1200 Calories some sort of sin??

hookilau

[
So then if you're not qualified, certified, licensed to give out advice, why are you here on the forum?

Right everybody who isn't qualified, certified or licensed to give out advice, out you go, off you go now, get out of here.

fortysixpounds

:laugh: We do indeed say 'look it'!....something I've only heard people from Astoria, & other areas in Queens. I do recall a high Irish population growing up, so it *does* make a lot of sense Just curious...do you 'cross yourself' as in 'make the sign of the cross' when you walk past or drive past a church?

hahaha no I don't but I am in a small minority of non Catholics. Most of the population are Irish Catholics and would cross themselves passing a church...or if an ambulance passes them...actually theres lots of occasions where I've seen people do that

fortysixpounds

[
So then if you're not qualified, certified, licensed to give out advice, why are you here on the forum?

Right everybody who isn't qualified, certified or licensed to give out advice, out you go, off you go now, get out of here.

LMAO

parkscs

Frankly, I think it’s a bit naïve to believe some people who can’t even set-up their profile correctly will automatically understand the manner in which to hit their nutrient levels with 1200 calories. Therefore, I don’t see any problems with people questioning 1200 or low calories diets.

I suspect we're actually in agreement on this issue and just talking past each other. I'm saying that eating 1200 calories is not in and of itself dangerous, as under optimal conditions an overfat individual can get all essential nutrition with 1200 calories of food (or even quite a bit less). I think what you're saying is that, as a practical matter, it may well be dangerous/unhealthy for the typical MFP newbie to attempt to eat 1200 or fewer calories, because they probably aren't following a well-designed diet and generally don't know what they're doing - and that I completely agree with. I don't think our positions are actually in disagreement; I'm just making more of an academic argument and you're talking about what's likely to be the case as a practical matter.

And like I said earlier, I don't think 1200 calories or less is a good idea for the vast majority of people, particularly since some people have some really stupid ideas about how they should go about eating so little (e.g., lemonade fasts... I've even seen an all cheerios - no milk - VLCD).

hookilau

:laugh: We do indeed say 'look it'!....something I've only heard people from Astoria, & other areas in Queens. I do recall a high Irish population growing up, so it *does* make a lot of sense Just curious...do you 'cross yourself' as in 'make the sign of the cross' when you walk past or drive past a church?

hahaha no I don't but I am in a small minority of non Catholics. Most of the population are Irish Catholics and would cross themselves passing a church...or if an ambulance passes them...actually theres lots of occasions where I've seen people do that

:laugh: :drinker:

WalkingAlong

In these cases, shouldn’t the OP be informed that it is possible for him/her to eat more and still lose weight and allow to him or her to make the final decision? Is there something wrong with this gesture?

Since you are collecting links, here is one for you:

http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501

Branstin- No, I think there's nothing wrong with that gesture.

Thanks for the link. Good one. I added it. An excerpt that pertains well, especially:

" While there is no biologic evidence to support the "starvation mode" myth, there may be behavioral reasons why weight loss stops when calories are severely reduced. Over-restriction of calorie intake, known as high dietary restraint is linked to periods of overeating, hindering successful weight loss.3 (For more information on dietary restraint, read the Science Center article, The Skill of Flexible Restraint).

Metabolism after Weight Loss
The good news is that after the weight-loss goal is achieved and weight has stabilized, it does not appear that the dip in metabolism is permanent. Several rigorous studies done at the University of Alabama in Birmingham showed that metabolism goes back to expected levels with sustained weight loss, discounting the theory that a lowered metabolism helps to explain the common phenomenon of weight regain following weight loss. "

And the study it references:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11063433?dopt=Abstract
CONCLUSIONS:
"Energy restriction produces a transient hypothyroid-hypometabolic state that normalizes on return to energy-balanced conditions. Failure to establish energy balance after weight loss gives the misleading impression that weight-reduced persons are energy conservative and predisposed to weight regain. Our findings do not provide evidence in support of adaptive metabolic changes as an explanation for the tendency of weight-reduced persons to regain weight."

WalkingAlong

I love this post^^^^^

And Walkalong is the biggest defender on MFP of low calorie diets without ever taking context into consideration. Oh yea, and with a closed profile, no pictures, no proof of anything accomplished.

MrM- If you're ever in AZ I'll gladly buy you a beer and you can confirm that I do in fact have a face and a normal-ish BMI and I can bring proof of accomplishments too, if you want. LOL. My profile was blank but I added some links and excerpts that might clarify my stance. :flowerforyou:

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Tw1stedPixie

I am currently doing the 5:2 diet. But as it is only 15 days until I go on holiday I have dropped to 1200 calories a day on food days and 600 calories for the two fasting days... When I get back off of holiday I will be eating a "normal" amount and try to lose it slower :-)

T x

Snip8241

Here's my last post on the 1200 topic:

Folks: play with the calculators. Become a 30 year old of varying heights, and weights, then vary your age. Then consider menopause at each age. Then consider hypothyroidism. No, it's not impossible for people to lose weight, but... the challenges DO vary.

My sister is a great example. She's short. She's 60+ and she's over weight. Her BMR is about 1100. Her TDEE is about 1400. That's a tiny weight loss window. Then factor in menopause and hypothyroidism (half a thyroid even). Her window between loss and maintenance may be about 100 calories. Her margin of error is pretty small.

Consider me and my other sister. Same basic height. If we both walk 30 minutes she burns about half the calories I do. Because she's older. And has a slower metabolism, and less LBM...

If my friend who's my age and height but weighs about 100LBS more and I go for a 30 minute run, logic says she'll burn more, because she weighs more, but there may be other factors at play.


My point: we're all different. To jump in and say a priori: "I'm losing at 2300" means nothing.
Everyone needs to decide how to best fuel their body and create a deficit. And for each of us, it's going to be different.

Thank you !!

TeaBea

I am currently doing the 5:2 diet. But as it is only 15 days until I go on holiday I have dropped to 1200 calories a day on food days and 600 calories for the two fasting days... When I get back off of holiday I will be eating a "normal" amount and try to lose it slower :-)

T x

Ummm....I hate to be the one to break it to you, but this is NOT the 5:2 diet.

The 5:2 diet has you eat maintenance the other 5 days. Please stop giving people the impression that 5:2 is zig-zagging for a daily average of 1,028 daily calories. If you want to eat below your BMR that's your business, but 5:2 (actual 5:2) would help you keep lean muscle & lose fat.

afiallo

Not a sin! 1200 and working out 5 days/week has worked for me.

Remember we are not made from the same pattern!
I suggest that people play with BMI Calculator (webmd.com/diet/body-calculator#weight) and factor in their conditions.

Kimdbro

So noted. You are following your doctor's recommendation. Please, carry on.

When my Grandmother was put on a 1200 calorie diet by her doctor she lost a ton of weight rather rapidly, when she returned to the doctor for her next appointment he was shocked and clearly upset... he asked her what she had been doing and she answered that she had been following his recommendation of 1200 calories including the diet plan layed out for her. He exclaimed "Oh good god, you actually followed it?!!!" He then explained that Doctors suggest 1200 calorie diets because they know that people will eat more than they think, will most times cheat, and forget about the 'little snacks, bites and drinks' and the 1200 calorie recommendation is so when they actually eat th 1500 calories that they inevitably really are eating, they will lose weight and still be healthy. 1200 calories is not enough food for a human being unless perhaps they are 4 feet tall, or lay in a bed all day.

People on here say it varies for different people of different sizes etc. and they are right.... but just because your window of weight loss is smaller doesn't mean you should be on 1200 or less calories. I would love to lose 8 lbs a week, but I'd have to eat 500 calories a day. That would be stupid. So if you can only lose 2lbs per week by selecting 1200 calories then perhaps you should just be happy to lose 1lb per week and enjoy the nutrients you can have in your 1500 calorie day and take a little longer to take the weight off.

I realize this is moot, I'm once again wasting my time because in 90 seconds there will be another 1200 calorie thread. So this is my last post on the matter.... ever. And really I hope before someone post yet another one, that perhaps they'll just click the search button and be happy reading through the 7000 preceding threads on the matter.

MsKyat90

i think it's really a "concern" when it's applied to those of us who are underweight and still don't eat the recommended daily calorie intake that they are supposed to. Some medications do counteract with weight loss/gain and honestly if it is working for you then continue with it. The other thing, the fact that people are even using this sight, typically means they do actually care what other people (total strangers) think of them. Not everyone is right either but just putting it out there. 1200 calories to me is like eating nothing. (but it depends on what YOU are eating.)

Kimdbro

... I realize this is moot, I'm once again wasting my time because in 90 seconds there will be another 1200 calorie thread. So this is my last post on the matter.... ever. And really I hope before someone post yet another one, that perhaps they'll just click the search button and be happy reading through the 7000 preceding threads on the matter.

Totally Quoting mysef.... because LITERALLY like, 90 seconds later this popped up in my feed :laugh:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1408536-1200-calories-a-day

divinedivasceo

Um, OK....

You didn't read the thread, did you?

No one would tell you not to do it. It has been posted multiple times, within this thread, which individuals the notion of 1200 might be too low is for, and why many point it out.
[/quote]

So, not sure what you are trying to say here by trying to call me out? I was giving my opinion as we all are entitled to do. You stated it had been stated multiple times so not sure why my post stuck a nerve. Sorry, I hit a chord with you but I wasn't talking to you, I was replying to the original thread which yes, I did read.

I really hope you have a good day and happy posting.

WalkingAlong

i think it's really a "concern" when it's applied to those of us who are underweight and still don't eat the recommended daily calorie intake that they are supposed to.

The people who are underweight and trying to lose... that is a whole other problem and set of issues.

Branstin

So please do not be condensing to me.

I believe the word you're looking for is condescending - having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority.

Condensing is the present participle of condense which is to make something denser or more concentrated. Could also be defined as change or cause to change from a gas or vapor to liquid.

Neither definition of condense makes much sense with what you said. I was quite confused personally. So distraught in fact that I couldn't finish reading your post. I actually may need to seek professional help now because of the whole ordeal. My workout and meal plan for the week have been completely ruined because of your misuse of the word. :huh:

If you need to touch up on your definitions there are great resources online.

While you're there you should look up the definition for "sarcastic" and "*kitten*" as well and report back to me with what you find. If you don't find a picture of me near those 2 words then you're not looking in the right place. :devil:

I made a typo so sue me!

I don’t need a lesson in definitions or online resources. However, I think you need a lesson in hypocrisy because I am sure despite your picture being beside the definition for "sarcastic" and "*kitten*", you have made the same mistake over the years. If the misuse of a word by a stranger on the Internet ruined your workout and meal plan then that states more about you than me.

So exactly what was your point?

Chevy_Quest

I would love to post more here, but I don't feel I have enough knowledge or evidence to back up my claims. All I know is that I have estimated my BMR to be around 1700 and my TDEE to be between 2400 and 2600. I am a 5'7" male and I weight 190 lbs. I am trying to lose weight by netting around 2000-2200 lbs. Gradually.

I am going to bookmark this so that in 4 months hopefully I will be able to give some more hard data.

1200 may be right for some. But I contend that there are a lot of people (both men and women) how are steadily losing netting 1700, 1800, 1900 calories on up.

I used to buy into the "I will starve myself to lose weight". A few years ago I ate 1200 calories regularly. Did I lose... sure I did. Felt like crap because I had no energy. And when I gained it back... it was terrible because I had been feeling "psychologically deprived"

RGv2

Um, OK....

You didn't read the thread, did you?

No one would tell you not to do it. It has been posted multiple times, within this thread, which individuals the notion of 1200 might be too low is for, and why many point it out.

So, not sure what you are trying to say here by trying to call me out? I was giving my opinion as we all are entitled to do. You stated it had been stated multiple times so not sure why my post stuck a nerve. Sorry, I hit a chord with you but I wasn't talking to you, I was replying to the original thread which yes, I did read.

I really hope you have a good day and happy posting.

You stated this

I have done it before and have medical reasons for doing so and have age reasons,

It was pointed out about 1/2 a dozen times before you posted that due to medical reasons or age or etc...1200 is fine. It's when the 18 year old (who's probably actually 15) posts about how their grossing 1200 calories that draw the attention of many posters letting them know how unhealthy that is.

That would be why it was pointed out that you may have skipped the thread....or just ignored all of those posts. I mean, we did discuss the whole medical thing and the normal "1200 is bad" is aimed at the young with little to lose, but whatev's

pjstar31

So please do not be condensing to me.

I believe the word you're looking for is condescending - having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority.

Condensing is the present participle of condense which is to make something denser or more concentrated. Could also be defined as change or cause to change from a gas or vapor to liquid.

Neither definition of condense makes much sense with what you said. I was quite confused personally. So distraught in fact that I couldn't finish reading your post. I actually may need to seek professional help now because of the whole ordeal. My workout and meal plan for the week have been completely ruined because of your misuse of the word. :huh:

If you need to touch up on your definitions there are great resources online.

While you're there you should look up the definition for "sarcastic" and "*kitten*" as well and report back to me with what you find. If you don't find a picture of me near those 2 words then you're not looking in the right place. :devil:

I made a typo so sue me!

I don’t need a lesson in definitions or online resources. However, I think you need a lesson in hypocrisy because I am sure despite your picture being beside the definition for "sarcastic" and "*kitten*", you have made the same mistake over the years. If the misuse of a word by a stranger on the Internet ruined your workout and meal plan then that states more about you than me.

So exactly what was your point?

Is there a point in needing a point? It's quite obvious you really do need to look up the definition of "sarcastic".

Go ahead ..... I'll wait. :yawn:

Branstin

So please do not be condensing to me.

I believe the word you're looking for is condescending - having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority.

Condensing is the present participle of condense which is to make something denser or more concentrated. Could also be defined as change or cause to change from a gas or vapor to liquid.

Neither definition of condense makes much sense with what you said. I was quite confused personally. So distraught in fact that I couldn't finish reading your post. I actually may need to seek professional help now because of the whole ordeal. My workout and meal plan for the week have been completely ruined because of your misuse of the word. :huh:

If you need to touch up on your definitions there are great resources online.

While you're there you should look up the definition for "sarcastic" and "*kitten*" as well and report back to me with what you find. If you don't find a picture of me near those 2 words then you're not looking in the right place. :devil:

I made a typo so sue me!

I don’t need a lesson in definitions or online resources. However, I think you need a lesson in hypocrisy because I am sure despite your picture being beside the definition for "sarcastic" and "*kitten*", you have made the same mistake over the years. If the misuse of a word by a stranger on the Internet ruined your workout and meal plan then that states more about you than me.

So exactly what was your point?

Is there a point in needing a point? It's quite obvious you really do need to look up the definition of "sarcastic".

Go ahead ..... I'll wait. :yawn:

Yes, there is a point in needing a point if you are going to address someone's misuse of a word when all a person had to do is look over your posting history and see the countless errors in some of your posts. So, I will ask you one more time. What was your point?

Go ahead ... I'll wait. Eyeroll!