1,200 Calories no matter what?
Options
Replies
-
starvation mode is a myth IMO, as long as you are getting some amount of food.0
-
If it is not about the number on the scale but about the way you look I would recommend you, that you fuel your body properly and hit the weights hard. That will give you the ripped look you are after. Dieting will not do that and neither will long hours of cardio.
I am getting tired of the 1200 kcal recommendation everyone seems to get on here. Everybody is different and everybody has different numbers. It takes some tie and tweaking to find the correct numbers for everybody.
But I definitely think that both if you should be eating more. Because if you hit a plateau, what are you going to do? Lower your calories even more? Or increase your workouts? You have to find a way that is sustainable for you, and not only for the time losing weight, but also later, if you want to keep it off.0 -
You should focus on your net calories. Be sure you eat at least 1200 net calories. This number can be seen on the home page of this website. It's the number furthest to the right.
If the calories are under 1200 then her body could go into starvation mode. You should eat back your calories!!!
If you have any questions let me know.
that net calorie point is a good one. i've just checked my nets for the past couple weeks and i'm under 1200 nearly every day. i now have a new way to tackle this!0 -
I am guessing you have your weight loss set to 2 lb a week. I would recommend a less aggressive goal. Think of it as a lifestyle change, not a diet, and if you lose weight more slowly, you are more likely to keep it off . Plus, it means you get to eat more, including the occasional treat.0
-
How did you adjust the carb/protein/fat split. Is it possible to do it in the program or just in your own records?
My trainer stated 1200 calories a day and 45 g of protien is way too Low for someone that works out 3 plus days a week.
Can I adjust my protein number so when I key in what I eat it reads my intake from minus 90 vs from minus 45? I love this app but it needs tweeking. Thanks.
My home ===> goals ===> change goals ===> check "custom" hit continue ===> set carb/fat/protein percentages.0 -
Honestly, I think MFP sets 1,200 as the warning level because it would rather give a US government recommendation for everyone rather than individual warnings.
If you need the explanation for how things work in detail, you should absolutely check out In Place of a Road Map 2.0. Here's the link: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
Also, you'll here a lot of people on here who say that starvation mode is a myth. I don't feel like getting into the whole argument about why it's not, even at high body fat %, but I will say that eating too little means a) you are hungry for no good reason, b) you will burn more lean muscle mass, meaning your metabolism will slow down and you are more likely to regain, and c) you will burn more lean muscle mass, meaning that your results will be less aesthetically pleasing.0 -
Honestly, I think MFP sets 1,200 as the warning level because it would rather give a US government recommendation for everyone rather than individual warnings.
If you need the explanation for how things work in detail, you should absolutely check out In Place of a Road Map 2.0. Here's the link: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
Also, you'll here a lot of people on here who say that starvation mode is a myth. I don't feel like getting into the whole argument about why it's not, even at high body fat %, but I will say that eating too little means a) you are hungry for no good reason, b) you will burn more lean muscle mass, meaning your metabolism will slow down and you are more likely to regain, and c) you will burn more lean muscle mass, meaning that your results will be less aesthetically pleasing.
This, pretty much.
Also at 6 ft + and 200 lbs your calories at 1400 are likely too low, especially if yu are reaching days when you get the dreaded 1200 message. I'm 6 ft about 190 lbs and eat 2000 to lose (+ exercise) and 2600 to maintain. Since you are close to your goal weight, you should think about doing some resistance training and increase to 1600-1800 - you'll lose slower but it won't be muscle loss.
And I'm maybe 20 years older than you (old fart category --> slower metabolism)0 -
I am guessing you have your weight loss set to 2 lb a week. I would recommend a less aggressive goal. Think of it as a lifestyle change, not a diet, and if you lose weight more slowly, you are more likely to keep it off . Plus, it means you get to eat more, including the occasional treat.
Agree 100% with this!
Setting too fast a weight loss target is where all these issues of eating 1200 calories begin. Unless you have loads of weight to lose it is very hard to lose 2lbs of FAT. 2lbs of weight - yes, 2lbs of fat - no.
My advice would be to reset your goal to the recommended 1lb a week and focus on health, nutrition, fitness and not just weight loss.0 -
-
Honestly, I think MFP sets 1,200 as the warning level because it would rather give a US government recommendation for everyone rather than individual warnings.
If you need the explanation for how things work in detail, you should absolutely check out In Place of a Road Map 2.0. Here's the link: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
Also, you'll here a lot of people on here who say that starvation mode is a myth. I don't feel like getting into the whole argument about why it's not, even at high body fat %, but I will say that eating too little means a) you are hungry for no good reason, b) you will burn more lean muscle mass, meaning your metabolism will slow down and you are more likely to regain, and c) you will burn more lean muscle mass, meaning that your results will be less aesthetically pleasing.
^^^^^ this x 10000000000000000000 -
Which has more protein: broccoli or steak? The answer may surprise you. It's broccoli.
what??0 -
Which has more protein: broccoli or steak? The answer may surprise you. It's broccoli.
El-Oh-El
No.
calorie per calorie broccoli wins
edit depending on the cut of meat and if you subtract the dietary fiber
edit 2
Used caloriecount.com
Broccoli
fat 3g
carbs 46g
fiber 23g
protein 26
total Cals 315 Cals if u count fiber
223 Cals if u dont count any fiber
250 Cals given by label
Sirlone
fat 14.9g
protein 26.9g
total Cals 250 Cals by label
241 Cals if u add it up manually0 -
I am guessing you have your weight loss set to 2 lb a week. I would recommend a less aggressive goal. Think of it as a lifestyle change, not a diet, and if you lose weight more slowly, you are more likely to keep it off . Plus, it means you get to eat more, including the occasional treat.
Why do you guess this? I didn't see him mention his fiance's starting weight at all in this thread. For a starting weight that isn't too close to the goal weight, even setting your weight loss goal at 0.6 pounds a week will still give you 1200 calories for a woman.0 -
I am guessing you have your weight loss set to 2 lb a week. I would recommend a less aggressive goal. Think of it as a lifestyle change, not a diet, and if you lose weight more slowly, you are more likely to keep it off . Plus, it means you get to eat more, including the occasional treat.
Why do you guess this? I didn't see him mention his fiance's starting weight at all in this thread. For a starting weight that isn't too close to the goal weight, even setting your weight loss goal at 0.6 pounds a week will still give you 1200 calories for a woman.
1200 is really low for anyone. That is a commonly known flaw of MFP is that the calories is gives most people is not sufficient. I am a perfect example of someone who ate 1200 calories as recommend by MFP, ate back my calories, swore it was working because I dropped 50 lbs really quickly. Then I stalled, started gaining back slowly and am starting all over using the calorie goal obtained using the TDEE/BMR method.
There are women who are 5 feet tall, within 5 lbs of a healthy weight and still eat 1500-2000 calories or more and lose successfully. Frankly, MFP's settings are setting many people up for a crash diet failure.0 -
This is a good point, why does MFP set it at 1200?
Im not going into the whole starvation mode thing BUT my friend is a shortie, very petit but with a great figure. I know most days she eats way less than 1200 but shes not starving. Quite the opposite, shes helathy happy and never gets sick (ive had a cold since December, its ridiculous) her body doenst need any more, its used to what she gives it i suppose. On the days she works out she probably eats more than 1200.0 -
Which has more protein: broccoli or steak? The answer may surprise you. It's broccoli.
El-Oh-El
No.
Yes0 -
- The reason I run her account for her is because I do the grocery shopping, the cooking, and the meal prep. Her job requires her to be away for sometimes 12 hours a day. So rather than having her eat fast food (and because I have much more free time than she does), I said I would be willing to make homecooked meals for her to take to work.
Within that, because I was the one planning every day, it made sense for me to run her MFP account in tandem with mine. Also, she's really not one for having to stress and deal with calorie-counting (even as easy as MFP makes it), so we struck a deal. I control what she eats, and she breaks me on the stairmaster each day :P
What an awesome way to support each other. Good luck on your journey together!0 -
I am guessing you have your weight loss set to 2 lb a week. I would recommend a less aggressive goal. Think of it as a lifestyle change, not a diet, and if you lose weight more slowly, you are more likely to keep it off . Plus, it means you get to eat more, including the occasional treat.
Why do you guess this? I didn't see him mention his fiance's starting weight at all in this thread. For a starting weight that isn't too close to the goal weight, even setting your weight loss goal at 0.6 pounds a week will still give you 1200 calories for a woman.
1200 is really low for anyone. That is a commonly known flaw of MFP is that the calories is gives most people is not sufficient. I am a perfect example of someone who ate 1200 calories as recommend by MFP, ate back my calories, swore it was working because I dropped 50 lbs really quickly. Then I stalled, started gaining back slowly and am starting all over using the calorie goal obtained using the TDEE/BMR method.
There are women who are 5 feet tall, within 5 lbs of a healthy weight and still eat 1500-2000 calories or more and lose successfully. Frankly, MFP's settings are setting many people up for a crash diet failure.
It seems to have worked fine for me. If I wind up gaining it back then maybe I'll admit that it's flawed. Until then, I'm going with it being fine. I lost 25 pounds with that method. I never stalled. I only really had 25 pounds to lose. It took me 9 months to lose the weight, so I wouldn't really consider that a crash diet in the first place.0 -
I think MFP already factors in a safe deficit, with your BMR + calorie needs for basic activities of living (whether you're sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, whatever you filled out when figuring your calorie needs), then gives you a calorie goal enough below that to give you a loss of about half a pound a week, which is safe, in fact quite conservative. If you eat back the calories you burn through exercise, you are still taking in "net" calories at the set level. For example, 1500 calories, you exercise 500 worth. If you didn't eat that back you'd have 1000 net calories, too low. Eat it back and you have 1500. That's the way I understand their math. You can change your calorie allowances via the "settings" button if you think you need more than they're giving you.
this0 -
Which has more protein: broccoli or steak? The answer may surprise you. It's broccoli.
El-Oh-El
No.
calorie per calorie broccoli wins
edit depending on the cut of meat and if you subtract the dietary fiber
edit 2
Used caloriecount.com
Broccoli
fat 3g
carbs 46g
fiber 23g
protein 26
total Cals 315 Cals if u count fiber
223 Cals if u dont count any fiber
250 Cals given by label
Sirlone
fat 14.9g
protein 26.9g
total Cals 250 Cals by label
241 Cals if u add it up manually
For what sort of volume?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions