**Controversial** Eating 1,200 Calories or Less

Phoenix_Warrior

It could also be a vague, discontent, subconscious jealously when people become literally angry at someone who eats 1,200 calories or less because they lack the will power to do so. Who knows.

lolz. I'm losing 1.5 lbs a week eating 1550. I don't give two sh*ts if you want to starve yourself to get to the same place I'm getting (not you specifically but others). So I would sign they off in bogus crap. There are plenty of successful people who try to steer others towards properly fueling the body but you know the whole talking to a wall sentiment.

Then obviously you fall into the category of people who don't care and don't suffer from any of the above, right?

yeeesh, I'm secretly jealous I dont has the willpower to put down my hummus and wheat thins or cookie to lose just one more ounce quicker.

lol, no one was saying you were jealous honey.

Maybe it's subconscious?!

I think the subconscious ones are the ones who get really really mad but don't apply to the above theory! You know, the whole, "Holy F YOU IDIOT YOU WILL DIE" type of responses (less dramatic though, thankfully)

haha, I've seen that and I dont understand it. Both sides, either way yelling normally has the opposite effect of what it's original intent was. Which I suppose was the other post of similar nature.

rosemary98

i eat maintenance (according to MFP) at 1450 and it has been pretty accurate. I am just starting to exercise so I will be eating more, but for someone sedentary with no exercise 1200 is not extreme.

QuietBloom

There is a very good reason for it. For anyone to get enough nutrients to survive in any kind of a healthful manner (unless you are a midget or something) you need to eat at least 1200 calories of nutrient dense food every day.

In 3rd World countries, subsistence is at around 1,000 a day for an adult, which leaves them very little fat stores and generally malnourished. This counts a great deal to the shortened life expectancies of these people, and the quickly devastating effects of famine.

I think that is a pretty good reason for staying at or above 1200 calories.

Mokey41

Th OP has no clue how MFP really works, doesn't care to find out and loves to flaunt the 1200 calorie diet she is doing so well on for at least a week now. It's pointless to offer information or try to enlighten. Let her crash and burn.

Mr_Knight

You catch no flies either way...I've been at this over a year and unfortunately, I do care...otherwise I'd just say **** it and move on. Nobody listens until bad **** happens...that's MFP

Jaysus...settle down, mom, it's just an internet chat board...

Mr_Knight

In 3rd World countries, subsistence is at around 1,000 a day for an adult, which leaves them very little fat stores and generally malnourished...

That's not the case when you *start* with large fat stores.

Momwidomski

I never "got" that one either. If you eat the calories you burned, then how the heck are you supposed to lose weight?
This may be fine for someone maintaining, but not me for sure. If I eat burned calories up then I can't lose a thing.

BetterThanExpected

1200 calories is supposedly the lowest you should go if you're a woman who is trying to lose weight. It's not just on MFP, it's on practically every website, i.e. you'll get attacked if you say you're going lower. In my opinion, if you have enough energy, and aren't hungry, why force yourself to eat more? Then you also have the people who insist you also have to eat back your exercise calories or you're going to keel over and die...

saffron981

For most people, it's probably healthiest to net at least 1,200 calories a day. But doctors are putting people on very low calorie diets all the time; it's not one size fits all. I think only a psychologist could explain why some get so angry and personal when another user eats less than that.

Momwidomski

Agree! You can't even cover the 4 basic food groups with that caloric intake.

paddythemic

I have not seen anyone say that about 1200 NET calories.

I don't think I will go into STARVATION MODE if I consume 2500 and burn 1300 away the same day.

paquettamyrickhancock

You're not alone...1200 calories is my recommended daily allowance. It could be, however, that eating less than that means that you may not be getting as many nutrients from your food as you should. Eating less than that could also send your body into "starvation mode" which means that your body will start to hoard what you do eat and it will make it very hard for you to lose any wait at all. Just a guess....

cwolfman13

I never "got" that one either. If you eat the calories you burned, then how the heck are you supposed to lose weight?
This may be fine for someone maintaining, but not me for sure. If I eat burned calories up then I can't lose a thing.

LOL...

Mokey41

I never "got" that one either. If you eat the calories you burned, then how the heck are you supposed to lose weight?
This may be fine for someone maintaining, but not me for sure. If I eat burned calories up then I can't lose a thing.

Your weight loss deficit is built into your budget so if you are eating back exercise and not losing then you're either eating too much to start with or over estimating your exercise burn.

Momwidomski

LOL

anaconda469

What is Flame Baiting?

Flame baiting is deliberately posting a topic or question that is guaranteed to cause a huge amount of controversy. "Flame wars" are when two or more very heated (haha no pun intended) sides are represented and it almost stops being about the original topic, and more about verbally barbecuing your opponent into a huddled mass of charcoal.

Like the Lifters -vs- Cardio discussions.

QuietBloom

In 3rd World countries, subsistence is at around 1,000 a day for an adult, which leaves them very little fat stores and generally malnourished...

That's not the case when you *start* with large fat stores.

Yes, but fat stores are just...fat. You can live off them for some time in suboptimal conditions, but you will suffer malnutrition long before you reach any kind of goal weight.

Momwidomski

Interesting answer. Overeating exercise burn is a very good possibility as this website is not the most accurate and is guestimating.

pauldix

Extremely well put. You speak for the majority I'm sure.

Momwidomski

This is soooo true. You do not have to be skinny to be considered malnourished.

Wildflower0106

I never "got" that one either. If you eat the calories you burned, then how the heck are you supposed to lose weight?
This may be fine for someone maintaining, but not me for sure. If I eat burned calories up then I can't lose a thing.

LOL...

QFT

Momwidomski

Been on this nearly a year. My caloric intake is normally between 1,200 where I can lose weight or 1,300 where I can maintain my weight. Due to age and health conditions (osteoporosis and osteoarthritis), bad knees (bone on bone arthritic) there's not a whole lot I can do that will improve a deteriorating condition. I was told to stop the cycling that it was causing more damage to my knees and concentrate on more of the flexing type exercises (isometric) instead and this is after a year of orthopedic study and Supartz shots to the knees.

peleroja

This is soooo true. You do not have to be skinny to be considered malnourished.

Nor do you have to eat 1200 calories. 1200 well-planned, micronutrient-heavy calories eaten with thought about the macros as well is not leaving anyone malnourished. 1200 calories of nonfat yogurt and Special K bars probably is, but that's equally possible on 1800 or 2800 calories. Let's not blame lower calories for people not getting adequate nutrients.

Momwidomski

Whatever! I am 68 years old, not thirty something.

peleroja

Whatever! I am 68 years old, not thirty something.

And what does that have to with anything, exactly?

Mr_Knight

[Yes, but fat stores are just...fat. You can live off them for some time in suboptimal conditions, but you will suffer malnutrition long before you reach any kind of goal weight.

What do you think dieting is? All caloric deficits, no matter how small, require the dieter to "live off them for some time".

CaliforniaGold

Hummm.....my information here told me that a 5' 10" female should be eating 1,350 calories a day to lose 2 lbs. a week. I will have to try this out as I have never counted calories before. Think I will stick with 1,350 and see what happens. I don't want to get sick!

rosemary98

This is soooo true. You do not have to be skinny to be considered malnourished.

Nor do you have to eat 1200 calories. 1200 well-planned, micronutrient-heavy calories eaten with thought about the macros as well is not leaving anyone malnourished. 1200 calories of nonfat yogurt and Special K bars probably is, but that's equally possible on 1800 or 2800 calories. Let's not blame lower calories for people not getting adequate nutrients.

agreed.

ChrisM8971

If we look back at the OP we will see that the original responses on Net calories etc was not based on the 1200 she was eating but the additional cardio and weights 5 times per week with no mention of eating any of the exercise calories back.

Actually 1200 seems quite high compared to some on this site, 500 calories now seem to be a regular thing and this is often twinned with 300-600 calorie burns.

So whether 1200 is considered low or not surely a net daily calorie intake of 900 or less can't be good?

CHRISTTY33

Well, I'm 5'2" and MFP tells me to eat only 1,200 calories a day. Sooo I don't know why people are freaking out.

No one should be getting angry at what another person chooses to eat or not - that's just silly.

I am 5'2 and eat between 1600-1900 calories, See ticker below!!! :bigsmile:

MFP is set up that you SUPPOSE to eat back all or most of your exercise calories. That's why when you put in your exercise your calories go up!! :ohwell:

Did you start off eating 1699-1900 calories to lose our is that what you eat now? Good job by the way