When is 1200 calories appropriate? (hint: almost never)

EmmaKarney

Still hoping we can clarify if this is about consuming 1200 or "netting" 1200.

It's netting.

But even so - netting 1200 is too low. This is the point of this thread.

Eating 1200 and exercising on top is plain ludicrous.

stormynytes4ever

I'm 5'4", 27 years old, and have a seditary lifestyle due to my desk job. I usually don't eat a whole lot anyway, but MFP started me off at 1200 daily and it has remained at that level even though I've lost almost 30lbs since. I do take multivitamines and suplements just to make sure I'm getting all the important stuff I need, but I've always done that. I don't always come in under that mark, but I do more offen than not. I usually eat more vegetables and fruits which are pretty low in calories anyway, but in the evenings I'll have quite a large portion of lean meat cooked in coconut oil. I'm never left hungry and I've even been able to work a daily cardio routine into my day-to-day schedule (not easy because I live nowhere close to a gym). I'll usually eat those calories back, but not always. All my blood tests have come back fine (I get one once a year), and my blood-pressure is excelent. I've got a remarkably increased energy level and much better quality of sleep since I've started and have yet to experience any ill effects.

I suppose it just depends on the person.

Duck_Puddle

Still hoping we can clarify if this is about consuming 1200 or "netting" 1200.

It's netting.

But even so - netting 1200 is too low. This is the point of this thread.

Eating 1200 and exercising on top is plain ludicrous.

Wish you quoted the whole thing. Netting 1200 is too low? I net 1200 but eat 1500-2300 a day. Just how much more do I need to eat for it to not be too low? Eating 1200 and exercising on top o that and netting like 600 is too low. Netting 1200 is fine.

WinnerVictorious

I have actually been quite irritated with MFP about this. I understand that some people do only require 1200 calories, but no matter what I put in it says I only need 1200. I tried all of the activity levels just to see what it would say, 1200 calories across the board.

Last year I spent 6 months losing weight, only eating 1200 calories and exercising almost everyday, and plateaued for quite a bit of that time. At the start of my "weight loss" this time I am more educated, and decided to find other sources to calculate my TDEE and I input my daily calories into MFP every morning. I am calorie cycling at the moment, but even before starting that I manually input my calorie allowance.

While there are some people that do only need 1200 calories, a person who works out 5-7 days of the week needs more, and MFP should have the system set up to *correctly* reflect all the differences.

Did you put in .5 lb/week as your goal? You have so little to lose you really shouldn't have it set any higher than that.

^^ This

The closer you get to your goal weight, the less of a deficit you should have. :flowerforyou:

This was actually last year when I had over 30 pounds to lose.

Even now at 127, and working out 5 days a week, It is still saying I need 1200 calories, which goes against every other website I have used to calculate a healthy amount of calories (webmd, free dieting, Jillian michales, and a few others) I tried an array of different setting but the highest it goes up to is like 1274.

are you setting your loss rate too high?

when you get close to your goal, you can't really expect to lose at a 2lbs/week rate.

also, you can figure out the numbers yourself to sanity check them against what MFP suggests. here's one way to do it.

BMR - from a calculator using your height, weight, age, gender, and possibly BF%
Harris-Benedict mulitplier based on your daily activity level (not including exercise)
Daily Exercise Calories from database, calculators, or HRMs.

TDEE = BMR x Harris-Benedict multiplier + Daily Exercise Calories

then subtract your calorie deficit from the TDEE. if the result is lower than 1200, then your calorie deficit is set too high. even if the result is not under 1200, your calorie deficit may be set too high.

when people talk about changing MFP, i think they just mean that there needs to be a calorie deficit sanity check based on current weight and goal weight before MFP spits out a daily calorie goal. that's essentially something you can do yourself as stated above.

tryinghard71

Still hoping we can clarify if this is about consuming 1200 or "netting" 1200.

It's netting.

But even so - netting 1200 is too low. This is the point of this thread.

Eating 1200 and exercising on top is plain ludicrous.

Wish you quoted the whole thing. Netting 1200 is too low? I net 1200 but eat 1500-2300 a day. Just how much more do I need to eat for it to not be too low? Eating 1200 and exercising on top o that and netting like 600 is too low. Netting 1200 is fine.

Oh my my... I totally agree. How can netting 1200 calories be too low when I am eating 1800 and losing weight.

WinnerVictorious

Still hoping we can clarify if this is about consuming 1200 or "netting" 1200.

It's netting.

But even so - netting 1200 is too low. This is the point of this thread.

Eating 1200 and exercising on top is plain ludicrous.

Wish you quoted the whole thing. Netting 1200 is too low? I net 1200 but eat 1500-2300 a day. Just how much more do I need to eat for it to not be too low? Eating 1200 and exercising on top o that and netting like 600 is too low. Netting 1200 is fine.

Oh my my... I totally agree. How can netting 1200 calories be too low when I am eating 1800 and losing weight.

if you're eating 1800 and getting good nutrition and then doing 600 calories of cardio to result in a 1200 NET, then i can't say that 1200 NET is too low. different issues come into play here. there may still be some metabolic slowdown as your body attempts to get more efficient, but more likely you may run into issues with energy levels and fatigue. assuming of course that you continue netting 1200 day in and day out over a period of time. your body will of course draw energy from stored fat, but that's not as efficient as getting it from daily intake. as it dips into your stored fat, you may have to worry about catabolism of muscle. i can't say for sure that will be a big concern with the numbers you've given me, but for people who are morbidly obese and continually run large daily deficits (1500+ per day) even while eating more than enough calories to meet their nutritional needs, loss of LBM becomes a real worry.

our bodies do all work the same way, but with variation. some folks might be perfectly fine in the scenario you've outlined above. others may find that they are lethargic. it does depend alot on how each person's body responds. all i could advise is that if you feel fine doing that and not losing muscle mass (which i think shouldn't be significant at a 4lb/month loss rate), then your settings for weight loss are probably good ones for you.

AllonsYtotheTardis

My maintainance total is rougly 2150 cals a day. I'm looking to lose the maximum healthy amount per week I can (no more than 2 pounds a week which is the limit MFP recommends)

aiming for 2 lbs per week, when you have less than 25 to lose, is NOT healthy. This is where MFP fails people. It should be advising them of this.

peachfigs

Yawns. *eye roll*

I'm always amazed at the amount of people so focused on what other people are doing and eating....

^ This.

primpixie

I am a virtually sedentry 40 year old with medical issues and yes i eat 1200 calories per day - but more if I have managed to exercise - surely this is common sense?

LCDTX70

My current MFP recommendation is 1200 a day BUT I am just starting to ramp my exercise levels and I work in a very sedentary job. I think it's key to go back adjust as your fitness levels increase. I kind of like keeping it at 1200 for now, because if I exercise, I get calories added and that's my incentive to eat up to 1500. It works as a motivating factor for now, but obviously as I exercise more consistenly, the calorie intake also needs to rise.

tryinghard71

My current MFP recommendation is 1200 a day BUT I am just starting to ramp my exercise levels and I work in a very sedentary job. I think it's key to go back adjust as your fitness levels increase. I kind of like keeping it at 1200 for now, because if I exercise, I get calories added and that's my incentive to eat up to 1500. It works as a motivating factor for now, but obviously as I exercise more consistenly, the calorie intake also needs to rise.

^^^

Duck_Puddle

Still hoping we can clarify if this is about consuming 1200 or "netting" 1200.

It's netting.

But even so - netting 1200 is too low. This is the point of this thread.

Eating 1200 and exercising on top is plain ludicrous.

Wish you quoted the whole thing. Netting 1200 is too low? I net 1200 but eat 1500-2300 a day. Just how much more do I need to eat for it to not be too low? Eating 1200 and exercising on top o that and netting like 600 is too low. Netting 1200 is fine.

Oh my my... I totally agree. How can netting 1200 calories be too low when I am eating 1800 and losing weight.

if you're eating 1800 and getting good nutrition and then doing 600 calories of cardio to result in a 1200 NET, then i can't say that 1200 NET is too low. different issues come into play here. there may still be some metabolic slowdown as your body attempts to get more efficient, but more likely you may run into issues with energy levels and fatigue. assuming of course that you continue netting 1200 day in and day out over a period of time. your body will of course draw energy from stored fat, but that's not as efficient as getting it from daily intake. as it dips into your stored fat, you may have to worry about catabolism of muscle. i can't say for sure that will be a big concern with the numbers you've given me, but for people who are morbidly obese and continually run large daily deficits (1500+ per day) even while eating more than enough calories to meet their nutritional needs, loss of LBM becomes a real worry.

our bodies do all work the same way, but with variation. some folks might be perfectly fine in the scenario you've outlined above. others may find that they are lethargic. it does depend alot on how each person's body responds. all i could advise is that if you feel fine doing that and not losing muscle mass (which i think shouldn't be significant at a 4lb/month loss rate), then your settings for weight loss are probably good ones for you.

Ok. So if I said I'm eating TDEE-20% (which for me is 1680) instead of saying I net 1200 while eating 1700-1800 avg per day then it's OK? Cause I can do that-it's really six of one, 1/2 dozen of the other. But using mfp as its set up allows me to make sure I'm not eating exercise calories I'm not actually earning (been injured/sick many times in 15 months). It's the same number doing TDEE-% or using mfp and eating exercise calories. So the entire post there applies to people using TDEE-% just as much as someone using mfp settings and eating their exercise calories.

stacymercado

I am pretty sure MFP has dr approval for their 1200 calorie recommendations.... In fact.. while I was pregnant and gaining a TON of weight my Dr. said a 1200 calorie diet was more than okay (of course I didnt follow it) and went from 155-209. I was able to lose all of the baby weight and some on a 1200-1500 caloric intake - felt healthy - energized etc. A lot of people cannot have 2000 calories without blowing up. I think MFP recommendations are on point and really help in losing extra lbs. Its a great guide and I have never felt better while actively using MFP.

MercenaryNoetic26

I agree but I had a low calorie day yesterday. This was after logging elliptical. On days I'm more sedentary, I eat less. On days I'm more active, I eat more. As long as it balances out weekly. If I go way over one day I may restrict the following day. Anyway, I would never make 1200 a daily thing but thought it was funny that yesterday my net was less than.

peachfigs

If anyone has tried the Net Diary Calorie Counter (I tried that one before MFP) it can even suggest 800-900 calories as your maximum. Not healthy, but after nearly starving myself and being completely miserable I switched to MFP and so 1200 feels like a feast for me.

That being said, I'm not hungry on 1200, and when I feel its not enough, I'll readjust my calories. I'm tired of justifying my calorie intake.

If you don't do well on 1200 calories, don't eat 1200 calories, but don't dictate to other people.

It's really that simple.

WinnerVictorious

Still hoping we can clarify if this is about consuming 1200 or "netting" 1200.

It's netting.

But even so - netting 1200 is too low. This is the point of this thread.

Eating 1200 and exercising on top is plain ludicrous.

Wish you quoted the whole thing. Netting 1200 is too low? I net 1200 but eat 1500-2300 a day. Just how much more do I need to eat for it to not be too low? Eating 1200 and exercising on top o that and netting like 600 is too low. Netting 1200 is fine.

Oh my my... I totally agree. How can netting 1200 calories be too low when I am eating 1800 and losing weight.

if you're eating 1800 and getting good nutrition and then doing 600 calories of cardio to result in a 1200 NET, then i can't say that 1200 NET is too low. different issues come into play here. there may still be some metabolic slowdown as your body attempts to get more efficient, but more likely you may run into issues with energy levels and fatigue. assuming of course that you continue netting 1200 day in and day out over a period of time. your body will of course draw energy from stored fat, but that's not as efficient as getting it from daily intake. as it dips into your stored fat, you may have to worry about catabolism of muscle. i can't say for sure that will be a big concern with the numbers you've given me, but for people who are morbidly obese and continually run large daily deficits (1500+ per day) even while eating more than enough calories to meet their nutritional needs, loss of LBM becomes a real worry.

our bodies do all work the same way, but with variation. some folks might be perfectly fine in the scenario you've outlined above. others may find that they are lethargic. it does depend alot on how each person's body responds. all i could advise is that if you feel fine doing that and not losing muscle mass (which i think shouldn't be significant at a 4lb/month loss rate), then your settings for weight loss are probably good ones for you.

Ok. So if I said I'm eating TDEE-20% (which for me is 1680) instead of saying I net 1200 while eating 1700-1800 avg per day then it's OK? Cause I can do that-it's really six of one, 1/2 dozen of the other. But using mfp as its set up allows me to make sure I'm not eating exercise calories I'm not actually earning (been injured/sick many times in 15 months). It's the same number doing TDEE-% or using mfp and eating exercise calories. So the entire post there applies to people using TDEE-% just as much as someone using mfp settings and eating their exercise calories.

the person that i was responding to above was dismissing the idea that their 1200 daily net was bad. i was simply responding to what they posted. they have chosen to use a TDEE-30% calorie setting. i pointed out that even though they might be getting enough nutrition in the 1800 calories they were eating, that there could be other side effects for them. their TDEE-30% is higher than the usually recommended TDEE-20% deficit, but MFP will allow that as i understand it (e.g., if your TDEE is 3000 and you choose a 2lbs/week loss rate, then eating at 2000 is TDEE-33%). since my goal was not to enter into specific arguments on this thread, but simply to put out a reminder to anyone interested that there can be a better and easier way than rigid adherence to a 1200 per day goal, it didn't seem useful for me to get sidetracked into a TDEE-% debate.

i believe that TDEE-20% is the generally recommended goal for most people and this is covered in the links i gave at the top of the thread.

CristinaL1983

I personally don't care what other people do to get to their fitness goals, but for me, 1200 calories works. Not only that, I have never found any scientific evidence that 1200 calories causes LBM loss or BMR decrease. In fact dozens and dozens of studies suggest that none of that is true. For overweight/obese people, studies show that even on a VLCD BMR decrease and muscle loss are not significant. Research shows that even on VLCD at high rate of fat loss muscle mass and BMR are maintained and muscle mass can even be increased by up to .5lb/month in obese individuals.

Research like the Minnesota Starvation experiment show that BMR will decrease when an individual hits their "essential" body fat level. But even in that experiment, all but one of the individuals who started was healthy weight and even once they hit "essential" body fat the continued to lose weight at a rate of 2.25lb/wk instead of 3lb/wk (which was the expected number). Of course, because they were all at healthy body fat to begin with and fed a starvation diet while training exhaustively, they began to experience psychosis etc...

I have personally had two DXA scans done (one in the beginning and one pretty recently) that showed no muscle loss and only a decrease in fat. I have been on here since Jan15 and lost 14+ lbs (I had also been losing weight for months before joining MFP). There is also no research to suggest that losing weight more slowly is in anyway superior to losing weight more quickly (obviously not talking about VLCD or ED). In fact, some research suggests that not only will losing weight more quickly make it more likely that an individual will get to their healthy weight but there is no difference in ability to maintain once healthy weight is reached.

I have no doubt that for some people a lower deficit can lead to a longer, healthier lifestyle change. But, that does not make it true for everyone.

The last thing is that for someone who regularly exercises, 1200+exercise calories is usually somewhere in the neighborhood of TDEE-20. Probably within a hundred calories or so. It is a matter of working out the math ahead of time or as you go. Of course this is not true all the time and there are a variety of situations that would make this untrue.

If anyone has research, I'm not talking about articles written on some website online or a link to a "case study" posted either here or somewhere else, but links to research in journals that contradicts any of this information, I would love to read it. I have not been able to find any and have done some pretty exhaustive searches. If anyone wants to read any of the research I've found it's in my post history (and I'll dig it up if someone actually wants to read it, most people don't actually read it so I am not going to go through all that stuff for no reason). The research I found is pretty much all from pub-med or the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

BunkyBumBum

I don't have a 1200 calorie goal, but close. Mine is 1360 (I think I chose a goal of losing 1 pound per week). I'm 34, 5'2", 150lbs, I say "lightly active" because I chase my 5 year old and walk a lot (city life). I work out 3x per week, 15 minutes HARD strength training (as in, 3 sets of 10 reps and by the last one in each set I can barely lift the weight) and 30 minutes on the elliptical or arc trainer.

I stay pretty close to my goals, and have been doing this for 3 months. Know how much I've lost? Zero. Gaining muscle, sure, I didn't have much before. Eating healthy? I'm a vegetarian, fruits and veggies and black beans and tofu are my world and have been for 20 years. I'm a stay at home mom and cook everything from scratch, there are very few processed foods in this house. I'm not a fool when it comes to losing weight, I lost 75 pounds 3 years ago and kept it off. I have a degree in biology, I know how it works, but I also know a heck of a lot of other factors weigh in (I'm suspicious that low blood sugar might be why I'm "stuck"). I cut out coffee two weeks ago (I drank it black but 3 cups per day and I wanted that out of my system so I switched to green tea). I cut out wine a month ago, I used to drink one glass of red wine about 2 times per week. Next, and most difficult, is sugar. I need to cut it out, I know it's spiking my levels but I also know that with my blood sugar being so low I crave it like nuts.

So, I sort of got sidetracked, but I'm a pretty healthy person who wants to lose 15-20 pounds and MFP is giving me 1360 calories. (And no, my journal isn't open, I do that to keep myself honest so I write down everything, even a bite of this or that, I track it. My journal is personal to me, though I do print it because I have decided that after another month, if nothing changes, I'll take those pages to a certified nutritionist for evaluation).

myofibril

1,200 calories is fine as a short term measure. If you use it then you could always break it up by having a diet break every few weeks, refeeds, a high calorie day etc.

As a long term measure (say 3 months or more) when it is used without a break then not so much for most people.

WinnerVictorious

If anyone has tried the Net Diary Calorie Counter (I tried that one before MFP) it can even suggest 800-900 calories as your maximum. Not healthy, but after nearly starving myself and being completely miserable I switched to MFP and so 1200 feels like a feast for me.

That being said, I'm not hungry on 1200, and when I feel its not enough, I'll readjust my calories. I'm tired of justifying my calorie intake.

If you don't do well on 1200 calories, don't eat 1200 calories, but don't dictate to other people.

It's really that simple.

who here on this thread demanded that you justify your calorie intake? i certainly didn't. nobody here is dictating anything to you. if you have taken the time to inform yourself and have chosen to be on a VLCD and risk whatever side effects may come your way, then good luck to you. i hope it works out for you.

aside - i'm a bit saddened to see that a handful of people who are determined to stick to their 1200 calorie mindset have decided to come into this thread to defend their belief that 1200 is fine. for a small percentage of people it can be fine. for another percentage of people, there's nothing anyone can say to dissuade them. this thread is not for either of those 2 groups of people. it's for the people who are new, who are confused, or who are frustrated because 1200 is no longer working for them. however, i feel that the attempts to derail this thread into specific debates about specific people and their specific circumstances undermines the usefulness of these public forums and that's why i would re-iterate to those seeking assistance that they should check out the 2 links i posted in at the top of the thread. inform yourself. decide for yourself. try to ignore those personal agendas that are attempting to derail this thread.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/10118-eat-train-progress