why is 1200 cal/day too low?
Options
Replies
-
simply because 1200 is far below your bmr, unless you are a midget
Well I must be a midget...because my TDEE - 20% = 1017 calories a day. Everyone is different. This works for me.0 -
i'm back to 1200 + exercise cals. unfortunately the 'eat more to lose more' doesn't work for me. the principles are sound - its just my will power goes to f*** when i have all those calories - i invariably end up eating more than the 1800 or 2000 that i should
but if you only have a wee bit to lose and you find it works for you, i'd give upping your calories a go - its all trial and error and seeing what works for your body (and mind, in my case).0 -
I did 1200 a day for quite a while with great results. I personally don't see why everybody gets all up in arms about it.
thank you! I rarely net above that and I'm fine. Just got lab results back from the doctor and she is amazed by not only my weight loss, toning but also my off the scale lab results. Kind of ironic -- went to school with her...and she's my doctor and asking me advice on how I am getting so healthy.
I am learning to eat when I am hungry..not when somebody tells me it's time to or eating because MFP tells me that I have like 400 more to eat so I don't starve myself. ( eye rolling)0 -
I think there are certain situations where 1200 cals is not necessarily a "bad" goal. If you are elderly or immobile you don't need a bunch of calories. The older you are, the less efficient your metabolism is. And if you are bed or chair bound, you probably don't need to eat much either (again, that also depends on age and how sedentary you truly are).
Also, severely obese people have plenty of nutrient stores in their fat cells, so they can take a big whack to their calorie intake without much damage to their bodies. And for them, the "cost" of stressing the body from such a calorie restriction is balanced by the "benefit" of quickly reducing the overall stress to the body from being so severely overweight.
Finally, some people claim that they eat severely restricted diets a couple days a week and less restricted diets other days (the 5/2 plan and similar diets) and that works for them. I'm not a doctor so i can't comment on how healthy it is to be constantly be putting your body on a roller-coaster ride of feast and famine, but overall their calorie intake over the course of a week averages out to more than 1200 cals/day, and they are losing weight.
So unless you consider yourself elderly, severely obese, or an invalid, reducing your intake to 1200 cals is probably not necessary. Some may argue whether it's healthy or not, or "doable" over the long term, but you have to ask yourself; is it necessary? based on just what you told us, probably not. But a doctor is much better able to advise you than any of us! :-)0 -
Assuming you are at an average height - you must of had the willpower of GOD to hold off the hunger!
I currently consume 1650 calories (up to 3000 calories) if i go to work and exercise back at home and still losing weight very steadily - any less and i would be crazy!
Deep respect though! :drinker:0 -
we are beginning to understand a little bit more about the physiology of metabolism.Turns out that 2 people of the same height,weight,age and gender may need very different calorie intakes to maintain their weight even if they have identical lifestyles. We all respond differently to exercise too which is a bit depressing if you turn out to be a minimal responder. I guess it's finding out what works for each individual that is the real challenge. 1200 calories is a whopper with cheese and a portion of fries! My feeling is that if your guts are rumbling for a large proportion of the day, then you aren't eating enough. If your hair, skin, teeth and nails are healthy then you're probably eating OK. For me it's a couple of pieces of fruit a day, a bowl of cereal and not too many chocolates, cakes and fried food + a good plateful of dinner at the day!0
-
Assuming you are at an average height - you must of had the willpower of GOD to hold off the hunger!
I currently consume 1650 calories (up to 3000 calories) if i go to work and exercise back at home and still losing weight very steadily - any less and i would be crazy!
Deep respect though! :drinker:
You are male. I'm pretty sure that the calorie requirements for men is at least 300 calories more than women. I did not have the willpower of god to eat 1,200 calories. I'm not sure how many I was eating before to gain weight, but it was extremely easy to lower my calories to 1,200 when I cut out a lot of the bad stuff and added more protein and vegetables. It's was too easy, so now I'm close to underweight.0 -
You can save yourself a lot of trouble if you want to. Just figure out how many calories you will need at your goal weight and eat that. Then when you get there, you won't have to change anything.0
-
It just is. You will be starving all the time, and it's really too little food for a human to live on over the long term, or for the rest of their lives. Most women can easily eat 1600 cals a day and still lose weight. Many can eat more than that and still lose. It's just a lame thing MFP does to women. Plus, most women put that they want to lose 2 lbs per week instead of a more reasonable 1 lb per week.
If you really want to know, go here: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-12
You can thank me later, and Dan, of course.
It just is? I don't think this woman could lose weight at 1600 unless she is doing some really heavy exercise and not eating back. She is already not overweight. Many women have no problem sticking to around 1200 cals, especially if they are eating back exercise calories.
OP- keep looking around the boards. Eat more to lose more? Ask yourself, Has that worked for you in the past?
I eat 2300 cals a day, my TDEE based on LIGHT exercise is 1885.
I lost weight on 1885 and I'm losing weight on 2300.
congratulations, you're not me nor are you the o.p. making a blanket statement that it won't work for anyone is ridiculous.
You sound hungry.
My point is that it's important to calculate your numbers based on your own situation. VERY few women have a BMR below or at 1200 calories.
If she works out her numbers using the links posted to the roadmap (which is what I did) she will have a better idea of what to eat based on HER particular level of activity and physical stats (height/weight/bf%).
I ate at the staple 1200 cals MFP gave me, loss was slow and painful. I upped my cals gradually and finally started to use TDEE-20% as a goal about a month ago and my weight loss has never gone easier. I have plenty of energy to work out and go to work and enjoy my day, I'm rarely hungry and I am still losing.
If the OP would care to run her numbers she may be pleasantly surprised to find she can eat a little more and still lose.
And in terms of body comp. activity level and weight/height, yes we do all vary, but the general mathematics and rules of thermodynamics apply to everyone. Barring medical complications, eating over BMR but under TDEE will equal weight loss.
OP doesn't have a lot to lose, so it might take a while, I'm cursed with still having 30lbs to go til my final goal, which means my TDEE is naturally going to be a lot higher.
Better?
Calling me "hungry" or "hangry" is pretty annoying. No I'm not overly hungry on a 1,200 calorie diet. FOR ME, it worked very well and I got to my goal. If 1,200 calories is bad for almost everyone, then either I'm the exception OR that's just wrong and 1,200 calories is fine. I found the roadmap to not be all that useful. Setting it to 1,200 and then either eating or not eating exercise calories back is basically the same idea. Does using random CAPITAL LETTERS get my point across better?0 -
1200 calories per day isn't too low for everyone. You'll need to experiment and figure out what works for you. The online calculators can help but remember they are based on averages and if you do follow the TDEE-20% calculation don't be afraid to cut calories if doesn't work so well for you. Try it for 2-3 months then lower by 100-200 cals per day if you aren't losing.0
-
I don't believe it is too low. ADA association says the average American needs 1500 to maintain health. So If losing weight is your goal you have to decrease calories, as well as jump start your metabolism by excersising. Dance, walk the dog, water walk, garden what ever it takes. I am someone that loves daytime tv and it showed. I started taping my shows and skipping the commercials later that day after going to the Y. The combination of calorie awareness, increased activity, and taping the shows that were making me sedimentary gave me a 3 pound weight loss this week. If you eat less than 1200 my fittness pal will allert you that your body is in danger of going into starvation mode. There you will release hormones that will make you store everything as fat. It's like having your own trainer right in your kitchen....If you're eating fresh fruits and vegetables and more fish and chicken I've found out my $200 a month food budget doesn't even suffer. If you need 1300 a day just increase your excersise what ever it is and like magic the weight you want to get rid of will drop off. Good luck
Sorry, but anyone reading this line of logic, please disregard it. Sorry. But this stuff isn't about what you think, or what I think or anyone else thinks. But that is what leads to confusion and why we have these questions. It's not about opinion. The body works in definite ways. And no, we're not all different. Again, sorry. Don't know any other way to say it. If you were telling her to eat 500 calories a day people would attack you vigorously. I see your statement the same way, but I'll hold off on attacking and just stick with being super blunt. You're wrong. And the ADA....well never mind. But raise your hand if you're "AVERAGE".... or want to base your health on other people....? It's NOT about exercise people. Undereating and overexercising is THE reason why people are confused. These statements lead to overexercising, underrecovery, and metabolic slowdown/damage, then a plateau/stall, which is usually incorrectly followed up by lower calories and more exercise. It's not about weight loss, it's about health. Ethiopians are very adept at losing weight.0 -
The days I eat more than 1200 it always causes a gain for me. Everyone is different. If I am hungry I eat more but if not I dont bother. I have lost 50 pounds in 13 months so I think that is slow and healthy for me!
0 -
I'm in a good mood today, another fallacy. Tell us how much and what nutrients are stored in fat cells? Another common mistake. People think fat isn't alive and kicking and releasing very important hormones. So starve it to death. Surely this works. Ok go.I think there are certain situations where 1200 cals is not necessarily a "bad" goal. If you are elderly or immobile you don't need a bunch of calories. The older you are, the less efficient your metabolism is. And if you are bed or chair bound, you probably don't need to eat much either (again, that also depends on age and how sedentary you truly are).
Also, severely obese people have plenty of nutrient stores in their fat cells, so they can take a big whack to their calorie intake without much damage to their bodies. And for them, the "cost" of stressing the body from such a calorie restriction is balanced by the "benefit" of quickly reducing the overall stress to the body from being so severely overweight.
Finally, some people claim that they eat severely restricted diets a couple days a week and less restricted diets other days (the 5/2 plan and similar diets) and that works for them. I'm not a doctor so i can't comment on how healthy it is to be constantly be putting your body on a roller-coaster ride of feast and famine, but overall their calorie intake over the course of a week averages out to more than 1200 cals/day, and they are losing weight.
So unless you consider yourself elderly, severely obese, or an invalid, reducing your intake to 1200 cals is probably not necessary. Some may argue whether it's healthy or not, or "doable" over the long term, but you have to ask yourself; is it necessary? based on just what you told us, probably not. But a doctor is much better able to advise you than any of us! :-)0 -
To the OP:
1. Take your self more seriously. go see a doctor because,(besides other reasons)...
2. Looking at your pic, your weight might not be a real issue to be concerned about. I don't know when that pic was taken though.
3. This might lead to you doing things that might not be in your best interest just to meet a goal that could be totally unrealistic,unhealthy, or arbitrary.
4. You might be more satisfied with a different ratio of muscle to change your aesthetics and weight goals.
5. MFP isn't a diety. It's estimating. From what I see, it gets those estimates severely wrong on many occasions. Like BMI. There's only so much you can do with simple estimates given by people on this site. It's great for tracking but it's not a dietary consultant or trainer.
6. You could live perfectly fine the rest of your life on 1200 calories a day, especially if it was packed with real food, which it won't be. The problem is that you will also probably lower your thyroid and other hormonal functions to a metabolic rate that would pretty much SUCK for lack of better words, and over time, we would call this metabolic damage. You want to lose fat at the highest caloric intake possible. This gives you more metabolic room to adjust and cheat later.
7. Again, to remind people, every part of your body burns calories! Not just your muscles when they move. Your eyelids, your eyeballs, your retina, your iris....your heart of course, your skin, your cuticles, your follicles, your spleen, your brain, your tendons. When sustenance gets low, your body will slow it's metabolism to protect you in the idea of living longer. Simply put, as it seems I am the only person who reminds people of this. If you were lost in the woods with only 1200 calories, would you want your metabolism to slow down? If you needed to run for 2 hours a day while you found your way home(ahem, ahem, cough cough, to the over-exercisers out there) would you want your metabolism to slow down or speed up? Would you want to burn more fat or less fat? Simple. The body doesn't know you have a fridge and cupboard fully stocked, and it won't any time soon.
8. Anecdotes should be taken lightly if you're serious. Sure many people have done just fine on 1200 calories. But you're not them, you don't have the same expenditure they do, you don't have the same genes they do(to an extent, but you get the point).
The reason why you and so many others can't be 100% white knuckle tight gripped on your intake and goals is because everyone thinks they're a damn trainer or dietician and want to talk about opinions when the thyroid could care less about what someone thinks. You liver has no opinion. Your fat cells are not enemies.
9. Chances are if you're exercising you need to increase your intake and increase your protein. You'll get a better thermic effect of food, you'll stabilize your metabolism better and probably feel better.
10. Remember women are designed to hold more fat. You're burdened with the direct responsibility of populating the planet which takes a little bit more back up energy requirements, as it should!0 -
It's not about weight loss, it's about health. Ethiopians are very adept at losing weight.
totally agree. can you lose weight at 1200? Sure. It will most likely be muscle as well as fat. Loss might happen faster at lower calories, but it usually isn't as healthy and you are less likely to keep it off. If your goal is just to get to your goal, fine. If you want to be healthy, fit, and set yourself up to keep the weight off, eat more. Get your protein. This is not a race.0 -
I generally ate between 1200-1300 for three and a half months and I lost 56 pounds. I had a ""cheat day"" every other week or so. I rarely exercised and when I did I didn't eat my calories back. I felt fine at that amount. Now, after taking a break from logging while pregnant, I am finding that range harder to stick to. I really think it depends on the person and what their eating. For some people it's sustainable and for some it isn't. If you're hungry all the time and have no energy you'll need to eat more. But if you're losing at 1200 and you feel good, stick with it until it's not working. There isn't one answer for every body, in my opinion.0
-
It is not too low if you are eating the right foods. Try eating mostly a high nutrient plant-based diet with lean protein. You can eat your fill of vegetables, making sure htat you are getting enough protein and fats in limited amounts. It has worked well for me, and I thought "there is no way I can eat ony 1200 calories". Now I have to make sure that I am eating my full 1200 because I often feel satisfied with only 1100. Go to Peer Trainer and join the Point of no Return Program (PONR). I have lost 34 pounds so far, and am working on my last 18. The food you eat is more important than the calories. Good luck!!0
-
....
9. Chances are if you're exercising you need to increase your intake and increase your protein. You'll get a better thermic effect of food, you'll stabilize your metabolism better and probably feel better.
10. Remember women are designed to hold more fat. You're burdened with the direct responsibility of populating the planet which takes a little bit more back up energy requirements, as it should!0 -
Everyone is not different.The days I eat more than 1200 it always causes a gain for me. Everyone is different. If I am hungry I eat more but if not I dont bother. I have lost 50 pounds in 13 months so I think that is slow and healthy for me!
You might gain weight because you NEED to. It might be your metabolism's last dieing horah of an attempt to protect itself! At 1200 calories???? You're planning on eating 1200 calories a day the rest of your life? Every chance your body gets it's gonna want to store! How many calories a day do you think your heart alone burns?0 -
My ilk, those passionate about the truth, have our work cut out for us. We have to battle an industry and culture that is bred from birth. Especially with females. That's not sexist, it's a truth, and we know it.
A large part of the problem is our general fear of meat. So we under eat and under eat protein, leaving no "thermic effect of food" which results in the need for low calories to lose weight. This is because it takes 8 to 10 times more energy to process and deal with protein than it does fat and carbs. In other words there's no internal "work" required to process fat and carbs. This is not good or bad. It just is. You'd be dead without fats, they aren't bad. You would NOT be dead without carbs, but in todays society you'd probably wish you were.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions