Am I missing something here?
Replies
-
I'm one of "those" people who struggles to get in 1200 cals. I'm not fooling myself or exaggerating either.
Not everyone on MFP is here because they ate themselves into oblivion. I don't think that is a fair assumption. MFP is NOT a diet website. It is a health and fitness website.0 -
Wow everyone OK no need to take it all personally though, yes. It was just a question.
I guess it comes down to differing visions of healthy and a lifestyle change for life - I don't see cutting out bread, nuts, healthy oils, dairy and all those nutritious and calorie dense foods as either healthy NOR maintainable for life. nor do I see living on low-fat no fat low-cal no-fun foods healthy or a good lifestyle choice (my goodness one would need a chemistry degree to even start deciphering the ingredients listings on some of those things - and they're passed off as "healthy"? Scary) as our bodies need fats and the nutrients that it carries.
I see I am not missing anything, I just have a different vision of healthy.
0 -
I wish there was a like button...cause i'd like the *kitten* out of this post lolI'm one of "those" people who struggles to get in 1200 cals. I'm not fooling myself or exaggerating either.
Not everyone on MFP is here because they ate themselves into oblivion. I don't think that is a fair assumption. MFP is NOT a diet website. It is a health and fitness website.
another thing is it all depends on what u cut out...for example...I cut out alot ALOT of carbs...i eat protien and good fats and mostly fresh produce carbs....i just find that my body feels better without the carb over load and i tend to not stop eating them ... therefore that is a huge chunk of cals taken out0 -
its not fair to call those life styles unhealthy???....i am perfectly healthy ...and dont eat many carbs maybe 40 a day and all from fresh produce mostly...so that right there is just not fair to say...and it may not be a complete lifestyle change but once a person reaches their goals they can choose to slowly incorprate them back into the diet....Wow everyone OK no need to take it all personally though, yes. It was just a question.
I guess it comes down to differing visions of healthy and a lifestyle change for life - I don't see cutting out bread, nuts, healthy oils, dairy and all those nutritious and calorie dense foods as either healthy NOR maintainable for life. nor do I see living on low-fat no fat low-cal no-fun foods healthy or a good lifestyle choice (my goodness one would need a chemistry degree to even start deciphering the ingredients listings on some of those things - and they're passed off as "healthy"? Scary) as our bodies need fats and the nutrients that it carries.
I see I am not missing anything, I just have a different vision of healthy.0 -
I totally agree here.....I have 600 calories I still need to eat and I am not hungry...Today for breakfast I ate a slice of wheat bread, a slice of turkey ham and one egg....for lunch I ate grilled chicken breast and spinach.....snack an orange....and fo r dinner I was tired from working out so I ate a bowl of cheerios - multi grain. I will eat another peice of fruit and drink water, but other than that I'm not hungry. Another think I noticed....before I used to eat just to be eating or because it was routine. Now I eat because I am hungry and when I am full I stop eating. In the beginning I was complaining like hell about 1200 calories....now I am trying to eat them....I think it's because it's hard to eat "good" and get that many calories. If you are not eating bread (like I am), a sandwich is out, so the calorie count goes way down without it. We eat alot, but not calorie dense food, so it's hard to be able to eat enough to reach our calorie goal because we are full.
At least that's the way it is with me.0 -
I didn't say it was UN healthy, its just not MY vision of healthy, which is what I was "missing". I guess I have a more holistic viewpoint.0
-
I wish there was a like button...cause i'd like the *kitten* out of this post lol
I agree! A "like" button would be awesome! Wow, how Facebook has changed the way we think nowadays. LOL
~~~~ Sorry for my interruption ~~~~0 -
I don't feel like I am lying to myself about being full. There are times that even when i am full I take a few more bites because I know my body needs the calories and I don't want to jip myself. But in all honestly I do eat balanced meals. I don't eat a lot of bread because I don't like deli meat and I don't like cheese but if I want bread its not like i feel that I can't have it. I don't deprive myself of things that I want, I just eat in moderation and try to find low fat options. I am a huge chocoholic and I compensate for that by eating chocolate pudding and fat free chocolate ice cream. My goal is to be healthy. For once I am including veggies in my meals, grilling chicken, and just saying no to things I don't need anymore (such as salt). I realized that food is good when you don't load it with crap like butter, salt, or oil. I also learned about portion control. For instance, for a bowl of cereal I would normally pour cereal to the top and eat away. Now I am learning to measure out the cereal (1 cup of total whole grain) and by the end, I am full! So all of that extra cereal I was eating before wasn't going to cure my hunger but really because thats how much I thought I was hungry for. Thats really all I have got. I'm trying to not be sensitive about the subject (which sometimes its hard to be) and in no way do I feel like that I am being unhealthy with my eating. Being healthy is my whole goal and it's not something I want to compromise.0
-
If you are eating 1200 cals than you are certainly here to lose weight, and that inherently IS a diet. After some careful observation since I've joined WAY back in June 2008, I find that people who have this 1200 calorie issue are generally newer folks...usually 1-3 month members, that was me back then too, I had trouble eating the 1200. There's something to be said about really embracing the 1200 cals, I know for me I was obsessed with how much of everything I ate, every little calorie....then reality sets in. More failures occur over time, no one can be perfect 100% in this process, and sometimes it just gets easier to cheat after you've been logging for a long time...things begin to slide. I'm not here to discourage anyone, but I think over time reality sets in and 1200 isn't hard to achieve. If it were easy then everyone would eat a healthy number of calories to maintain, gain, or lose. But isn't eating too many cals what brought most of us here in the first place? And then there's the folks who have quite a bit of weight to lose who swear that they always under ate and they were never eating enough so that's why they are overweight, well, I don't have much to say about that because I've seen anorexics who are always in starvation mode who don't look obese...ah well, it's all a process, a journey that I think mfp has helped me learn a ton about what I was doing right and wrong!0
-
I didn't say it was UN healthy, its just not MY vision of healthy, which is what I was "missing". I guess I have a more holistic viewpoint.
I have to say I do agree with you..**ducking the daggers**
. People have this 1200...a number..stitched in the heads, whether it be the right or wrong number for them people can become fixated on it. I'm curious to know if you went a few days without "counting" calories and went based solely on what your body is telling you, letting your body tell you you're hungry, and not eating cayse you have exercise calories, or you need to use them up....do you think that number would be higher or lower? this is based if course on the lifestyle changes you've already applied to your lives. I'm quite fascinated more by the 1200 calorie gig...cause everyone and their grandma fits this number on MFP, if I ate that, i'd die...seriously, I would be famished, probably would eat one of my young ones...but to each their own, not saying it's right or wrong, you do what's in your best interest and what's working for you. 0 -
I think metabolic systems have alot to do with it, too. I am a fast oxidizer (my system processes my food quickly) and I can fill up on veggies but I am not satisfied and can't stay full on them for very long. I am soon looking for something more to eat. I really need heavier types of food at meals, which means that my calories are "eaten up" pretty quickly. My husband (a slow oxidizer), on the other hand, can go all day without eating until dinner time and still not overeat. I simply cannot be satisfied on 1200 calories a day for more than a day or two and so I will do workouts that burn the most calories possible so I can eat more. I can't identify with the folks who are filled up quickly and stay full on small amounts of food. I'm relatively petite ( about 5'1") and have only about 15 lbs. of leftover baby weight to lose but I really struggle to stay within my calorie allowance.
This is in no way meant to be snarky, but how does one know whether or not they are a fast or slow oxidizer? Does a doctor tell you this based on blood sugar? Really curious as I've never heard of this term...just googled fast oxidizer, there are diets that support your oxidation...interesting, will research more...0 -
I have to say, I was being a bit sensitive earlier. I realize now that there was a more diplomatic way to say was I was feeling. I'm just as guilty of not thinking things through as I accused you guys of being in my earlier post.. >.<
*sigh*
Sorry.
0 -
Of course not everybody is here for that reason but let's be real - the majority of people on here are trying to lose weight and are overweight because of over eating. I think it's a pretty fair assumption. But obviously there are people that are not in that situation.I'm one of "those" people who struggles to get in 1200 cals. I'm not fooling myself or exaggerating either.
Not everyone on MFP is here because they ate themselves into oblivion. I don't think that is a fair assumption. MFP is NOT a diet website. It is a health and fitness website.0 -
I think what is hard to understand about people not being able to reach 1200 calories is that 1200 calories is really not that much. The thing is - I think the trap is that we are trying to cut calories to lose weight and most people (myself included) go overboard - low cal this, low fat that, "diet" stuff. But it's not the best for you. I am totally guilty of this. There are things that you can swap out that are so similar that will give you those calories without making you feel more full so it is hard to see how it would be so difficult. Regular string cheese instead of light string cheese. Regular anything instead of lite/light and that will add some calories. Avocados, nuts, peanut butter, cheese, olive oil - there are tons of little things that you can add that you won't necessarily notice but will bump up your calories.
It's a process though - I have been at a place where I can't seem to fit 1200 calories and now am at a place where I think it's amazing that I can eat SO much food and feel like I'm eating all the time (little meals every few hours) and still come in on my caloric goal.
ETA: It's also nice to rarely feel hungry, but also rarely feel full - a nice balance of just feeling good.0 -
I didn't say it was UN healthy, its just not MY vision of healthy, which is what I was "missing". I guess I have a more holistic viewpoint.
I have to say I do agree with you..**ducking the daggers** . People have this 1200...a number..stitched in the heads, whether it be the right or wrong number for them people can become fixated on it.
You know, this does bring an interesting point up... I don't see scads of people posting a calorie goal of 1870, which is what I have. The question is... why do SO MANY people have a 1200 calorie goal? The simple matter of the fact is that MFP artificially cuts off calorie goals at 1200. Why do so many people have 1200 calorie goals? I would say that 99.9% of those have calculated goals below 1200.
So, there are two possibilities... either MFP is overly conservative and needlessly cuts off calorie goals at 1200, or too many people are setting their weight loss goals too aggressively. I wonder what people think about those choices?0 -
All I can say is I really envy those who feel full on just 1200 calories a day. I try to keep to 1200 to 1400 a day (and it's all healthy food -- shrimp, crab, salmon, turkey breast, yogurt, fruits and vegetables), but I'm pretty much always hungry. And I'm not losing weight despite working out. Frustrating!0
-
I didn't say it was UN healthy, its just not MY vision of healthy, which is what I was "missing". I guess I have a more holistic viewpoint.
I have to say I do agree with you..**ducking the daggers** . People have this 1200...a number..stitched in the heads, whether it be the right or wrong number for them people can become fixated on it.
You know, this does bring an interesting point up... I don't see scads of people posting a calorie goal of 1870, which is what I have. The question is... why do SO MANY people have a 1200 calorie goal? The simple matter of the fact is that MFP artificially cuts off calorie goals at 1200. Why do so many people have 1200 calorie goals? I would say that 99.9% of those have calculated goals below 1200.
So, there are two possibilities... either MFP is overly conservative and needlessly cuts off calorie goals at 1200, or too many people are setting their weight loss goals too aggressively. I wonder what people think about those choices?
It might be a bit of both. I'm on the shorter side (5'3) and was already at a healthy weight (just not totally happy with my lack of muscle tone). When I plugged in my numbers and set just a 1-lb/wk goal, MFP gave me a 1200 limit (due to the cut off I wasn't even able to try for a 2lb/wk goal. But I knew that would be unrealistic anyway). I said "no way". I've lost weight before on more and I know myself and I know that that wasn't going to be enough.
I'm trying to lose the "vanity weight" which is quite a different process than losing an extra 50-100 lbs. When one is already at a healthy weight, the body is more reluctant to give up the fat because the body NEEDS fat to survive. It actually doesn't need much muscle, so it will use muscle for fuel. So, I knew that to lose the last few pounds I would be needing to eat more. Besides, I just don't want to spend hours a day working out to get more exercise calories. So, I set it to lose .5 lb/week and I've actually been losing about twice that.0 -
I think people are being too aggressive/unreastic in their goals, But it DOES cut you off at 1200, regardless.
I've played with my calorie goals a bit lately:
I'm currently on 1930 (1/2lb week, active) without exercise.
But if I ramp it up to 2lb/week it gives me 1200.
(Actually I made a post about this just recently, about having a small loss goal to make it more realistic and whether that was a good idea)
My overall target is 66kg which pus me on a 24.5BMI, so I don't have a lot to loose. I tried to work my loss into a realistic percentage and based my loss/week goal on that. I just didn't see more than that happening per week anyway as I'm not hugely overweight and my body won't be able to drop that much % weigh that fast, iygwim.
Someone with 100+lb to lose can probably realistically expect to aim for 2lb/week, at first, toning it down as they get closer to their goal, but I don't think someone with say 10lb to lose, and/or who is already in a healthy BMI range, can expect the same % loss.0 -
Ditto that! I'm curious about what exactly those people are eating when they say they struggle to eat 1200 calories. My first thought is quality of food. I personally have no problem getting my calories in especially after a big work out.0
-
Why does everyone even assume that everyone else needs 1200 cal anyway??....I was told my a nutritionist that 1000 was sufficient enough for my body type...height & weight....0
-
Why does everyone even assume that everyone else needs 1200 cal anyway??....I was told my a nutritionist that 1000 was sufficient enough for my body type...height & weight....
Probably for very slight and short people under 1200 is probably OK (just for loss, right? I don't see it being sufficient for maintaining so I figure you mean for loss), but I guess there has to be some sort of cut-off figure on this system so that people who shouldn't be below that, aren't given it.0 -
I didn't say it was UN healthy, its just not MY vision of healthy, which is what I was "missing". I guess I have a more holistic viewpoint.
I have to say I do agree with you..**ducking the daggers** . People have this 1200...a number..stitched in the heads, whether it be the right or wrong number for them people can become fixated on it.
You know, this does bring an interesting point up... I don't see scads of people posting a calorie goal of 1870, which is what I have. The question is... why do SO MANY people have a 1200 calorie goal? The simple matter of the fact is that MFP artificially cuts off calorie goals at 1200. Why do so many people have 1200 calorie goals? I would say that 99.9% of those have calculated goals below 1200.
So, there are two possibilities... either MFP is overly conservative and needlessly cuts off calorie goals at 1200, or too many people are setting their weight loss goals too aggressively. I wonder what people think about those choices?
I was wondering about the 1200 calorie thing as well. I'm 5'2" ,190lbs ,sedentary with 3 15 min workouts a week and chose the lose 1lb a week option. My allotted calories for this is 1410.0 -
michnthecity, there are several very good programs to support the metabolic typing therory. The Metabolic Typing Diet by William Wolcott, in my opinion, is the most thorough in explaination with a pretty detailed test and the book is free at the library. Dr. Jordan Rubin touches on it in his book, Perfect Diet America, Dr. Joseph Mercola has a program thru his website that is very detailed with support available, but expensive and even Jillian Michaels provides the test in her latest book--of which the title now escapes my memory, but it is geared toward those who just want to lose the those last stubborn 20 lbs or less--that I also was able to get from my local library.0
-
I can eat the hell out of 1200 calories and more :bigsmile:
Me too. My dairy alone adds 200 cals. I also try to get 3-4 servings of fruits and veggies. If I'm low, a spoon of peanut butter fills it in nicely. You can eat them if you choose to. I think a lot of people are afraid to.0 -
michnthecity, there are several very good programs to support the metabolic typing therory. The Metabolic Typing Diet by William Wolcott, in my opinion, is the most thorough in explaination with a pretty detailed test and the book is free at the library. Dr. Jordan Rubin touches on it in his book, Perfect Diet America, Dr. Joseph Mercola has a program thru his website that is very detailed with support available, but expensive and even Jillian Michaels provides the test in her latest book--of which the title now escapes my memory, but it is geared toward those who just want to lose the those last stubborn 20 lbs or less--that I also was able to get from my local library.
Here is a link to this type of testing - it explains then give you the test - then explains proteins, carbs set up. :flowerforyou:0 -
http://caloriecount.about.com/metabolic-types-eating-ft93247
:blushing: Forgot to put the link... sorry.0 -
I do think it's probably newer members that have that concept of eating 1000 cals or less when you're on a diet. I was like that myself. I ate 900 cals a day and didn't exercise at all when I lost my baby weight (a long time ago). Being here has totally changed the way I think about food and exercise. If you're filling up on healthy calories you can eat more of them. It's all about changing the way you think about food. If you're working out hard, you actually need them. I do anyway. Running makes my blood sugar dip way down if I don't feed myself properly. I would be too exhausted to function if I didn't eat healthy carbs and proteins as well as my dairy, veggies, and fruits.
Anyway, everyone has their own opinions about what works best for them. The way I'm eating will work for me even when I hit my goal.0 -
Why does everyone even assume that everyone else needs 1200 cal anyway??....I was told my a nutritionist that 1000 was sufficient enough for my body type...height & weight....
1200 is not some magical number... instead it is a threshold based upon an average. As the word average implies, some people will be above and some below the number (BMI). Yet, like you said, 1200 seems to carry with it a mythical power.
I am not an expert, but from what I have read there are three ways of determining your daily caloric expenditure. The first two are laboratory proceedures, involving putting you in a chamber to measure your heat expenditure or putting on a mask that measures your oxygen/co2 exchange. The third method is a calculation using formulas. MFP and I would bet your nutritionist use the latter method. There are a few variants of the calculations, but unless you are obese, the calculations should be somewhat close.
Unfortunately, I can't get the numbers to work out that 1000 calories is "sufficient" for anyone not on an extreme deficit diet (which should be monitored by a doctor). Here is what the numbers say for a 1000 calorie diet (along with adjustments).
Age : 30 (younger --- calories go up, older --- calories go down)
Height: 4' 10" (taller --- calories go up, shorter --- calories go down)
Weight: 106 (heavier --- calories go up, lighter --- calories go down)
Weight loss goal: 1 lb per week (less weight --- calories go up, more weight --- calories go down)
BMI: 22.2 (just over midpoint in healthy band)
You might be in a band that suggests 1000 calories is healthy, I'm just not seeing the band.0 -
michnthecity, there are several very good programs to support the metabolic typing therory. The Metabolic Typing Diet by William Wolcott, in my opinion, is the most thorough in explaination with a pretty detailed test and the book is free at the library. Dr. Jordan Rubin touches on it in his book, Perfect Diet America, Dr. Joseph Mercola has a program thru his website that is very detailed with support available, but expensive and even Jillian Michaels provides the test in her latest book--of which the title now escapes my memory, but it is geared toward those who just want to lose the those last stubborn 20 lbs or less--that I also was able to get from my local library.
Here is a link to this type of testing - it explains then give you the test - then explains proteins, carbs set up. :flowerforyou:
Thanks for the link... I scanned the article and took the test. I will have to look at it in more detail later... but it looks interesting.0 -
I find that on the days I don't get all of my calories is when I don't start with a good healthy breakfast. I'm then left with way too many calories for the evening. I've always had a fear of not having enough calories left for dinner and late snack so I tend to back load my calories instead of a nice even intake all day. I know eating late in the day is the wrong way to go...so I have to work on this.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 433 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions