Yes, 1200 calorie diets work!

AmyRhubarb

Why does everyone keep saying that this is not sustainable? Nobody (including op) is talking about eating at deficit for the rest of your life. You use this mega-deficit to quickly shed weight for:

1) Self-esteem/self-image/Confidence
3) Health (yes, it is healthier to eat at a deficit rather than being obese)
4) It's easier to workout /exercise when your 30-40lbs lighter. If you don't believe me, try weighing down a backpack with that much weight and doing your workout.

Once the initial weight is loss, you work on getting back closer to maintenance a bit at a time.

Fear-mongering a 1200 calorie-a-day-diet is the ultimate first-world problem. You'd think by the way these folks talk that everyone in Southeast Asia is completely bald.

Key word - "deficit" - I'm eating 2000 cals a day and STILL in a deficit. 1200 or less for a dude is not enough food! And what happens after losing the initial weight and going to a higher calorie goal? Weight gain of course, generally causing a freak-out and instantly dropping cals again, and posting that "I can't lose on more than 1200 or 1100, or 1000 cals a day!" - because eating super low for too long results in the metabolism slowing to match the low intake, and requiring a lower and lower intake to show a loss. That's a nasty spiral I do NOT want to go down.

gotolam

Why does everyone keep saying that this is not sustainable? Nobody (including op) is talking about eating at deficit for the rest of your life. You use this mega-deficit to quickly shed weight for:

1) Self-esteem/self-image/Confidence
3) Health (yes, it is healthier to eat at a deficit rather than being obese)
4) It's easier to workout /exercise when your 30-40lbs lighter. If you don't believe me, try weighing down a backpack with that much weight and doing your workout.

Once the initial weight is loss, you work on getting back closer to maintenance a bit at a time.

Fear-mongering a 1200 calorie-a-day-diet is the ultimate first-world problem. You'd think by the way these folks talk that everyone in Southeast Asia is completely bald.

Key word - "deficit" - I'm eating 2000 cals a day and STILL in a deficit. 1200 or less for a dude is not enough food! And what happens after losing the initial weight and going to a higher calorie goal? Weight gain of course, generally causing a freak-out and instantly dropping cals again, and posting that "I can't lose on more than 1200 or 1100, or 1000 cals a day!" - because eating super low for too long results in the metabolism slowing to match the low intake, and requiring a lower and lower intake to show a loss. That's a nasty spiral I do NOT want to go down.

Except that it doesn't work that way. Do you have any idea how long it would take you to lower your metabolism to the point where it can only process 1200 calories/day without adding weight?

AllieMarie2244

bump

conqueringsquidlette

5'4", 170 lbs., female, totally sedentary. I treat 1200 as my yellow light - I don't treat it as a hard and fast limit. So I'm over it often, but not by much. I eat my exercise calories, so this is net to be clear. Even so, my fitbit shows that my daily deficit is arround 500 a day.

I'm never "starving", I don't get "hangry", and my hair isn't falling out. I had a burger and a beer last night because I wanted them, so I'm not depriving myself of anything. At worst, I have a little trouble meeting my protein counts on days that I didn't plan perfectly ahead of time. I'm losing just at that pound a week (after the water weight drop the first couple days), sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less. I log everything I eat and all of my activity.

If I ate at 1600, I'd never lose the 50 pounds I need to without drastically increasing my physical activity. Which is a goal of mine, and one I'm slowly working towards, but is it really so awful that I'm in the 1200-1300 range in the meantime?

DerekVTX

[/quote]

1600 cals guys. He lost substantial amount of weight I'm guessing at 1200 cals and now he is at 1600 obviously tweaking things to get what works best for him. I'm at 1250 cals and often don't eat back my exercise cals and I'm doing just fine. I lift weights a couple times a week, yoga once a week, run a couple times a week and with summer here I'll probably start swimming too. If he says it worked for him that's great and I'm totally supportive of that. Do what works for you and you only. Congrats OP :flowerforyou:
[/quote]

You are doing just fine.........FINE :flowerforyou:

AmyRhubarb

Why does everyone keep saying that this is not sustainable? Nobody (including op) is talking about eating at deficit for the rest of your life. You use this mega-deficit to quickly shed weight for:

1) Self-esteem/self-image/Confidence
3) Health (yes, it is healthier to eat at a deficit rather than being obese)
4) It's easier to workout /exercise when your 30-40lbs lighter. If you don't believe me, try weighing down a backpack with that much weight and doing your workout.

Once the initial weight is loss, you work on getting back closer to maintenance a bit at a time.

Fear-mongering a 1200 calorie-a-day-diet is the ultimate first-world problem. You'd think by the way these folks talk that everyone in Southeast Asia is completely bald.

Key word - "deficit" - I'm eating 2000 cals a day and STILL in a deficit. 1200 or less for a dude is not enough food! And what happens after losing the initial weight and going to a higher calorie goal? Weight gain of course, generally causing a freak-out and instantly dropping cals again, and posting that "I can't lose on more than 1200 or 1100, or 1000 cals a day!" - because eating super low for too long results in the metabolism slowing to match the low intake, and requiring a lower and lower intake to show a loss. That's a nasty spiral I do NOT want to go down.

Except that it doesn't work that way. Do you have any idea how long it would take you to lower your metabolism to the point where it can only process 1200 calories/day without adding weight?

I do not have any hard and fast numbers on how long it would take, but I do know that I see people post here on a regular basis that they have eating "below goal", which is usually 1200 or less, for x amount of time, and that every time they try to increase cals they gain. Whether it's a metabolism issue, or just a temp gain after a few days due to a change in cals (most likely in most cases), they freak out and drop back to low cals. And that sucks.

My main point - why eat so low when you don't have to? In the long run, it's not good for ya. From my own experience - I ate low and yoyo dieted, stopped and started, lost and regained. Once I started eating the proper number of cals for my stats, the weight/fat/inches steadily came off and life was much more enjoyable all the way around. And it's been 2 and half years without any stopping or restarting, no regain of weight lost, etc. Sustainable!

ChrisM8971

1600 cals guys. He lost substantial amount of weight I'm guessing at 1200 cals and now he is at 1600 obviously tweaking things to get what works best for him. I'm at 1250 cals and often don't eat back my exercise cals and I'm doing just fine. I lift weights a couple times a week, yoga once a week, run a couple times a week and with summer here I'll probably start swimming too. If he says it worked for him that's great and I'm totally supportive of that. Do what works for you and you only. Congrats OP :flowerforyou:


You are doing just fine.........FINE :flowerforyou:

So guessing you are losing about 5 lbs or more a week? Possible 2 lbs fat and 3 lbs muscle?

For you that may be fine, glad you didn't say healthy though

brower47

Claims 1200 works...
Has been dieting for four months...
Come back and say that when you've kept it off for a year.

Also, your muscles are waving goodbye to you as I type this.

1200 cals works for 4'5" people and shorter.

For you, it's working at removing muscle, incurring vitamin deficiencies and almost guaranteeing weight regain.

Autk79

I personally think 1200 is low for a male. I do 1250 when I dont work out and Im not bitter, or losing sleep or starving. And I have cheat days and prob will the rest of my life. But I also could prob eat the way I do the rest of my life.....I think everyone is different.

skullshank

Claims 1200 works...
Has been dieting for four months...
now eats 1600
starting to eat 1800 soon
Come back and say that when you've kept it off for a year.

Also, your muscles are waving goodbye to you as I type this.

1200 cals works for 4'5" people and shorter.

For you, it's working at removing muscle, incurring vitamin deficiencies and almost guaranteeing weight regain.

FIFY

Itskaleena

I think it also depends on the person. 1200 doesn't work for everyone just like 2000 doesn't work for everyone.
Congrats on the weight though! Keep up the good and healthy work.

bigblakey82

So in...

Okay OP..you are a 29 year old man eating less than 1200 calories of course you are losing weight but you are also losing fat and muscle...congrats to you.

In the long term you will notice the following as well...

Low energy
Lethargy
brittle nails and hair
Hunger cues will diminish
Your metabolism is going to slow eventually too

You will do damage to your heart and muscles
You will not be able to exercise much

And then...you will break...you will eat a wad of food

Long term you become nutrient deficient, your metabolism will adapt and make it hard to lose weight, your bones will become brittle due to lack of muscle...

But hey you lost weight...good on you.

As for the will power...naw...my goal is to be healthy and happy not weak, lethargic, unhealthy and skinny with no muscle mass...

Self control means eating as much as I can while I still lose weight not as little as possible as a form of self punishment for gaining weight.

There is no way as a man at 1200 calories you are getting in adequate nutrition...1200 is the bare min for a woman ...

But hey do what works for you...flay yourself as much as you want, don't learn to eat all food in moderation and when you come off this 1200 calorie a day diet and go back to "normal" and gain your weight back because you didn't learn moderation in all foods only self deprevation you will understand why there are those of us who say no to 1200...

I agree with this poster.

Inept_With_Weights

You know, you're not trying to look like an elite athlete, and I think it's hilarious how people are speaking to you as if they are one when telling you all of the bad things you're doing to yourself as if your physique was near peak and you're about to ruin it, etc.
I will just say that extreme caloric deficits won't work well indefinitely and I suggest doing this only for a set period of time. Get your body fat measured so you can at least vaguely quantify things as far as what's fat and what's muscle in regard to your rate of loss.

I do have a qualm with this though.

Someone here will complain about my use of a protein bar. Many argue they are candy bars on steroids. They are meal replacements, quite tasty and have good nutrients (fiber and protein being the main ones).

Here's the ingredient list for your brand of protein bar.
http://www.specialk.com/en_us/products/meal-bars/chocolate-peanut-butter.html

Ask yourself if all that corn syrup and other forms of sugar, hydrogenated oil (trans fat), super refined carbs which are only a half step up from sugar (dextrose, etc) doesn't pretty much constitute a candy bar. Then look at the protein powder they threw in. It's soy. research soy isoflavones and see how estrogenic soy is and decide for yourself whether or not that's healthy for you as a daily lunch. I'm proud of you for losing so much fat, but you're doing yourself a disservice when you can't look honestly at what you're eating. I eat protein bars too right now. The difference is, it's not meant to be a daily or almost daily thing for me. I consider them a cheat treat and having to skip a real meal so I can fit it in is a compromise. I encourage you to look at them as more of a control tool for sweet cravings rather than a legit meal. Would you eat a snickers bar and pop a multivitamin and tell yourself you ate a healthy lunch? No, of course not. All a protein bar really is is a candy bar with vitamins and some cheap protein powder thrown in. Try finding one with 20-32g protein in it at least if you're going to call it a meal. 10g is a snack if you're lifting weights.

Iron_Feline

1600 cals guys. He lost substantial amount of weight I'm guessing at 1200 cals and now he is at 1600 obviously tweaking things to get what works best for him. I'm at 1250 cals and often don't eat back my exercise cals and I'm doing just fine. I lift weights a couple times a week, yoga once a week, run a couple times a week and with summer here I'll probably start swimming too. If he says it worked for him that's great and I'm totally supportive of that. Do what works for you and you only. Congrats OP :flowerforyou:

Congratulations on getting to your goal weight, being happy with how you look, maintaining as much LBM as possible and maintaining your loss on a reasonable calorie amount.

Oh........ wait.........

KombuchaCat

I lost 1/2 of the 50 lbs I want to lose on the netting 1200 calorie diet. I ate back all my exercize calories so I never actually ate only 1200 calories. I still struggled all the time with food cravings and feeling faint. Like many of the other posters I hit a major plateau. I switched it up to eating my TDEE and cutting out all added sugar and processed foods. I find that I will lose weight while eating much more if I greatly reduce the sugar. It also helps with the cravings. Different food effect your body differently and either facilitate or stand in the way of weight loss.

dlionsmane

I guess I just don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to eat AS MUCH AS THEY CAN and still lose weight. Why would you want to start with the LEAST and have no where to go?? For me answering the "and you just exercise off the extra calories" I say - no, at least not in my case. I don't, I do lift but I don't get big burns,. I never have, yet I eat 1600-1800 and I still lose, slowly yes... very slowly sometimes. But you know what I DON'T CARE. I am not in any hurry. I have the rest of my life for this. I for one would rather spend it enjoying the foods I eat! Good luck to you.

Also to add- I have never gone to bed hungry! Why would I??

Akimajuktuq

Yup very low calorie diets work terrifically for slowing one's metabolism, causing muscle loss, and for being completely unsustainable for the long term... hence re-gaining the fat at some point later on when one adds more food but has a slower metabolism and barely any muscle. Brilliant. Measuring a short term success as a TOTAL success is a fallacy. Only considering weight loss as success is also a fallacy.

It's people pushing this kind of crap that leads to yesterdays news headline (in Canada): "Permanent weight loss is impossible.... without surgery...." Cuz there's so many people who choose an unsustainable, unhealthy weight loss path which has no other outcome than to FAIL over the long term.

43mmmgoody21

I eat more than that in one meal. But if it is working for you (and you're not experiencing health issues) who cares what other people think.

When you lose the weight are you going to slowly bump your calories up (i am assuming you won't be eating this low for the rest of your life-- i.e. 1600/day)?

manicautumn

How tall are you?

I'm astounded. I'm 5'0 and I rarely go under 1400 and only on sedentary days.

I don't know how you have enough energy on that little...

brower47

Claims 1200 works...
Has been dieting for four months...
now eats 1600
starting to eat 1800 soon
Come back and say that when you've kept it off for a year.

Also, your muscles are waving goodbye to you as I type this.

1200 cals works for 4'5" people and shorter.

For you, it's working at removing muscle, incurring vitamin deficiencies and almost guaranteeing weight regain.

FIFY

Good. I saw the 1.6k number, but he's still a guy with a guy's metabolism and nutrient needs. 1600 cal is the male equivalent of 1200 cals for a gal. And he plans to add another 200 soon...

Color me not impressed. Medically supervised VLCDs for the morbidly obese because quick weight loss is deemed a medical necessity is one thing. Advocating the same for less dire circumstances is unwise and could promote unhealthy/ineffective weight loss practices in individuals that would be better served using a modest calorie deficit for healthy/sustainable weight loss.