Short girls 1200 calories just not enough?

FitForLife81

I am 5'3" and lost NOTHING at 1200 calories! LOST at 400-1600 and maintain at 2000+

PapaverSomniferum

I'm 5'2" and maintenance for me is approximately 1300. At 1200, any loss is not noticeable on the scale. I have to exercise, then eat back only half just to cause a deficit. Weight loss this way has been super slow, (20lb in 3 years, ugh) but every time I take the MFP forums advice and up my calories by a few hundred, I end up putting on weight rapidly (once gained 10lb in 1 month of eating 1500 net. **** you, MFP forums! It took me 9 months to re-lose that 10lb! *joking, but not really joking*)

To lose weight, as a short person, I've learned success is in LOTS of exercise, and learning to just eat less than you are socially conditioned to by years of eating the same quantities that "normal sized" people do. It doesn't take much to fuel a petite body healthily.

Building muscle to up BMR is my goal.

laurenpjokl

I struggled at first on the 1200 calorie goal, but got I eventually got used to it after a few weeks. Maybe you need to examine the foods you are eating and figure out if there are more filling/less calorific alternatives. I had to seriously up the amount of veg I was eating and pay careful attention to carbohydrates. Lower your portion size and see if you still feel hungry.

tula1980

I'm 154cm and weigh 48.5kg and I'm losing currently on 2150 calories per day! I am super active and lifting, though trying not to lose weight.

How many calories you need to 'break even' is dependant on so many things, height - yes, but also weight, age, sex, activity levels and the amount of lean body mass you have. I would recommend spending 30 minutes plugging it all into one of the TDEE calculators and working out how many calories you would need with your activity levels to maintain your goal weight, then eat at or slightly under that number until your there. If that's less than 1600 calories per day then I'd say you need to get moving more and/or work on increasing your lean body mass with some sort of strength or weight training.

neandermagnon

I'm 154cm and 1500 calories is not enough for me, I'm starving and hangry on that amount of calories. 1800 is a very slow cut, i.e. slow weight loss, and I maintain around 2100 calories. I'm already at a healthy body fat percentage, so if I want to reduce it, then I'll do it slowly (i.e. around 1800 cals/day) rather than risk losing muscle/strength and enduring 24/7 hangryness (or should I say forcing the people around me to endure me being hangry because it's worse for them LOL). You don't want to know me when I'm hangry lol....

being short only reduces the amount of calories you need by a small amount. Your activity levels will affect your TDEE much more than your height will. Also, frame size affects it too. I'm short and large framed with a high lean body mass for my height, so that increases my BMR a bit and cancels out some of the height thing. If you're short and small framed you'd need to eat a little less than me, but in any case if you're more active that's going to add a lot more calories to your TDEE than height or frame size will. So yeah, being short does equal eating somewhat fewer calories but IMO the difference is over-exaggerated.

Achrya

I'd punch a baby before I ate that low. I'm 5'3 and lose at 1800 calories a day (usually more; sometimes 1800 is just not enough) with little to no cardio and 2-3 hours of lifting a week.

That's just my experience though.

mrsamanda86

I'm only 4'11 and I usually try to NET between 1250-1400. Was losing about 1-1.5 a week for a while, but recently it's been more like .5-1 a week(already just over halfway to my goal and only have another 20 pounds or so to go, not in any rush).
ETA- Just in case it isn't obvious, I don't ONLY eat 1250-1400, except on my rest days. Usually I end up eating somewhere between 15-1800 calories depending on how hungry I am and how much I exercised.

neandermagnon

That's great that there are so many small women here who can lose weight on higher calorie amounts. My point was just that the reason the calorie goal generators come up with 1200 is because the average woman 5' tall, etc., who wants to lose x/week, has to go that low. If you're not average, that's terrific.

I don't think that number is for average women of 5'0" either. Or that frame size (the only thing that makes me non-average) makes that much of a difference.

My BMR estimate from the Katch-McArdle calculator = 1428 cals/day

BMR for someone same height, same body fat percentage, who weighs 20lb less (i.e. smaller frame) = 1277 cals/day

note that the above is BMR, not TDEE, this would be calories burned keeping the body alive, exercise and activity calories would be additional to these. There's only 150 or so calories difference. So my non-average frame size/lean body mass for height only gives me an extra 150 or so calories.

Even for the data for the hypothetical smaller framed woman (same height and body fat percentage as me, but weighs 20lb less), 1200 cals/day would be too little for her, as this is below her BMR. When you add in activity and exercise calories, she too can probably lose on 1500-1700 cals/day.

Lastly, no matter what your height, frame size and BMR is, even if you have such a tiny frame size that your BMR is below 1200 cals/day, you can still eat more by being more active. If the BMR is that low, then *netting* 1200 cals/day would be reasonable, but with exercising and eating back exercise calories the total calories eaten could still be as high as 1600-1800 cals/day.

WalkingAlong

Your post is full of MFPisms (myths). 1- You can't eat below BMR. 2- People come in 3 frame sizes. 3- There is such thing as 'net calories'.

If you can lose weight on 1800, more power to you. But you're not the average 5' tall woman, if you can. MFP spits out that number based on averages and simple math, not because it's trying to be mean and make short people starve.

Lillyloooo

4ft 11

speedy740

I'd punch a baby before I ate that low. I'm 5'3 and lose at 1800 calories a day (usually more; sometimes 1800 is just not enough) with little to no cardio and 2-3 hours of lifting a week.

That's just my experience though.

That is the funniest thing I have read on here lol Too cute!*

neandermagnon

Your post is full of MFPisms (myths). 1- You can't eat below BMR. 2- People come in 3 frame sizes. 3- There is such thing as 'net calories'.

If you can lose weight on 1800, more power to you. But you're not the average 5' tall woman, if you can. MFP spits out that number based on averages and simple math, not because it's trying to be mean and make short people starve.

so wait, people don't come in different frame sizes, yet the amount of calories I burn is unnaturally high for a woman of my height. Now, that wouldn't be because of having extra lean mass due to having a larger frame now, would it? :huh:

ETA: I presume you weren't responding to my post because my post doesn't contain 1 or 3

nancybuss

I'm around 1200, often a bit more, although I eat back workout calories. I've slowly increased but I've gained almost 3 pounds also. I'm 'waiting' to see if that will look like more belly fat or what.
Both my TDEE and MFP show me at 1200 to 1300 for Staying Even with wait, but my fat % is still high. at least according to the hand held machines. Being short has many disadvantages

I'm 4'10" 95 - 97 pounds.

I need to gain muscle so I can eat more!

Cheeky_and_Geeky

I'm 5'1" & eat 1450 calories a day but I workout 30mins per day. I did 1200 calories & lost 2 pounds a week, increased to 1350 & still lost 2lbs a week. Now I eat 1450 & am gradually moving to maintenance.