Are my calories too low?

Jay9201

Hi all, quick background info about me. I am 27, female 5'5 currently weighing in at 166lbs. GW is around 125-130lbs.

I'm wondering if eating at 1200 calories is too low? I don't have a specific eating plan, I simply weigh my food and track calories in vs calories out.

But I seem to be hungry a lot! I am dropping weight it's been two weeks on 1200 calories and I'm hungry a lot. I'm pretty active I'll workout between 3-4x a week I will do cardio classes and I lift weights.

I'm dropping my calories because I'm really struggling to lose my belly fat. But now wondering if my calories are too low.

I'm not entirely sure how to open my diary but I am happy to do so if someone can tell me how lol.

Any tips would great !

J

pontious11349

MFP defaults to 1200 as the lowest it will let you go. It sounds like you have put a very aggressive target date to get to 125lbs and its just defaulted to 1200.

If this is going to be a sustainable journey for you, then you cant be hungry all the time and 1200 calories is too low. Up your daily intake and be patient.

Others will chime in, but here is a broad brush calculation I have picked up along the way:

1) Maintenance calories = bodyweight in lbs x 13-15 (i go by 14)
So for you to stay same weight you would need to consume ~2324kcals (116x14) per day.

2) To lose 1lb you need a deficit of 3500kcals. So a 500kcal deficit per day (3500/7) will having you lose 1lb a week.

3) Based on you being 166lbs you could eat 1824kcals (2324-500) per day and still lose 1lb per week. Chuck in the exercise you are doing and you will lose more.

There are plenty threads on tummy fat but bottom line is you cant spot reduce. You can certainly tone up but the fat needs to go to see those mythical abs i am still searching for myself lol.

Be patient on your fat loss journey.

Jay9201

Great thank you so much! Yes I'm currently lifting heavy weights with cardio sessions. 1824 calorie sounds great I can actually eat more filling food. I am looking to lose weight in a sustainable way so even if its 1lb a week that's progress. I will try upping my calories thank you!

kimny72

Jay9201 wrote: »

Hi all, quick background info about me. I am 27, female 5'5 currently weighing in at 166lbs. GW is around 125-130lbs.

I'm wondering if eating at 1200 calories is too low? I don't have a specific eating plan, I simply weigh my food and track calories in vs calories out.

But I seem to be hungry a lot! I am dropping weight it's been two weeks on 1200 calories and I'm hungry a lot. I'm pretty active I'll workout between 3-4x a week I will do cardio classes and I lift weights.

I'm dropping my calories because I'm really struggling to lose my belly fat. But now wondering if my calories are too low.

I'm not entirely sure how to open my diary but I am happy to do so if someone can tell me how lol.

Any tips would great !

J

With 30ish lbs to lose, you should be set to lose no more than 1 lb per week. You are also supposed to log your exercise and eat back at least some of those calories.

Losing too fast can lead to losing more muscle than you'd want. Plus, as you've found, you end up really hungry, which for many of us will lead to eventually hitting the wall and eating it all back!

Unfortunately, belly fat is almost always the last to go, regardless of how fast or slow you lose.

Check out these posts too:

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1080242/a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants/p1

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1161603/so-you-want-a-nice-stomach/p1

:drinker:

Panini911

kimny72 wrote: »

Jay9201 wrote: »

Hi all, quick background info about me. I am 27, female 5'5 currently weighing in at 166lbs. GW is around 125-130lbs.

I'm wondering if eating at 1200 calories is too low? I don't have a specific eating plan, I simply weigh my food and track calories in vs calories out.

But I seem to be hungry a lot! I am dropping weight it's been two weeks on 1200 calories and I'm hungry a lot. I'm pretty active I'll workout between 3-4x a week I will do cardio classes and I lift weights.

I'm dropping my calories because I'm really struggling to lose my belly fat. But now wondering if my calories are too low.

I'm not entirely sure how to open my diary but I am happy to do so if someone can tell me how lol.

Any tips would great !

J

With 30ish lbs to lose, you should be set to lose no more than 1 lb per week. You are also supposed to log your exercise and eat back at least some of those calories.

Losing too fast can lead to losing more muscle than you'd want. Plus, as you've found, you end up really hungry, which for many of us will lead to eventually hitting the wall and eating it all back!

Unfortunately, belly fat is almost always the last to go, regardless of how fast or slow you lose.

Check out these posts too:

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1080242/a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants/p1

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1161603/so-you-want-a-nice-stomach/p1

:drinker:

All this.

pontious11349

Yup. Who wants to be hungry.

try eat 1800 on fruit, veg, nuts seeds and meat/fish alone.....you will not be hungry.

23 weeks to xmas - set a goal of 140lbs by then. Go get this!!!!

AnnPT77

pontious11349 wrote: »

MFP defaults to 1200 as the lowest it will let you go. It sounds like you have put a very aggressive target date to get to 125lbs and its just defaulted to 1200.

If this is going to be a sustainable journey for you, then you cant be hungry all the time and 1200 calories is too low. Up your daily intake and be patient.

Others will chime in, but here is a broad brush calculation I have picked up along the way:

1) Maintenance calories = bodyweight in lbs x 13-15 (i go by 14)
So for you to stay same weight you would need to consume ~2324kcals (116x14) per day.

2) To lose 1lb you need a deficit of 3500kcals. So a 500kcal deficit per day (3500/7) will having you lose 1lb a week.

3) Based on you being 166lbs you could eat 1824kcals (2324-500) per day and still lose 1lb per week. Chuck in the exercise you are doing and you will lose more.

There are plenty threads on tummy fat but bottom line is you cant spot reduce. You can certainly tone up but the fat needs to go to see those mythical abs i am still searching for myself lol.

Be patient on your fat loss journey.

MFP's estimate (plus eating back a reasonable estimate of exercise calories) or a TDEE calculator estimate of TDEE (minus a sensible deficit) will give a more sound, research-based estimate for calorie needs than these kinds of "X per pound of body weight" ideas that don't take into account activity level or demographics.

If I ate 15 x my current weight (I'm 5'5" and female like you, OP, by the way, just lighter and way older) as my gross intake I'd lose weight: It sure wouldn't be maintenance!

OP, 1200 was too low for me. It's not too low for everyone (especially women who are older, shorter, quite active, etc.), but it's too low for quite a few people who give it a try.

I don't know what MFP would calculate for you to lose a pound a week at the maximum, but I'd suggest checking that out (and keep in mind that you then add more calories to that for your cardio and strength training). If you prefer to eat the same calories every day, Sailrabbit (a multi-formula TDEE calculator) suggests your TDEE would be 2100 or higher (depends on details of your activity that I don't have), so 1800-ish to lose probably isn't that crazy in your case, even though the PP's number method works super poorly for me.

As far as hunger, paying attention to what you eat and when may give you some hints about how to feel more satiated (compare good days vs. worse days, in your diary). Most people are satiated by one of fats, protein, or volume (like high-fiber/low-cal veggies), so you can experiment with those within a healthy range (the MFP defaults aren't terrible as a starting point for most people). How many meals/snacks you eat, when, and which are larger, may also be a factor. You should be able to experiment, and find a more satisfying routine. Sleep and stress, among others, may also make a difference in hunger.

Jay9201

You guys have been great with all your tips!!! Thank you so much!!

yirara

pontious11349 wrote: »

MFP defaults to 1200 as the lowest it will let you go. It sounds like you have put a very aggressive target date to get to 125lbs and its just defaulted to 1200.

If this is going to be a sustainable journey for you, then you cant be hungry all the time and 1200 calories is too low. Up your daily intake and be patient.

Others will chime in, but here is a broad brush calculation I have picked up along the way:

1) Maintenance calories = bodyweight in lbs x 13-15 (i go by 14)
So for you to stay same weight you would need to consume ~2324kcals (116x14) per day.

2) To lose 1lb you need a deficit of 3500kcals. So a 500kcal deficit per day (3500/7) will having you lose 1lb a week.

3) Based on you being 166lbs you could eat 1824kcals (2324-500) per day and still lose 1lb per week. Chuck in the exercise you are doing and you will lose more.

There are plenty threads on tummy fat but bottom line is you cant spot reduce. You can certainly tone up but the fat needs to go to see those mythical abs i am still searching for myself lol.

Be patient on your fat loss journey.

What is this equation based on? is it for men? If I were to use it I'd have about 1960kcal per day. Being a small, not so young anymore woman I would certainly gain weight on that.

pontious11349

Its simply a general rule of thumb, hence the range in calories per lbs in bodyweight.

@AnnPT77 offers a complex solution but landed at a similar outcome. The point is you can live and die by the numbers (totally cool to do this) or use "super poor" arithmetic to generate a similar benchmark. After you have established your benchmark you simply adjust depending on the results you are seeing.

The answer I am glad we both agree on is: "yes, your 1200 calories limit per day is too low"

@yirara: great it sounds like you already know how many calories you need to maintain weight. You have your benchmark. good job.

Jay9201

Thank you so much for these tips! Never realised I was hungry all this time and it's because I'm not fuelling my body properly.

sijomial

@pontious11349

I maintain on a 20+ multiplier

There really is no merit in such a potentially hugely inaccurate method that makes no attempt to adjust for activity and exercise when the very simple and superior alternatives of TDEE and MyFitnessPal estimates are easy and convenient to use.
i.e. Don't use a broad brush when far narrower brushes are also in someone's toolbox.

(If someone didn't have internet access maybe it would have relevance - but that's not this audience!)

pontious11349

@sijomial

Face palm. It's the narrow brush that set the inappropriate goal of 1200kcal a day in the first place.

The is an inherent trust in the figures MFP sets, so the internet remark is obnoxious.

Merit of broad brush is simplicity. It's a starting point. If you turn out to be a 20+ multiplier (as rare as that might be) then you adjust accordingly if you are not progressing towards your goals.

Anyway - I understand the need to agonise over the numbers and control every aspect of life. Cool. That's just not for me.

sijomial

pontious11349 wrote: »

sijomial

Face palm. It's the narrow brush that set the inappropriate goal of 1200kcal a day in the first place.

The is an inherent trust in the figures MFP sets, so the internet remark is obnoxious.

Merit of broad brush is simplicity. It's a starting point. If you turn out to be a 20+ multiplier (as rare as that might be) then you adjust accordingly if you are not progressing towards your goals.

Anyway - I understand the need to agonise over the numbers and control every aspect of life. Cool. That's just not for me.

@pontious11349
Double facepalm!

It's not the MFP or TDEE calculation that sets 1200 cals because the calculation made isn't of your deficit number it's actually calculating your maintenance calories. That's the first point you don't seem to grasp.

People then select their rate of loss - that when they get an inappropriate low daily goal. It's not the calculation or the tool it's the person choosing too fast a rate of loss.

It's silly to pick what can be a massively wrong calorie base and then adjust when it's simple to choose a far closer start point and make small adjustments. Personal example using x14 for maintenance for me would be 1200 cals away from reality, using MFP it might be out by a couple of hundred.

Don't conflate the numbers people get by using the tool inappropriately with the tools themselves being the issue.
(But I would argue the setup could be vastly improved by making a suggestion as to what might be appropriate or a warning of the consequences of picking 2lbs/week fastest rate of loss.)

pontious11349

Im enjoying the face palms.

Believe me I grasp the methodology of MFP and TDEE calculations - I know the 1200 is because the rate of loss goal was too aggressive and not the actual calculation itself.

I think you have hit the nail on the head with the setup. If you chose weight loss / gains perhaps MFP could go a little further and also determine appropriate rates of loss / gain based on starting stats?

I understand your desire to push the very detailed calculations, but be aware that people often over estimate calories burned and then eat them back and question why they are not reaching their goals.

Now to give rise to your internet comment I googled "how to calculate maintenance calories" (a very fair assumption that the audience may type this) and the first drop down without even clicking a single link says:

"Just take your current body weight in pounds and multiply it by 14 and 17. Somewhere in between those 2 amounts will usually be your daily calorie maintenance level. For example, a 180lb person would do 180 x 14 and 180 x 17 and get an estimated daily calorie maintenance level of somewhere between 2520-3060 calories"

Now I know the internet is plagued with conflicting information (such as this thread). The industry makes a fortune out of over complicating the *kitten* out of things so that us muggles subscribe to the latest trends. I cant stress enough this calculation was to keep things simple. It generally works but I recognise no two people are the same. Hence why its a line in the sand only.

I honestly don't have a passion for this calculation, nor did i expect to have to defend it, I have nothing negative to say to anyone who subscribes to any calculation to be honest. For me its about starting the process of self awareness.

sijomial

The art of estimation (as well as the mathematical science) is to make your estimates as good as reasonably possible.

Basing solely and exclusively on weight excludes:

• Gender
• Activity/Job
• Exercise
• Body composition (for some formulae)
• Age

Some of the list are subtle with little impact, some are extremely significant for many, many individuals.
It simply isn't a good choice to ignore all those factors when alternative methods are freely and easily available.
I'm old enough to remember pre-internet days and dieting methods, they mostly weren't very smart and the tools to make them smarter weren't available to the general population.

I can drive in a nail with a screwdriver and with some application I could make a reasonable job of it, or I could simply use a hammer. Extending the analogy - hitting your thumb with a hammer doesn't make it a bad tool, just a poor aim.

Do agree MFP could make their tool much better ( provide a thumb guard? ) especially the goal setting which is the start point for most people - with minimal development too.
Ages ago they asked for suggestions and the vast majority of suggestions were around guiding people better around activity settings, how exercise is accounted for, warning what the impact is of choosing inappropriate rates of loss. Nothing was actually done though, sadly.

What we do also agree on is self-awareness and making adjustments based on results over time.