Still think your 1200 or less diet is a good idea?

THANKS! Now I'm definitely going to eat more. That's always worked GREAT for me in the past.

Please, 30 YO men, tell me again how much I should be eating!

:laugh:

I've been on 1200 calories a day since I started MFP in August and I lost the first 25 pounds very fast, that being said I have been stuck between 150-155 for a month and a half now WITH more exercise and better choices of food. I am positive I am eating too little and plan on going up to 1600- 1800 calories (slowly) even though the thought of eating MORE to lose weight scares the hell out of me.

I was here too...the 1200 calories a day diet (and honestly not knowing any better). I found the link to check out my BMR and TDEE last week, and gave it a try. I was scared to eat more and gain weight. Guess what? I ate at my TDEE minus 20%, and I lost weight this week, even cutting back on my exercise to once this week (I exercised 5 times last week, ate 1200 calories, and gained weight). You do the math. It's working!! I have to get over the feeling guilty for eating a lot. I also helped hubby set up his correct calorie count using BMR and TDEE, and he lost weight too. I'm amazed, and am going to pay attention. This stuff is awesome!!

It works great for me! Maintaining on 1200-1300 for 20 years now. Feel free to add my story to your scrap book.

Yea, I got about one paragraph into that before you lost me.

the following information:
Current Weight:
Height:
Age:
Sex: Male Female

What is your BMR?
Your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate) is an estimate of how many calories you'd burn if you were to do nothing but rest for 24 hours. It represents the minimum amount of energy needed to keep your body functioning, including breathing and keeping your heart beating.
Your BMR does not include the calories you burn from normal daily activities or exercise.
Our calculator uses the Mifflin-St. Jeor equations to estimate your BMR which is believed to be more accurate than the more commonly used Harris-Benedict equation.


Your estimated BMR is: 1,281 calories/day*..... So if I want to lose 1 pound a week, I should eat 1200 calories a day-after exercise -- right?

1200 90% of the time is fine for me. im a vegetarian so i eat lots of fruit and veg which keeps me satiated.

im sorry you have to eat lots to lose weight but care to get over the fact that it works for some people if you do it right? :flowerforyou: ttfn

Why are you sorry that other people get to eat lots of calories? I don't get it. I also don't get what's desirable about only eating 1200 calories a day "if I do it right", when I can eat 1850 calories a day. If I do what right? If I eat just right I'll be able to survive on 1200 cals/day without any bad health effects? Why would I want to when i don't have to?

Sorry, I'm confused.

I'm not sure why you're confused that 1200 calories NET is enough to satisfy people. OK it doesn't satisfy you...but that's you, and I'm sorry I don't care what you put into your body and what you have found works for you.

1200 works for me because I eat good food and chose wisely. I'm still functioning, I'm still healthy. Now give me my special snowflake cookie.

why would anyone only eat (or net) 1200 cals a day when they could eat more and get the same (or even better) results? (which is true for the vast majority of people)

Why are you sorry that I'm not satisfied on 1200 cals/day? I'm not satisfied on 1500 cals/day, incidentally. Why do you see that as something you have to feel sorry for me about?

ok you seem to have an issue with the fact that some people don't want to gorge themselves. i notice your diary isn't open...any reason for that? just what exactly do you eat to get your target?

I don't have any issue with people not wanting to gorge themselves. I don't gorge myself, and if you think that 1850 calories a day is gorging myself, then that suggests to me you don't have a very healthy relationship with food.

My diary is open to friends. I don't use my diary to be accountable to other people, I don't need to be. I maintain my weight without tracking, and only track if I'm doing a bulk or a cut. I do that for me, so I know how much to eat to meet my goals. I'm currently cutting on 1850 cals/day. I may go to 100 cals lower than that, but that's my limit. I only open my diary to friends in case they want to get meal ideas.

im feeling pity because it's insane that actually care this much about what other people are doing.

I don't' care particularly what anyone else is doing, I am, however, giving general advice that could benefit people and enable them to achieve their body composition goals without endangering their health in the process. What I find bizarre is how many people jump to defend their decision to eat only 1200 calories a day and perceive the advice that they could eat more and still lose as an attack rather than as being advice that could benefit them a lot. You can choose to take it or leave it, I don't really care either way, I'm just attempting to understand the mentality of choosing to restrict yourself so much when it's not necessary. So please explain to me, if someone has a choice, as in they can lose weight at 1200 cals a day, or they could lose weight at 1850 cals a day, why on earth would they want to choose to do it at 1200 cals a day?

i'm 5'3" with not a lot to lose, how the hell are you going to tell me that forcing myself to eat crap is going to help me? the reason why i have to lose these 20lbs in the first place is because i didnt know portion control or ate chocolate instead of a piece of fruit. i make 1200 with ease because i eat right and im not hungry at the end of the day.

I'm 5'1" with not a lot to lose, I'm going from 22% body fat to 18-20%. That's not a lot of lbs of body fat. I'm shorter than you and I eat more than 500 cals a day more than you, and I'm still losing fat, I'm also getting stronger and my body fat percentage is going down.

Nowhere did I even come close to telling you to force yourself to eat crap. I'm merely trying to understand why you pity people like me who are eating 1850 cals a day or thereabouts and still managing to lose body fat. Why is it pitiable? Why is it better to be able to exist on 1200 calories a day when you can eat far more and still lose fat, and have a stronger body in the process? If you want actual advice, then yes I would advise running your numbers through a TDEE calculator, and as you have only a little left to lose, I'd advise TDEE - 10% as your deficit, and I'd advise you to lift heavy weights.

BTW the main health benefit to eating more, (since you asked how it would benefit you if you ate more) - this all the more important when you have only a little more to lose - is that it ensures you're only losing fat, and not lean body mass. Loss of lean body mass weakens your muscles and joints and makes your bones less dense, and increases the risk of osteoporosis. The less you have to lose, the more conservative your deficit needs to be in order to prevent this. Failing to pay attention to body composition, especially for the last few lbs, means that you may hit your weight goals, but your body fat percentage stays about the same, and you still have stubborn fat, because a lot of the weight you lost was lean tissue. Lifting heavy weights also helps a lot to conserve lean body mass. That's why there's no way I'm going to go lower than around 1750 cals, if I even go that low at all. There is no way I'm going to eat less than that, because I value the healthy tissue in my body, and want to keep it, and keep my metabolism fast. I want a fast metabolism, strong bones and strong muscles. That requires feeding my body with a sufficient amount of healthy food.

Anyway, the information is there, take it or leave it.

in all fairness though there are many factors to consider some of the people who do 1200 calories are a really petite height. some folks are elderly and don't require so much calories. some are reccomended to eat these calories for medical reasons. unless you really know their situation you really have no place to judge. the journey is about them. posts like these don't help matters. the best thing that will be helpful is to keep your comments to yourself.

Well stated. I am older, less active and have medical issues. I have consulted with my doctors. It is unfair to make generalizations. I wont compare myself to someone in their 20's. Hell, in my 20's , thirties and forties, yes even 50's I look awesome. Then I got sick, then it all changed. It can happen to anyone, so no putting people down. Unfair and based on your opinion.

This is correct, there are a small number of people for whom, due to either being extremely petite or having certain medical issues, 1200 would be the right number of calories.

The problem that I and everyone else has, is that the vast majority of people who eat only 1200 calories a day, are not eating enough and could still lose fat and be more healthy and have a much easier time in the process eating more. The situation currently is that people with no medical issues are following advice presented as general advice, that actually was advice given to people with specific medical needs in a doctor supervised situation. It's pretty much the same as one person saying they're taking heroin to cure a headache, and someone else advising them that taking paracetamol would be much healthier, then the first person replying that their friend was prescribed heroin by their doctor when they were suffering from a serious, very painful medical condition, so it must be safe, and it's okay for them to take it just for a headache.

None of this advice is intended as an attack, it's simply concern for people's health. Those that read this information and choose to ignore it, it's their choice. But there are a lot of people out there who actually don't know this, and so it pays to get the information out there.

It is so frustrating when the 1200 calorie defenders seem to never have open diaries. I just want to see what their macros are like . I appreciate that the petite 1200 calorie woman earlier in the thread did leave her diary open. That was refreshing to see.

I am not defending the 1200 way of life, in fact, I can't seem to always stick to it - however, I thought that it was what I was supposed to be doing since it is what MFP put me at.
If I work out, I try to eat protein before and after. I JUST started working out again so I am sure my calorie intake will go up once I change that info.
It just suc*ks because when I was eating more, I was STUCK for years at 150 and feeling like crap.
I think healthy eating, working out and higher, quality calories maybe are the trick.
My diary is open.. and I am open to advice.

Thanks to the original poster and all commenters that remind people that sometimes eating MORE is what a person needs to do. It seems counter-intuitive, but it really depends on what you eat as well. I started out eating between 1100-1250 calories, but I've been slowly increasing. It has really helped! I had switched to plant based diet (instead of a regular vegetarian). I was eating all the time, but only getting 1200 calories. I was avoiding nuts and oils because that's what you do when you're trying to lose weight, but those foods are important when everything I'm eating is waaaay low in calorie. My diary is open, and I too am open to feedback. I still don't eat anywhere close to -20% of my TDEE, but I am getting closer. I am hoping that by the time that I reach goal that maybe I will be close to TDEE...

I'm not sure how many of you are former Weight Watchers (or current!), but I was just curious how my current diet would stack up to theirs. The minimum daily points for any person currently is 26. On one of my standard days, I consumed 21. That doesn't even include activity points that I could have eating or the 'weekly points'. I eat a TON of fruits and veggies, which Weight Watchers doesn't even bother counting...

The good news for me is that I am almost at my Weight Watchers goal weight, so as a Lifetime member, I'll be able to go and enjoy meetings without paying! Yay! But I will continue to use MFP to log my food because I like it better.

Anyone over 60? Lets see you in a bikini? I looked hot in mine at 40.

OK, that's just mean!

bump

It works great for me! Maintaining on 1200-1300 for 20 years now. Feel free to add my story to your scrap book.

You look great. And healthy. And I predict your offer to be added to the (biased) scrap book will be ignored.

I've seen plenty of posts by people who tried eating more on the advice of other MFPers. They gained weight.

I am over 40 under 5'4 completely sedentary and cannot work out regularly or hard for much of the year thanks to allergy induced asthma. If I eat over 1200 regularly I simply will not lose. Or I'll gain. I would invite one of these champions of the higher calorie diets over to check my plate and scale in order to prove to them the truth of what I say, but that would be creepy.

It works great for me! Maintaining on 1200-1300 for 20 years now. Feel free to add my story to your scrap book.

You look great. And healthy. And I predict your offer to be added to the (biased) scrap book will be ignored.

I've seen plenty of posts by people who tried eating more on the advice of other MFPers. They gained weight.

I am over 40 under 5'4 completely sedentary and cannot work out regularly or hard for much of the year thanks to allergy induced asthma. If I eat over 1200 regularly I simply will not lose. Or I'll gain. I would invite one of these champions of the higher calorie diets over to check my plate and scale in order to prove to them the truth of what I say, but that would be creepy.

you may want to look into this book: "Why Stomach Acid is Good For You" http://www.amazon.com/Why-Stomach-Acid-Good-You/dp/0871319314

Yeah... seems like a random thing to bring up right? Actually turns out, that you can actually significantly decrease allergies, if not eliminate them, by fixing your gut and digestive function. Almost all Americans and Europeans have less than stellar digestive processes due to years and years of eating badly and often taking antacids at the advice of doctors. But there's been a lot of research lately that shows that healthy digestive function can literally cure a ridiculous number of illnesses - even some that seem unrelated to gut function. Turns out, if you're not digesting your food properly, you aren't getting the nutrition you think you are, and it can cause all sorts of issues all over the body - including allergies. Now obviously some things are genetic, and if you've had them your whole life, that may not be related to this, but if not, and they developed later, it might be worth exploring.

Losing weight is great, but figuring out a way to get yourself more active will reap so many more benefits.

Just a suggestion, feel free to ignore.

Anyone over 60? Lets see you in a bikini? I looked hot in mine at 40.

This woman is 75.



(I've got 15 years before I get to 60, but I think she's awesome)

But...

Shepherd said she eats several small meals a day as part of a diet plan she formulated with her trainers. She takes in 1,700 calories a day, mostly comprised of boiled egg whites, chicken, vegetables and a liquid egg white drink. And she is adamant that she does not use performance-enhancing drugs or even supplements beyond vitamin D.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/HealthyLiving/ernestine-shepherd-find-grandma-flab-fab/story?id=11149879

That's actually not a huge amount of calories considering how much she works out.

Shes one in a million. The average woman dosent look like that. It is like saying there should be no fat girls under 60.

It works great for me! Maintaining on 1200-1300 for 20 years now. Feel free to add my story to your scrap book.

You look great. And healthy. And I predict your offer to be added to the (biased) scrap book will be ignored.

I've seen plenty of posts by people who tried eating more on the advice of other MFPers. They gained weight.

I am over 40 under 5'4 completely sedentary and cannot work out regularly or hard for much of the year thanks to allergy induced asthma. If I eat over 1200 regularly I simply will not lose. Or I'll gain. I would invite one of these champions of the higher calorie diets over to check my plate and scale in order to prove to them the truth of what I say, but that would be creepy.

you may want to look into this book: "Why Stomach Acid is Good For You" http://www.amazon.com/Why-Stomach-Acid-Good-You/dp/0871319314

Yeah... seems like a random thing to bring up right? Actually turns out, that you can actually significantly decrease allergies, if not eliminate them, by fixing your gut and digestive function. Almost all Americans and Europeans have less than stellar digestive processes due to years and years of eating badly and often taking antacids at the advice of doctors. But there's been a lot of research lately that shows that healthy digestive function can literally cure a ridiculous number of illnesses - even some that seem unrelated to gut function. Turns out, if you're not digesting your food properly, you aren't getting the nutrition you think you are, and it can cause all sorts of issues all over the body - including allergies. Now obviously some things are genetic, and if you've had them your whole life, that may not be related to this, but if not, and they developed later, it might be worth exploring.

Losing weight is great, but figuring out a way to get yourself more active will reap so many more benefits.

Just a suggestion, feel free to ignore.

Thanks for the info, I'll check it out. I was pretty sad when I realized low carb didn't fix the issue, some people have gotten rid of or reduced their allergies that way, but not me, I'm still wheezing and sick.

Oh, and I have had them my whole life, but never like this. It's gotten much worse over the years.

I can do 1200 for my breakfast.

I got told yesterday that only 900 calories for one meal is "ridiculous." The person didn't respond when I insinuated they must be on 1200ish. :laugh:

Boom!!!!