Is 1200 calories too low?

Options
nerdatworklike123
nerdatworklike123 Posts: 5 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I'm 19, 5'6 and weight 134 pounds. I want to lose about 7-10 pounds by a month or so. If I go on a 1200 calorie/day diet is this unhealthy?
How many calories and carbs should I actually be having?
And also, I barely can exercise right now since I go to school full time.

Is this a reasonable goal?

Your help would be extremely appreciated!

Replies

  • sofielein
    sofielein Posts: 539 Member
    Options
    I think for you it is, you are young, not really overweight... I think you need to go for a slower thing
  • pichiPurinsesu
    pichiPurinsesu Posts: 776 Member
    Options
    too low. your BMR is 1458kcal - 1200 is below this number therefore (from what i have been picking up on here) this is bad.

    also, since your bmi is within a healthy range, it's a bit of a leap trying to loose 7-10lb in a month
  • Tachyonic
    Tachyonic Posts: 64 Member
    Options
    Another user just posted a really similar question, so here's my answer from that thread:

    In order to lose 10 pounds in a month, you need to cut/burn an extra 8,750 calories per week from your resting caloric burn (the amount of calories you'd burn if you ate just enough food for your body to burn it and nothing more each day--called Basal Metabolic Rate or BMR). This means you have to burn an extra 1,250 calories a day.

    Depending on your height & weight (and level of activity), your resting weight will vary.

    Here is a basic BMR calculator: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/

    With your height & weight, your BMR is probably around 1500 calories. If you cut 200-300 calories from your diet (NEVER go under 1,200 calories of food per day, otherwise your body could go into starvation mode, which is bad for your health and for weight loss), you would need to burn an extra 1,000 to 900 calories out of exercise each day. This is pretty intense, but you could do it by making small changes in your daily activity (walking/biking to school instead of driving, using the stairs instead of the elevator, taking a walk on your lunch break instead of sitting after your meal), and by going to the gym for some intense exercise for about an hour. If you work hard, it's possible to burn 600 or 700 calories from an hour at the gym. You'll be exhausted, but it will make a big dent.

    However, just exercise and cutting calories won't quite do it. Make sure that you are eating a well-balanced diet, and not putting too many processed foods in your system. Drink a lot of water, too.

    *I'm not a health professional in any way, by the way! These are just some facts that I've learned along the way. I hope that they help! If you aren't able to lose the whole 10 pounds in a month, don't worry. It takes a LOT of work to do that, and I'm sure that you can make a significant dent in a month, 7 or 8 pounds would probably be extremely reasonable.



    I'm also in school full time right now, but there are small ways that you can incorporate exercise into your routine. Walk or bike to school instead of driving, take the stairs and not the elevator, use part of your lunch break to go on a walk or jog, and maybe start doing the 30 Day Shred (Google search it if you don't know what it is), which takes about 30 minutes per day... something you can do before you go to bed or when you wake up in the morning, if you just wake up a little earlier!
  • lunnay
    lunnay Posts: 66 Member
    Options
    Your BMI is 21.6, at 124 pounds your BMI would be 20. Are you sure you want to aim for a lower BMI, or you just want a body that looks more 'fit'? I ask because a more 'toned' look (with more muscle mass!) is usually what's desired, and a BMI of 21.6 seems about right for it.

    Your BMR is around 1450. Eating below this is usually not recommended. 1200 calories a day would be under this, but you're probably not going to suffer from it if you do it for a few days or even a few weeks. That said, it'd be recommended you eat at least your BMR for a slower but healthier/more sustainable loss.
    I don't know your activity level, but assuming lightly active, you burn 2000 calories a day. Eating at 1450 would give you a 550 deficit a day = around a pound a week loss.
    Eating at 1200 would give you a 800 deficit a day, 1.6 pounds a week.

    In both cases, you should eat low sodium (to get rid of all the water you might be retaining), high protein (30%), enough fat (20-30%), rest carbs. Eat plenty of vegetables, not only are they filling but they're nutritious and great for you.

    7-10 pounds in a month isn't reasonable. Half a pound to a pound a week might be, but you only have 7-10 pounds to lose.
  • babydiego87
    babydiego87 Posts: 905 Member
    Options
    i lost 7lbs under a month on 1200 so it can be done. 1200 is not that low, if you eat the right things. try it for a few days and see if it works for you. remember to exercise and eat your calories back
  • meshashesha2012
    meshashesha2012 Posts: 8,326 Member
    Options
    too low. dont eat below your BMR which is the amount your body would need to sustain itself and its organs and vital life functions if you were in a coma. there's no reason to eat below that amount on purpose
  • melaniecheeks
    melaniecheeks Posts: 6,349 Member
    Options
    Too much in a short space of time given your current stats. yes it might be possible for someone with much more to lose, but, to repeat what is so obvious everyone has said it, you are already at a healthy weight. Your body will put up a huge struggle to lose more.

    Why that goal weight and date?
  • babydiego87
    babydiego87 Posts: 905 Member
    Options
    here we go again....
  • squinz
    squinz Posts: 136
    Options
    Without all the science part of it, for me 1200 is too low. It feels too restrictive for me and I personally don't like to eat solely diet foods (but I still eat healthily). I would rather eat more calories, lose weight slower and incorporate more exercise in to my life to allow me to eat what I like.
  • Tatiyanya
    Tatiyanya Posts: 255 Member
    Options
    I think i sometimes net at 1200 calories, but its on high burn days.
    You got really not much to loose so 1200 just from food and no workouts whatsoever...
    I'm not sure is that healthy or not, i guess depends what you eat, healthy whole foods or **** containing 1200 kcals ,but Id get snappy as heck if i had to ony eat 1200 kcal.

    Id srsly suggest like 20-30 min workouts a day, because your problem might not be scale weight but high body fat. Nothing will get rid of that better than excercise. Be it short and intensive if you lack in time.

    Dont put yourself through too much misery for a number tbh. Otherwise the weight will come back on :)
  • chellebublz
    chellebublz Posts: 568 Member
    Options
    I've lost 18 lbs in 2 months, so around 9 lbs a month. But I have alot of weight to lose, I hear that it is harder and slower to lose when you are near a healthy weight. So I wouldn't expect you to be able to safely lose that amount in a month. I agree with 30DS, you might not lose alot of pounds but it will trim inches off of you and build muscle which to me is more preferable than losing pounds.
  • chellebublz
    chellebublz Posts: 568 Member
    Options
    Also, there is nothing wrong with NETTING 1200 calories, but again, that's NET. That means you eat back your exercise calories if you are working out at all. If you are eating 1200 calories total, and burning 400 calories a day, then your only netting 800 and at a low weight, that's not a good thing.
  • flynnfinn
    flynnfinn Posts: 209 Member
    Options
    i don't know if 1200 is too low for you...try it and see how you feel. but losing 10lbs in a month considering you are already at a healthy weight is going to be tough. it just won't come off as fast as it would on someone that is actually overweight.

    i am 6lbs away from my goal (i'm 5'6" 126lbs) and the weight is coming off at a rate of about 0.25lbs a week. yes, you read that right. 0.25lbs...basically 1/4th of a lb. at this rate, i'm losing about 1lb a month and it might take me 6 months to get to goal. however, i'd rather lose it slowly and maintain the weight loss than rush through it and yoyo back and forth. been there done that.
  • babydiego87
    babydiego87 Posts: 905 Member
    Options
    Also, there is nothing wrong with NETTING 1200 calories, but again, that's NET. That means you eat back your exercise calories if you are working out at all. If you are eating 1200 calories total, and burning 400 calories a day, then your only netting 800 and at a low weight, that's not a good thing.
    I agree. net 1200 and it should be OK
  • ladyraven68
    ladyraven68 Posts: 2,003 Member
    Options
    I'm 19, 5'6 and weight 134 pounds. I want to lose about 7-10 pounds by a month or so. If I go on a 1200 calorie/day diet is this unhealthy?
    How many calories and carbs should I actually be having?
    And also, I barely can exercise right now since I go to school full time.

    Is this a reasonable goal?

    Your help would be extremely appreciated!

    I suppose it depends on how you chose that 1200 target, and if you know what your actually daily calorie burn is. (TDEE or Maintenence)

    If your TDEE is very low, then 1200 may be OK,
    the average female mainatins on around 2000 calories, and therefore they would lose 1lb a week on 1500 calories.
    an active person would have a TDEE of closer to 2500 so could lose 1lb a week on 2000 calories, and a defcit of 50% would be very bad.

    It's all trial and error, so do some reasearch on your TDEE, pick a sensible defict, give it a try for a few weeks, if you don't get the results you want, adjust up or down, rinse and repeat.
  • jasonpclement
    jasonpclement Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    One thing here thats not mentioned. These posts always come up, and then someone comes in and says they lost a billion pounds in a month, on super restrictive calories etc...

    1 pound does not equal 3500 calories. 1 pound of fat equals 3500 calories. If you put yourself in a 1000 calorie deficit for two days, and your body burned pure musle, and no fat, you'd probably lose a little over two pounds... This is just an extreme theoretical example... But on these super restrictive diets, you'll lose weight, and even appear a little smaller... But in the end your body composition (body fat percentage) is actually worse!

    When you are super restrictive your body will still burn some fat, but it will burn even more muscle. If you diet slowly, you can retain most of your muscle and burn primarily fat. The scale moves slower, but in the end your body composition is a harder, leaner you.
  • babydiego87
    babydiego87 Posts: 905 Member
    Options
    One thing here thats not mentioned. These posts always come up, and then someone comes in and says they lost a billion pounds in a month, on super restrictive calories etc...

    1 pound does not equal 3500 calories. 1 pound of fat equals 3500 calories. If you put yourself in a 1000 calorie deficit for two days, and your body burned pure musle, and no fat, you'd probably lose a little over two pounds... This is just an extreme theoretical example... But on these super restrictive diets, you'll lose weight, and even appear a little smaller... But in the end your body composition (body fat percentage) is actually worse!

    When you are super restrictive your body will still burn some fat, but it will burn even more muscle. If you diet slowly, you can retain most of your muscle and burn primarily fat. The scale moves slower, but in the end your body composition is a harder, leaner you.
    Except 1200 net is not super restrictive.
  • ladyraven68
    ladyraven68 Posts: 2,003 Member
    Options
    One thing here thats not mentioned. These posts always come up, and then someone comes in and says they lost a billion pounds in a month, on super restrictive calories etc...

    1 pound does not equal 3500 calories. 1 pound of fat equals 3500 calories. If you put yourself in a 1000 calorie deficit for two days, and your body burned pure musle, and no fat, you'd probably lose a little over two pounds... This is just an extreme theoretical example... But on these super restrictive diets, you'll lose weight, and even appear a little smaller... But in the end your body composition (body fat percentage) is actually worse!

    When you are super restrictive your body will still burn some fat, but it will burn even more muscle. If you diet slowly, you can retain most of your muscle and burn primarily fat. The scale moves slower, but in the end your body composition is a harder, leaner you.

    Actually, for pure muscle, you'd lose almost 6lbs

    from http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-energy-balance-equation.html

    "create a 3,500 cal/week deficit and you should lose one pound of fat, right? Again, wrong.

    There is a built in assumption in the above that turns out to not be necessarily correct but also throws a wrench into expectations about the energy balance equation. That assumption is that 100% fat is being lost when a deficit is created. Now, if you diet correctly (e.g. the way I describe in my books), this is a pretty good assumption but it’s not universally true. Often people also lose muscle and connective tissue on a diet.

    And the issue is that muscle and connective tissue doesn’t provide as much energy to the body as a pound of fat. Rather than 3,500 calories to break down a pound of fat, a pound of muscle provides about 600 calories to the body when it’s broken down for energy.

    Let me put this in mathematical terms, to show you how the identical 3,500 calorie/week deficit can yield drastically different changes in body mass depending on what percentage of tissue you’re losing. I’m going to use the extremes of 100% fat, 50/50 fat and muscle, and 100% muscle.


    Condition Energy Yield Total Weight Lost
    100% Fat 3500 cal/lb 1 pound
    50%Fat/50% Muscle 2050 cal/lb 1.7 pounds
    100% Muscle 600 cal/lb 5.8 pounds

    See what’s going on? The assumption of one pound per week (3,500 cal/week deficit) is only valid for the condition where you lose 100% fat. If you lose 50% fat and 50% muscle, you will lose 1.7 pounds in a week for the same 3,500 calorie deficit. Lose 100% muscle (this never happens, mind you, it’s just for illustration) and you lose 5.8 pounds per week.

    I’d note that I suspect this is why many rapid weight loss centers advise against exercise: exercise limits muscle loss on a diet and the simple fact is that you will lose MORE TOTAL WEIGHT faster if you lose muscle.

    Finally, I’d note that most obesity researchers assume a loss for obese individuals of roughly 25% lean body mass and 75% fat which would put the true expected weight loss somewhere between the 1 lb/week and 1.7 pounds per week."

Categories