success stories from 1200 calorie dieters wanted
Options
Replies
-
this
Glad to see these success stories. I've noticed that some ppl on here are "know it alls" or just like to be rude for some reason lol idk but congrats to everyone who has been successful eating 1200 calories a day. Everyone is different and wat may not work for u can work for someone else.0 -
I ate 1200 calories daily, lost 35 lbs in 6 months, dropped 3 sizes and have kept it off for over a year now. It works if you stick to it and make good choices of food and active lifestyle0
-
When I first started using MFP, I think last year summer? I was on a 1200 calories a day diet, and in about 2 1/2 months, I lost 25 pounds and yes I still ate food. (Some people actually thought I was starving). It works I mean if it was not safe, why would MFP even give you the choice on it right? But it could be hard in the beginning if you are not use to eating less calories, but think of it this way, if you cannot keep up with 5 small meals a day, you can give yourself 500 calorie meal three times a day and work off the excess to balance it out. 500 calories makes you full but don't assume just any. Example, a 300 cal. mcchicken is not a good idea, maybe whole wheat bread topped with tuna, low fat cheese etc.
Good Luck!0 -
I'm 6'2 and started off at 285 in late July by logging my food. I ate around 1200 + half exercise calories for many months and it worked great for me. I eat 40/30/30, and rarely eat any bad carbs (junk, processed food, etc.), so 1200 calories of healthy food goes a really long way, especially when 30% comes from protein.
I love the posts from people who think you won't get any responses and now you're up to almost 80. Just shows the 1200 calorie haters that it absolutely DOES work for some people.0 -
If you're only eating 1200 calories and exercising then you are not even getting the 1200 calories. It's common sense. I don't care if you only want to eat 1200, but you NEED to be eating your exercise calories back...
Maybe you do, but everyone's body is different. Some people don't lose if they eat back all their cals, some people lose just fine if they do. Do what works for your body.
If I ate 1200 calories and ran 13 miles (did that last week for a race) I would be at a net of around 150 cals. That would be bad.
Yes....but I am overweight...trying to lose and certainly can't run 13 miles lol. 1200 is pretty basic where I am. On days where I am especially active I sometimes do have to eat more to maintain my energy. Other days I don't.
It all depends on where you are in your "journey".
You're missing my point I think. I net more than 1200 anyway. But say 1200 was my goal on here. There would be a huge difference between eating 1200 + half marathon burn and eating 1200 and not eating half marathon burn. The not eating back version would mean I'd feel really poorly because my body and all the cells in it would be depleted of the energy needed to carry out basic processes for life. If you take the dont eat back principle on a VLCD and you do exercise, you're actually going to be on a VVVLCD. And I have to say, that's what I did when I was suffering from an eating disorder, so it's definitely bad! I guess the difference isn't as noticeable if your exercise is 100 a day or so (though I still would eat it back using that method) but I was trying to illustrate the point. There is a huge difference between eating back and not if you're going with how mfp sets goals. Mfp's in house method already builds in your deficits.0 -
i dont think it is drastic, it is only drastic depending on the amount of calories you were eating before lowering to 1,200.
If someone who ate 3,000-4,000 cals per day went to that it would feel like starvation, however if like myself someone averaged around 1900-2000 cals per day it is not drastic it is just a case of cutting our some unhealthy snacks and replacing them with some fruit and vegies.0 -
I have always been told take the weight you want to be and multiply by 10. I want to be 128 again....so ideal for me is 1280 calories. But going below 1200 can be counter productive because your body thinks it is starving at that point and will slow your metabolism to compensate.
You must TAKE IN 1200.
If your calories burned through exercise is 300, you would not be required to eat more even though it brings your net cals to 900 because....you have already TAKEN IN 1200.
Give or take a couple hundred calories is not going to hurt you.
However....if you are 160 lbs and want to be 120......eating back your calories to bring you back up to TAKING IN 1600 calories is only going to maintain the same weight. 160 X 10 = 1600
SMH.
I guess I ought to be somewhere bt 200-230 lbs. then.
And I'd be gaining 2 pounds per week. Wow. That recommendation is so far off it's unreal.
You guys are so polite it is unreal :yawn:
I have edited that since I wrote it. Hard to finish a thought with these children running around.
I said that's how I understand it. If I'm wrong...enlighten me....teach me. Don't be rude.
USe a TDEE calculator--the 10, 12, 14, etc calorie per pound is just not realistic. I like scooby's workshop.
Mine is around 2000 calories WITHOUT exercise. I stick to around 1200 and if I feel the need to eat more...I do. I'm averaging around 1400 with exercise. ( My burn is average around 800 calories). If I ate 2000 calories I would be so full I'd feel (and look) like a beached whale.
But......that's just me. I'm not everyone....obviously0 -
175lbs
150lbs
Have lost another 15lbs since on 1200 cals a day plus exercise cals am now working on weights to tone up and do not want to get to a lower weight
if anyone can work out the photo links lol!
How long have you kept it off for?
I have been steadily losing 1lb per week and reached my first goal of 140lbs back in November I decided to go to 135lbs and stick at it and just go with toning up. I don`t want to be super abs (never will happen) but I eat 80% clean and have the odd glass of wine and treat, so I am happy and healthy, it works for me x
How much do you eat to maintain 135 lbs
I am 144 lbs now and looking to get to that weight to maintain but was just wondering how much calories do you eat in a day to maintain your weight? 0 -
I reached my goals netting between 1100 and 1200 calories a day. Sometimes I ate all my exercises calories, and sometimes I ate only half of it.
I have been on maintenance for over two years, and I still eat more or less the same way. I am not hungry, starving or cranky, and if I want to eat more during the weekends (rest days), I do it without problems. I keep my carbs under 150 and my protein between 90 and 120 gr/day.
I am 69 years old. 4'11" and my weight fluctuate between 101 and 102lbs. According with several websites my BMR is between 1045 and 1075, so my net is well above those numbers. My TDEE is around 1600, so I am really eating (total) between 10 and 15% below.
No, I am not anorexic, or a "melted candle,"and I am not a prune either. I have small waist but wide hips and I am busty. I do weight training, limited cardio, Pilates, Yoga, Ballet, and some DVD workouts when I want a change in my routine. I have a sluggish thyroid and I am on meds, so I need to keep my weight under control. I know my body and I respect my body, and my doctor is very happy with my weight and lab results.
In my book, the quality of my calories is as important as the quantity. I don’t eat junk, I don’t eat fast food, and I don’t endorse any particular diet regimen, and even on the days that I go over my goals, I am very careful to make my choices as healthy as possible.
Do I want to eat more, can I eat more? NO to both questions! For me this is a long term goal that is very easy to maintain, and my stomach is not happy when I go above my limit. On the other hand, if I need more fuel, my body will tell me and I will oblige
.
Is this a success story? I don’t know just make your own decision. I am happy and that is all that counts.0 -
After a while I felt great on 1200 cals until I started noticing extra hair in the shower and all my nails cracked off and I started noticing I was always cold.0
-
1200 calories will probably produce weight loss in most people.
My questions is why? Why would I eat 1200 calories when I could eat 1900 and still lose weight? I know some people are okay with 1200 calories (by okay, I mean NOT miserable) but I know I wouldn't be. I'm pretty unhappy at 1900 actually...0 -
If you're only eating 1200 calories and exercising then you are not even getting the 1200 calories. It's common sense. I don't care if you only want to eat 1200, but you NEED to be eating your exercise calories back...
Maybe you do, but everyone's body is different. Some people don't lose if they eat back all their cals, some people lose just fine if they do. Do what works for your body.
If I ate 1200 calories and ran 13 miles (did that last week for a race) I would be at a net of around 150 cals. That would be bad.
Yes....but I am overweight...trying to lose and certainly can't run 13 miles lol. 1200 is pretty basic where I am. On days where I am especially active I sometimes do have to eat more to maintain my energy. Other days I don't.
It all depends on where you are in your "journey".
You're missing my point I think. I net more than 1200 anyway. But say 1200 was my goal on here. There would be a huge difference between eating 1200 + half marathon burn and eating 1200 and not eating half marathon burn. The not eating back version would mean I'd feel really poorly because my body and all the cells in it would be depleted of the energy needed to carry out basic processes for life. If you take the dont eat back principle on a VLCD and you do exercise, you're actually going to be on a VVVLCD. And I have to say, that's what I did when I was suffering from an eating disorder, so it's definitely bad! I guess the difference isn't as noticeable if your exercise is 100 a day or so (though I still would eat it back using that method) but I was trying to illustrate the point. There is a huge difference between eating back and not if you're going with how mfp sets goals. Mfp's in house method already builds in your deficits.
I see what you are saying. :happy:
I do find I eat some of them back. But, if I followed my TDEE, I feel that would be too much. I average about 800 cal burned each workout but find I only need to eat back about 200-300 of them.
I apologize if my choice of words led anyone to believe that what I wrote was gospel and you should only eat 1200...or 10 cal per pound.....I was just saying that's the way I've heard it.
I listen to my body more than I pay attention to an equation. If you're hungry you should absolutely eat! Never keep yourself hungry.0 -
. 79 years old, ca.1200 a day, around 300 calories in exercising, allowing me to actually eat around 1500 calories a day. I've been doing this since the beginning of the year and have lost 10 lbs. Slow and steady wins the race. I have around 6-8 more lbs. to reach my goal and am very happy to keep doing what I'm doing.0
-
I reached my goals netting between 1100 and 1200 calories a day. Sometimes I ate all my exercises calories, and sometimes I ate only half of it.
I have been on maintenance for over two years, and I still eat more or less the same way. I am not hungry, starving or cranky, and if I want to eat more during the weekends (rest days), I do it without problems. I keep my carbs under 150 and my protein between 90 and 120 gr/day.
I am 69 years old. 4'11" and my weight fluctuate between 101 and 102lbs. According with several websites my BMR is between 1045 and 1075, so my net is well above those numbers. My TDEE is around 1600, so I am really eating (total) between 10 and 15% below.
No, I am not anorexic, or a "melted candle,"and I am not a prune either. I have small waist but wide hips and I am busty. I do weight training, limited cardio, Pilates, Yoga, Ballet, and some DVD workouts when I want a change in my routine. I have a sluggish thyroid and I am on meds, so I need to keep my weight under control. I know my body and I respect my body, and my doctor is very happy with my weight and lab results.
In my book, the quality of my calories is as important as the quantity. I don’t eat junk, I don’t eat fast food, and I don’t endorse any particular diet regimen, and even on the days that I go over my goals, I am very careful to make my choices as healthy as possible.
Do I want to eat more, can I eat more? NO to both questions! For me this is a long term goal that is very easy to maintain, and my stomach is not happy when I go above my limit. On the other hand, if I need more fuel, my body will tell me and I will oblige
.
Is this a success story? I don’t know just make your own decision. I am happy and that is all that counts.
0 -
A battle between 2 beliefs on the forums tonight it seems... It's like bringing up politics or religion..0
-
I am 69 years old.
You really can't compare your caloric needs to the 25 year olds on here. They need to eat more than you do.0 -
In for the pics (and because I'm genuinely interested in seeing these).
(Maybe I just haven't been looking for them, but I honestly don't remember seeing many (any?) of them in my couple of years here.)
ETA: So far, I'm confused. I've only skimmed, but I didn't see any of the requested pics in the first four pages. Will check back later tonight though.0 -
I am 69 years old.
You really can't compare your caloric needs to the 25 year olds on here. They need to eat more than you do.
So you can only share your story if you're young.
Got it.0 -
1200 calories will probably produce weight loss in most people.
My questions is why? Why would I eat 1200 calories when I could eat 1900 and still lose weight? I know some people are okay with 1200 calories (by okay, I mean NOT miserable) but I know I wouldn't be. I'm pretty unhappy at 1900 actually...
Because some of us actually listened to all the eat more BS and it didn't work we just gained so we have gone back to what works. Do you not understand that different people have different calorie needs.?0 -
I am 69 years old.
You really can't compare your caloric needs to the 25 year olds on here. They need to eat more than you do.
So you can only share your story if you're young.
Got it.
That's not what I said. My point was that the caloric needs of a 69 year old woman at 4'11" are going to be much lower than a 25 year old who is 5'6". She was trying to make it sound like what was an acceptably low number for her was also acceptable for someone with much higher metabolic needs.
But go ahead. Misinterpret what I said. There's a lot of that going on around here anyway.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 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
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 973 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions
Do you Love MyFitnessPal? Have you crushed a goal or improved your life through better nutrition using MyFitnessPal?
Share your success and inspire others. Leave us a review on Apple Or Google Play stores!
Share your success and inspire others. Leave us a review on Apple Or Google Play stores!