1200 is not difficult.

1…89101214

Replies

  • Luvs_Chocolate
    Luvs_Chocolate Posts: 34 Member
    AMEN SISTA!!!
    OP, I completely agree with you. 1200 isnt hard for me to do either. Just depends on what I choose to eat as there isnt much wiggle room. But I often eat 1200 and never feel hungry. And i don't think your post was offensive or condescending at all. Not sure why people get so upset by people who eat 1200. I dont care how many calories people eat. Do what works for you. The end.
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    >>Strength gains are not muscle gains. Muscle appearing "firmer" is not muscle gains either. That's the muscle tissue retaining >>more water for repair.

    So if I am able to squat or curl more weight it does not mean that I gained muscle?

    Yes, that is correct. Strength gain does not necessarily mean muscle gain. Hoping someone will chime in who can explain it much better than me.


    http://www.livestrong.com/article/426093-does-building-strength-necessarily-mean-building-muscle-mass/


    In a nutshell... ^^^this.

    Adequate protein is also essential.
  • raebels
    raebels Posts: 45 Member
    I agree. It isn't impossible at all. Sure, when I started it wasn't exactly easy but I adjusted and like you, I sometimes hit a point where I don't even hit 1200 and I'm not starving myself by all means! :smile:

    Keep doing what you're doing because it seems to be working! Great job!
  • WalkingGirl1985
    WalkingGirl1985 Posts: 2,046 Member
    If i could go down to 1200, and be alright and feel good at that base I would..but I have felt sticking to that was just hard. I was always hungry, not fueled enough for workouts, it just didn't work for me..,most days and this is my NET I would avg between 1600-2000 calories a day. I'm 5"6 198lbs and 2000 calories at most would still be under what I concider "losing range".
  • RychelleD
    RychelleD Posts: 103 Member
    I agree, if you plan it out well, it totally works. I dont lose if i go higher. Higher may work for some but 1200 is making a difference for me. WTG on your weight loss
  • marieautumn
    marieautumn Posts: 928 Member
    I agree. It isn't impossible at all. Sure, when I started it wasn't exactly easy but I adjusted and like you, I sometimes hit a point where I don't even hit 1200 and I'm not starving myself by all means! :smile:

    Keep doing what you're doing because it seems to be working! Great job!
    hi :flowerforyou:
  • rachelelizabeth88
    rachelelizabeth88 Posts: 73 Member
    I'm a vegetarian but eat mostly vegan and 1200 isn't hard for me at all.. most of my meals are vegetables which have like no calories, so I always try to OD on them lol I don't really like being at 1200 but it happens. I'm also very short/petite, so whatever works for your body :)
  • joeysox
    joeysox Posts: 195 Member
    everybody is different, ive lost 174pounds i first started on 1800cals then when the weight slowed to half a pound losses 1600, now im on 1400 and it works well for me its enough because i home cook absolutely everything (with odd exceptions if at my inlaws etc) so its easier to make it work but i can see how some people will struggle. today i did way more exercise than usual and burned almost what i ate and i feel drained and hungry now. guess it depends on your routine and everyones body works diff xxx
  • ArroganceInStep
    ArroganceInStep Posts: 6,239 Member
    Nobody is different.

    You are not special, unique, or a delicate snowflake.

    Personal preferences, ailments, and lifestyles might lend themselves better to one paradigm or another. But the same basic principles apply to everyone:

    Eat less than you burn and you will lose weight.
    Eat too much less than you burn and a greater portion of that weight lost will be from LBM and can result in health issues
    Eating adequate protein supports LBM retention on a deficit and growth on a surplus
    Resistance training supports LBM retention on a deficit and growth on a surplus
    Weight loss/gain and LBM loss/gain are not linear processes
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    To use your example, that 400 lb woman is probably somewhere in the 40-60% BF (body fat) range, which means her LEAN MASS is approximately 160-240 lbs.

    Interesting idea,

    Obese: 194 lbs, FFM 111 lbs, 42 %fat
    Morbidly obese: 239 lbs, FFM 122 lbs, 48% fat
    from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12641641

    I'm not seeing 40% BF at 400 lbs somehow
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    To use your example, that 400 lb woman is probably somewhere in the 40-60% BF (body fat) range, which means her LEAN MASS is approximately 160-240 lbs.

    Interesting idea,

    Obese: 194 lbs, FFM 111 lbs, 42 %fat
    Morbidly obese: 239 lbs, FFM 122 lbs, 48% fat
    from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12641641

    I'm not seeing 40% BF at 400 lbs somehow

    The calculators I have used said that I started at 68% body fat (263 lbs) and now 56% body fat (225 lbs). That *does* seem rather high, but how should I now? :ohwell:

    The same calculator showed me at 89 pounds LBM in the beginning and now shows 96 pounds LBM. I always hope that it's really higher. There's no way to know for sure, I guess.
  • LISALOSBORNE
    LISALOSBORNE Posts: 4
    I read all 14 pages of this thread.

    The 1200 calories and me being 5'2" will probably work for a while.
    At 1200 calories may be starving my husband to death. He'll be happy to know, I'm increasing his calorie intake.

    :D
  • ArroganceInStep
    ArroganceInStep Posts: 6,239 Member
    The calculators I have used said that I started at 68% body fat (263 lbs) and now 56% body fat (225 lbs). That *does* seem rather high, but how should I now? :ohwell:

    The same calculator showed me at 89 pounds LBM in the beginning and now shows 96 pounds LBM. I always hope that it's really higher. There's no way to know for sure, I guess.

    Calculators like that are NOTORIOUSLY bad for folks at extreme ends of the spectrum (short, tall, heavy, light). I weigh 300 lbs. BMI doesn't have a shot in hell of accurately assessing my actual BF%. Don't sweat it.
  • Thisprincesswearsrunningshoes
    Thisprincesswearsrunningshoes Posts: 51
    I think 1200 is reasonable. I have a way to test my muscle mass and body fat whenever I want and that helps to make sure I am not shorting myself on calories.. I am not a tall person and I feel more than happy with 1200 calories and my doctor said that most people who are on the shorter side like me, I am five foot and one half inch can do okay with it as long as they are not doing hard core training.
  • servilia
    servilia Posts: 3,452 Member
    When I was into losing (before pregnancy), 1200 worked fine for me. That was 1200 net, so if I exercised I ate more. It wasn't that hard and I wasn't starving at all.
  • BiscuitsNDavy
    BiscuitsNDavy Posts: 212 Member
    Some may hate me for it, but generally, if you're a petite female, 1200 is perfectly fine. 10-11 calories per POUND of body weight for sedentary individuals is a healthy amount. Granted, this is of course such a diet has sufficient EFAs, micronutrients, and protein. 1200 calories of just fats/carbs and no fiber/micros/protein IS unhealthy.
  • nikilis
    nikilis Posts: 2,305 Member
    128622_v1.jpg

    Winston Churchill is not impressed.
  • justbecause2014
    justbecause2014 Posts: 371 Member
    I was excpecting this.

    1200 is not difficult...said no one...ever.

    I'm leaving now
  • BookterAE12
    BookterAE12 Posts: 82 Member
    I try to pre-plan what I am going to eat the day before. 1200 calories is tough. I'm either 100 calories over or like 60 under. Any thoughts or suggestions on a great meal or day of meals/snacks?
  • mommyweighless
    mommyweighless Posts: 192 Member
    I ate 1200 calories for months, and started at 221 pounds, and I felt 'full' too.

    Then suddenly I wasn't losing anymore, and my family was complaining how cranky I was, and how saggy I looked.

    Went to the doctor and most of the weight I lost was fat, and muscle.

    I had to start strength training to rebuild what my body had eaten to fuel itself.

    I now eat almost 1800 calories a day and I lose weight steadily.

    I have a *kitten* ton more energy, I am not longer cranky, and I look fit...not skinny.
  • blues4miles
    blues4miles Posts: 1,481 Member
    Since OP keeps pointing out that we're all special snowflakes, and what works for some people, won't work for everyone...

    I can only assume the whole point of this thread was to bow down to her awesomeness that "1200 is not difficult"

    I ran outta gold stars so I hope this will do:

    orson-welles-clapping.gif
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    Some may hate me for it, but generally, if you're a petite female, 1200 is perfectly fine. 10-11 calories per POUND of body weight for sedentary individuals is a healthy amount. Granted, this is of course such a diet has sufficient EFAs, micronutrients, and protein. 1200 calories of just fats/carbs and no fiber/micros/protein IS unhealthy.

    I agree. There are certain people for whom 1200 is not too few.
  • chrisdavey
    chrisdavey Posts: 9,834 Member
    Some may hate me for it, but generally, if you're a petite female, 1200 is perfectly fine. 10-11 calories per POUND of body weight for sedentary individuals is a healthy amount. Granted, this is of course such a diet has sufficient EFAs, micronutrients, and protein. 1200 calories of just fats/carbs and no fiber/micros/protein IS unhealthy.

    well said.

    This can sum up this whole thread.
  • nz_deevaa
    nz_deevaa Posts: 12,209 Member
    Some may hate me for it, but generally, if you're a petite female, 1200 is perfectly fine. 10-11 calories per POUND of body weight for sedentary individuals is a healthy amount. Granted, this is of course such a diet has sufficient EFAs, micronutrients, and protein. 1200 calories of just fats/carbs and no fiber/micros/protein IS unhealthy.

    well said.

    This can sum up this whole thread.

    But the OP isn't a petite female. She's 220lbs (ish) or 100kgs.
  • zanaedreamwalker
    zanaedreamwalker Posts: 6
    Great job. It is seeming difficult to me. I'm sure that the more I learn, the easier it will get, though. I am 57-year-old, with firbromyalgia and Type 2 diabetes, so it will take adjusting at a slower pace, I think. You are an inspiration!
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    Nobody is different.

    You are not special, unique, or a delicate snowflake.

    Personal preferences, ailments, and lifestyles might lend themselves better to one paradigm or another. But the same basic principles apply to everyone:

    Eat less than you burn and you will lose weight.
    Eat too much less than you burn and a greater portion of that weight lost will be from LBM and can result in health issues
    Eating adequate protein supports LBM retention on a deficit and growth on a surplus
    Resistance training supports LBM retention on a deficit and growth on a surplus
    Weight loss/gain and LBM loss/gain are not linear processes

    So everyone has the same BMR and TDEE??

    I can guarantee that a 60 year old woman needs fewer calories than a 25 year old man. Yes, we are different. I am not a unique snowflake, for there are many snowflakes just like me. But I am a different snowflake than you!
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    Some may hate me for it, but generally, if you're a petite female, 1200 is perfectly fine. 10-11 calories per POUND of body weight for sedentary individuals is a healthy amount. Granted, this is of course such a diet has sufficient EFAs, micronutrients, and protein. 1200 calories of just fats/carbs and no fiber/micros/protein IS unhealthy.

    well said.

    This can sum up this whole thread.

    But the OP isn't a petite female. She's 220lbs (ish) or 100kgs.

    She is also 45. Her metabolism is a lot lower than a 20 year old.
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,654 Member
    Some may hate me for it, but generally, if you're a petite female, 1200 is perfectly fine. 10-11 calories per POUND of body weight for sedentary individuals is a healthy amount. Granted, this is of course such a diet has sufficient EFAs, micronutrients, and protein. 1200 calories of just fats/carbs and no fiber/micros/protein IS unhealthy.

    well said.

    This can sum up this whole thread.

    Does it make me a dirty old woman if I say you have awesome abs?!
  • angelatolomeo
    angelatolomeo Posts: 9
    1200 for me is over what I normally do. I thought I had to stay above 1,000 when I started dieting until I came on here. When I track my foods it always says I'm under and that I should be eating 1600 (YEAH RIGHT!) I always try and eat 1000 or less.
  • Apeck87
    Apeck87 Posts: 68 Member
    Some may hate me for it, but generally, if you're a petite female, 1200 is perfectly fine. 10-11 calories per POUND of body weight for sedentary individuals is a healthy amount. Granted, this is of course such a diet has sufficient EFAs, micronutrients, and protein. 1200 calories of just fats/carbs and no fiber/micros/protein IS unhealthy.

    well said.

    This can sum up this whole thread.

    But the OP isn't a petite female. She's 220lbs (ish) or 100kgs.

    She is also 45. Her metabolism is a lot lower than a 20 year old.

    I looked at her diary, she doesnt exercise.. If you dont exercise its easier to eat less, I eat about 1250-1400 calories a day. 1200 is not doable if you are exercisely intensly.

Categories