success stories from 1200 calorie dieters wanted

acrowder99

I've been on 1200 for 15 months now and have lost nearly 20 lbs. I am 5'6" and am at 146 but would like to be 135. My problem is that I go over my sugar allowance pretty much every day and I don't eat my exercise calories back for the most part. Maybe it is time to readjust the calories because I have not lost an ounce in about 7 months now.

That's when I think everyone stalls out - that last 10 lbs. It's probably time to eat back your exercise calories plus some & resistance training could be your best friend for that last 10 lbs or at least those last couple of inches you want gone.

I am the same height as you and would be happy with 146 as long as it was a tone 146. I think the only way to get there is to up the good calorie intake & lift some weight. My goal weight is the same as yours though 135 because that's where I remember feeling the best.

Are you using the MFP sugar recommendations? I removed that because if I eat an apple I go over - it's got to be too low. I just stay away from refined sugars & don't worry much about that number.

DebbieLyn63

The measure of whether a diet is successful is whether the weight loss has been maintained 5 years later. This is the number that studies on success/failure rates (at least in this country) are based on.

Could we modify the question to take that into account? After all, it's not a success if you hit your goal and then 2 years later you gain most of it back again.

I would be genuinely interested in whether people have lost the weight, kept it off for 5 years and, if so, what diet/maintenance plan they followed.

Have you reached your goal and maintained it for 5 years? So far on this site, I haven't come across anyone that has done that. Perhaps there are a few out there, but since this site is mostly (not all) made up of people who are looking to lose weight. Most of them have gone on with the rest of their lives after 5 yrs at goal.

Off of this site, I have known many people who were successful at losing and maintaining for over 5 years. And many who lost and gained back, again and again.
Just like people are different in the ways they lose weight- (some had GPS, some did WW, some did it slowly over several years, etc)
So also are they different in their maintenance methods, or lack thereof.

No matter how slowly or quickly someone loses the weight, if they go back to their old habits when the weight is gone, they WILL gain it back.

I have had family members who did GPS, lost tons of weight, and have kept it off for over 20 yrs.
I also have a family member who lost his weight by going to the gym and lifting. He did really great until his job changed and he no longer had the time to go to the gym every day. He DIDN'T drastically cut his calorie intake to compensate for that, and guess what? He gained it all back and more.

I haven't read every success story on here from the inception of this site, but I dare say that none of them are from people who have successfully kept their weight off for over 5 years. But I would still consider them a success. Lorina and Ed have not kept their off for over 5 yrs either, YET, but I would definitely call them a success at this point.

I DID, 24 yrs ago, lose over 40 pounds in 3 months using WW, and kept within a healthy weight range for the next 12 yrs, aside from a pregnancy during that time, in which I gained very little and lost it quickly. It was only after I was disabled from a work injury and no longer able to work my normal job, that I ended up in the obese category. But I am less than 5 pounds away from being OUT of that category again, and certainly will consider myself a success for doing so.

bcattoes

I've been on 1200 for 15 months now and have lost nearly 20 lbs. I am 5'6" and am at 146 but would like to be 135. My problem is that I go over my sugar allowance pretty much every day and I don't eat my exercise calories back for the most part. Maybe it is time to readjust the calories because I have not lost an ounce in about 7 months now.

A bit of unsolicited advice (so feel free to treat it like unsolicited advice deserves). You’ll might find better success if you increase your deficit by eating the same, but intensifying your exercise a bit. At least that has been my experience.

acrowder99

There is a huge difference between 1200 NET calories, and just eating 1200 calories, which is what many of the anti-1200 threads have been about.

MFP is set up for people to eat 1200 PLUS their exercise calories, which is what you are doing.

Many people ignore the exercise calories part and just eat 1200.

You are doing great

Thank you I see that a lot of people mentioned they don't eat back exercise. I can see why they would think it's a bad idea (why am I exercising then kinda thing) but when you think in terms of net then it makes a lot of sense. I would think most people wouldn't put themselves on a 500-800 calorie diet but when you don't eat back your exercise that's what you are doing. I look at exercise as a way to eat more food that I like but more important I don't want to jiggle. I'm a pear shape & if I don't tone I jiggle, even at 135 lbs.

babydiego87

1200 here for just over a month and lost nearly 10lbs

babydiego87

Ha! I ate 1200 calories for a year, and exercised, did not eat the exercise calories back. I lost 50lbs, I looked and felt like total crap and gained 20lbs back in less than a year.


I'm back again to do it the right way. I'm eating 1700 calories day now.

So you werent even getting 1200 cals if you were exercising as well you probably netting 1000 or less

Nope I was negative everyday for a very long time. I was miserable and tired. I read a bunch of threads here on how other people were eating 1200 calories and had success, and weren't eating their exercise calories back. I couldn't wrap my head about the idea of eating more to lose.


Now I get it.

so if you actually did it properly it'd work...?

DebbieLyn63

I just want to clear up a misconception about EM2WL and IPOARM. "Eat more" is a nice little catch phrase, but it's not about eating MORE, it's about eating RIGHT for your body, your age, your weight, your activity, etc.

It's just math. Calculating what your body burns in a typical day, or what it will burn at your goal weight, and taking a reasonable percentage off that amount. Typically 20% below is recommended, sometimes 30% if you have a lot to lose, or 10-15% if you're closer to your goal. All you need to lose weight is eat less than your TDEE, and not a HUGE amount less.

My TDEE is about 2300. If I were to eat 1200 calories, that would be about half of what my body burns in a day. I don't need a ~50% deficit to lose weight. No one does.

I like thinking of losing body fat like being a merchant selling clothing. Because I like shopping and it's something I can wrap my brain around. If I want to sell a lot of shirts, I might discount the price. If I offer 10-30% off, it's going to be a lot more enticing for those shopping. But if I sell it at 50% off, people will surely buy it, but it doesn't leave me, as a merchant, enough of a profit to live on.

If I only give my body 50% of what it needs, I'm not giving myself enough nutrition to live on. I might be able to get by for a time, but it's going to have negative consequences long term. Just like not making enough profit.

Now, I've noticed that a lot of the success stories in here (and congrats, BTW!) are from women who tend to be around 45 and up, and many admit to being fairly sedentary. Some of you are very petite, too. In your cases, you might plug all your numbers into a TDEE calculator and find out that 1200 calories IS the right amount for you. And if that's the case, great!

But pretty please, with sugar on top, don't go into a thread from a much younger, much more active person who's struggling to lose weight and suggest that "1200 is just fine" because it's fine for you. Please at least state your stats to that person, so they have some kind of perspective.

Lorina, I have never done this, nor have I really ever seen anyone else do this. I will defend a person's right to eat at a calorie level that is right for them, and is working for them. Whatever that level is. I would never tell you that you are eating too much, because what you are doing is working for YOU.
What most of us are seeing on here, is whenever someone says they are trying to eat 1200, then a bunch of people jump in and start bashing the 1200 number, stating that it isn't right for ANYONE, not just the OP. Then that will bring out some people who say, "wait a minute, 1200 is working for me, so you can't say that it isn't right for ANYONE. "

Most of your posts that I have seen, is simply you jumping in and saying that you are over 40 and you eat 2300 a day, without saying that you work out 6 days a week, or sometimes not even pointing out that you are on maintenance. Or the fact that you were never Obese, which can change the whole situation as well.

You are a great poster child for older women lifting. You look great, and many women are impressed with your pictures. For someone needing to lose 25 pounds and wanting to get a tighter, leaner body, I would certainly point them in your direction.

But for someone needing to lose 100 pounds, who is fairly sedentary and has a junk food addiction they can't get under control, you would not be the one I would send them to. I have several other ladies as friends who have succeeded in breaking their food addictions, learned to eat healthier, and have lost well over 100 pounds and are maintaining, or are still progressing toward their goals, and thriving. Doesn't mean that person will have to eat at 1200 to lose, but most likely they will not be able to eat at 1800, like so many people insist that they can. Just because someone is 100 pounds overweight, doesn't mean that they ate 3000 cals a day to get there.

I agree with everything you have just written. Now please take your above post, and change it to the other side perspective.-

But pretty please, with sugar on top, don't go into a thread from a much older, much less active person who's struggling to lose weight and suggest that "2200 is just fine" because it's fine for you. Please at least state your stats to that person, so they have some kind of perspective.

I will agree to not do this, and would like for you and others to do the same.

ktsmom430

I lost about 50lbs in 5 months eating 1200 calories. Then I slacked off a little bit and gained it all back within 5 more months.

To those who do it and keep it off, congrats. But I am a perfect example of 'just because you are losing, doesn't mean you are doing it right". I under ate, lost quickly and gained it back quickly, working extra hard to lose it the right way now, 2000 calories a day.

What guarantee do you have that when you eat more calories, lose the weight, then slack off and do not gain it back? It happens both ways. You have to monitor weight loss and be diligent even after you are on maintenance. No matter how you lose the weight or how many calories you eat.
What works for one may, or may not work for another.
1200 calories IS working for me.

determined_erin

I started my weight loss on the first day of the new year 2013. It's been a little over 2 months, and I've lost 30 lbs so far. I eat a daily average of 1,200 to 1,300, plus I exercise for 1 - 2 hours each day. It's been working fine for me so far.

BflSaberfan

Ha! I ate 1200 calories for a year, and exercised, did not eat the exercise calories back. I lost 50lbs, I looked and felt like total crap and gained 20lbs back in less than a year.


I'm back again to do it the right way. I'm eating 1700 calories day now.

So you werent even getting 1200 cals if you were exercising as well you probably netting 1000 or less

Nope I was negative everyday for a very long time. I was miserable and tired. I read a bunch of threads here on how other people were eating 1200 calories and had success, and weren't eating their exercise calories back. I couldn't wrap my head about the idea of eating more to lose.


Now I get it.

so if you actually did it properly it'd work...?

I dont know, but if I can lose at 1700 I am going to do that instead.

theconstantgardener

yeahbuddy

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/806822-before-and-after-almost-there

love4fitnesslove4food_wechange

Interesting article--albeit simplistic explanation-- but interesting nonetheless:

http://www.everydayhealth.com/weight/fewer-calories-stalls-metabolism.aspx

Here are some highlights:

Eating too few calories can be the start of a vicious cycle that causes diet distress. When you cut your calories so low that your metabolism slows and you stop losing weight, you probably will become frustrated that your efforts are not paying off. This can lead you to overeat and ultimately gain weight.

"It is so hard to sustain cutting calories and eating too little. What typically happens is that the person will go in the opposite direction; they will just become too hungry and go into a binging mode," says Lummus. "Because you are getting frustrated by not seeing any weight loss, you just sort of throw in the towel."

mdconline

I started in July 2012 and I have lost 56 pounds. I have cut out fast food, and eating more fiber foods and fruit. I am exercising and trying to keep to my 1200 calories a day. Some days are harder than others. I am proud to be losing the weight and wearing clothes that are the smallest size that I have ever fit into. 1200 calories are working for me, and I would recommend that anyone wanting to lose weight safely, go through their physician. Myfitnesspal is a wonderful tool to keep track of my accomplishments, and also for the days that I don't do so well.

DebbieLyn63

This may not be exactly what you were looking for and it's a bit long but it may help:

I'm 48 years old, 5'5" tall and for most of my adult life I have weighed 125 lbs. Seven years ago, I fell into a severe depression and gained weight. This started a vicious Catch-22 system that I decided to break last year. I mention this because I think there might be a difference in the way people lose weight who have always been heavy versus the the people who were heavy for relatively short periods of their lives.

One year ago, I was obese, weighing in at over 191 pounds with a BMI of 30.10 and a waist measurement of 42". I led an extremely sedentary lifestyle and my caloric intake was anywhere from 2000-6000 calories a day. I ate a lot of processed foods, drank regularly and I was weak and tired all the time. When I started MFP, I focused on my calorie macro of 1360 and very slowly became more active. It should also be noted that I opted to move more by increasing my overall daily activity as opposed to doing workout sessions per se. I started walking around and taking the dogs for walks. I was very careful to eat my exercise calories back and tried to hit my calorie number as close as possible. You may laugh, but I would literally go find items that enabled me to get within single digits of my calorie goals for the day :laugh:

After only two weeks, I dropped enough weight to get out of the obese category (I was on the low end of that category) and was "just overweight." My calories goal was dropped to 1300. I was still only nominally active (parking farther away from the mall doors) and while I was still eating processed foods, I was very conscious of portion sizes and making sure I had enough calories spaced throughout the day. I starting eating three full meals and two snacks and drinking just water. I was still extremely focused on meeting my calorie goal to within single digits.

After six more weeks, I had dropped about 20 pounds and my calorie goal shifted to 1240. My activity level bumped up a little bit. I found I had more energy and so I found myself looking for excuses to not sit down. I started eating a little cleaner and changing the items in my diet every two weeks or so. I also learned how to manage my eating when I wasn't in control of the food situation (barbeques, restaurants and events like weddings.)

After ten more weeks, I had lost about 40 pounds and was in the high end of the "normal" range. My calorie goal dropped to 1200. I became more active my taking up hiking and made sure to get within 100 calories of my daily goal every day. There were a couple of days that I blew it either way: I ate something that I knew was high in calorie for the sheer joy of it or, I was so tired from some some adventure that at the end of the day I was too tired to eat ! On those days, I tried to keep the "margin" of error to within 500 cals.The thing is, I never tried to compensate the next day by over- or under-eating. I just moved on, taking each day as it's own. I hit a mini-plateau (about ten weeks) in the dead of winter. I wasn't active but I worked on eating eating cleaner and being patient. :grumble:

Then, a couple of weeks ago, the weather got a little warmer, the trails opened up and the mini-plateau broke! I was able to lose the last 5 lbs within two weeks. I was tempted to lose a couple of more pounds, but I found that I stopped feeling good: I started to feel weak, tired and hungry so I took that as my cue to call it!

It's taken me a little more than ten months to lose 67 lbs (5 lbs before MFP, 62 here on MFP) and I spent about 5 months or about half that time on the 1200 calorie guide. I didn't experience any weight fluctuations (only losses and a mini-plateau) and I wasn't hungry, or light-headed. The weight-loss and dietary changes also helped break the Catch-22 cycle I mentioned earlier

I'm currently at a 1500 cal maintenance level: I weigh between 125 and 130 lbs, my BMI is 20.8, and my waist measures 28.50". My energy levels are excellent. I'm eating cleaner than ever and as an added bonus, my hair and skin have improved dramatically as well. I'm at the low end of the normal range! Now I have to be careful not to slip into the underweight category! My current goals are to stay within the 125-130 pound range, continue eating cleaner and explore more trails.

So, it worked for me; but your mileage may vary

This is fantastic! Congrats to you for figuring out what works for you and doing it. You are definitely a success story and an inspiration for me. I am initially shooting for 155 to get in a healthy weight range, but would LOVE to be back down to 140 again. My lowest adult weight was 136, but that is the absolute bottom for my body, and I'm not sure if I can get to that point again, but somewhere in the low 140s would be awesome.

DebbieLyn63

I think it's awesome that it's working for you... but you don't have 100lbs to lose like the person in the post you're quoting. According to your ticker, your goal was less than 20. Some of us are facing 5x that goal or more. I've been directed to the eatmore2weighless site whose logo is in your ticker more times than I can count and it honestly disturbs me that people take this site as fact. The "facts" are that the 2 women that run that site aren't medical or fitness professionals, they have zero credentials.

Women athletes burn more calories because they have more muscle mass and burn more throughout the day, so they can maintain their weight with much higher calorie intakes. Obese people that need to lose large amounts of weight have different needs than someone who just needs to lose 20lbs, and they shouldn't be constantly attacked for "eating too little" because of it. Not attacking you personally, just sick of seeing this EM2WL propaganda and its formula promoted as gospel all over the forums when it's truly not a formula that is one size fits all.

1. Those two women ARE fitness professionals.

2. Just because my ticker says that doesn't mean that I started at a much higher weight before I joined MFP. You don't know what my journey has been.

3. People with lots of weight to lose actually need to eat much more to start. A 5'7" female at 250lb actually has a caloric need of 3300 calories per day. Three times what most of you are eating.


The point is that you all are pulling 1200 out of thin air without calculating how much you need to maintain muscle mass and your activity level and your goals.

The point is NOT how much an athlete eats or how much the people on EM2WL eat..... the point is that they're informed and you're not. They take time to read the information and make well-informed decisions. They're calculating their needs for their activity and their goals. And voila, they're being successful.

At my highest weight of 237, and 5'6", I NEVER ate anywhere near 3300 cals per day. I think this is one of the biggest myths for some people that assume that obese people eat tons of calories. At 237, I was maintaining around 1800 a day. At my fittest and most active time of life, when I was 30, working an extremely physical job and lifting weights 3 days a week, I maintained around 2500. What a lot of people don't realize is that BF% makes a huge difference in your metabolism. A 250 pound weight lifter needs considerably more calories than a 250 pound sedentary middle aged woman with a BF% of 60%.

MstngSammy

I am 69 years old.

You really can't compare your caloric needs to the 25 year olds on here. They need to eat more than you do.

Women over 40 (and especially over 50) -- Please come join this group: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/9239-the-ladies-who-lunch

No skinny teenagers or bulky body-builders... just real women "of an age" who know ourselves and our bodies, have been through childbirth and/or menopause, enjoy real food, and will never, ever spend 1 or 2, let alone 5 or 6 hours a day in the gym. We have real lives, real jobs, real families, we know who we are, we have a sense of humor about that (by the way), and we're willing to share what we're learning (without judgment) with each other.

And wine. There's always room for wine.

So maybe you didn't mean it to come out that way, but i find your comment incredibly offensive, because you appear to have the idea that anyone who doesn't fit your definition isn't a "real" woman. That's such an oppositional view of things. I like the gym, and I have to eat more than 1200 calories or I get sick. That does not make me, or anyone like me, not "real". So it's a bit ironic you talk about "no judgement" in your closing.

She means the average woman. Average women over 40.

MstngSammy

I think it's awesome that it's working for you... but you don't have 100lbs to lose like the person in the post you're quoting. According to your ticker, your goal was less than 20. Some of us are facing 5x that goal or more. I've been directed to the eatmore2weighless site whose logo is in your ticker more times than I can count and it honestly disturbs me that people take this site as fact. The "facts" are that the 2 women that run that site aren't medical or fitness professionals, they have zero credentials.

Women athletes burn more calories because they have more muscle mass and burn more throughout the day, so they can maintain their weight with much higher calorie intakes. Obese people that need to lose large amounts of weight have different needs than someone who just needs to lose 20lbs, and they shouldn't be constantly attacked for "eating too little" because of it. Not attacking you personally, just sick of seeing this EM2WL propaganda and its formula promoted as gospel all over the forums when it's truly not a formula that is one size fits all.

1. Those two women ARE fitness professionals.

2. Just because my ticker says that doesn't mean that I started at a much higher weight before I joined MFP. You don't know what my journey has been.

3. People with lots of weight to lose actually need to eat much more to start. A 5'7" female at 250lb actually has a caloric need of 3300 calories per day. Three times what most of you are eating.


The point is that you all are pulling 1200 out of thin air without calculating how much you need to maintain muscle mass and your activity level and your goals.

The point is NOT how much an athlete eats or how much the people on EM2WL eat..... the point is that they're informed and you're not. They take time to read the information and make well-informed decisions. They're calculating their needs for their activity and their goals. And voila, they're being successful.

At my highest weight of 237, and 5'6", I NEVER ate anywhere near 3300 cals per day. I think this is one of the biggest myths for some people that assume that obese people eat tons of calories. At 237, I was maintaining around 1800 a day. At my fittest and most active time of life, when I was 30, working an extremely physical job and lifting weights 3 days a week, I maintained around 2500. What a lot of people don't realize is that BF% makes a huge difference in your metabolism. A 250 pound weight lifter needs considerably more calories than a 250 pound sedentary middle aged woman with a BF% of 60%.

Exactly the point I was trying to make.

TDEE is for maintaining weight. My TDEE is around 2300 calories....if I did that I would actually gain weight at my normal activity level. I am a stay-at-home-mom so the only strenuous activity for me is laundry and mopping (before working out).

My BMR is between 1500-1800 without working out. If I sit on my butt all day and do nothing (same as sitting at a desk all day) it would be around 1200-1300. When I do workout....usually my burn can range anywhere from 600-1100 calories....I follow my body. I eat when I need to instead of when I want to and I eat whole real food (processed food makes me hungry and weak). I find I only eat back 200-400 of those calories back. I feel fine now. Will my need for calories increase as my muscle to fat ratio increases? Well of course it will! IT TAKES MORE TO FUEL MUSCLES THAN FAT! Right now I have more fat than muscles and need less because some of the energy comes from the fat that I'm burning.

I suppose I should add that I'm 41

bcattoes

I am 69 years old.

You really can't compare your caloric needs to the 25 year olds on here. They need to eat more than you do.

Women over 40 (and especially over 50) -- Please come join this group: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/9239-the-ladies-who-lunch

No skinny teenagers or bulky body-builders... just real women "of an age" who know ourselves and our bodies, have been through childbirth and/or menopause, enjoy real food, and will never, ever spend 1 or 2, let alone 5 or 6 hours a day in the gym. We have real lives, real jobs, real families, we know who we are, we have a sense of humor about that (by the way), and we're willing to share what we're learning (without judgment) with each other.

And wine. There's always room for wine.

So maybe you didn't mean it to come out that way, but i find your comment incredibly offensive, because you appear to have the idea that anyone who doesn't fit your definition isn't a "real" woman. That's such an oppositional view of things. I like the gym, and I have to eat more than 1200 calories or I get sick. That does not make me, or anyone like me, not "real". So it's a bit ironic you talk about "no judgement" in your closing.

She means the average woman. Average women over 40.

But, the average woman over 40 has bone loss and too much fat. The "real woman" label was a tad offensive but easily ignored. But I believe that as we women age - I am a perimenopausal woman fast approaching 52 yo - exercise becomes even more important than it was at a younger age. Gym or no gym doesn't matter, but a regular exercise routine that includes aerobic, strength and flexibilty training is the best way to keep your bone and muscle, without keeping too much fat.

I am a real woman - full time desk job, husband, daughters, grandkids, aging parents, etc., I make time for my workout because I love my life and want to continue to enjoy it for as long as possible.

MstngSammy

I just want to clear up a misconception about EM2WL and IPOARM. "Eat more" is a nice little catch phrase, but it's not about eating MORE, it's about eating RIGHT for your body, your age, your weight, your activity, etc.

It's just math. Calculating what your body burns in a typical day, or what it will burn at your goal weight, and taking a reasonable percentage off that amount. Typically 20% below is recommended, sometimes 30% if you have a lot to lose, or 10-15% if you're closer to your goal. All you need to lose weight is eat less than your TDEE, and not a HUGE amount less.

My TDEE is about 2300. If I were to eat 1200 calories, that would be about half of what my body burns in a day. I don't need a ~50% deficit to lose weight. No one does.

I like thinking of losing body fat like being a merchant selling clothing. Because I like shopping and it's something I can wrap my brain around. If I want to sell a lot of shirts, I might discount the price. If I offer 10-30% off, it's going to be a lot more enticing for those shopping. But if I sell it at 50% off, people will surely buy it, but it doesn't leave me, as a merchant, enough of a profit to live on.

If I only give my body 50% of what it needs, I'm not giving myself enough nutrition to live on. I might be able to get by for a time, but it's going to have negative consequences long term. Just like not making enough profit.

Now, I've noticed that a lot of the success stories in here (and congrats, BTW!) are from women who tend to be around 45 and up, and many admit to being fairly sedentary. Some of you are very petite, too. In your cases, you might plug all your numbers into a TDEE calculator and find out that 1200 calories IS the right amount for you. And if that's the case, great!

But pretty please, with sugar on top, don't go into a thread from a much younger, much more active person who's struggling to lose weight and suggest that "1200 is just fine" because it's fine for you. Please at least state your stats to that person, so they have some kind of perspective.

Lorina, I have never done this, nor have I really ever seen anyone else do this. I will defend a person's right to eat at a calorie level that is right for them, and is working for them. Whatever that level is. I would never tell you that you are eating too much, because what you are doing is working for YOU.
What most of us are seeing on here, is whenever someone says they are trying to eat 1200, then a bunch of people jump in and start bashing the 1200 number, stating that it isn't right for ANYONE, not just the OP. Then that will bring out some people who say, "wait a minute, 1200 is working for me, so you can't say that it isn't right for ANYONE. "

Most of your posts that I have seen, is simply you jumping in and saying that you are over 40 and you eat 2300 a day, without saying that you work out 6 days a week, or sometimes not even pointing out that you are on maintenance. Or the fact that you were never Obese, which can change the whole situation as well.

You are a great poster child for older women lifting. You look great, and many women are impressed with your pictures. For someone needing to lose 25 pounds and wanting to get a tighter, leaner body, I would certainly point them in your direction.

But for someone needing to lose 100 pounds, who is fairly sedentary and has a junk food addiction they can't get under control, you would not be the one I would send them to. I have several other ladies as friends who have succeeded in breaking their food addictions, learned to eat healthier, and have lost well over 100 pounds and are maintaining, or are still progressing toward their goals, and thriving. Doesn't mean that person will have to eat at 1200 to lose, but most likely they will not be able to eat at 1800, like so many people insist that they can. Just because someone is 100 pounds overweight, doesn't mean that they ate 3000 cals a day to get there.

I agree with everything you have just written. Now please take your above post, and change it to the other side perspective.-

But pretty please, with sugar on top, don't go into a thread from a much older, much less active person who's struggling to lose weight and suggest that "2200 is just fine" because it's fine for you. Please at least state your stats to that person, so they have some kind of perspective.

I will agree to not do this, and would like for you and others to do the same.

:flowerforyou:

MstngSammy

What is " EM2WL and IPOARM" ?