Not to beat a dead horse....

LessthanKris

I am in no way trying to start a debate but have a simple question. For those who are strongly against 1200 calories diets, do you truly believe they are for no one?

I see many saying that if you stick to it you are killing your metabolism. MFP set me at 1200 calories. I work out 6 times a week and eat back all my exercise calories so I normally actually eat between 1500-1600 on most days. I do have a day every week or two where I do go over. At this setting, right now I am set to lose 1.2 lbs a week. I am 5'1 and I have about 33 lbs left to lose. Right now it is working for me. When I get within ten pounds, I plan on changing my settings to only losing .5 lbs a week.

I checked the TDEE calculators online and I feel more comfortable using MFP. I have a heart rate monitor for my workouts so I can get a more accurate calorie burn and my activity level is set at light activity. I am a stay at home mom.

It just seems like as soon as anyone mentions 1200 calories, everything blows up. Again not trying to start THE big debate but just trying ot understand if it is a blanket statement that no one should be on such a low diet.

Mokey41

I'm 5'2", 56, 115 lbs and my BMR by calculators is 1194 so I can live on 1200 calories quite easily. You have to take some perspective on who the person is that's doing 1200 and how much nutrition you make sure you get in those calories. I generally eat between 1200 & 1500 a day with no ill effects over almost 3 years. I don't know why you'd want to live on 1200 if you don't have to though.

TX_Rhon

I'm in because it's Friday and I am stuck at my desk today. :grumble:

MinnieInMaine

OP, sounds like you're doing it right, it's folks that do it wrong that get people all worked up. The problem folks have with 1200 calorie diets is that in many cases, it's not right for the person. Some, like yourself and Mokey, are smaller and lighter and have a lower BMR so 1200 calories is reasonable and even healthy, assuming they NET at that amount. Others are larger, taller and active enough that they should be eating quite a bit more in order to be at a healthy deficit.

They think 1200 is ok because that's what the website gave them for a goal but the program is only as good as the data input and therein lies the issue. Everyone wants to lose the weight NOW so they put in to lose 2 pounds per week eventhough the website recommends no more than 1 pound per week and they only have like 20 pounds to lose. Or they're active and don't get the whole earned exercise calorie thing and figure they'll lose faster if they don't eat them back.

Ultimately, I think the reason we're passionate about it is that we've seen so many folks fail at trying to lose weight by starving themselves of needed calories/nutrients (and risk health issues, hair loss, etc). Why limit yourself when you can enjoy your food and still lose weight?!

Hope that helps.

Amitysk

I'm in because it's Friday and I am stuck at my desk today. :grumble:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :flowerforyou:

diannethegeek

In my experience, there are two kinds of people who say they are eating 1200 calories.

Group A is the 1200 calories and more group. They always eat *at least* 1200 calories and include at least a part of their exercise calories, usually eating closer to 1500-1800 calories. While some people will wonder if 1200 is a good net goal for them if they're particularly tall, active, or male, most of us aren't concerned about the people NETTING 1200 calories.

Group B is the 1200 or less group. They always eat *less than* 1200 calories, ignoring exercise calories, and often mention that they work out for 2 hours a day, are training for a 5K, etc. They may also be tall, active, or male, but they eat 1200 or less per day, and usually their diaries show an amount closer to 900-1100 per day. They put in a very aggressive goal and then often ignore the recommendations and eat even less.

There are, of course, circumstances where 1200 calories GROSS are appropriate, but too many people here on MFP who eat 1200 GROSS actually shouldn't be, in my experience.

_jayciemarie_

Alot of the people that I have friended on this site eat around 1200 calories a day. They are all different heights/weights right now. They all are losing. The first 2 months of my journey I was eating around 1200 calories a day (well below my BMR) and I was losing 2-3lbs a week. I have since upped my calories and I'm losing maybe 1-2lbs a week. Honestly--I don't buy into the "your body goes in to Starvation mode at 1200 calories". Eat what you feel is best. If you are absolutely miserable at 1200 calories--eat more. If you can go about your day eating only 1200 calories and feel fulfilled--then do it.

SezxyStef

The issue is as others have said when they are gross 1200 and below that is the issue.

If you net 1200 (typically gross 16-1800) great you are eating to fuel your workouts.

Lives2Travel

I stick to 1200 per day and eat back 1/2 of my exercise calories (IMO, MFP over estimates calories burned). I do this for the following reasons:

1. I'm obese
2. I'm female
3. I'm over 50
4. I'm post-Menopausal
5. It works without me feeling hungry, deprived or unwell.

If I was a 28 year old highly active male with 10 lbs to lose, 1200 calories a day would be ridiculous. For me, it's good for now. Once I cross over into overweight and out of the obese range, I plan to add calories and slow down my weight loss.

Cindyinpg

The issue is as others have said when they are gross 1200 and below that is the issue.

If you net 1200 (typically gross 16-1800) great you are eating to fuel your workouts.

Yep.

Holly_Roman_Empire

It's not usually an issue with the number. It's an issue with people that eat 1200 calories and complain about being hungry, weak, and tired all the time. Then they follow up with how they work out 6 times a week and don't eat exercise calories. Also, like others have said, most can lose weight on more than 1200 calories, so why would you force yourself to eat less? I completely understand though, that some short petite women can eat 1200 calories and be just fine.

Stage14

In my experience, there are two kinds of people who say they are eating 1200 calories.

Group A is the 1200 calories and more group. They always eat *at least* 1200 calories and include at least a part of their exercise calories, usually eating closer to 1500-1800 calories. While some people will wonder if 1200 is a good net goal for them if they're particularly tall, active, or male, most of us aren't concerned about the people NETTING 1200 calories.

Group B is the 1200 or less group. They always eat *less than* 1200 calories, ignoring exercise calories, and often mention that they work out for 2 hours a day, are training for a 5K, etc. They may also be tall, active, or male, but they eat 1200 or less per day, and usually their diaries show an amount closer to 900-1100 per day. They put in a very aggressive goal and then often ignore the recommendations and eat even less.

There are, of course, circumstances where 1200 calories GROSS are appropriate, but too many people here on MFP who eat 1200 GROSS actually shouldn't be, in my experience.

Just pretend I said all of that.

WalkingAlong

I think it's also an issue with 1200 that a lot of people eating 1200 here are young, first-time dieters in a hurry, not used to logging 100% and impatient. They log 80% of the time and hit 1200 80% of that time and after 3-4 weeks they feel like they should be somewhere besides down 1-2 lbs., despite that they weigh 5 times a day and are not really sure which number is 'real'. Plus they've been working out for the first time, so they're gaining muscle or water weight. Then they post that they ate 1200 for 5 weeks and lost nothing.

There is another group that aims for 1200 because we're small and older and female and we know humans underestimate and we can aim for 1200 and stop there if we're full but if not we may log 1500 and may really be eating 1700, but we're still going to lose some weight and we'll feel like we've been indulgent and listened to our bodies along the way.

Siansonea

It's an arbitrary number, and people flip their s___ over it for no reason. There are people for whom 1800 calories is much too low, and people for whom 1200 calories is actually too high. It isn't a one-size-fits-all issue. But people act like it is, because of MFP's arbitrary lower limit in its software programming.

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

The issue is as others have said when they are gross 1200 and below that is the issue.

If you net 1200 (typically gross 16-1800) great you are eating to fuel your workouts.

Yep.

^^

mikeykhan2003

The only thing worse than a 1200 calorie diet are vaccinations!!!!

Aaaaanddd.... FIGHT!!!

<popcorn>

adstar20

What's wrong with beating a dead horse?

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

The only thing worse than a 1200 calorie diet are vaccinations!!!!

Aaaaanddd.... FIGHT!!!

<popcorn>

:laugh:

erickirb

They are fine for small sedentary women. But the thing to remember on 1200 cals it is very difficult to get enough protein and fat, while getting all the micro nutrients (vitamins and minerals) you need, which leaves very little room for any treats or empty calories.

TX_Rhon

The only thing worse than a 1200 calorie diet are vaccinations!!!!

Aaaaanddd.... FIGHT!!!

<popcorn>

I thought the only thing worse was sugar??? :devil:

DeterminedToLoseIt02

I eat 1,200 because it works for me at my height, weight, age and activity level. If I increase my activity level on a certain day I'd increase my intake for that day.

kyleekay10

In my experience, there are two kinds of people who say they are eating 1200 calories.

Group A is the 1200 calories and more group. They always eat *at least* 1200 calories and include at least a part of their exercise calories, usually eating closer to 1500-1800 calories. While some people will wonder if 1200 is a good net goal for them if they're particularly tall, active, or male, most of us aren't concerned about the people NETTING 1200 calories.

Group B is the 1200 or less group. They always eat *less than* 1200 calories, ignoring exercise calories, and often mention that they work out for 2 hours a day, are training for a 5K, etc. They may also be tall, active, or male, but they eat 1200 or less per day, and usually their diaries show an amount closer to 900-1100 per day. They put in a very aggressive goal and then often ignore the recommendations and eat even less.

There are, of course, circumstances where 1200 calories GROSS are appropriate, but too many people here on MFP who eat 1200 GROSS actually shouldn't be, in my experience.

/thread

Rage_Phish

"not to beat a dead horse.........but let's beat this dead horse"

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

The only thing worse than a 1200 calorie diet are vaccinations!!!!

Aaaaanddd.... FIGHT!!!

<popcorn>

I thought the only thing worse was sugar??? :devil:

Well sugar and vaccines both cause autism. So there's that.

TigerBite

The more aggressive the deficit, the more muscle you will lose ... Slow and steady ...

Amitysk

What's wrong with beating a dead horse?

This is what I was waiting for....,

beachlover317

Just...so...tired....

RGv2

In my experience, there are two kinds of people who say they are eating 1200 calories.

Group A is the 1200 calories and more group. They always eat *at least* 1200 calories and include at least a part of their exercise calories, usually eating closer to 1500-1800 calories. While some people will wonder if 1200 is a good net goal for them if they're particularly tall, active, or male, most of us aren't concerned about the people NETTING 1200 calories.

Group B is the 1200 or less group. They always eat *less than* 1200 calories, ignoring exercise calories, and often mention that they work out for 2 hours a day, are training for a 5K, etc. They may also be tall, active, or male, but they eat 1200 or less per day, and usually their diaries show an amount closer to 900-1100 per day. They put in a very aggressive goal and then often ignore the recommendations and eat even less.

There are, of course, circumstances where 1200 calories GROSS are appropriate, but too many people here on MFP who eat 1200 GROSS actually shouldn't be, in my experience.

Agreed...

carrieo888

...not trying to start THE big debate...

Uh, yes you are, otherwise why post?

yarwell

They are fine for small sedentary women. But the thing to remember on 1200 cals it is very difficult to get enough protein and fat, while getting all the micro nutrients (vitamins and minerals) you need, which leaves very little room for any treats or empty calories.

100g of protein is 400 calories, only 1/3 of the way to the magic number. Essential fats are, what, 30 grams or 270 cals so only half way in total for these macros.

It does take effort to get everything into 1200 calories, but equally there are people eating 1800 or 2400 with probable micronutrient deficiencies.

carrieo888

The only thing worse than a 1200 calorie diet are vaccinations!!!!

Aaaaanddd.... FIGHT!!!

<popcorn>

I thought the only thing worse was sugar??? :devil:

And bananas. Darn those bananas.