Dear "I don't associate with those who eat under 1200 c"...

jodigirl03

The purpose was to try and open the eyes of some condemning those that only eat 1200 calories or less. That sometimes it's done for medical or physical or misinformed reasons. I've seen a fair number of posts where folks are given a lot of grief for low calorie consumption and it struck a chord with me because I'm one of them. And I think, maybe they're like me and just don't have a choice. It's not that I have an 'I need to everyone to like me' issue. It's just something that struck me as I was reading some replies to different threads.

But please understand that I'm not referring to those wonderful folks who post or reply to educate those who simply don't understand the body's processes or don't have enough of a background to research the topic.

They've done their research and come to their own conclusions, and while if you explain to them why you individually are unable to eat 1200, that doesn't change the fact that they don't, in general, want to have low calorie friends. And that's their right, just like I could refuse to be friends with anyone for whatever reason as well. For example, I generally remove people from my friends list that are consistantly negative. I just don't get why would you even want to be friends with them when they don't want to be friends with you.

Sorry if I'm coming off as contrary. I'm not!

My apologies as well. Sometimes it's hard to discern intent through posts. I guess maybe I'm just not explaining myself well. It's not that I care whether or not I'm friends with someone who takes that position, or that I aspire to be. It's that I don't care to be judged about the type of person I may or not be simply because my caloric intake is at or below 1200. In the grand scheme of things, it isn't THAT big of a deal to me. It was just an observation.

I DO think it's a big deal and needs to be addressed that not all 1200 cal eaters fall into the same category. It's really kind of 2nd grade-ish. Like "I can't be friends with you I'm sorry. It's because of the way you eat." Lmbo!
I DON'T WANT to be friends w/ a presumptuous hater anyway. I'm here for my personal journey. Good Lord, don't let them ruin it for you. IF "eat more to lose weight" doesn't apply to you, it just doesn't apply to you. I was estactic when I found the site and then wanted to cry when I realized It doesn't apply to me.
Oh well, hungry @1200 I will be. Love me or hate me. It's totally up to you. I'm an adult now and will be fine either way

reneepugh

Not all people who eat under 1200 have eating disorders. I happen to take meds that sometimes makes me sick to my stomach and I just can't eat that much. It doesn't happen all the time, but it happens several times during a month. To compensate, I eat healthy and eat a little more at other times, when I can. I go to the doc often and all of my bloodwork is where it should be. So, eating under 1200 isn't necessarily unhealthy. Everyone has different opinions on this and as long as it's not noticeably starvation, don't be too quick to judge.

tuyetnoriega

Wishing you the very best with your goals!!!!

LadyIvysMom

I agree with most of this but i don't believe in starvation mode and i don't belive that a low-calorie lifestyle is particulary bad for health if those cals are made up of nutrient dense food.

This!

I don’t believe in starvation mode either. Numerous studies such as this one have shown that it takes a long time to get to that point:
http://fitnessblackbook.com/main/starvation-mode-why-you-probably-never-need-to-worry-about-it/

I eat under 1200 most days so I keep my diary private to avoid the judgement. Some days I eat more. I’ve had many days where I eat 1300+ but work most of it off.

With my exercise, which usually includes walking at least 8 miles a day, I tend to net under 600 calories each day when all is said and done. Last week, my average net daily was 347 cals. I also take a multivitamin and try to eat a variety of foods.

Today was a bizarre day in which I ate both 2 small cookies and a slice of pizza. As a rule, I don’t eat junk. I’ll probably end up netting over 600 today, because I want some real nutrition to balance out the crap I ate for lunch.

I’m not starving myself. If I get hungry, I eat. If I eat more than I feel comfortable with, I work out and work it off. I don’t binge or do anything like that associated with an ED.

I’m losing weight at a steady rate of 2 lbs a week doing this. I’m also building muscle through my workouts. At no point since I’ve been doing this have I felt tired, weak, shaky, dizzy, or sick. I do not look skeletal, my hair isn’t falling out etc.

I will never understand the “1200 is a magic number” mentality. Everybody’s body is different. What works for me might not work for someone else. What works for someone else might not work for me.

Helloitsdan

The 1200 lifestyle isnt so bad IF you actually fit into it.
Obese people who eat back their calories will do great!

Other than that...

runningfromzombies

I am relatively new to MFP (after a short stint of giving MFP a try last year and then stopping) and have spent quite a bit of time these last couple of weeks reading posts here and trying to educate myself as to the best approach to lose weight and become healthy and fit. I have learned a great deal and truly appreciate those who work in the health and fitness fields or those who have done research in that area that are kind enough to post and share their knowledge. I have benefited from that information and I thank you.

But there is one recurring theme that I've seen in a number of posts that I'd like to address. I've seen a lot of " I don't associate with people who eat well below the 1200 or net below 1200" or 'Don't 'friend' me if your calorie intake is under 1200.'

Please try to remember that not all folks who eat below 1200 calories do so intentionally. Nor are they all doing it as a means to quick weight loss. Sure there are those that do so for that reason but generally they are simply uninformed and don't know any better. Unless they've spent time researching the issue, it makes total sense to believe that the fewer calories consumed results in weight loss. Another point to consider, many folks have mitigating factors that results in a low calorie intake. I'm one of those people. Until I started spending a great deal of time reading the posts here I had no idea and thought I was doing the right thing. I thought that all I needed to do was restrict my caloric intake and exercise. I now know that isn't true. However, try as I might, I have a hard time eating above 1200 calories. Why? A number of years ago I had abdominal surgery (not gastric bypass but surgery to repair a true medical issue). The result of that surgery prevents me from eating large amounts of food at one time so my caloric intake is limited. If I space small meals throughout the day - my surgeon told me to eat 6 mini meals rather than the customary 3 meals a day - I might be able to reach 1300 calories. But I don't always have the time to devote to stopping to prepare food and eat 6 times a day. Sure, I could eat junk and reach that goal but is that healthy? No. So I choose to eat healthy and be resigned to the fact that many days I will fall under my calorie goal. It isn't because I want to, nor do I believe it is a good thing.

For those of you who might feel envious that I have a natural calorie restriction, don't. I am no different than you. If I eat junk, I gain weight. In fact, despite being limited in the amount of food I can eat, I am still overweight. Partially due to prior poor food choices and partially due to my metabolism having slowed significantly due to underfeeding (I am a classic example of the 'Starvation Mode' thread Banks posted a couple of weeks ago). So much so that even with my limited calorie intake, I still gain weight. It's incredibly frustrating to physically not be able to eat, yet still be over weight and continue to gain weight even though I eat relatively little. I am no different than all of you struggling to get healthy. I must still be very selective about what I eat. I must still exercise and work my body to see results.

I am trying very hard to up my calorie intake while still making healthy choices, but it's hard. Very hard. So please don't pass judgment and make blanket statements about how you don't associate with or befriend people who eat under 1200 calories. While there are certainly those that are informed about the dangers of underfeeding and stubbornly continue to ignore documented fact of the harm they are doing themselves, many of us realize the detriment to our bodies that low calorie intake causes and are doing our best to become healthy, just like you.

Since the eating disorder trigger has already been covered, I'll point out another reason people don't like to have "under-1200ers" on their friend list, or one reason for me, specifically: I see friends get tons of pats on the back, "way to gos" and "great days" for falling under the 1200 number. But when I post my diary...crickets, for the most part. (My BMR is 1581. I am Very Active, because not only do I commute on bike to work and school, but I am training for a half-marathon. I eat 2300 calories a day.) I have been on a Very Low Calorie Diet before. It breaks my heart to see that way of eating get reinforced and reinforced when I have first-hand experience with how much it wrecks your metabolism. It's even worse when very few people even see my way of eating as a viable way.

These people are (generally speaking, this by no means applies to everyone) very resistant to gentle suggestions or pointers--even hostile. I don't see the point in being friends with someone who I cannot learn something from, who cannot learn something from me, or who makes my time on this website discouraging rather than inspiring. I am not passing judgment; I am merely choosing not to associate with those who have a negative impact on me, something I apply in a blanket fashion throughout my entire life, not just on this website.

Yes, there are exceptions to every rule. You sound like one of those exceptions. But if I could make a suggestion: a good way to get in those six meals even when you don't have time to stop and prepare food so often is to simply make a bunch of things up in advance--the night before, on the weekend, etcetera. Package up ziploc bags of fruit, tupperware containers of celery and peanut butter or cottage cheese and pineapple, make sandwiches in bulk, and then there's nothing to prepare--you just take it out of your bag or freezer and nom it. It requires a little more planning, but it's doable.

LorinaLynn

I don't police my friends' diaries and don't really care what they eat. But I've had a few that complained about being "so fat," and then would brag about how they were 1000 calories under their goal for today and how the "in five weeks" message said they'd weigh in the 90s... Those girls need help that I can't give. And since just about every one of my posts is about eating a substantial amount of food and getting good nutrition and how VLC was wrong for me, I can't help but think, "WTF did you send me a FR for?!"

pastryari

tl;dr

nikkifk

:happy:

cookn_mama

I am relatively new to MFP (after a short stint of giving MFP a try last year and then stopping) and have spent quite a bit of time these last couple of weeks reading posts here and trying to educate myself as to the best approach to lose weight and become healthy and fit. I have learned a great deal and truly appreciate those who work in the health and fitness fields or those who have done research in that area that are kind enough to post and share their knowledge. I have benefited from that information and I thank you.

But there is one recurring theme that I've seen in a number of posts that I'd like to address. I've seen a lot of " I don't associate with people who eat well below the 1200 or net below 1200" or 'Don't 'friend' me if your calorie intake is under 1200.'

Please try to remember that not all folks who eat below 1200 calories do so intentionally. Nor are they all doing it as a means to quick weight loss. Sure there are those that do so for that reason but generally they are simply uninformed and don't know any better. Unless they've spent time researching the issue, it makes total sense to believe that the fewer calories consumed results in weight loss. Another point to consider, many folks have mitigating factors that results in a low calorie intake. I'm one of those people. Until I started spending a great deal of time reading the posts here I had no idea and thought I was doing the right thing. I thought that all I needed to do was restrict my caloric intake and exercise. I now know that isn't true. However, try as I might, I have a hard time eating above 1200 calories. Why? A number of years ago I had abdominal surgery (not gastric bypass but surgery to repair a true medical issue). The result of that surgery prevents me from eating large amounts of food at one time so my caloric intake is limited. If I space small meals throughout the day - my surgeon told me to eat 6 mini meals rather than the customary 3 meals a day - I might be able to reach 1300 calories. But I don't always have the time to devote to stopping to prepare food and eat 6 times a day. Sure, I could eat junk and reach that goal but is that healthy? No. So I choose to eat healthy and be resigned to the fact that many days I will fall under my calorie goal. It isn't because I want to, nor do I believe it is a good thing.

For those of you who might feel envious that I have a natural calorie restriction, don't. I am no different than you. If I eat junk, I gain weight. In fact, despite being limited in the amount of food I can eat, I am still overweight. Partially due to prior poor food choices and partially due to my metabolism having slowed significantly due to underfeeding (I am a classic example of the 'Starvation Mode' thread Banks posted a couple of weeks ago). So much so that even with my limited calorie intake, I still gain weight. It's incredibly frustrating to physically not be able to eat, yet still be over weight and continue to gain weight even though I eat relatively little. I am no different than all of you struggling to get healthy. I must still be very selective about what I eat. I must still exercise and work my body to see results.

I am trying very hard to up my calorie intake while still making healthy choices, but it's hard. Very hard. So please don't pass judgment and make blanket statements about how you don't associate with or befriend people who eat under 1200 calories. While there are certainly those that are informed about the dangers of underfeeding and stubbornly continue to ignore documented fact of the harm they are doing themselves, many of us realize the detriment to our bodies that low calorie intake causes and are doing our best to become healthy, just like you.

WHERE IS THE "LIKE" BUTTON!!!???

healthynotthin

Dear this thread, you should talk to this thread going on now http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/735718-if-eating-under-1200cals-is-so-bad and yell at each other for fun, LOL!

The best thing to do is find similar-minded people to you on MFP whether that be the barely 1200 group or the almost 2000 group - do what works for you as we could go back and forth all day on studies on starvation and the real effect as dramatic or mundane as determined by the results of countless studies.

Weight Watchers BTW is <1200 cals regularly, 18-22 pts or 29 pts+ is 1000-1250 in cals - trust me, I've counted enough times and swapped out foods for lower-carb ones (so you can’t say it’s the TYPE of foods) and it still always ends up the same, under eating according to many studies but yet it works. Or at least that's what Jennifer Hudson tells us

You're my favorite.

Marla64

I agree with most of this but i don't believe in starvation mode and i don't belive that a low-calorie lifestyle is particulary bad for health if those cals are made up of nutrient dense food.

Hallelujah!!

You may not, and that's up to you to decide what to believe. But I've lived it, and I know first hand what it did to me.

Me, too--

sweet post, but at the end of the day, don't worry about strangers here. You'll find your niche if you stick around enough. Ignore the idiots and the idiot threads, and you can find a nice support network.

Starvation mode is something the masses wish to ignore....it's rather like faith. Because some haven't seen, they don't believe.

You know, whatever--

I've lived it, too-- it is horrible.

If you're inclined, you'll find a support network here....but don't give an ounce of worry to what idiots say.

brittnicoledav

I agree and well a set calorie like 1200 is just silly because the number is relative to you body size.. While that would be way to low for a big person, for me it's barely below my BMR? So am I in starvation mode for eating at BMR. Since we tend to actually eat 100-200 calories more than we THINK we do, I log less on purpose because really it's just an estimate and serving sizes can legally go OVER in calories but not under, so they always error in the OVER direction.

The whole thing is just silly.

THANK YOU. my set intake is 1200, and that is plenty for me. I am 5'1" and 124 pounds, so it clearly takes me way less food to fuel my body. They always say "fuel yourself, you're like a car and need fuel" but small car takes a lot less fuel than a truck lol. So don't judge people, all different body types have all different needs, and although 1200 may be not enough for someone taller or whatnot, its enough for me! no, i am not pro ed and i always aim for 1200, not lower, but people need to be more open minded and realize everyone is different and a 1200 cal diet is far from "starving" for a lot of people!

Gwen_B

I rarely eat over 1200 calories and have been eating the same way for over 25 years. What I do eat is healthy, No fried foods, Fast foods, or even red meat. I am physically fit and my weight doesn't fluctuate. Being on MFP, I am trying to eat my 1450 a day as I am getting older. I think MFP is beneficial for people to eat correctly either to loose weight or be healthy, no one should just others, we all want to be healthy.

Gwen_B

Exactly, everyone has different needs.

runningfromzombies

I agree and well a set calorie like 1200 is just silly because the number is relative to you body size.. While that would be way to low for a big person, for me it's barely below my BMR? So am I in starvation mode for eating at BMR. Since we tend to actually eat 100-200 calories more than we THINK we do, I log less on purpose because really it's just an estimate and serving sizes can legally go OVER in calories but not under, so they always error in the OVER direction.

The whole thing is just silly.

THANK YOU. my set intake is 1200, and that is plenty for me. I am 5'1" and 124 pounds, so it clearly takes me way less food to fuel my body. They always say "fuel yourself, you're like a car and need fuel" but small car takes a lot less fuel than a truck lol. So don't judge people, all different body types have all different needs, and although 1200 may be not enough for someone taller or whatnot, its enough for me! no, i am not pro ed and i always aim for 1200, not lower, but people need to be more open minded and realize everyone is different and a 1200 cal diet is far from "starving" for a lot of people!

Even someone as short as you would need more than 1200 calories, seeing as, depending on your age and activity level, your BMR is somewhere around 1300-1400 calories, and you should never ever ever eat below your BMR (which is what your body needs just to breathe, pump blood, keep the brain functioning, etcetera). There's a calculator here: http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/

Amabuela

Another factor to consider is age. I'm in my late 60s. My BMR is 1200. My 40-year-old daughter's is 1800+. I have to exercise 2-3 hours a day to get my calorie burn up to 1800. She routinely goes well over 2000. You have to do what works for you and your own body.

Annitte

That's odd to me that someone who say that. We are all here to motivate each other. 1200 calories only represent, that, that person wants to weight about 120pds-125 or what ever. When we entered what we wanted our goal weight to be, MFP calculated this for us. But we all have to do what works well for us. So with that being said to each his own... Love yourself!!

CallMeCupcakeDammit

I can't support people who eat 800 calories every day. A girl FR'd me who thought it was ok to eat 800 cals and burn off 500, then she deleted me when I tried to help her. I've had people send me a FR and explain why they can't eat 1200, because of an illness or surgery, and I've accepted their FRs, no problem. I got tired of trying to help the ones who thought under 1200 was the fastest and best way to lose weight, and didn't want to hear different, so I choose not to be friends with them. My choice. This is America after all.

firstsip

I agree with most of this but i don't believe in starvation mode and i don't belive that a low-calorie lifestyle is particulary bad for health if those cals are made up of nutrient dense food.

Hallelujah!!

You may not, and that's up to you to decide what to believe. But I've lived it, and I know first hand what it did to me.

Me, too--

sweet post, but at the end of the day, don't worry about strangers here. You'll find your niche if you stick around enough. Ignore the idiots and the idiot threads, and you can find a nice support network.

Starvation mode is something the masses wish to ignore....it's rather like faith. Because some haven't seen, they don't believe.

You know, whatever--

I've lived it, too-- it is horrible.

If you're inclined, you'll find a support network here....but don't give an ounce of worry to what idiots say.

Lol, oh, right, so you've ~seen~ for faith? That's an awful analogy, because starvation mode, fitness, and diet are based on science, ever evolving, and have tons of research.

Faith is the people who have no basis for comparison and just decide, "Well, 1000 calories just works for me. There's not really evidence because I haven't been at it long term, and I'm on this site for a reason, but, well... I have faith that it works."

See the difference?