clarification needed on the "not under 1200 cal" rule

MsAnnThropy

Hi all. I'm still fairly new to the site, but already think it's great!
Just one clarification needed though - as I'm a sedentarty person (working from home in front of a computer) MFP assessed my BMR pretty low, and suggested that to lose weight at 0.5 pounds a week I don't eat MORE than 1200 cal (I have always heard that eating less than that sendy our bodies into starvation mode). Added to that, I work out 5 - 6 times a week with a VERY intense crosstrainer and weights programme that burns just under or over 500 cal normally.
My question is, should I still be NETTING at around 1200. Currently, I am not. For example, if I do the workout, I get 500 cal extra, bringing the total recommended to 1700, and I eat around 1600. In the reports section of the site it then says my net amount is less than 1200.
Is this a problem? I have to admit I feel utterly exhausted after a week of this, and couldnt get out of bed 2 days ago (I'm not ill, just tired) and had to take the day off. I'm wondering if my body is in starvation mode, and if the idea is to NET 1200 cal, but not less because of starvatio mode (?).

Any help appreciated! Still not totally au fait with this stuff!

TavistockToad

what is your height/weight/goal weight?

JakeBrownVB

Nah you aint in starvation mode. Your calories are fine but you are kinda killing it at the gym. Unless you are looking to get crazy cardio endurance for a specific reason (marathon or whatever), I would ease of the cardio for sure. Spend the rest of the time doing proper weight lifting, none of these girly thigh machines only etc, women so easily neglect weights, which I can completely understand as most gyms can be quite intimmidating.

fruitninja93

from experience, I'd say that you need to eat back your exercise calories. The problem with 1200 cal is that, while it might work for a while, you'll soon get stuck and slow your metabolism right down. Then its a horrible journey of trying to up your kcals without putting the weight back on just to get through the plateau. So if you're doing high intensity exercise, try starting at something like 1800 a day, do that for a week, assess the scale, assess how you feel, and go from there. If you are feeling exhausted then you're probably not eating enough for the exercise that you're doing and in the long run that will be bad for both health and weight loss. Most of the calories you burn in a day are from your metabolism ticking over and keeping you alive rather than working out, so whatever you do don't muck up your metabolism by not eating enough! Its trial and error, really, but the more you can eat while losing (even if that's losing slowly) the better! Good luck

castadiva

Yes, speaking generically, unless you're absolutely tiny, the idea is to net no less than 1200. It's highly unlikely you're in starvation after only a week, but I'm not surprised you're knackered after the week you describe! Could you scale back the crosstrainer to 3 or 4 times a week and do some gentler exercise on the inbetween days? Most physical trainers/physiotherapists recommend a day off between high-intensity workouts to allow the body to recover.

SenseiCole

I am 1200 a day, exercise most days, I eat back those cal.

MsAnnThropy

Thanks guys for the info. Travistock - Im actually just trying to lose 2kg then maintain after that, as my bodyweight it quite low at 50kg and 5"6 (I'd just gained the 2kg very quickly, despite not changing my habits and I worried the gain wouldnt stop). I actually dont mind if I don't lose the 2kg (as Ive been told it can be dangerous to be at that eight anyway) but I want to stop the gaining, because it wasnt musce (all my measurements crept up too, so its fat). Im just a bit confused as to why the suggested calorie intake is so low as I actually ate more than that for the entire year during which I was thinner.
Fruitninja - thanks for that advice. My phisiotherapist did say a similar thing as while back and Id forotten, so the timely reminder is great. From the nutrition perspective though, It's just a lot easier to exercise more so I can eat more than 1200 calories - it just isnt enough calories for me to enjoy food! I think cos of my current size (which is fairly small) it estimated that low. Just to test it I tried out plugging in different data - that I wanted to lose 2kg a week (just to see what it would do!) and it still wouldnt go lower than 1200, so its definately the kind of lower limit we all talked about, but having to aim at it exactly as a goal for maintenance just seems a little limiting.
Jake - thanks for the tip about weights. It's a good idea. One question there though - does using weights necessarily mean you look more muscular, or is that a pre-conception that using weights always has that effect?. Im actually happy with how I looked just minus the 2kg of fat and wouldnt be very keen to look more bulky.

thanks again for the info all!

Fozzi43

You WON'T get bulky doing weights.

TavistockToad

if you only have 2kg to lose, you shouldnt have such a large deficit. you should be working on losing 0.5lbs per week at the most. which if you set MFP this way it is unlikely to be 1200 cals.

you may well look more muscular or 'toned' by doing weights as you are getting rid of bodyfat, so the muscle shows more.

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

Your BMI puts you in the underweight category. You did say 50 kg (110 lbs) at 5'6" right? That makes your BMI 17.5.

If you're unhappy with the way you look I'd recommend that you start lifting, eat at maintenance or even a slight surplus and gain some muscle.

nikilis

starvation mode

woah... thats like, woah.

nikilis

Your BMI puts you in the underweight category. You did say 50 kg (110 lbs) at 5'6" right? That makes your BMI 17.5.

If you're unhappy with the way you look I'd recommend that you start lifting, eat at maintenance or even a slight surplus and gain some muscle.

17.5... woah... thats like, low.