Why 1200 calories isn’t for me
Replies
-
I agree. I am 5’5” and when I was a young, dumb college sophomore I thought those “small and sedentary” descriptions applied to me. I walked everywhere and went to the gym everyday. Yeah, they didn’t. I lost 20 pounds, but I couldn’t maintain it. I had brain fog and was starving all the time. It didn’t take long for me to snap and go on a months long binge where I gained back the 20 plus an additional 30.
Ten years later, I’ve lost 65 pounds in the past year eating 1800. I hope this time it’s more sustainable. On the other hand, I don’t think I would have understood this without having a first hand experience.5 -
-
I'm a short, middle aged woman and would be biting my arm off if I tried to survive on 1200. I've been marathon training since the beginning of the year and was eating 3500-4000 Calories a day, put on 8lb during that time and started cutting again last week. I totally freaked when MFP gave me 1300 to eat, I can do that much in a meal if I'm fuelling for a long run the next day. But I forgot it adds my exercise/fitbit Calories on. Granted I'm an outlier as far as activity level goes but I worked out I could still eat 2500 Calories and lose just over 1lb/week.4
-
quiksylver296 wrote: »I would freak out and binge after a week! But I’m 5’9 and my maintenance calories are about 2300. So I can lose a half pound a week on about 2000 calories and not lose my mind! Which is awesome!
I'm 5'5" but am in the same boat. 2000 calories for me to cut.2 -
OP and others - do you feel 200 cals more makes a huge difference to perceived/hunger?0
-
Also OP - height, weight and age? I'm 40, 169cm and currently approx 62kg - I find I need about 1400 a day or I'm hangry and feel weak.1
-
Bodies are weird.
I settled on 1200 kcal a day through a bit of experimenting, as it was high enough to give me some 'wiggle room' - I was eating around 800 kcal a day at one point, and being shouted at by MFP. At the weekends I allow for a little more, as long as the overall kcal deficit for the week is between 6k and 8 k, I usually lose 0.5kg. (no, I'm not very sedentary, I'm definitely not petite, I just have a body with a horribly sluggish metabolism).
I find 1200kcal pretty easy to work with, but I have the luxury of working from home so can cook every meal, and most of the food I eat is protein with a boat load of veggies. I seldom snack as I'm just not hungry. But it took me years of overhauling my diet to get to this place.
I've only been sticking at this for about 6 weeks now, so perhaps I'll come back in 6 months and complain bitterly. But it's the first time in many years of trying that I'm able to manage weight loss without going to crazy extremes. Eating higher calories a day will leave me maintaining and not losing.
Some of us just have bodies that won't let us have any fun!8 -
Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »Also OP - height, weight and age? I'm 40, 169cm and currently approx 62kg - I find I need about 1400 a day or I'm hangry and feel weak.
I'm 5'5" (165 cm) and 160 pounds (72.5 kg). I'm 41. For ME, a few more calories helps. It also helps me learn to eat healthy, not just eat 1200 calories. Again, just my experience.
2 -
I was given the magic 1200 when I first started. I'm older (49 now)/sedentary (outside of exercise)/short (5'3.75"). It seems to comfortable for some and miserable for others. I fit in the miserable category.
One of my overall goals and still is, is to push my TDEE as far as I could through exercise and NEAT (non exercise) improvements so that I can be able to eat more this was both to lose my initial weight and be able to maintain on a higher intake. Fast forward almost 5 years, I now maintain on 2100-2200.
10 -
To lose 1.5lb/week, mfp gives me 1280cal. I’m aiming for 1530cal, for 1lb/week. I’m 5’2 and about 200lbs.
But if you look at my diary it’s a little wonky. I spent my first week “back” trying to first just count what I was eating “normally” which was about 2100cal/day on a day where I didn’t binge. Then to find my minimum hunger level. I can eat below 1200 and not be starving (for a 2lb loss I’d need to eat 1030cal and while I’m never going to do that, it’s technically possible).
but meal timing at 1200 becomes crucial. I can’t wait to eat, I can’t eat dinner with my family because I need to eat at 3 or 4pm etc. If I wait, or something isn’t exact, I get headaches, fatigue, and brain fog. I’m not able to think about other things.
If I lived alone, maybe I could do 1280 but because I like eating socially (dinner with my family, dates with my SO, going out with friends) I need more room to maneuver. But I also try not to just eat when I’m not hungry to meet 1530 every day. If I’m sedentary and not with people I can take advantage and eat less to save those calories for something more fun than idk an extra yogurt or something. I like food!!2 -
I'd love to reply to you all, I just don't have the time. I certainly understand that 1200 calories works for some people. The title of my post was why 1200 calories doesn't work for ME. It was in no way intended to bash those who use it. I just found, in my experience, it didn't teach me a way to live my life in maintenance.
I apologize if anyone thought I was telling them what to do.9 -
I've never tried 1200 calories/ day cos I know I couldn't do it. I'd be miserable and cranky and hungry all the time.
I'm set at 1,500 kcal/ day and I eat back half my exercise calories too. I can do that. I'm nearly at my goal weight now....with a few fluctuations !!
But it came off slowly and steady and I feel I can maintain this too....fingers crossed!4 -
I'd still be hungry on a 1200-calorie diet, but more importantly, I couldn't maintain my workout regime. That being said, on the days I sorta semi-fast, I do a little under 1200, but it's balanced with carbs/proteins.2
-
working with a RD (Paul Nobles) at Eat to Perform - I maintain on 2800-3200cal a day with a relatively light workout - their theory is set a goal weight a bit above where you are; jack up calories until you stabilize and maintain - then when you go for a fat loss cycle its more effective than being stuck at a low calorie intake for a period of time1
-
SisterSueGetsFit wrote: »The 1200 calorie diet seems good in theory. For some reason several women seem to think this is the magic number. Let me tell you it’s not.
With that being said, I lost almost 60 pounds in 9 months following it. BUT... in the long term it just wasn’t sustainable. I Gained back almost 20 of those 60 pounds once I started eating normally again.
What is “normal” to you? Too many people seem to think that once they lose the weight they want they can just go back to eating what they consider “normal.” The fact of the matter is that these normal eating habits are typically how the weight was gained in the first place. Maintaining is just as much work as losing. You can’t ditch your efforts and expect the weight to stay off.10 -
Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »Also OP - height, weight and age? I'm 40, 169cm and currently approx 62kg - I find I need about 1400 a day or I'm hangry and feel weak.
You're average height at 5ft 5 ish so 1400 isn't a lot for you at all - none of us like the hangry
2 -
Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »OP and others - do you feel 200 cals more makes a huge difference to perceived/hunger?
I think if you add those 200 cals in protein/fat/fibre then yes they can make a lot of difference to hunger.7 -
SisterSueGetsFit wrote: »The 1200 calorie diet seems good in theory. For some reason several women seem to think this is the magic number. Let me tell you it’s not.
With that being said, I lost almost 60 pounds in 9 months following it. BUT... in the long term it just wasn’t sustainable. I Gained back almost 20 of those 60 pounds once I started eating normally again.
What is “normal” to you? Too many people seem to think that once they lose the weight they want they can just go back to eating what they consider “normal.” The fact of the matter is that these normal eating habits are typically how the weight was gained in the first place. Maintaining is just as much work as losing. You can’t ditch your efforts and expect the weight to stay off.
I responded to this, in part, in another response post. 1200 calories just didn’t provide me a good foundation to learn maintaining when I was done losing. I lost quite a bit, pretty quickly. I wish I'd have known I could have done it slower and possibly had better results, maybe just not as quickly.
This is just me and my experience (hence, the title of my post). I’m sure for some, it works fine. In my opinion, a lot of people starting out think 1200 is a "magic number," when it's actually quite low. I’ve since switched things up and have maintained at a 45 pound loss for the last year plus. I’m back to try to lose the last 20 now. From what I’ve learned after much trial and error, I don’t have to to it at 1200 calories.
I happily support anyone making a healthy change, I was just sharing my experience.
3 -
Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »OP and others - do you feel 200 cals more makes a huge difference to perceived/hunger?
I think 200 does make a difference in hunger for many people.
To lose 2 lbs a week you need a 1,000 calorie daily deficit, 1.5 lb per week is 750, 1 lb is 500 and .5 lb is 250. I would say from experience and posts on this forum that people can feel pretty different changing their goal to one that is just 250 calorie difference. My experience was changing my goal by 50-70 calories made a difference in how I felt.
The difference between activity levels is often estimated at about 200 calories also. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCalorieNeedsPerDayTable.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi_sPzMhuLaAhVl7oMKHdB2CusQFjASegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw2b-PsWv8FW85CKQXSAr39M
So a lightly active person can get a couple hundred calories more than a sedentary person. Many people do seem to find that makes a difference for them.
If you had 200 more calories that might be quite a bit more food depending on what you eat. 200 calories could be be adding a couple of eggs or a pile of vegetables with dip or a small dessert. https://www.boredpanda.com/what-200-calories-look-like/
Try out for yourself eating 200 calories more than normal for you and see if you feel any difference in how full or satisfied you are. Or go the other way and eat 200 calories less than your normal daily goal and see if that changes how you feel. I bet you notice a difference.
2 -
I'm a 5'5" woman, and 1200 calories is just too small for me. I'm trying to be patient with my weight loss. 1200 would have me going crazy and having ravenous binge nights.
I gained these extra 20 lbs over a period of five years, so I know I'm not going to lose it in two months. I'd even be happy losing only 10 lbs but having a much better muscle vs. fat ratio. If MFP says I can eat 1450 on an inactive day and still lose a half-pound a week, I am happy with that, because I gained that weight eating 2000-2500 a day. I can't go from eating 2000-2500 calories a day to 1200 overnight because I will feel hungry and resentful. Especially if I'm also working out. That extra 250 calories makes a big difference in being able to stick to my goal.
Even if I go over, if it was with quality food, I feel ok with it. I'd rather go over my calorie budget from eating edamame than from eating chips. At least that way I know my body can use it somehow, and I didn't just shove empty calories in my face for the quick dopamine blip and that's all.
If it works for whoever does it, fantastic and good for them! I couldn't do it. I love food so much.3 -
LivingtheLeanDream wrote: »Pastaprincess1978 wrote: »OP and others - do you feel 200 cals more makes a huge difference to perceived/hunger?
I think if you add those 200 cals in protein/fat/fibre then yes they can make a lot of difference to hunger.
It definitely made a massive difference to me. I was able to increase those, and I felt much more functional.2 -
EatLikeAHuman wrote: »I'm a 5'5" woman, and 1200 calories is just too small for me. I'm trying to be patient with my weight loss. 1200 would have me going crazy and having ravenous binge nights.
I gained these extra 20 lbs over a period of five years, so I know I'm not going to lose it in two months. I'd even be happy losing only 10 lbs but having a much better muscle vs. fat ratio. If MFP says I can eat 1450 on an inactive day and still lose a half-pound a week, I am happy with that, because I gained that weight eating 2000-2500 a day. I can't go from eating 2000-2500 calories a day to 1200 overnight because I will feel hungry and resentful. Especially if I'm also working out. That extra 250 calories makes a big difference in being able to stick to my goal.
Even if I go over, if it was with quality food, I feel ok with it. I'd rather go over my calorie budget from eating edamame than from eating chips. At least that way I know my body can use it somehow, and I didn't just shove empty calories in my face for the quick dopamine blip and that's all.
If it works for whoever does it, fantastic and good for them! I couldn't do it. I love food so much.
I SUPER LOVE this thought, thank you for saying it. I will keep that in mind. Better for me to grab that 100 pack of almonds than just shovel in crap when I'm hungry.
2 -
Currently my MFP is set for 1210 to lose 2 lbs a week. I know this is too low for me most of the time but there are days I hit it just fine. So I leave it. But If I'm hungry I allow myself to go over. I couldn't do 1200 every single day, I would be a miserable beast.3
-
Sounds like the 1200 calories DID work for you. You lost the weight. Gaining weight afterward had nothing to do with how much you were eating while losing. You gained weight because you ate above your maintenance calories.6
-
geneticsteacher wrote: »Sounds like the 1200 calories DID work for you. You lost the weight. Gaining weight afterward had nothing to do with how much you were eating while losing. You gained weight because you ate above your maintenance calories.
Not to be flip, but it only worked to a degree. I lost the weight, but didn't teach myself to maintain it. I was fairly miserable doing it too. I also lost a lot of lean muscle mass and my body is a mess. So was I really a winner? Depends on how you look at it I suppose. The point of this post was to (possibly/hopefully) let some people who was/were/are going to be on the 1200 path, that usually it can be done differently. Did I gain the weight back because I ate too much? Of course, I'm not arguing this.
6 -
I don't understand something: many are replying saying that they tried 1200 but they couldn't do it because for them was too high a deficit. Why did you try? And why are you saying that the problem were the calories? I agree that you should lose slowly, and even more so if you have little to lose, but for somebody 1200 is a big deficit, for others it's a small deficit. So why everybody tries to eat just 1200 when it's too litlle for them? And why then they say that it is too little for everybody?6
-
I don't understand something: many are replying saying that they tried 1200 but they couldn't do it because for them was too high a deficit. Why did you try? And why are you saying that the problem were the calories? I agree that you should lose slowly, and even more so if you have little to lose, but for somebody 1200 is a big deficit, for others it's a small deficit. So why everybody tries to eat just 1200 when it's too litlle for them? And why then they say that it is too little for everybody?
I think the thread topic is actually a little misleading... essentially this is about choosing a weekly weight loss goal that is too aggressive. Many people either come on here and choose the 2 lb/week goal in set-up- because obviously more is better, right?- or they choose the number randomly because they've heard it repeated elsewhere. But 1200 is just the lowest recommended calories for a woman in order to obtain adequate nutrition. Why anyone would purposely/randomly choose the bare minimum is beyond me. And incidentally, when someone chooses the 2 lb/week goal on MFP and receives 1200 calories, it may or may not result in a 2 lb/week loss for that person, depending on the actual deficit it represents for them. MFP simply defaults at 1200 if the selected goal would take you below that.
A helpful thread on the topic:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10569458/why-eating-too-little-calories-is-a-bad-idea/p1
I happen to think a good rule of thumb is, if a person chooses a 2 lb/week goal and gets a calorie allowance of 1200, that goal is probably too aggressive.2 -
geneticsteacher wrote: »Sounds like the 1200 calories DID work for you. You lost the weight. Gaining weight afterward had nothing to do with how much you were eating while losing. You gained weight because you ate above your maintenance calories.
Almost anybody (5'0 or taller) WILL lose weight with 1200 calories. That's not making it "work." When it "works" is when you lose the weight, AND keep it off afterwards, IMO. If one is relying on sheer willpower to lose and then returns to previous eating patterns, then is has not "worked". It takes time to develop the habits to eat at maintenance. I think sometimes people who lose very quickly don't even think about it and if they've been supressing their appetite for a few months, even seeing the maintenance number there, they can't control their eating and gain it all back (and then some).6 -
Why 1200 wasn't for me...
I first started MFP at 256lbs and wanting/needing to lose +/-100 lbs. I signed up for a 2lb per week lost, and MFP spit out a little more than 1200 calories. I stuck to it for about 7 months, and rarely ate exercise calories back. To be fair, I didn't exercise much--mostly walking the dog and a lunchtime walk.
When I hit the 5 month mark and had lost around 50-60lbs, I should have felt amazing. Instead, my skin was a mess, I had a weird rash, my hair was falling out, and I was so tired I couldn't even see straight. This is definitely not what I imagined losing weight to feel like.
I went to the doctor (which I almost never do), and learned I had a severe vitamin D deficiency. I was given a 50,000 unit per week supplement and told to eat more. At that point, I adjusted my calories to 1500 and I continued to lose between 1.5-2lbs for a week for a few more months. With the supplements I did start to feel better, and my took a few months to clear up (we're talking super, super dry psoriasis-type skin), and my energy levels returned to normal.
At that point, I began exercising more seriously and heeded advice to at least some of my earned exercise calories back. While I'm still chiseling away at the last few pounds I want to lose, if I could do it all over again, I would have started with a MUCH more conservative weight loss goal, like 1lb per week. I think I would have saved myself some discomfort and been more equipped to figure out my true maintenance calories.4 -
fitoverfortymom wrote: »Why 1200 wasn't for me...
I first started MFP at 256lbs and wanting/needing to lose +/-100 lbs. I signed up for a 2lb per week lost, and MFP spit out a little more than 1200 calories. I stuck to it for about 7 months, and rarely ate exercise calories back. To be fair, I didn't exercise much--mostly walking the dog and a lunchtime walk.
When I hit the 5 month mark and had lost around 50-60lbs, I should have felt amazing. Instead, my skin was a mess, I had a weird rash, my hair was falling out, and I was so tired I couldn't even see straight. This is definitely not what I imagined losing weight to feel like.
I went to the doctor (which I almost never do), and learned I had a severe vitamin D deficiency. I was given a 50,000 unit per week supplement and told to eat more. At that point, I adjusted my calories to 1500 and I continued to lose between 1.5-2lbs for a week for a few more months. With the supplements I did start to feel better, and my took a few months to clear up (we're talking super, super dry psoriasis-type skin), and my energy levels returned to normal.
At that point, I began exercising more seriously and heeded advice to at least some of my earned exercise calories back. While I'm still chiseling away at the last few pounds I want to lose, if I could do it all over again, I would have started with a MUCH more conservative weight loss goal, like 1lb per week. I think I would have saved myself some discomfort and been more equipped to figure out my true maintenance calories.
This. Thank you for saying what I was trying to, but clearly not doing a good job at it.1
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
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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