one day in isolation. When it comes to setting your actual goal, the 1200 minimum is definitely net calories. It doesn't mind you going under 1200 net once in a while as long as you ate more than 1200 total that day, but it wants you to be eating more than 1200 net overall.

youdoyou2016

/

Slowfaster

Long ago dieticians set the 1200 per day minimum, because they thought it would be nearly impossible to get the necessary nutritional needs on anything less. That was in the 1950's when meeting the "four basic food groups," was a big thing so women were expected to drink 2 glasses of milk per day, eat five servings of bread, one yellow veg, one green veg, three meat or egg servings, etc.

These days, with low-carb eating and less emphasis on servings of grain, not to mention vitamin supplements, I doubt if the 1200 calorie rule is as hard and fast.

In any case the amount of nutrition you have consumed will not change if you exercise a lot. So let's say you eat 1200 calories worth of fish, some fat, fruit and vegetables. Working out for an hour wont take away from the vitamins and protein grams you have eaten.

I just wouldn't worry about it. I try not to go over 1300 calories, don't count how much I work-out or whether I cleaned the garage, and if I occasionally go below 1200 it all averages out by the end of the week.

kshama2001

SusanMFindlay wrote: »

ashliedelgado wrote: »

I don't consider the calories I get from just moving around - only those from intentional exercise. I eat back - if I'm hungry - what I earn from that. The 100 or so extra calories garmin gives me from moving around some days doesn't seem to make that big of a difference. I also do not look at the calories garmin connect gives me to eat - only those in MFP.

That works well when you're only talking about 100 calories difference. As someone who gets more than 1,000 calories/day of "just moving around", I can tell you that your approach won't work for more active people.

Ya, my mom is extremely active, but very little of that is from intentional exercise, and always hovers around Under Weight.