1200 calorie diet? But what about if you exercise?
charm1018
Posts: 3 Member
I am at a loss. I am working my tail off at the gym. I do not seem to be losing weight steady enough. Am I suppose to stick to my 1200 calories with or without exercise?:sad:
0
Replies
-
Please don"t! if you choose to eat 1200 cals, PLEASE eat your exercise calories back - you are setting yourself up for failure if you don't....0
-
You eat back what ever you burn with exercise. So if you are set up at 1200 and you burn 400 you eat 1600 and are still netting 1200.0
-
^^agreed^^ if you are exercising eat the calories back you body need the fuel and nutrition.Please don"t! if you choose to eat 1200 cals, PLEASE eat your exercise calories back - you are setting yourself up for failure if you don't....0 -
You need to NET 1200 calories, at least. For some people, their bodies still need more than this to function normally. By "net", I mean, what you eat, minus what you burn, should equal at least 1200 calories a day. A 1200 calorie a day diet already has a significant deficit built in, and you could lose weight without any actual exercise at this calorie level (though you would lose a lot of muscle tissue). I was at 1200 calories a day for a while, but when it got to a point where I was working out 5-6 days a week, I realized by body really needed more "base" fuel than this, so I upped it to 1650, and I eat back a handful of my exercise calories, though not all of them. I never net less than 1200 calories a day.0
-
Please don"t! if you choose to eat 1200 cals, PLEASE eat your exercise calories back - you are setting yourself up for failure if you don't....
this,
Please forget the 1200 number that gets thrown around here so often and so misguidedly.
Workout out your BMR and calorie needs FOR YOURSELF! You are an individual with individual needs and requirements, set your diet out as such instead of following this number blindly.
A good place to start would be
http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/0 -
I don't know your "stats" as in how much you weigh currently, how much exercise you are doing etc. But I would have to say that 1,200 is too low.
Might I suggest the Group~ Eat More, Weigh Less on here....
It could give you insight on your BMR (resting metabolic rate), your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). And you can go from there at how many calories you should be eating.
On my higher workout days, I tend to eat more, since your body is like a furnace and it needs to refuel especially after working out.
Hope this might help you.0 -
It depends on what you want your cut to be: if you have a 1700 (sedentary) TDEE and want to lose 1 lb a week then you need to have a 1200 goal (500 cal a day cut, and 3500 calories in a pound, seven days in a week). Then you can exercise and eat back all your cals and still maintain your cut. If you didn't eat back it would just add to your cut (therefore losing faster than 1 lb a week, which may be too agressive for you).0
-
I don't know your "stats" as in how much you weigh currently, how much exercise you are doing etc. But I would have to say that 1,200 is too low.
Just arbitrarily saying that 1200 is to low is idiotic. 1200 goal is common for shorter women who aren't way overweight. :grumble:0 -
1200 is your base, when you exercise you eat back those calories. MFP has already given you a deficit based on the activity level you have chose. Now go exercise so you can eat!!
0 -
Track your exercise here on MFP an then be sure that you eat back your calories that you burn so your "net" is never below 1200. I speak from experience on this. I was losing weight quickly and all the sudden 2 years ago it stopped. I couldn't understand it because I had become a very active person! I finally went to my doc and met with a dietitian who helped me figure out that I had not been eating enough! My body was in a true "starvation" mode.
For instance, if you have a 1200 calorie goal for the day but you burn 300 at the gym, you would only "net" 900 calories for the day and your body would experience an energy deficiency. Eat back those 300 calories because your body needs it. I track here because it will calculate what I am supposed to eat based on my exercise. MFP has saved me and the weight is coming off again! It has been hard because I feel like I'm eating too much but it's really opening my eyes to how much I've been under eating!
Good luck!0 -
In before someone brings up "starvation mode"...
--P0 -
I don't know your "stats" as in how much you weigh currently, how much exercise you are doing etc. But I would have to say that 1,200 is too low.
Just arbitrarily saying that 1200 is to low is idiotic. 1200 goal is common for shorter women who aren't way overweight. :grumble:
Sorry for being so idiotic.. I guess I should have said the "for me" it is too low and that I also did not know if she is short, tall or her weight...0 -
You should add in your exercise calories. 1200 calories should be your net after exercise. For example: if you burn 300 calories exercising, you should take in 1500 calories. Subtract the 300 you burned & your net calories will be 1200. Also keep in mind that it is not safe to go below 1200 calories a day, so you have nowhere else to go once you hit a plateau. And you will hit a plateau after awhile. I had to then increase my net calories for a couple of weeks (up to my maintenance calories for each day), then go back to the 1200 plus increase my workout intensity to break through the plateau. Best wishes to you! It's hard work & takes time but it will be worth it!0
-
Track your exercise here on MFP an then be sure that you eat back your calories that you burn so your "net" is never below 1200. I speak from experience on this. I was losing weight quickly and all the sudden 2 years ago it stopped. I couldn't understand it because I had become a very active person! I finally went to my doc and met with a dietitian who helped me figure out that I had not been eating enough! My body was in a true "starvation" mode.
For instance, if you have a 1200 calorie goal for the day but you burn 300 at the gym, you would only "net" 900 calories for the day and your body would experience an energy deficiency. Eat back those 300 calories because your body needs it. I track here because it will calculate what I am supposed to eat based on my exercise. MFP has saved me and the weight is coming off again! It has been hard because I feel like I'm eating too much but it's really opening my eyes to how much I've been under eating!
Good luck!
This! The human body NEEDS that fuel. And for me, I plateaued after about 5 weeks at 1200 calories, and started losing again once I upped my calories by 450 a day.0 -
My body was in a true "starvation" mode.
Whoops. Too late. We have a winner!
--P0 -
You won't gain weight back by eating your exercise calories. Yes eat them back though!0
-
Track your exercise here on MFP an then be sure that you eat back your calories that you burn so your "net" is never below 1200. I speak from experience on this. I was losing weight quickly and all the sudden 2 years ago it stopped. I couldn't understand it because I had become a very active person! I finally went to my doc and met with a dietitian who helped me figure out that I had not been eating enough! My body was in a true "starvation" mode.
For instance, if you have a 1200 calorie goal for the day but you burn 300 at the gym, you would only "net" 900 calories for the day and your body would experience an energy deficiency. Eat back those 300 calories because your body needs it. I track here because it will calculate what I am supposed to eat based on my exercise. MFP has saved me and the weight is coming off again! It has been hard because I feel like I'm eating too much but it's really opening my eyes to how much I've been under eating!
Good luck!
This!
I recommend getting new rules of lifting, they have one specific on for women and the original is for men. It has a formula for what your cal intake should be. MFP is very inaccurate when gauging this!
This is the link that another MFP put on here to the formula
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/538943-how-to-calculate-calorie-goals-according-to-nrolfw0 -
I don't know your "stats" as in how much you weigh currently, how much exercise you are doing etc. But I would have to say that 1,200 is too low.
Just arbitrarily saying that 1200 is to low is idiotic. 1200 goal is common for shorter women who aren't way overweight. :grumble:
well just to play devils advocate.....a 5"2 30 year old woman who weighs 120lbs (which would be normal weight range) would have a bmr of 1327. Considering that most people here are going to be overweight her statement is not totally idiotic, in fact it's probably correct for the majority of people here.0 -
Why? Starvation mode exists and it can make you gain weight, so it is important to bring up, even if it is mentioned 10000000 times.In before someone brings up "starvation mode"...
--P0 -
This. She is trying to lose weight, so obviously her body requires more than 1200 MOST LIKELY and if it doesn't, she may be underweight to start..unless she is totally short as well, no offense meant.I don't know your "stats" as in how much you weigh currently, how much exercise you are doing etc. But I would have to say that 1,200 is too low.
Just arbitrarily saying that 1200 is to low is idiotic. 1200 goal is common for shorter women who aren't way overweight. :grumble:
well just to play devils advocate.....a 5"2 30 year old woman who weighs 120lbs (which would be normal weight range) would have a bmr of 1327. Considering that most people here are going to be overweight her statement is not totally idiotic, in fact it's probably correct for the majority of people here.0 -
Depends on if your hungry or not, Why would you eat if your not hungry? Kinda silly if you ask me. But then again I happen to not believe in "starvation mode" Reality is it's just a plateau and everyone has them. If you've stopped losing all together then your maintaining and you need to do things differently.
If your hungry eat back some of your calories or until you no longer feel empty. I eat some of mine back sometimes but I'm not always hungry and may just crave a snack so then I get my snack. Sometimes I don't want anything so I don't have anything. Just be smart about it. I'm also NOT of the mind set that you have to eat back ALL your calories and look I'm losing with no issues and I'm not starving, no matter what some may think.0 -
Why? Starvation mode exists and it can make you gain weight, so it is important to bring up, even if it is mentioned 10000000 times.In before someone brings up "starvation mode"...
--P
Starvation mode may exist, but 99.9% of the people who use the term have not experienced it.
And it can't make you *gain* weight. If that were the case, nobody would ever die from starvation, would they?
--P0 -
When I started using MFP I thought to myself there is no way I would stick to 1200. That amount is far too generic and it depends on the individual as to how many calories they need anyway.
I decided to limit myself to 1350 calories.. however in the last day or two I've been learning about BMR and TDEE's on here. I calculated my BMR as 1304.45, which isn't much less than what I'm netting.. I class myself as lightly active so using an equation tool on the internet, I multiplied the BMR by 1.375. This makes my TDEE 1793.62..
I understand that I'm supposed to aim between these two amounts, so 1550 or thereabouts. What I don't understand is whether 1550 calories includes exercise recorded or not? Should I be netting 1550, or eating 1550?
If that's my net amount, I may eat say 1650 in one day, and burn off 300 doing exercise making my net 1350. So should I then eat my calories burned? To me that's as if I'm wiping out my efforts of exercise.
I'm really quite confused! :frown:0 -
When I started using MFP I thought to myself there is no way I would stick to 1200. That amount is far too generic and it depends on the individual as to how many calories they need anyway.
I decided to limit myself to 1350 calories.. however in the last day or two I've been learning about BMR and TDEE's on here. I calculated my BMR as 1304.45, which isn't much less than what I'm netting.. I class myself as lightly active so using an equation tool on the internet, I multiplied the BMR by 1.375. This makes my TDEE 1793.62..
I understand that I'm supposed to aim between these two amounts, so 1550 or thereabouts. What I don't understand is whether 1550 calories includes exercise recorded or not? Should I be netting 1550, or eating 1550?
If that's my net amount, I may eat say 1650 in one day, and burn off 300 doing exercise making my net 1350. So should I then eat my calories burned? To me that's as if I'm wiping out my efforts of exercise.
I'm really quite confused! :frown:
If you are going the TDEE route there is none of this "eating back" and all that stuff.....this has already been figured into your calculations.
You eat 1550 every day....do it for 2 weeks, if necessary adjust the calories by 50 or so.....make your life simple!0 -
Thank you for that! Looking forward to eating a little more
May increase my calories by 50 or so each week, I don't think an immediate sudden increase would do me any favours.0 -
Why? Starvation mode exists and it can make you gain weight, so it is important to bring up, even if it is mentioned 10000000 times.In before someone brings up "starvation mode"...
--P
Starvation mode may exist, but 99.9% of the people who use the term have not experienced it.
And it can't make you *gain* weight. If that were the case, nobody would ever die from starvation, would they?
--P
I agree, only third world countries will experiance it, if that is indeed what's going on with them. Don't believe anyone here on this site will every experiance it or even know anyone who's experianced it. It's a term someone decided to use freely in place of the word plateau.0 -
Why? Starvation mode exists and it can make you gain weight, so it is important to bring up, even if it is mentioned 10000000 times.In before someone brings up "starvation mode"...
--P
Starvation mode may exist, but 99.9% of the people who use the term have not experienced it.
And it can't make you *gain* weight. If that were the case, nobody would ever die from starvation, would they?
--P
I agree, only third world countries will experiance it, if that is indeed what's going on with them. Don't believe anyone here on this site will every experiance it or even know anyone who's experianced it. It's a term someone decided to use freely in place of the word plateau.
I beg to differ. Two years ago I tried a diet and wasn't eating enough and working out like crazy. I was only eating 900 calories a day, if that, but I didn't realize it. I would lose 10 pounds, gain 13, lose 9, gain 15. I didn't get what I was doing wrong. So, I went to my doctor to get checked for a thyroid condition. I was feeling lethargic, sick all the time, just wanted to sleep. I felt miserable. So, she sent me to a dietitian. She told me to keep a diary of what I ate everyday; I did. She told me I wasn't eating enough and that I did in fact put my body in starvation mode. This means that your body things you are starving, so when you eat things, even healthy things, your body instantly turns it into fat to store because it thinks that you aren't going to get food for a long time. This way, your body starts eating away at your muscle, and packs on the fat instead. That is why people in third world countries have bloated bellies.
"Starvation mode" is in fact real. And it happens to people who AREN'T just in third world countries. I have experienced it first hand. It took my body almost 6 months for my body to get back to it's regular metabolical rate, so I kept packing on pounds that long.0 -
Sigh,
This starvation mode discussion again,
Call it whatever you like, but severe calorie deficits combined with high stress (be that through exercise/life/work/whatever) will raise cortisol levels and put you in a place where your body is not eager to get rid of its fat reserves.If you want to call that "starvation mode" feel free to do so.
If you are saying that this is a complete myth, then why do we not all eat 500 calories per day and lose 10lbs per week instead, or maybe 200 per day and lose 15lbs per week ....... because your body does not work like that.
Everyone needs to read this
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html0 -
The more frequent the eating pattern, the lower the body fat and the higher the muscle mass. Instead of eating all your calories in 3 meals(breakfast, lunch, dinner), divide the same amount of calories over 6 meals(breakfast, snack1,lunch,snack2,dinner,snack3). This will keep your energy balaced. Avoid large peaks and valleys throughout your day. When you eat a large meal, your body will not utilize all that energy and store it as fat. When you go for more than 3 hours without eating your body will breakdown your lean mass and use it for energy thereby reducing your metabolism even more. A steady stream of energy is ideal.0
-
Thanks for posting this.
You have proven yet again that starvation diets don't work.
Heed the advice you have been given.
Eat back your exercise calories. Good Luck :flowerforyou:0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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