1200 calories a day.
Replies
-
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
I've pulled many a people out of the 1200 pit.
Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity.
That is unless you are eating back ALL burned calories.
I went out of the pit :bigsmile: I was supposed to eat the dreaded 1200 cal a day by MFP, I upped to 1500 and I am still losing but I am not as grumpy, tired and cold all the time ... I did very bad last week so if you check my diairy please don't take it into acount :bigsmile: I am not suuposed to gain any weight till 1800-1900 so when I have a cheat day I don't feel as bad as before...0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
I've pulled many a people out of the 1200 pit.
Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity.
That is unless you are eating back ALL burned calories.
I am 49, NOT 80, 5'6" NOT 4 ft tall, and am fairly sedentary other than 30 minute bike ride 4-6 days per week. My TDEE (maintenance) is around 1700. A 500 calorie deficit puts me at 1200 for a 1 pound loss. An extra 150-200 calorie exercise burn gives me a bit more if I don't eat them back. Of course I could eat more if I exercised more and lifted weights, but medical issues and injuries prevent that for me, as well as many others on here. Or perhaps they have jobs and families and don't have an extra 10 hrs a week to spend in the gym. It is not that we CHOOSE to eat the least amount of food that we can, we eat at an appropriate level for us, to get in the nutrients that we need, without STARVING ourselves, but losing an appropriate 1-2 lbs per week.
Dan, you are a smart guy who has indeed helped a lot of people on here, but when you make such ridiculous statements like those, you start to lose credibility. Like I have mentioned before, I know a 60 yr old lady who is 4'10" (almost 5 ft) is fairly active and MAINTAINS her weight on 900 calories per day. She has been a WW leader for 30 yrs and is very healthy. Why is it so hard to accept that for many people, 1200 a day is perfectly healthy and acceptable for them when they are trying to lose weight? No, it is NOT appropriate for EVERYONE, but it is certainly NOT unhealthy for EVERYONE either.
And they don't have to be 80 year old bedridden midgets. Please keep your comments a little more realistic.
I have done 100s of numbers for old, young and in between.
I've only had 1 BMR come out below 1200.
She was 21 and 4'11".
If you get out of bed and you want to get in good shape and look good naked then you wont eat 1200 calories.
If you want to lose "weight" and you arent too concerned with how you look at the end of your road then by all means eat 1200 daily.
I can assure you that skinny-fat is neither pretty nor easy to get rid of.
So spend as much time as you want cutting calories and getting weak then come see me when you are ready to look good naked.
I'll have you eating above TDEE for a few months to build up the lean mass youve lost then cutting all over again next year.
Stop wasting your time and do this right.
My case and point on this is if you look at most of the people who claim 1200 is the cure, look at their join date and how much they have lost.
Eating more allows your body to work naturally to lose "fat" first.
Eating too few calories gives your body reason to store "fat".
Why give the most important machine in the world the bare minimum.
Doesnt make any sense.
^^ Good advice there!!!
I'm 4'11" 37y/o. SW:159 CW:142
I quickly stalled on 1200 cals per day (I plataued for almost 12 weeks). I slowly increased my daily intake and now I'm at 1400 cal per day and am losing weight again. On days that I lift I easily eat between 1700-1900 cal.
One of the nice things about cyclical dieting, eating high on lift days and low on rest, is that it keeps leptin high all week because of the carb refeeds and higher cals.
So on lift days you are actually using the nutrients you put in for recovery and its not getting stored as fat.
If you had say....40% body fat then a pure cut would last a while and you can expect to lose fat while eating at a slight deficit daily.
The leaner you get the less deficit weekly you need to lose the fat.
Nice work!0 -
I am!!!! Excersice is a MUST if you want to stay at this level to cancel out those extra ones you'be consumed. Unless you are trying to stay at this level by food consumption only.......*siiiiigh* it's really tough. This has been my goal for a couple months, but i will eat up to 1500/1600 on days I have a great workout.
Good luck, and let's give eachother ideas!!!0 -
Im on 1200! i cant undertand it though. it keeps telling me that i will put on weight?! Also its coming up as 30 mins running is burning 18 kcals?? huh help anyone im new to this x0
-
Have been on 1200calories for three weeks, losing 1-1,5 lbs a week. I train 3 times a week, cycling for an hour. With 1200 calories I feel I eat WAY LESS than I did before but not spectacular weight loss. Should I try eating more calories ? Because I heard also that you sometimes dont leoose weight because you dont eat enough?
I do not eat my exercise calories,leaving at least 300-500.0 -
I have this goal as well! Its so hard. The fist time i did it 2 days ago, i realized I only had 100 calories for dinner, which seriously wasn't going to work! So what ive planned out it:
BREAKFAST: Porridge (166 calories )
LUNCH: Apple & Banana (140 calories)
SNACKS: Bounty-treat! (270) & some fruits or biscuits
DINNER: Leaves like 600 calories for dinner, which is my Favorite meal of the day!0 -
is anyone on the same goal of 1200 a day like me. could do to buddy up with you and take a peak at your diary for ideas
I was doing 1200 calories a day! I just lowered my daily calorie allowance by 50 calories thought (1150). Feel free to add me on here. I'm a vegetarian. Maybe we could get ideas from each other.0 -
I am! Have been for 3 weeks now and have lost 6 lbs. You're welcome to look at it, but I've just found a couple things that I keep doing over and over (progresso soup for lunch or quarter - yes quarter - salad from Old Chicago). I think you can really eat anything ... just in tiny (it feels like it) increments. I have been scanning everything in, and adjusting the portion sizes to meet my goals.0
-
I am at 1210 but am thinking of lowering it to 1200. I seem to be stuck at 11 lbs weight loss.0
-
:flowerforyou: When I started about a year and a half ago, I did 1200 cals a day-and had great success, lost the bulk of my weight in 7 months. Still trying to loose that last few pounds and am set at 1310 cals a day. Feel free to add me and check out my diary.0
-
PS: last night was a Bruce Springsteen concert so please ignore the alcohol calories ... also, you'll see my Saturdays are calorie heavy and that's due to Nebraska football games ... but I keep working on it.0
-
thank you0
-
my goal is 1260. When I first started it was 1300 something, but went down when I lost weight. You can check out my diary. I eat very balanced, but all my meals are vegetarian. I am so used to it now after 6 1/2 weeks, if I ate more than that, I would probably feel overstuffed!!0
-
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
I've pulled many a people out of the 1200 pit.
Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity.
That is unless you are eating back ALL burned calories.
I was one of them. I ate around 1300 per day.
Glad to say I eat 2,000 calories when I cut weight now.
Glad my metabolism is wrecked like it could have been.0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
I've pulled many a people out of the 1200 pit.
Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity.
That is unless you are eating back ALL burned calories.
I am 49, NOT 80, 5'6" NOT 4 ft tall, and am fairly sedentary other than 30 minute bike ride 4-6 days per week. My TDEE (maintenance) is around 1700. A 500 calorie deficit puts me at 1200 for a 1 pound loss. An extra 150-200 calorie exercise burn gives me a bit more if I don't eat them back. Of course I could eat more if I exercised more and lifted weights, but medical issues and injuries prevent that for me, as well as many others on here. Or perhaps they have jobs and families and don't have an extra 10 hrs a week to spend in the gym. It is not that we CHOOSE to eat the least amount of food that we can, we eat at an appropriate level for us, to get in the nutrients that we need, without STARVING ourselves, but losing an appropriate 1-2 lbs per week.
Dan, you are a smart guy who has indeed helped a lot of people on here, but when you make such ridiculous statements like those, you start to lose credibility. Like I have mentioned before, I know a 60 yr old lady who is 4'10" (almost 5 ft) is fairly active and MAINTAINS her weight on 900 calories per day. She has been a WW leader for 30 yrs and is very healthy. Why is it so hard to accept that for many people, 1200 a day is perfectly healthy and acceptable for them when they are trying to lose weight? No, it is NOT appropriate for EVERYONE, but it is certainly NOT unhealthy for EVERYONE either.
And they don't have to be 80 year old bedridden midgets. Please keep your comments a little more realistic.
I have done 100s of numbers for old, young and in between.
I've only had 1 BMR come out below 1200.
She was 21 and 4'11".
If you get out of bed and you want to get in good shape and look good naked then you wont eat 1200 calories.
If you want to lose "weight" and you arent too concerned with how you look at the end of your road then by all means eat 1200 daily.
I can assure you that skinny-fat is neither pretty nor easy to get rid of.
So spend as much time as you want cutting calories and getting weak then come see me when you are ready to look good naked.
I'll have you eating above TDEE for a few months to build up the lean mass youve lost then cutting all over again next year.
Stop wasting your time and do this right.
My case and point on this is if you look at most of the people who claim 1200 is the cure, look at their join date and how much they have lost.
Eating more allows your body to work naturally to lose "fat" first.
Eating too few calories gives your body reason to store "fat".
Why give the most important machine in the world the bare minimum.
Doesnt make any sense.
I'm sorry Dan, I was under the impression that you were a professional in the medical field or at least in the health and fitness field. You declare 'facts' like you have been formally educated and actually work professionally in the field of Health and Nutrition.
I finally took a peek at your profile and surprisingly found this-
""I'm not a nutritionist or fitness expert but I do ask them a lot of questions and I do what they do!"
"Disclaimer: Dan accepts no responsibility in anything physical or emotional that could happen to you by following his advice! Take his advice at your own risk. Dan is not a doctor or nutritionist. He builds bears FFS! All information Dan gives you can be found freely on the interwebs! Thats where he found it! He researches this crap and brings it to you! =D "
Had I known that you researched that 'crap' on the internet and simply recycled it on here as fact, then I would not have wasted my time debating anything with you. Perhaps you should add your 'disclaimer' to all your posts on here, in the spirit of full disclosure.
Before I go, I must ask for some clarifications-
You first posted-
"Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity."
Then you stated-
"I've only had 1 BMR come out below 1200.
She was 21 and 4'11"."
So which one is it, a 4'11" 21 year old, or an under 4 ft tall 80 yr old?
And as for your concern of how I look naked- I am 49, have had 3 children, and several surgeries on various parts of my body, so I don't look like I did at 20, but my husband thinks I look pretty hot naked and hasn't complained.
Despite my physical injuries, I am still pretty strong for an old grandma, and since I have been riding my recumbent bike, my legs have gotten even stronger and my butt is looking pretty good! My husband is quite enjoying seeing, and feeling my muscles emerge as the fat is getting out of their way.
And I don't stay in bed all day.
One last thing I am curious about. According to your ticker you weigh less than 140 pounds, and I assume that you lift weights and are quite muscular. So exactly how tall are you? I am not being snarky and calling you short, I am sincerely curious as to your height and BF%. All of the muscular men I have known have always weighed quite a bit more than that, even the shorter ones.0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
I've pulled many a people out of the 1200 pit.
Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity.
That is unless you are eating back ALL burned calories.
I was one of them. I ate around 1300 per day.
Glad to say I eat 2,000 calories when I cut weight now.
Glad my metabolism is wrecked like it could have been.
you look great.
I assume you aren't over 40 and fairly sedentary, are you?
if you are, bravo, cause you have the body of a young woman.0 -
My case and point on this is if you look at most of the people who claim 1200 is the cure, look at their join date and how much they have lost.
I don't think 1200 calories is the cure for anyone but myself, but yes... look at join dates and amount lost.
<---
It may not be right for you, but it's right for some.
(btw, join dates and amount lost really don't have much bearing on success. Some people put the amount they weighed long before joining MFP and others have different goals, starting weights, or medical issues. I started here 3 months ago at 255.)0 -
i am
FEEL FREE TO ADD ME
0 -
Hi everyone,
I just started this week, and I am also set to the 1200 mark. I have never done anything like this before, and I could really use some guidaince and support. especially if some know how to jugle this if you also want to go out at hit the town and have dinnerparties with your family and friends.
Please add me, and lets lose some waight together ^^0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
I've pulled many a people out of the 1200 pit.
Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity.
That is unless you are eating back ALL burned calories.
I am 49, NOT 80, 5'6" NOT 4 ft tall, and am fairly sedentary other than 30 minute bike ride 4-6 days per week. My TDEE (maintenance) is around 1700. A 500 calorie deficit puts me at 1200 for a 1 pound loss. An extra 150-200 calorie exercise burn gives me a bit more if I don't eat them back. Of course I could eat more if I exercised more and lifted weights, but medical issues and injuries prevent that for me, as well as many others on here. Or perhaps they have jobs and families and don't have an extra 10 hrs a week to spend in the gym. It is not that we CHOOSE to eat the least amount of food that we can, we eat at an appropriate level for us, to get in the nutrients that we need, without STARVING ourselves, but losing an appropriate 1-2 lbs per week.
Dan, you are a smart guy who has indeed helped a lot of people on here, but when you make such ridiculous statements like those, you start to lose credibility. Like I have mentioned before, I know a 60 yr old lady who is 4'10" (almost 5 ft) is fairly active and MAINTAINS her weight on 900 calories per day. She has been a WW leader for 30 yrs and is very healthy. Why is it so hard to accept that for many people, 1200 a day is perfectly healthy and acceptable for them when they are trying to lose weight? No, it is NOT appropriate for EVERYONE, but it is certainly NOT unhealthy for EVERYONE either.
And they don't have to be 80 year old bedridden midgets. Please keep your comments a little more realistic.
I have done 100s of numbers for old, young and in between.
I've only had 1 BMR come out below 1200.
She was 21 and 4'11".
If you get out of bed and you want to get in good shape and look good naked then you wont eat 1200 calories.
If you want to lose "weight" and you arent too concerned with how you look at the end of your road then by all means eat 1200 daily.
I can assure you that skinny-fat is neither pretty nor easy to get rid of.
So spend as much time as you want cutting calories and getting weak then come see me when you are ready to look good naked.
I'll have you eating above TDEE for a few months to build up the lean mass youve lost then cutting all over again next year.
Stop wasting your time and do this right.
My case and point on this is if you look at most of the people who claim 1200 is the cure, look at their join date and how much they have lost.
Eating more allows your body to work naturally to lose "fat" first.
Eating too few calories gives your body reason to store "fat".
Why give the most important machine in the world the bare minimum.
Doesnt make any sense.
I'm sorry Dan, I was under the impression that you were a professional in the medical field or at least in the health and fitness field. You declare 'facts' like you have been formally educated and actually work professionally in the field of Health and Nutrition.
I finally took a peek at your profile and surprisingly found this-
""I'm not a nutritionist or fitness expert but I do ask them a lot of questions and I do what they do!"
"Disclaimer: Dan accepts no responsibility in anything physical or emotional that could happen to you by following his advice! Take his advice at your own risk. Dan is not a doctor or nutritionist. He builds bears FFS! All information Dan gives you can be found freely on the interwebs! Thats where he found it! He researches this crap and brings it to you! =D "
Had I known that you researched that 'crap' on the internet and simply recycled it on here as fact, then I would not have wasted my time debating anything with you. Perhaps you should add your 'disclaimer' to all your posts on here, in the spirit of full disclosure.
Before I go, I must ask for some clarifications-
You first posted-
"Read this and understand that 1200 probably isnt your number unless you are 80 years old, under 4 foot tall with ZERO activity."
Then you stated-
"I've only had 1 BMR come out below 1200.
She was 21 and 4'11"."
So which one is it, a 4'11" 21 year old, or an under 4 ft tall 80 yr old?
And as for your concern of how I look naked- I am 49, have had 3 children, and several surgeries on various parts of my body, so I don't look like I did at 20, but my husband thinks I look pretty hot naked and hasn't complained.
Despite my physical injuries, I am still pretty strong for an old grandma, and since I have been riding my recumbent bike, my legs have gotten even stronger and my butt is looking pretty good! My husband is quite enjoying seeing, and feeling my muscles emerge as the fat is getting out of their way.
And I don't stay in bed all day.
One last thing I am curious about. According to your ticker you weigh less than 140 pounds, and I assume that you lift weights and are quite muscular. So exactly how tall are you? I am not being snarky and calling you short, I am sincerely curious as to your height and BF%. All of the muscular men I have known have always weighed quite a bit more than that, even the shorter ones.
Me?
I'm 5'6" with a BMR of appx 1590 and a TDEE that ranges from 2k-2900 depending on the week and activity.
I just pinpointed this number after months of testing it out.
I'm now ready for my winter bulk.
When I lost my weight I went from 175 down to 135 in about 3-4 months eating between 1600-2200 cals a day and working out 3x a week.
As for not being snarky I was more leaning towards Hangry.
listen, my door is open even to you if you want me to run personal numbers for you and set up a program.
I've only encountered 2 people this didnt work for and we later found out they had metabolic disease.0 -
Eating more allows your body to work naturally to lose "fat" first.
Eating too few calories gives your body reason to store "fat".
Why give the most important machine in the world the bare minimum.
Doesnt make any sense.
Sorry, but your first two sentences? Wrong.
I do agree with the third. 0 -
Specifically (and with sources) how are the first two statements "wrong"?Eating more allows your body to work naturally to lose "fat" first.
Eating too few calories gives your body reason to store "fat".
Why give the most important machine in the world the bare minimum.
Doesnt make any sense.
Sorry, but your first two sentences? Wrong.
I do agree with the third.0 -
I am
I sometimes go over and sometimes under, just have a look and see 0 -
I started at 1200 (plus exercise calories... I always ate them), but after a few weeks I realized that the only way I could lose 2 pounds a week was when I had a 48 hour stomach flu. That's when I started looking at the numbers and realized that I was set to lose 1.2 pounds a week on 1200, but I'd lose one pound a week on 1350. Very first week I ate at 1350, I lost 1.5 pounds. Averaged 5 pounds a month while at that level, then switched to a half pound a week when I was within 10 pounds of my goal weight. And most amazingly, it was while I was losing the least amount per week that I noticed the most changes to my body size and shape!
I'm 5'5 and 40 years old. All told, I ate a total of 1700-2000+ while losing, and I've been maintaining for a year and a half. Currently eating around 2000-2500 a day. I run 2-3x a week, between 30-60 minutes, and lift weights 3x a week (about 30 minutes a pop). So probably about 5 hours a week exercising, tops. I spend more time per week reading, or watching reruns of Big Bang Theory, or putzing around on MFP.
I used to think I had a slow metabolism and used to think I had to eat less than 1000 calories to lose. I'm happy to report I was very, very wrong.0 -
I am around that as well, you can buddy up with me 0
-
I think you should have lost more than 20 pounds in 7 months - you could've lost double that. The 1200 calories a day probably slowed your metabolism down a lot.Eating below your BMR is very unhealthy and setting yourself up for failure.
Very untrue. I have been successfully maintaining a 1200 cal diet for over 7 months now. I have lost 20 lbs and counting, and am hardly ever hungry. It's all about making smarter choices on foods that will keep you full longer.0 -
Hi! I'm a petite girl so I gain weight easy. I've had to learn to stay under 1200 calories. I found the right foods and the right way "dress" them and I eat quite a bit. My diary is open, so all can see. I eat a lot of egg whites, Kroger carbmaster yogurt (only 60 calories) and tuna.0
-
Specifically (and with sources) how are the first two statements "wrong"?Eating more allows your body to work naturally to lose "fat" first.
Eating too few calories gives your body reason to store "fat".
Why give the most important machine in the world the bare minimum.
Doesnt make any sense.
Sorry, but your first two sentences? Wrong.
I do agree with the third.
Where would you like me to begin?
sounds like the "thrifty gene" hypothesis...sigh..
You do know that Neel published a review of further research in the 80s showing that his thrifty genotype hypothesis was wrong. Feast and famine cycles of human existence are a no go.
Shouldn't you or Dan be providing the sources for your beliefs? hmmm?0 -
Hello, I just joined and am set at the 1200 a day but apparently I don't eat that many calories. I'm done eating for the day and still have 250 calories to consume. So....yeah.0
-
I don't know where this argument began or will end, but I would just like to state that metabolic slowdown is assosciated with decreased calorie intake over an extended period of time, which allows the body to store excess energy when calorie intake increases again.
Specifically (and with sources) how are the first two statements "wrong"?Eating more allows your body to work naturally to lose "fat" first.
Eating too few calories gives your body reason to store "fat".
Why give the most important machine in the world the bare minimum.
Doesnt make any sense.
Sorry, but your first two sentences? Wrong.
I do agree with the third.
Where would you like me to begin?
sounds like the "thrifty gene" hypothesis...sigh..
You do know that Neel published a review of further research in the 80s showing that his thrifty genotype hypothesis was wrong. Feast and famine cycles of human existence are a no go.
Shouldn't you or Dan be providing the sources for your beliefs? hmmm?
There's your feast and famine cycles.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions