Do I need to meet my goal of 1200 calories a day?

Options
sunkissedprincess
sunkissedprincess Posts: 6
in Health and Weight Loss
I rarely meet it right now, I eat about 1050 a day and workout 5 times a week burning at least 500 so it puts my net calories really low. I don't plan on eating back my calories that I burn but is it important that I meet the 1200 a day or am I doing fine? i'm not hungry either.

Replies

  • Goal4Good
    Goal4Good Posts: 115
    Options
    I'm not a physician but everything I've ever read or experienced regarding weight loss, is that if you go below 1200 calories a day, your body will go into starvation mode. It will fight against you and start holding on to every calorie you put in your mouth. Supposedly it will slow your metabolism and derail your weight loss efforts. I wouldn't recommend it. Mainly I am baffled how someone can exercise to that extent and not have a raging appetite!! I do about 500 calories a day exercising too but I eat EVERYTHING I'm allowed. Must be working. I lost 6 lbs last week.
  • zyle
    zyle Posts: 34
    Options
    bump
  • thetrishwarp
    thetrishwarp Posts: 838 Member
    Options
    Read the sticky topic (at the top of this forum) called "newbies please read me". I don't mean to be rude, but this question gets answered multiple times a day.
  • rikisue206
    rikisue206 Posts: 99 Member
    Options
    Yes, you need to eat at least 1200 cal a day, even if you don't eat back your excercise cals. If you eat less than 1200 you will go into starvation mode and possibly gain more.
  • sunkissedprincess
    sunkissedprincess Posts: 6
    Options
    thanks!
  • funkyspunky871
    funkyspunky871 Posts: 1,675 Member
    Options
    Yes. You need to be eating at least a net of 1200 calories day, but since you have so much weight to lose, you actually need to be eating more.
  • misscfe
    misscfe Posts: 295 Member
    Options
    I would talk to your Dr about that. It is possible to need to eat less then 1200 calories to lose weight and there is metabolic testing you can do to tell you what your caloric intake should be. My testing was done through the company I train with but some gyms also have it. When I did the testing it actually said I shouldn't eat more then 1030 a day. They told me anything less then 1000 calories is supposed to be under DR supervision.
  • YooHoonewyou
    YooHoonewyou Posts: 8 Member
    Options
    I realize that this is a contraversial subject, as to I too was once on a 1200 limit and not eating my 500 calories of exercise calories back. I thought that starvation mode was bull, so I didn't. I mean to me, it stands to reason, people who are anorexic, lose weight. I didn't understand. Week one, I lost 4 lbs. Week two, I lost 3 lbs. Week 3...nothing! After much research figured it couldn't hurt to bump up my calories. That was 6 days ago. I have lost 5 pounds since I upped my calories. My net calories went from being about 4-500, to 8-900. It's working like magic for me! I am so glad that I did, because i'm afraid that i would still be stuck. I found my "sweet spot" 900 net calories. Good luck in your journey!
  • DanDesroches
    DanDesroches Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    Hi guys,

    here's a good link that should address some of the questions / issues in these posts.

    http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debunked.html

    The 'starvation mode' bit is not exactly true. It certainly DOES occur, but typically only in cases of prolonged caloric restriction or fasting. 1-2 days of 1000kcal or even 1-2 days of 0kcal will likely not cause any change in metabolic rate or energy storage patterns. As outline in the article, the authors of the study observed an INCREASE in metabolic rate. This is likely attributed to the increase in catecholamines in the blood, namely adrenaline and nor-adrenaline. This is the hormone that makes you shaky and quick to think & act in stressful situations.

    I've definitely gone on a little bit of a tangent here. To get back on topic, I'd have to suggest that the OP sticks to the caloric requirements. And here we go, another tangent: We basically burn fat at a rate proportional to the amount of fat we have. The more you have, the more you will easily burn fat. In the situation of a very fat person, they are able to restrict calories severely for a long period of time before burning a significant amount of muscle. In the opposite context (a lean athlete), he/she would be losing proportionately more muscle than the fatter individual. So, if you (the OP) are fairly lean already, I'd suggest increasing calories and take the weight-loss slow and steady. If not, then such a calorie deficit will work at first, but will be difficult to maintain in the long run, once the body becomes more resistant to fat loss (once you lean out). At this point, most dieters will binge on food (this is said to be psychologically triggered by the desire to replenish serotonin and dopamine levels via carbohydrate ingestion). If you take it slow however, it is suggested that the body will be able to establish a new base-line (equilibrium / homeostasis) and be comfortable there. If anyone is interested, here's another great link full of articles:

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss

    Both of these links are written by authors who base their articles on science, and also practice what they preach. Both great places to start learning more!

Categories