Females: How many calories are you eating daily?
Replies
-
It depends.. I always plan what I am going to eat the night before and in my plan it's always around 1200-1224 cals. however I only stick to it for 2-3consecutive days, then I exceed the amount other days, BUT still keeping under 1500 in theori.. in reality I sometimes go over that if I eat more than I planned to..
so ideally I am aiming for 1200 calories and slighty over..I do not excersise much, but when I do, I prefer not to eat my burned calories.
ps. I am new to this forum and would really like some weightloss buddies, also, prior to applying for this website I have lost 16 pounds (it sucks that I can not enter a start weight in my ticker :S)0 -
Wow, I have found this thread to be a fascinating eye-opener. What a HUGE variance there is in people's caloric intake! I'm really saddened by how low some people eat. I've been on here for about 9 months and basically haven't lost anything. I've tried lots of things, but basically all fairly low, often having a net of about 800-1100 because I'm very active and run 5 days a week. I'm 5"3 and 134 lbs. And yes, I am usually hungry, (okay sometimes starving) most of the time. Just in the last few days I'm taking someone's advice from on here and upping my daily average from about 1300-1600 to 1850 and it's a little scary I admit. I've done this for 3 days, and judging by my hunger levels I'll be taking it higher. But it's a step of faith I tell you! It seems like way too much food, although it's also a relief for my hunger.
Upping your daily average is an absolutely fantastic idea. "starvation mode" for the average woman is 1200 calories or lower. When you go any lower than around 1200, your body starts holding on to any fat storage it has because it is afraid you aren't going to be intaking enough nutrients. The best way to lose your weight is to up your calorie intake, so your body isn't clutching onto your fat. I eat approximately 1450 calories a day, and dont eat back my exercise calories. I find this has worked very well for me. We have a similar stature.. i'm 5'5" and weigh 140. Try upping your calories and see how it works!0 -
Gotta pimp this thread: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/395948-caloric-intake-results?page=1#posts-5451195
A study on MFP members showing that women with low body fat eat about 1900 calories a day.
That is a fascinating little study. Thank you for posting that! I may have to share that with some people both on here and in RL.
I know for a fact that some of those women who are so proud of eating 2000+ cals regularly burn over a 1000 cals a day through exercise, so they're actually netting around 1000 which is not high. From a weight loss perspective this is no different than eating 1100 (under the magical minimum 1200 number) and then burning a 100.
I'm assuming you also know that they don't eat any of those calories back.
Yes, the ones I am talking about don't. But i don't see why you need clarification. I plainly said they eat 2000 cals. And burn 1000. I didn't say they eat 3000, or 2500, or 2800 (which would be eating exercise calories back).
ps I don't have a problem with any of this, the only thing I have a problem with is when some of these people come down hard on others who eat less, because it's hypocritical.
I'd love to know who you are referring to. Anyone I know from that thread is sure to NET at least 1200 but often eat over 2000 cals easily because they are so active. There is one girl who is only 5' tall and anyone that short has a much lower BMR. Anyone is welcome to come check out the threads and read what people are doing to look so HOT while EATING!
0 -
Gotta pimp this thread: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/395948-caloric-intake-results?page=1#posts-5451195
A study on MFP members showing that women with low body fat eat about 1900 calories a day.
That is a fascinating little study. Thank you for posting that! I may have to share that with some people both on here and in RL.
I know for a fact that some of those women who are so proud of eating 2000+ cals regularly burn over a 1000 cals a day through exercise, so they're actually netting around 1000 which is not high. From a weight loss perspective this is no different than eating 1100 (under the magical minimum 1200 number) and then burning a 100.
It's also in no way a "study". It is a survey of sorts with no control or measure for accuracy.
I've always found that eating enough so that you are not hungry works. If you exercise and burn more calories it's just common sense that you will need to eat more in order to not be hungry.0 -
I am 31yrs young 5'5 and 220lbs I eat about 1500 calories a day. Nothing more unless im a little hungry still 0
-
I'm 39 and I eat 1300 calories a day. :flowerforyou:0
-
I'M 192, MAINTAINING NOW AND EAT 1,790 CALS A DAY. I EAT BACK AT LEAST HALF OF MY BURN CALORIES NO MATTER WHAT. YOU HAVE TO KEEP FUELING THE FIRE YOU KNOW....0
-
I'm supposed to be eating 1200 calories, but I eat anywhere between 1200 and 1600 cals. I usually burn off 800-1000 calories through excersise daily.:drinker: (I'm 5ft2 and 35 years of age. I weigh 155lbs)0
-
Gotta pimp this thread: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/395948-caloric-intake-results?page=1#posts-5451195
A study on MFP members showing that women with low body fat eat about 1900 calories a day.
That is a fascinating little study. Thank you for posting that! I may have to share that with some people both on here and in RL.
I know for a fact that some of those women who are so proud of eating 2000+ cals regularly burn over a 1000 cals a day through exercise, so they're actually netting around 1000 which is not high. From a weight loss perspective this is no different than eating 1100 (under the magical minimum 1200 number) and then burning a 100.
I'm assuming you also know that they don't eat any of those calories back.
Yes, the ones I am talking about don't. But i don't see why you need clarification. I plainly said they eat 2000 cals. And burn 1000. I didn't say they eat 3000, or 2500, or 2800 (which would be eating exercise calories back).
ps I don't have a problem with any of this, the only thing I have a problem with is when some of these people come down hard on others who eat less, because it's hypocritical.
I'd love to know who you are referring to. Anyone I know from that thread is sure to NET at least 1200 but often eat over 2000 cals easily because they are so active. There is one girl who is only 5' tall and anyone that short has a much lower BMR. Anyone is welcome to come check out the threads and read what people are doing to look so HOT while EATING!
It would be in poor taste to single people out. I didn't have any one specific person in mind FYI. My point exactly - some people will eat that much and then run around telling everyone they should do that (and sometimes come down on people who don't) but they fail to share, in the same breath, that they burn the majority of all those calories off. So they're leaving people with the impression that the average person who burns let's say 200-300 cals through exercise can also meet their weight loss goals eating that much. Simply not the case. Again I don't have a problem with people eating so much, that's great! But then don't be hypocritical, netting around 1000-1200 and then tell others that they're eating too little (when they themselves are netting low).0 -
I'd love to know who you are referring to. Anyone I know from that thread is sure to NET at least 1200 but often eat over 2000 cals easily because they are so active. There is one girl who is only 5' tall and anyone that short has a much lower BMR. Anyone is welcome to come check out the threads and read what people are doing to look so HOT while EATING!
It would be in poor taste to single people out. I didn't have any one specific person in mind FYI. My point exactly - some people will eat that much and then run around telling everyone they should do that (and sometimes come down on people who don't) but they fail to share, in the same breath, that they burn the majority of all those calories off. So they're leaving people with the impression that the average person who burns let's say 200-300 cals through exercise can also meet their weight loss goals eating that much. Simply not the case. Again I don't have a problem with people eating so much, that's great! But then don't be hypocritical, netting around 1000-1200 and then tell others that they're eating too little (when they themselves are netting low).
Yes, not every woman can eat 2000 calories. Small women who don't work out that much cannot. However, the point of the group is to be around people who aren't eating 1200 calories because we simply have nothing in common with them and think that most people eating 1200 should / can eat more. We aren't encouraging women to eating 2000 blindly. We encourage women to find their maintenance, subtract a small number from that (200-300 calories), then workout and eat their exercise calories.
I however DID lose weight eating 2000+ calories. My maintenance is 2200 at 150lbs. So yes, I lost weight netting 1800-2000 calories, and grossing 2000-2500 calories. Right now I'm trying to gain muscle and net 2500.0 -
My base calorie goal is 1720, but I usually end up eating between 2000-2100 after my exercise calories are added in. I would die if my calorie goal was 1200! LOL
Same here! Mine's 1790....I usually eat 1500-1790 if I don't exercise, but if I DO exercise, I play tennis, and end up with 2700 cals for the day or something....I never EAT more than 2200 though 0 -
Oh, I'm 29 and 326 lbs right now, lost 27 so far!0
-
I'm shocked by how few calories most women here eat. I eat about 2,000 to 2,200 calories per day, which, minus exercise, nets me about 1,600 to 1,800. I dropped down to a net of about 1,400 for a couple weeks and stopped losing (not to mention that I was STARVING). I changed my goals to 1.5 pounds a week, and I've started losing consistently, again (and often more than 1.5 per week).
I feel the same way, there's no way I could do 1200. I think maybe some people don't realize you can lose weight with a higher cal goal and not be hungry all the time.
1 -
I'm shocked by how few calories most women here eat. I eat about 2,000 to 2,200 calories per day, which, minus exercise, nets me about 1,600 to 1,800. I dropped down to a net of about 1,400 for a couple weeks and stopped losing (not to mention that I was STARVING). I changed my goals to 1.5 pounds a week, and I've started losing consistently, again (and often more than 1.5 per week).
I feel the same way, there's no way I could do 1200. I think maybe some people don't realize you can lose weight with a higher cal goal and not be hungry all the time.
Why do you assume those on 1200 are "hungry all the time"? I've been on 1200 and trust me I was not hungry lol0 -
28 y/o, 141 lbs, 1200 calories per day. I do Not eat the calories I burnt.0
-
personal experience id guess - even when i was eating 1330 i was starving all the time... i did lots of exercise just so i could eat more.I'm shocked by how few calories most women here eat. I eat about 2,000 to 2,200 calories per day, which, minus exercise, nets me about 1,600 to 1,800. I dropped down to a net of about 1,400 for a couple weeks and stopped losing (not to mention that I was STARVING). I changed my goals to 1.5 pounds a week, and I've started losing consistently, again (and often more than 1.5 per week).
I feel the same way, there's no way I could do 1200. I think maybe some people don't realize you can lose weight with a higher cal goal and not be hungry all the time.
Why do you assume those on 1200 are "hungry all the time"? I've been on 1200 and trust me I was not hungry lol1 -
personal experience id guess - even when i was eating 1330 i was starving all the time... i did lots of exercise just so i could eat more.I'm shocked by how few calories most women here eat. I eat about 2,000 to 2,200 calories per day, which, minus exercise, nets me about 1,600 to 1,800. I dropped down to a net of about 1,400 for a couple weeks and stopped losing (not to mention that I was STARVING). I changed my goals to 1.5 pounds a week, and I've started losing consistently, again (and often more than 1.5 per week).
I feel the same way, there's no way I could do 1200. I think maybe some people don't realize you can lose weight with a higher cal goal and not be hungry all the time.
Why do you assume those on 1200 are "hungry all the time"? I've been on 1200 and trust me I was not hungry lol
I see.. sorry you felt that way. I just don't want people to be pitying us and looking down on us! We're not all hungry lol I'm sure SOME people are, but not everyone. I saved almost all my cals for dinner though (not hungry during the day) so I had a really satisfying evening every time! 0 -
My calorie goal is 1200 a day. I do eat some of my exercise calories. I look at the net calories and make sure they are still at 1200 though.0
-
I eat between 1100 - 1600 calories on any given day... 1400 is my average I think.
I don't aim to eat my exercise calories.. but sometimes friends want to go out for ice cream and it's good to have those calories so you don't feel guilty for eating the ice cream.
I used to do the 1200 calories a day, but I decided to change my weight loss goals to go a little slower and so I can eat more. I've been losing very steadily and I haven't hit a plateau this whole time.
And it all honesty, once I reach my goal, I'm going to be eating around 1600-1700 calories most likely.. and taking a jump from 1200 to 1600 just wouldn't be reasonable for me, haha.0 -
personal experience id guess - even when i was eating 1330 i was starving all the time... i did lots of exercise just so i could eat more.I'm shocked by how few calories most women here eat. I eat about 2,000 to 2,200 calories per day, which, minus exercise, nets me about 1,600 to 1,800. I dropped down to a net of about 1,400 for a couple weeks and stopped losing (not to mention that I was STARVING). I changed my goals to 1.5 pounds a week, and I've started losing consistently, again (and often more than 1.5 per week).
I feel the same way, there's no way I could do 1200. I think maybe some people don't realize you can lose weight with a higher cal goal and not be hungry all the time.
Why do you assume those on 1200 are "hungry all the time"? I've been on 1200 and trust me I was not hungry lol
I see.. sorry you felt that way. I just don't want people to be pitying us and looking down on us! We're not all hungry lol I'm sure SOME people are, but not everyone. I saved almost all my cals for dinner though (not hungry during the day) so I had a really satisfying evening every time!
I do not feel hungry with a 1200 calorie goal, but I also have a desk job where I sit all day. The only time I really feel hungry is in the morning, but I workout in the eveings so I am sure that is the root cause of that. I get hungry right after my workout too, but I allow for a post-workout snack for that.0 -
I'm at maintenance right now and I eat 1650, most days I actually probably go over by 100 or so.0
-
I am 62 , 5 ' 4" - 174 pounds and started out at 1200 calories and was starving.
Bumped it up to 1300 calories and feel better. I don't always eat back my
exercise calories. I try to stay under as much as I can.
Good Luck :flowerforyou:0 -
27, 5'10", 168-ish pounds, 1900-2000 calories on average (I'm on maintenance and don't track very often, but I try to stay around there).0
-
I know for a fact that some of those women who are so proud of eating 2000+ cals regularly burn over a 1000 cals a day through exercise, so they're actually netting around 1000 which is not high. From a weight loss perspective this is no different than eating 1100 (under the magical minimum 1200 number) and then burning a 100.
I have no studies or links or anything to back me up, but I'd imagine the person who eats 2000 and burns 1000 is going to be a lot healthier (heart and lungs, muscle, etc.) than the person who just eats 1000. Personally, I think burning that much is overkill, especially if it's done every day, but kudos to anyone who has the energy to burn that much daily!0 -
I'm shocked by how few calories most women here eat. I eat about 2,000 to 2,200 calories per day, which, minus exercise, nets me about 1,600 to 1,800. I dropped down to a net of about 1,400 for a couple weeks and stopped losing (not to mention that I was STARVING). I changed my goals to 1.5 pounds a week, and I've started losing consistently, again (and often more than 1.5 per week).
I feel the same way, there's no way I could do 1200. I think maybe some people don't realize you can lose weight with a higher cal goal and not be hungry all the time.
That is easily true for people that have a larger amount of weight to lose, but the closer you get to your goal weight the lower your BMR is, and thus the lower your net has to be in order to lose weight. I'm currently 140, my BMR is something like 1343 and my maintenance (with no extra exercise) is 1710. I'm shooting for 1 lb per week so my goal is 1210. After I lose a couple more pounds I will probably switch up my goal to 0.5 lb per week simply b/c I'm running out of wiggle room to not intentionally go below 1200. (plus I'm not going to override the site to ask for a lower-than-1200 net, so no sense keeping a 1 lb per week goal if the site won't even be able to support that goal anymore). On days that I don't exercise, I make sure I eat at least 1200. Sometimes I go over the 1210 goal too. I don't freak out over it, even if I'm a couple hundred over my 1210 goal, I'm still a couple hundred under maintenance and thus still on track to lose even if it's not as much as I selected in my account. I do exercise most days, though, b/c I enjoy eating extra snacks, and on the days I exercise I eat most (often all) of my exercise calories. Yesterday I ate over 1800 total but netted about 1200 b/c of exercise. Having a 1200-ish goal does not mean people are starving themselves. On the days that I don't exercise I try to make better (less calorie-dense) choices so that I can still have a good volume of food to keep me satisfied. I also watch my protein and fiber to make sure I get more than what MFP recommends regardless of whether it's an exercise day or not - helps me not feel crazy hungry even on my low-cal, no-exercise days.
We all have to remember that everybody on this site is at a different weight and activity level, so a higher calorie goal might be perfect for weightless for some and yet way too much for others, and a lower calorie goal might seem like starvation to some but is actually necessary for others. It's all about perspective for each person's individual situation.0 -
1260 net, which means anywhere from 1300 to 3000, depending on my exercise.0
-
I am 5'7.5", 36 years old, weigh 132lbs (yay). I consume aprox 1200-1250 calories a day (I have been tested for low metabolism). I will eat back calories on the weekends, but not during the week. I have lost a pound a week since starting MFP using this method. I have surpassed my goal and now I am toning. I will continue to use MFP though, most likely for the rest of my life if it is still around!!!!!!!!!!
It is a good idea to have your metabolism tested or test yourself with a slightly higher or lower calorie intake to see the healthiest weight loss rate. I think that 1-2lbs or less is a good healthy rate. I was told to eat 1100 calories a day, but with my active lifestyle, I can't survive on that!0 -
I know for a fact that some of those women who are so proud of eating 2000+ cals regularly burn over a 1000 cals a day through exercise, so they're actually netting around 1000 which is not high. From a weight loss perspective this is no different than eating 1100 (under the magical minimum 1200 number) and then burning a 100.
I have no studies or links or anything to back me up, but I'd imagine the person who eats 2000 and burns 1000 is going to be a lot healthier (heart and lungs, muscle, etc.) than the person who just eats 1000. Personally, I think burning that much is overkill, especially if it's done every day, but kudos to anyone who has the energy to burn that much daily!
Well yeah exercise is good and healthy, no one is going to argue against that. It might be too much of a good thing though but everyone knows their body best. In any case, I did say "from a weight loss perspective", not a health perspective. I just don't like the attitude that if you have a lower cal goal, say 1200-1300, that you're deserving of pity and not being good to yourself. In my college days I had plenty of time to burn tons of cals at the gym, but with a full time job, 1.5 hour commute (each way), and cleaning and cooking on top of it, I don't have 2 hours to spare for exercise every day. Not to mention that with a lower weight and higher fitness level (which I've gotten after a couple of months), my cals burned are pathetic. I use my HRM and it's sad how little cals you burn at 138lbs as a woman doing decent exercises lol0 -
43 Yr old..5'5". I am currently eating between 1300-1500 a day0
-
I am 62 , 5 ' 4" - 174 pounds and started out at 1200 calories and was starving.
Bumped it up to 1300 calories and feel better. I don't always eat back my
exercise calories. I try to stay under as much as I can.
Good Luck :flowerforyou:
I'm 41, 5"3' and 155 lb and ditto..for some reason 1200 was way too little, but 1300 is just right as long as I get some exercise calories in there. I've always had a real healthy appetite..I'm pretty much always hungry, but 1200 was leaving me grumpy and woozy.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions