1200 calorie daily allowance and feeling hungry :(
Replies
-
1200 calories?!?! Exercise more so you can eat. Take a jog before you eat, talk a walk after you eat. Be active.
I think I'm pretty active already. I do an hr of cardio 4-5x a week. But with my current diet I haven't been losing weight which is why I joined MFP to try to keep track of my calories =/
You do realize that MFP's caloric goals are net, not total, calories ... right?
wouldn't my daily deficit be super low then? it would take so long to lose 1lb..
Clearly some confusion as to how MFP works..........
Given 1200 net calories .....but you workout for 400 calories............this means you eat 1600 calories (1200+400).....This = 1200 net calories.
Why do you eat calories back........to get back to your ORIGINAL deficit.
Really large calorie deficits are good for losing "weight" quickly. Really large deficits do not support lean muscle. If your goal is a number on the scale.....continue on.
If your goal is reduced body fat.....then eat a portion of your calories back. A portion because MFP estimates are generally pretty high. Fueling workouts help support existing muscle.
OP - within 8 pounds of goal......1/2 pound is a reasonable weekly goal for you. 1 pound a week is too aggressive. Look up skinny-fat.0 -
I've never kept a food diary before and I'm shocked to see how quickly the calories add up. Anyone have any tips on how to stay satiated on 1200 cal/day diet?
4-6 scrambled egg whites over a couple cups of veggies (no cheese or milk) and seasoned with Mrs Dash is a full plate which I can barely eat for less than 200 calories. Add some diced meat, nuts, or cheese and make it a complete meal for a couple hundred more calories or so... So yummy, filling and no hating on yourself afterwards!
Thank you!!! This is the kinda stuff I'm looking for
Please, just eat the whole eggs (2 or 3). The yolk is the healthy part. Fat is healthy and necessary. No need to avoid healthy fats and it just makes one hungrier to do so!!!0 -
Here is what I set..
weekly loss goal: 2lbs
current weight: 118 lbs
activity level: i set this as sedentary because aside from my workouts I'm not especially active, I sit at the computer most of the time.
do you eat your exercise calories: new to the dieting, so no. i've just been going by this 1200 calorie limit that was calculated for me by MFP
I think that at 5'4 your goal weight of 110 lbs is on the low end for a healhty weight. May I ask if weight is your actual concern or if it's toning/body shape? If it is body shape and not weight maybe you could try switching to maintenance and incorporating more strength/weight training to help shape you. I am pregnant so my calories are higher but my diary is open so you can feel free to browse it for food ideas.0 -
Egg whites, steamed broccoli, and air popped popcorn are all super filling and low calorie!
You can have a HUGE salad with cucumbers, tomatoes, reduced fat feta cheese, and a tiny bit of chicken and stay very low calorie.
125 calorie PB&J's are also the greatest thing ever. 35 calorie bread, 2tbsp PB2 (powdered peanut butter), and 1tbsp sugar free jelly make for a filling yummy lunch!
Your 125 calorie PB&J makes me sad. My PB&J sammiches are beasts, frequently 500 calories minimum--more if I decide I'm going to grill it.
That is honestly absolutely terrifying to me lol!! I miss the days when I could eat that and enjoy it. Now even my 125 calorie sandwich is a "treat" lunch
0 -
Please, just eat the whole eggs (2 or 3). The yolk is the healthy part. Fat is healthy and necessary. No need to avoid healthy fats and it just makes one hungrier to do so!!!
^ Bad advice. Fat is healthy, IN MODERATION. 3 egg yolks is too much. I usually mix 1 egg with 1 egg white for my morning omelettes when I don't have chicken sausage to add to it. 2 egg yolks is just unnecessary in terms of fat intake to curb hunger, and 3 is just excessive. That is, unless you're extremely active.0 -
Bump0
-
Here is what I set..
weekly loss goal: 2lbs
current weight: 118 lbs
activity level: i set this as sedentary because aside from my workouts I'm not especially active, I sit at the computer most of the time.
do you eat your exercise calories: new to the dieting, so no. i've just been going by this 1200 calorie limit that was calculated for me by MFP
I think that at 5'4 your goal weight of 110 lbs is on the low end for a healhty weight. May I ask if weight is your actual concern or if it's toning/body shape? If it is body shape and not weight maybe you could try switching to maintenance and incorporating more strength/weight training to help shape you. I am pregnant so my calories are higher but my diary is open so you can feel free to browse it for food ideas.
Well that clarifies much and I would have kept my opinions to myself it you shared that info from the start. You are already at a very low weight for your height (maybe healthy, maybe not- I'm 5'6 so I'm thinking probably not so healthy), still want to lose more, are under-eating to do so, trying to lose 2 pounds per week, but expect not to be hungry? Good luck.0 -
I'm sure there are threads to research which offer low-cal nutritious meals... My two cent's worth would be to plan on pre-making meals up whenever possible.I've never kept a food diary before and I'm shocked to see how quickly the calories add up. Anyone have any tips on how to stay satiated on 1200 cal/day diet?
4-6 scrambled egg whites over a couple cups of veggies (no cheese or milk) and seasoned with Mrs Dash is a full plate which I can barely eat for less than 200 calories. Add some diced meat, nuts, or cheese and make it a complete meal for a couple hundred more calories or so... So yummy, filling and no hating on yourself afterwards!
I try to cook up one big meal at least once per week (inexpensive roast + veggies = enough food for 4 people for $12-15) and I take the leftovers and add barley and make a thick soup and enough lunches for hubby and myself for the week. Tupperware or Rubbermaid containers enable these to be popped in the freezer. Super inexpensive meals and 300-400 calories the way I make it. So good, and takes the guesswork out of busy mornings when everyone is trying to get themselves out the door.
On the off nights that I cook during the week, I still make extra... Leftovers is a wonderful word (no hate mail from those that think it is a bad word!) especially to a full-time working mom with a busy household.
I've often referred to myself as the Queen of Casseroles (I worked full-time, went to school full-time and maintained a home, hubby and children)... I had two upright freezers in the garage (in addition to the two fridge/freezers in the house)... Once a term I would spend a couple of days filling my freezers with every manner of casserole one could think of. Yeah, my family to this day as trouble looking a casserole in the eye...but, BUT, you control what goes into your meals and by pre-determining meals-one is less likely to make choices that are not that great.
Not saying that you need to cook meals for 12 weeks at a time ...start small and have a few meals that you really like and know are within your calories/macros waiting in your freezer, so that you aren't easily swayed to stop for fast food, or grab something breaded from the deli at the store.0 -
Please, just eat the whole eggs (2 or 3). The yolk is the healthy part. Fat is healthy and necessary. No need to avoid healthy fats and it just makes one hungrier to do so!!!
^ Bad advice. Fat is healthy, IN MODERATION. 3 egg yolks is too much. I usually mix 1 egg with 1 egg white for my morning omelettes when I don't have chicken sausage to add to it. 2 egg yolks is just unnecessary in terms of fat intake to curb hunger, and 3 is just excessive. That is, unless you're extremely active.
Three eggs is NOT TOO MUCH FAT. Are you kidding me?! I know you've bought into the fat phobia but you seriously need to reassess your beliefs. I spent 20 plus years buying into the "fat is bad" bs, allowing that mentality driven by the diet and food industry to destroy my health, and I'm going to speak out against it every chance I get. 30% fat, as set by MFP defaults if far too little for just about everyone. Even with 30% a person could easily eat 2 or 3 eggs every single day if they wanted to. There is NO such thing as too many HEALTHY fats. :noway:0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.0 -
Please, just eat the whole eggs (2 or 3). The yolk is the healthy part. Fat is healthy and necessary. No need to avoid healthy fats and it just makes one hungrier to do so!!!
^ Bad advice. Fat is healthy, IN MODERATION. 3 egg yolks is too much. I usually mix 1 egg with 1 egg white for my morning omelettes when I don't have chicken sausage to add to it. 2 egg yolks is just unnecessary in terms of fat intake to curb hunger, and 3 is just excessive. That is, unless you're extremely active.
Thank you. I have nothing against the odd egg yolk... I don't require 2-3 in my diet. I am a 5'5" fine-boned gal that has a fairly sedentary job. I try to exercise daily; that helps justify my mocha habit, helped me to hit goal-weight (120lbs), and keeps me feeling good. ps. I have a houseful of guys that are more than willing to add those yolks to their omelets or French toast...(benefits of living with kidlets with no weight issues!)0 -
Please, just eat the whole eggs (2 or 3). The yolk is the healthy part. Fat is healthy and necessary. No need to avoid healthy fats and it just makes one hungrier to do so!!!
^ Bad advice. Fat is healthy, IN MODERATION. 3 egg yolks is too much. I usually mix 1 egg with 1 egg white for my morning omelettes when I don't have chicken sausage to add to it. 2 egg yolks is just unnecessary in terms of fat intake to curb hunger, and 3 is just excessive. That is, unless you're extremely active.
Three eggs is NOT TOO MUCH FAT. Are you kidding me?! I know you've bought into the fat phobia but you seriously need to reassess your beliefs. I spent 20 plus years buying into the "fat is bad" bs, allowing that mentality driven by the diet and food industry to destroy my health, and I'm going to speak out against it every chance I get. 30% fat, as set by MFP defaults if far too little for just about everyone. Even with 30% a person could easily eat 2 or 3 eggs every single day if they wanted to. There is NO such thing as too many HEALTHY fats. :noway:
No disrespect, but please consider that not everyone is your height and weight and is at your activity level. Of course you can have too many healthy fats. You can have too much of any kind of food.... :flowerforyou:0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.0 -
125 calories is not lunch to me. It is barely a snack. I can understand how you might think so if you were struggling with some type of ED, or if your friends list was full of pro-ana young females feeding you this information (instead of the food you probably need).Egg whites, steamed broccoli, and air popped popcorn are all super filling and low calorie!
You can have a HUGE salad with cucumbers, tomatoes, reduced fat feta cheese, and a tiny bit of chicken and stay very low calorie.
125 calorie PB&J's are also the greatest thing ever. 35 calorie bread, 2tbsp PB2 (powdered peanut butter), and 1tbsp sugar free jelly make for a filling yummy lunch!
Your 125 calorie PB&J makes me sad. My PB&J sammiches are beasts, frequently 500 calories minimum--more if I decide I'm going to grill it.
That is honestly absolutely terrifying to me lol!! I miss the days when I could eat that and enjoy it. Now even my 125 calorie sandwich is a "treat" lunch0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
Yeah I agree with you. I don't have a tonne of weight to lose so its very hard for me to see even 1 lb of difference unless I'm going very hard at my workout and strict with my diet....=/0 -
Novel ahead...
I'm pretty light and maintain my weight on non-exercise days at around 1500 calories, so for me to lose weight (and nowhere near 2lbs/week...we're talking half a pound a week here) I couldn't go over 1200 calories unless I hit the gym (which gave me a couple hundred extra at most for my usual 5K run.) I'm 5'4" as well and have an office job. If you can devote more time to exercise, you can eat more, but if you're like me and fairly light and inactive already, 1200/day can be a reality that the majority of (heavier or more active) posters here don't understand.
That said...when I was losing, I ate mainly vegetables and lean protein for every meal. It wasn't exciting, but I wasn't often hungry and I had plenty of energy. I had to almost eliminate sauces and cooking oils in favour of baked/poached/etc methods of cooking. I used a lot of vinegars and mustard and hot sauce for flavour, as well as fresh herbs and lots of other spices. I ate a lot of fish, lean 6oz steaks, and chicken breasts, and I had things like eggs or yogurt with chia and hemp hearts for breakfast. I made massive salads and dressed them with vinegar or citrus. I weighed absolutely everything and portioned my calorie-dense foods (nuts and nut butters, any oils I did eat, etc) VERY carefully. I eliminated beverages with calories and stuck to black coffee, teas, and water. And I wasn't tired and I didn't lose much muscle mass at all.
There is no reason you can't be satisfied and well-nourished on a 1200 calorie a day diet if you're fairly small and not super active and if you are very, very careful to get the right proportion of macro and micro nutrients in your diet. It requires a lot of work and it's not for everyone, obviously, but it can be done and done healthfully.
I'm kind of tired of everyone freaking out every time the 1200 number comes up. I understand that 1200/day in white bread, chocolate, and Dr. Pepper is a terrible idea, yes. But with careful attention to nutrients, it doesn't have to be awful. And yes, I know that if I worked out more, I could eat more, but all I was/am willing to make time for is a half-hour run a few times a week and a couple short-ish strength training sessions, and so for me it was well worth the trade-off to eat a little less and not have to spend every waking moment in the gym.
I still feel the same way. I value my leisure time, get a moderate amount of exercise, and happily maintain my weight at about 1500 calories/day without a struggle. I have visible muscle tone and a low body fat percentage, I'm not skinnyfat, and I continue to find that as long as I eat a lot of vegetables and less-processed foods generally (although I do have the occasional restaurant meal/baked good/beer) I am not hungry. I'm jealous of my boyfriend, who's 50 pounds of muscle heavier and loves the gym, because he can put away 3000/day without gaining, but unless I put a ton of effort into building a lot of muscle and spend way more time exercising, I just can't get close to that at my size.
YMMV, of course, but I wanted to offer another perspective.
So true. Thank you!:flowerforyou:
As a small gal (weight-wise) that has a sedentary job (school teacher) I have days when it is hard to hit the 1200 calories...(and I love food!) Some people don't get that...0 -
What I do it is to eat more of the food that requires longer time to digest, so you will not feel hungry while your body is still digesting!!
Examples are onions, garlic, cabbage,bell pepper, ......0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.
It likely is, in fact, as we're the same height and weight. However, MFP won't set goals below 1200/day, so for me I get 1200/day as a goal whether I put in 2lbs/week or 0.5lb/week. People who aren't as light as the OP and I have likely never run into that particular bit of weirdness in the app before, so I'm not surprised you weren't aware. But yeah...if I set mine to anything other than maintenance, 1200 is what it spits out (as it's clearly not going to suggest I eat 600/day to get me to 2lbs/week.)0 -
Bump0
-
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.
It likely is, in fact, as we're the same height and weight. However, MFP won't set goals below 1200/day, so for me I get 1200/day as a goal whether I put in 2lbs/week or 0.5lb/week. People who aren't as light as the OP and I have likely never run into that particular bit of weirdness in the app before, so I'm not surprised you weren't aware. But yeah...if I set mine to anything other than maintenance, 1200 is what it spits out (as it's clearly not going to suggest I eat 600/day to get me to 2lbs/week.)
I am aware of how MFP works including for those who are short, light, etc.
I ran her numbers using multiple BMR calculators. For her a 1/2 pound per week is in 1400 calorie per day range not including exercise calories from her 4-5 hours per week of working out. 1200 is too low for a relatively young woman working out 4-5 times per week.
If her numbers are calculated using TDEE rather than the NEAT system used by MFP, her caloric needs are at about 2000 per day to maintain since exercise is included (using 3-5x per week working out).0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.
It likely is, in fact, as we're the same height and weight. However, MFP won't set goals below 1200/day, so for me I get 1200/day as a goal whether I put in 2lbs/week or 0.5lb/week. People who aren't as light as the OP and I have likely never run into that particular bit of weirdness in the app before, so I'm not surprised you weren't aware. But yeah...if I set mine to anything other than maintenance, 1200 is what it spits out (as it's clearly not going to suggest I eat 600/day to get me to 2lbs/week.)
I ran her numbers using multiple BMR calculators. For her a 1/2 pound per week is in 1400 calorie per day range not including exercise calories from her 4-5 hours per week of working out. 1200 is too low for a relatively young woman working out 4-5 times per week.
If her numbers are calculated using TDEE rather than the NEAT system used by MFP, her caloric needs are at about 2000 per day to maintain since exercise is included (using 3-5x per week working out).
Run it all you want, but I'm telling you that I am her size and similarly active and 2000 calories a day has me ballooning like a foie gras duck (and it wasn't water weight/glycogen replenishment as I'd been maintaining for some time already when I tried it.) There is just no way unless I run 50km/week. When I bartended and was on my feet all day every day, it was possible, but with a sedentary job I just can't.
I don't need to argue this because I've lived it and can offer the OP personal experience, which I have done already. Get back to me when you're a 115 pound woman with an office job who gets moderate exercise. The theory is great, but I'm simply offering my practical experience, and hoping it helps more than "YOU NEED TO EAT MORE" over and over again. Because quite honestly, eating more might not help her reach her goal.0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.
It likely is, in fact, as we're the same height and weight. However, MFP won't set goals below 1200/day, so for me I get 1200/day as a goal whether I put in 2lbs/week or 0.5lb/week. People who aren't as light as the OP and I have likely never run into that particular bit of weirdness in the app before, so I'm not surprised you weren't aware. But yeah...if I set mine to anything other than maintenance, 1200 is what it spits out (as it's clearly not going to suggest I eat 600/day to get me to 2lbs/week.)
I ran her numbers using multiple BMR calculators. For her a 1/2 pound per week is in 1400 calorie per day range not including exercise calories from her 4-5 hours per week of working out. 1200 is too low for a relatively young woman working out 4-5 times per week.
If her numbers are calculated using TDEE rather than the NEAT system used by MFP, her caloric needs are at about 2000 per day to maintain since exercise is included (using 3-5x per week working out).
Run it all you want, but I'm telling you that I am her size and similarly active and 2000 calories a day has me ballooning like a foie gras duck (and it wasn't water weight/glycogen replenishment as I'd been maintaining for some time already when I tried it.) There is just no way unless I run 50km/week. When I bartended and was on my feet all day every day, it was possible, but with a sedentary job I just can't.
I don't need to argue this because I've lived it and can offer the OP personal experience, which I have done already. Get back to me when you're a 115 pound woman with an office job who gets moderate exercise. The theory is great, but I'm simply offering my practical experience, and hoping it helps more than "YOU NEED TO EAT MORE" over and over again. Because quite honestly, eating more might not help her reach her goal.
I was going to lower myself to your level but changed my mind. Go learn the difference between NEAT and TDEE including how that difference impacts caloric goals.0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.
It likely is, in fact, as we're the same height and weight. However, MFP won't set goals below 1200/day, so for me I get 1200/day as a goal whether I put in 2lbs/week or 0.5lb/week. People who aren't as light as the OP and I have likely never run into that particular bit of weirdness in the app before, so I'm not surprised you weren't aware. But yeah...if I set mine to anything other than maintenance, 1200 is what it spits out (as it's clearly not going to suggest I eat 600/day to get me to 2lbs/week.)
I ran her numbers using multiple BMR calculators. For her a 1/2 pound per week is in 1400 calorie per day range not including exercise calories from her 4-5 hours per week of working out. 1200 is too low for a relatively young woman working out 4-5 times per week.
If her numbers are calculated using TDEE rather than the NEAT system used by MFP, her caloric needs are at about 2000 per day to maintain since exercise is included (using 3-5x per week working out).
Run it all you want, but I'm telling you that I am her size and similarly active and 2000 calories a day has me ballooning like a foie gras duck (and it wasn't water weight/glycogen replenishment as I'd been maintaining for some time already when I tried it.) There is just no way unless I run 50km/week. When I bartended and was on my feet all day every day, it was possible, but with a sedentary job I just can't.
I don't need to argue this because I've lived it and can offer the OP personal experience, which I have done already. Get back to me when you're a 115 pound woman with an office job who gets moderate exercise. The theory is great, but I'm simply offering my practical experience, and hoping it helps more than "YOU NEED TO EAT MORE" over and over again. Because quite honestly, eating more might not help her reach her goal.
Entering incorrect information into MFP isn't going to help her reach her goal either. She already admitted that she entered 2 lbs per week as a goal, which is completely unrealistic for someone wanting an 8 lb loss, no matter what their weight. There are also plenty of women on MFP with similar height and weight who lose eating a lot more than 1200 calories. She could be doing her body a disservice with such an aggressive goal, but we'll never know where she is supposed to be calorie-wise because she doesn't seem interested in looking at the data and figuring out the optimal number of calories for her particular situation. She just wants to lose weight quick. Oh well, we tried.0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.
It likely is, in fact, as we're the same height and weight. However, MFP won't set goals below 1200/day, so for me I get 1200/day as a goal whether I put in 2lbs/week or 0.5lb/week. People who aren't as light as the OP and I have likely never run into that particular bit of weirdness in the app before, so I'm not surprised you weren't aware. But yeah...if I set mine to anything other than maintenance, 1200 is what it spits out (as it's clearly not going to suggest I eat 600/day to get me to 2lbs/week.)
I ran her numbers using multiple BMR calculators. For her a 1/2 pound per week is in 1400 calorie per day range not including exercise calories from her 4-5 hours per week of working out. 1200 is too low for a relatively young woman working out 4-5 times per week.
If her numbers are calculated using TDEE rather than the NEAT system used by MFP, her caloric needs are at about 2000 per day to maintain since exercise is included (using 3-5x per week working out).
Run it all you want, but I'm telling you that I am her size and similarly active and 2000 calories a day has me ballooning like a foie gras duck (and it wasn't water weight/glycogen replenishment as I'd been maintaining for some time already when I tried it.) There is just no way unless I run 50km/week. When I bartended and was on my feet all day every day, it was possible, but with a sedentary job I just can't.
I don't need to argue this because I've lived it and can offer the OP personal experience, which I have done already. Get back to me when you're a 115 pound woman with an office job who gets moderate exercise. The theory is great, but I'm simply offering my practical experience, and hoping it helps more than "YOU NEED TO EAT MORE" over and over again. Because quite honestly, eating more might not help her reach her goal.
Get back to me when you understand basic math and the difference between TDEE and NEAT. It's obvious you don't.
You're encouraging a woman who admits to not eating back exercise calories to undereat based on every simple concept. Congrats. Then again, 5' 4.5" and 115 as you claim is at the low end of most healthy weight charts but you and the OP think losing more is the healthy choice. But based on your special snowflakeness ... it's all good.
I work in accounting. I understand math. And I know all about TDEE and NEAT. My TDEE is 1500/day, but if I run that day I can go up to about 1700 without gaining. The math checks out as far as it can with estimated calorie burns and without precise muscle mass/body fat percentage measurements (which you know aren't an exact science without specialised equipment.)
Yes, we are at the low end of a healthy BMI. Still healthy. My doctor is more than happy with my health and weight. I'm not large-framed and my body fat is right where it should be. OP might be the same, so I'm not going to attack her for wanting to lose a couple more pounds. I've considered it myself because I'd like my breasts to get a bit smaller. I am not a special snowflake, I'm just realistic about what works for me based on my own successful experience and current maintenance of a healthy weight. It's maybe not exactly what you calculate but it's close enough to make sense.
ETA: The simple fact that I'm neither gaining or losing any weight and haven't for a year should probably indicate that I've got the numbers right, no?0 -
Harris-Benedict BMR 1346
Sedentary value 1.2 .... so maintenance using NEAT derived from BMR is 1615 -250 per day for 1/2 lb per week = 1376 before exercise.
Using Scooby and TDEE set at light exercise 1851 per day to maintain, 1666 with a 10% reduction. Set it at moderate exercise (3-5x per week) comes out to 2087 maintenance, 1878 with 10% reduction.0 -
1200 is too low. 1200 and failing to eat exercise calories is bordering on dangerous. Redo all of the numbers based on 1/2 pound per week or remaining at/near current weight and undergoing body recomposition (weights to build/maintain lean mass, working to lower body fat %, not scale focused).
Or you can continue on your current path and the resulting hunger and likely unhealthy outcomes from failing to provide your body with the nutrients and fuel it needs. Your choice.
Yep, this. I know it's probably too late to convince the OP, but at least we can try to reach other people who might be reading this.
I posted this already in my (admittedly very long) post, but for some of us, 1200/day IS 1/2 pound per week, unfortunately. And as I also mentioned, it is perfectly possible to get the nutrients and fuel the body needs if one is extremely diligent with planning and tracking. It isn't easy, but it's doable.
For the OP, it isn't. Simple math.
It likely is, in fact, as we're the same height and weight. However, MFP won't set goals below 1200/day, so for me I get 1200/day as a goal whether I put in 2lbs/week or 0.5lb/week. People who aren't as light as the OP and I have likely never run into that particular bit of weirdness in the app before, so I'm not surprised you weren't aware. But yeah...if I set mine to anything other than maintenance, 1200 is what it spits out (as it's clearly not going to suggest I eat 600/day to get me to 2lbs/week.)
I ran her numbers using multiple BMR calculators. For her a 1/2 pound per week is in 1400 calorie per day range not including exercise calories from her 4-5 hours per week of working out. 1200 is too low for a relatively young woman working out 4-5 times per week.
If her numbers are calculated using TDEE rather than the NEAT system used by MFP, her caloric needs are at about 2000 per day to maintain since exercise is included (using 3-5x per week working out).
Run it all you want, but I'm telling you that I am her size and similarly active and 2000 calories a day has me ballooning like a foie gras duck (and it wasn't water weight/glycogen replenishment as I'd been maintaining for some time already when I tried it.) There is just no way unless I run 50km/week. When I bartended and was on my feet all day every day, it was possible, but with a sedentary job I just can't.
I don't need to argue this because I've lived it and can offer the OP personal experience, which I have done already. Get back to me when you're a 115 pound woman with an office job who gets moderate exercise. The theory is great, but I'm simply offering my practical experience, and hoping it helps more than "YOU NEED TO EAT MORE" over and over again. Because quite honestly, eating more might not help her reach her goal.
Get back to me when you understand basic math and the difference between TDEE and NEAT. It's obvious you don't.
You're encouraging a woman who admits to not eating back exercise calories to undereat based on every simple concept. Congrats. Then again, 5' 4.5" and 115 as you claim is at the low end of most healthy weight charts but you and the OP think losing more is the healthy choice. But based on your special snowflakeness ... it's all good.
I work in accounting. I understand math. And I know all about TDEE and NEAT. My TDEE is 1500/day, but if I run that day I can go up to about 1700 without gaining. The math checks out as far as it can with estimated calorie burns and without precise muscle mass/body fat percentage measurements (which you know aren't an exact science without specialised equipment.)
Yes, we are at the low end of a healthy BMI. Still healthy. My doctor is more than happy with my health and weight. I'm not large-framed and my body fat is right where it should be. OP might be the same, so I'm not going to attack her for wanting to lose a couple more pounds. I've considered it myself because I'd like my breasts to get a bit smaller. I am not a special snowflake, I'm just realistic about what works for me based on my own successful experience and current maintenance of a healthy weight. It's maybe not exactly what you calculate but it's close enough to make sense.
ETA: The simple fact that I'm neither gaining or losing any weight and haven't for a year should probably indicate that I've got the numbers right, no?
You've managed to confuse NEAT (doesn't include exercise so caloric intake varies daily dependent on exercise level) and TDEE (averaged based on exercise resulting in a constant daily caloric goal). I'm glad you don't do my accounting since you mix simple terms with different definitions.
If your logging is as accurate as your posting and knowledge of terms, your weight maintenance is purely luck.0 -
Harris-Benedict BMR 1346
Sedentary value 1.2 .... so maintenance using NEAT derived from BMR is 1615 -250 per day for 1/2 lb per week = 1376 before exercise.
Using Scooby and TDEE set at light exercise 1851 per day to maintain, 1666 with a 10% reduction. Set it at moderate exercise (3-5x per week) comes out to 2087 maintenance, 1878 with 10% reduction.
That's great, but as I've stated more than once, I've been maintaining easily for a year on a bit less, and that's okay because it's not a perfect calculation and more of a guideline, unless you're going all-out and getting your metabolic rate/body fat/muscle mass/bone density/etc professionally tested. It's pretty close: ~200 off for me, which is not a lot in the grand scheme of things when you consider the variables we can't control with an equation.0 -
eat more. I think i would literally wither away to nothing if i ate 1200 calories a day. I would be hangry and my hubby would hate me.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions