1200 cals this way works...

gsager

I found this site cause I love to eat, not to starve!

momtokgo

I would rather eat my 1200 calories worth of healhy foods then 1800 worth of crap. I usually eat between 1200-1400. Depends on the day.

I love reading that someone HAD to have icecream/fastfood/chips/candy etc. because they would have been under their calorie goal otherwise. I refuse to feed myself if I am not hungry or if I have to resort to junk food to add calories. I also refuse to go hungry and I have no issues going above 1200 if I need to.

Easywider

I eat 1200...for breakfast. That's a light day.

Eat like a bird, look like a bird.

Helloitsdan

The problem with not eating enough is a large % of your weight loss will come from lean muscle, not just fat. Higher protein will help but not eliminate the loss of lean muscle.

^^ this is actually very accurate.

If there is fat to burn, your body burns mostly fat and yes some lean muscle too. I've reduced my body fat from 25%-21% eating approx. 1200 calories, 95% clean, lifting heavy weights and having a cheat day twice a month.

There are folks who swear by starvation mode and folks that call it a myth. When I researched the subject, the opinions were 50/50.

The human body can only burn so much fat in a day.
And while fed will normally burn glucose.
So the question I have is if you can get the same results eating at a slight deficit and thus not having such a negative effect on hormones used for fat loss....why 1200?

I have women who are short, 4'11"-5'3", who eat in excess of 1800+ cals a day and workout 3x a week losing fat and not having issues with plateaus.
I see hundreds of forum threads a month about 1200cals and plateaus....so why would you want to give up vital nutrients in hopes of losing fat faster than you could eating at say 20-30% below TDEE?

This isnt some cookie cutter program.
It should be based around actual data like age, height, weight and body fat.

Short?
Tall?
Medium?

Doesnt matter.

I've come to a point where I can look at a woman and tell how much she should be eating by height, weight and age.
I've never come to 1200.

When i plateau ir begin to starve i'll look u up. Thanks for being a "pal". Btw..did u read the disclaimer?

Hezz

As long as you are Getting stronger or maintaining strength and have a lot of fat, you'll do fine for a while.
The problem is if you start to hit a wall strength wise then you are probably losing too much LBM.

I have clients losing plenty of fat at a slight deficit.
The plus side of eating higher cals as opposed to the cookie cutter 1200 is that you won't have to make up for lost LBM.

Take for instance SuzieQ who diets down at 1200 and loses 35lbs.
She's lost a good amount of weight and has also lost a lot of lean tissue.
She will at some point have to make up the lost LBM in order to not look skinny fat.
Now she's eating above TDEE to make it up and when you eat above TDEE for an extended period you add fat as well.

If she were to take a slower approach she would maintain LBM and even though the pounds aren't coming off as fast her diet length is essentially the same as the crash diet above.

Am I painting a good enough picture?

From an evolutionary standpoint the human body doesn't want to lose too much fat too fast.
Instead it turns to metabolically active tissue under immense stress.

In this case when you cut calories and add exercise causes immense stress.

Bobby_Clerici

Before I read anybody's comments. I check their ticker..lol
When a program works, keep punching.
I lost an average of .73 lbs per week, and I believe slower weight loss is optimal.
It's not a race.
Good Luck!

Excellent!! it's taken me six years so far to lose 80lbs and I am not done yet - it's a life long change for me and losing slowly means I will keep it off and have less loose skin than I would have had if I lost it all too quickly. Having said that, my portion sizes have changed considerably over the years and most days I eat around 1100-1200 calories without getting hungry - my meals are split into 5 to 6 small meals a day.

I eat over 3000 calories per day.....
I think low cal diets stifle metabolism.
And you may lose weight, but why eat so little?
Anyway, my diary is open; check out how things could be. It's really a choice. I love to eat well and see no virtue in what I call hunger diets.
And at my size, 1200 calories for you would be more like 1500 for me...STARVATION!
I'd be eating less than half of my current food intake and getting less results.
That does NOT compute.

Bobby_Clerici

I eat 1200...for breakfast. That's a light day.

Eat like a bird, look like a bird.

^^^^^^^^
THIS

Helloitsdan

I eat 1200...for breakfast. That's a light day.

Eat like a bird, look like a bird.

^^^^^^^^
THIS

Since I I.F. I'll be eating breakfast and lunch together....what.....1400cals?
*shrugs*

shaynak112

That's a LOT of meat!!!
So, I don't eat meat, and it's really easy for me to stay full on less than 1200 calories a day.

Hezzietiger1

The problem with not eating enough is a large % of your weight loss will come from lean muscle, not just fat. Higher protein will help but not eliminate the loss of lean muscle.

^^ this is actually very accurate.

If there is fat to burn, your body burns mostly fat and yes some lean muscle too. I've reduced my body fat from 25%-21% eating approx. 1200 calories, 95% clean, lifting heavy weights and having a cheat day twice a month.

There are folks who swear by starvation mode and folks that call it a myth. When I researched the subject, the opinions were 50/50.

The human body can only burn so much fat in a day.
And while fed will normally burn glucose.
So the question I have is if you can get the same results eating at a slight deficit and thus not having such a negative effect on hormones used for fat loss....why 1200?

I have women who are short, 4'11"-5'3", who eat in excess of 1800+ cals a day and workout 3x a week losing fat and not having issues with plateaus.
I see hundreds of forum threads a month about 1200cals and plateaus....so why would you want to give up vital nutrients in hopes of losing fat faster than you could eating at say 20-30% below TDEE?

This isnt some cookie cutter program.
It should be based around actual data like age, height, weight and body fat.

Short?
Tall?
Medium?

Doesnt matter.

I've come to a point where I can look at a woman and tell how much she should be eating by height, weight and age.
I've never come to 1200.

When i plateau ir begin to starve i'll look u up. Thanks for being a "pal". Btw..did u read the disclaimer?

Hezz

As long as you are Getting stronger or maintaining strength and have a lot of fat, you'll do fine for a while.
The problem is if you start to hit a wall strength wise then you are probably losing too much LBM.

I have clients losing plenty of fat at a slight deficit.
The plus side of eating higher cals as opposed to the cookie cutter 1200 is that you won't have to make up for lost LBM.

Take for instance SuzieQ who diets down at 1200 and loses 35lbs.
She's lost a good amount of weight and has also lost a lot of lean tissue.
She will at some point have to make up the lost LBM in order to not look skinny fat.
Now she's eating above TDEE to make it up and when you eat above TDEE for an extended period you add fat as well.

If she were to take a slower approach she would maintain LBM and even though the pounds aren't coming off as fast her diet length is essentially the same as the crash diet above.

Am I painting a good enough picture?

From an evolutionary standpoint the human body doesn't want to lose too much fat too fast.
Instead it turns to metabolically active tissue under immense stress.

In this case when you cut calories and add exercise causes immense stress.

I work out... and workout hard..with a trainer 3 days a week. I appreciate ur opinion. Hop on down to Bham work out with me. Check my b4 and after pics. Measure my lbm, bf%, measurements etc. Catch me 10 yrs from now and see that I'm still lean mean awesome and even sexier. I got this.

dawnp1833

Tomorrow is my 1 year anniversery here, and during that time I have kept my goal at 1200. Seems to be working for me. :happy:

I have not been hungry, I don't feel weak, I eat what I want and when I want. I do not 'deprive' myself. I try to work it in, or work it off.

So, you do what works for you. You and only you ( and your doctor) need to decide what is right for you.

Wishing you continued success in your journey to an healthier life. :flowerforyou:

Congrats on 1 year and a great success! (and your dog is adorable).

queenhiphop

How, when your body is about 46% fat, like mine, can mostly lean muscle being burnt on a 1200 diet with exercise? I can't fathom it..

Helloitsdan

How, when your body is about 46% fat, like mine, can mostly lean muscle being burnt on a 1200 diet with exercise? I can't fathom it..

The more fat you have, the more fat you lose.
You are in a unique window of opportunity where you can actually create LBM within a deficit.
It's only done with weights though so take advantage while you can.

The leaner you get the more lean mass you can burn while dieting down.
It becomes more of a hormonal game as opposed to cals in vs cals out.

This is where you see people becoming skinny-fat.

OP I'm proud of your results and I'm glad that you've allowed your body to metabolically slow down and this allow 1200cals so be sufficient.
My point is just because it's worked thus far doesn't mean it's the right way to diet down.

scrittenden

Apologies if im confused.. but i beleive what the previous topic was addressing is people who consistently have UNDER 1200, not having a go at people who are on a 1200cal diet.

butterfli7o

To the OP, congrats for keeping your cals healthy! I can't do 1,200, it's just too low for me. But I'm glad you're doing it the healthier way versus eating 1,200 cals of crap.

Toxictwist

1200 Calories has been working for me!

Hezzietiger1

I eat 1200...for breakfast. That's a light day.

Eat like a bird, look like a bird.

^^^^^^^^
THIS

Well... I'm far from looking like a bird. But i no longer look like a fat ugly gorilla. I dont wanna b skinny i wanna b fit and toned and i will b and am getting there. love beefy boys btw!!

Hezzietiger1

How, when your body is about 46% fat, like mine, can mostly lean muscle being burnt on a 1200 diet with exercise? I can't fathom it..

The more fat you have, the more fat you lose.
You are in a unique window of opportunity where you can actually create LBM within a deficit.
It's only done with weights though so take advantage while you can.

The leaner you get the more lean mass you can burn while dieting down.
It becomes more of a hormonal game as opposed to cals in vs cals out.

This is where you see people becoming skinny-fat.

OP I'm proud of your results and I'm glad that you've allowed your body to metabolically slow down and this allow 1200cals so be sufficient.
My point is just because it's worked thus far doesn't mean it's the right way to diet down.

Thanks.

Sapporo

Where do I find this 300 cal double chz burger??? That would be an awesome find.

liftingheavy

The problem with not eating enough is a large % of your weight loss will come from lean muscle, not just fat. Higher protein will help but not eliminate the loss of lean muscle.

^^ this is actually very accurate.

If there is fat to burn, your body burns mostly fat and yes some lean muscle too. I've reduced my body fat from 25%-21% eating approx. 1200 calories, 95% clean, lifting heavy weights and having a cheat day twice a month.

There are folks who swear by starvation mode and folks that call it a myth. When I researched the subject, the opinions were 50/50.

The human body can only burn so much fat in a day.
And while fed will normally burn glucose.
So the question I have is if you can get the same results eating at a slight deficit and thus not having such a negative effect on hormones used for fat loss....why 1200?

I have women who are short, 4'11"-5'3", who eat in excess of 1800+ cals a day and workout 3x a week losing fat and not having issues with plateaus.
I see hundreds of forum threads a month about 1200cals and plateaus....so why would you want to give up vital nutrients in hopes of losing fat faster than you could eating at say 20-30% below TDEE?

This isnt some cookie cutter program.
It should be based around actual data like age, height, weight and body fat.

Short?
Tall?
Medium?

Doesnt matter.

I've come to a point where I can look at a woman and tell how much she should be eating by height, weight and age.
I've never come to 1200.

Not sure how you an look at a woman and tell how much she should be eating, but if that is true, it's a gift. I eat at least 1200 calories a day, I net less than that on heavy workout days because if I'm not hungry, I won't eat more just to get to "eat more".

Like yesterday, I suppose I could have thrown in an extra steak, or a couple of chicken breasts but why?

beckajw

How, when your body is about 46% fat, like mine, can mostly lean muscle being burnt on a 1200 diet with exercise? I can't fathom it..

The more fat you have, the more fat you lose.
You are in a unique window of opportunity where you can actually create LBM within a deficit.
It's only done with weights though so take advantage while you can.

The leaner you get the more lean mass you can burn while dieting down.
It becomes more of a hormonal game as opposed to cals in vs cals out.

This is where you see people becoming skinny-fat.

OP I'm proud of your results and I'm glad that you've allowed your body to metabolically slow down and this allow 1200cals so be sufficient.
My point is just because it's worked thus far doesn't mean it's the right way to diet down.

Doesn't mean it's the wrong way either.