Results with 1200 Calories

Let me tell you my story...

I started dieting after my son was born in 2003, I figured diet was simply "stop eating so much" and 1000 calories sounded like a good reasonable number to go by. I lost all of my baby weight, became weight fixated, and lost more weight. I went from the 1000 calories to anorexia (this doesn't happen to everyone, but let's face it eating 1200 calories is border line anorexia. After all 1000 calories is only 200 less!) I was super skinny, I had never been so skinny, 5'8" 115lbs. Eventually I ate normal again, because you know life is a good feeling, being alive and all that jazz.

2006 I decided at 5'8" 150lbs I needed to get my eating habits under control. I set my goal at 1200, and lost to 129lbs in a few months. I was constantly crabby, I had no energy, I was so ravenous that if I didn't get to eat my scheduled meal I would start biting heads off. I was a real peach to be around. However, I was super skinny!!! YAY! Guess what? Eventually I got sick of starving and ate normal again, and balooned to 150lbs in about a month.

2008 I started working out, still not eating enough but better 1400 calories with a good work out. I lost the weight pretty fast still, but always felt hungry! (I wonder why? I was burning all of my calories with daily calorie useage, and then I was working out and burning even more.) I eventually made my goal weight, and body fat, and I was very fit! However again, STARVING, again I ATE NORMAL again I GOT BACK TO 150lbs without blinking an eye.

This time? I am eating normal, feeding my metabolism, making smarter choices, working out like a champion. I would reach my "goal weight" in a few months with 1200 calories, have the worst attitude ever, and be starving 24/7. This time? I am eating 1700 to 2200 calories, the weight is coming off slow, my muscles are beautiful. I am not a complete *kitten* to be around, and am enjoying my work outs. I can eat whatever I want and not have my butt go up three sizes.

MY SUGGESTION? FEED YOUR BODY. WORK HARD. Or you can ruin your metabolism, and eat 1200 calories the rest of your life, or do it the other way. Oh yes, and lift heavy things up and down, you will not get bulky and your body will thank you for it.

I really wish people would stop with the extremist assumptions on either end. If you eat 1200 calories a day you're not going to gain weight (unless you're an outlier and 1200 calories is over your TDEE). You likely won't fall over and die instantly, either.

By the same token, just because you 'feel full' or 'feel perfectly healthy' on 1200 calories does NOT necessarily mean that you are eating enough for your body to perform optimally.

MOST people have a TDEE substantially over 1200 calories. In general you don't want to restrict calories too heavily because under a large deficit a greater proportion of the weight lost will be LBM rather than fat. That doesn't mean you won't look good after losing the weight, or that you'll suddenly be massively 'unhealthy', but lower BF% at identical weights tends to result in a more desirable physique (to a point, of course, some folks don't like the ultra lean look, but something like that isn't going to happen on accident).

If you're dead-set on eating so little, ensure that the vast majority of your food is either lean protein or non-starchy veggies. This will be most likely to satisfy your nutrition needs. Just focusing on calories is NOT optimal (look up nutrient deficiencies if you care to educate yourself on it a bit more).

Now if you're on a large cut, are getting adequate nutrition, and you're relatively sedentary, you'll probably be ok. The issue arises when you add in large amounts of exercise on top of a steep calorie deficit. Your energy needs increase with that kind of activity. If your spending all day on a treadmill and not eating enough, you're likely jacking your cortisol levels and doing lots of bad stuff to your system (http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html if you care)

I tend to think being active is better. I'm more impressed with the person training for a marathon or a mud run or a some such than the person who isn't really doing much. I think people (even very busy people) should be more active in general, and they need to eat enough to do so effectively.

The last point is flexibility. If you're eating 1200 calories a day, the vast majority of your daily intake is dictated by your nutritional needs. There's only so many times I can eat chicken or tilapia and mixed veggies before I want something different. Even if you're trying to eat 'clean' or whatever, such a low calorie count pretty much prevents eating an entire range of foods (those that are calorie dense...and yes there are plenty of calorie dense foods that people consider 'clean' or 'paleo' or insert_whatever_diet_paradigm_you_follow).

I like food, and I like calorie dense foods. I like being able to eat some of those calorie dense foods, even while cutting weight. In my case (and the case of many others), in order to do that and still meet my base level nutritional needs as well, 1200 calories a day just isn't enough. If it's enough (taking into account the points that I mentioned above) for you that's great, good luck to you. Making the argument, however, that you feel full or that you're perfectly healthy or that 'well your diary has mcdonald's so you're clearly unhealthier than me!', isn't enough to prove that you're following the right diet.

Similarly, stop jumping in with 'you're going to gain weight and/or be skinny fat and/or die!!!!!1!' on low intake without knowing the person's stats beforehand...it just makes people defensive and is counter productive to the discussion.


TL;DR

*sigh...I don't even know why I bother.

I really wish people would stop with the extremist assumptions on either end. If you eat 1200 calories a day you're not going to gain weight (unless you're an outlier and 1200 calories is over your TDEE). You likely won't fall over and die instantly, either.

By the same token, just because you 'feel full' or 'feel perfectly healthy' on 1200 calories does NOT necessarily mean that you are eating enough for your body to perform optimally.

MOST people have a TDEE substantially over 1200 calories. In general you don't want to restrict calories too heavily because under a large deficit a greater proportion of the weight lost will be LBM rather than fat. That doesn't mean you won't look good after losing the weight, or that you'll suddenly be massively 'unhealthy', but lower BF% at identical weights tends to result in a more desirable physique (to a point, of course, some folks don't like the ultra lean look, but something like that isn't going to happen on accident).

If you're dead-set on eating so little, ensure that the vast majority of your food is either lean protein or non-starchy veggies. This will be most likely to satisfy your nutrition needs. Just focusing on calories is NOT optimal (look up nutrient deficiencies if you care to educate yourself on it a bit more).

Now if you're on a large cut, are getting adequate nutrition, and you're relatively sedentary, you'll probably be ok. The issue arises when you add in large amounts of exercise on top of a steep calorie deficit. Your energy needs increase with that kind of activity. If your spending all day on a treadmill and not eating enough, you're likely jacking your cortisol levels and doing lots of bad stuff to your system (http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html if you care)

I tend to think being active is better. I'm more impressed with the person training for a marathon or a mud run or a some such than the person who isn't really doing much. I think people (even very busy people) should be more active in general, and they need to eat enough to do so effectively.

The last point is flexibility. If you're eating 1200 calories a day, the vast majority of your daily intake is dictated by your nutritional needs. There's only so many times I can eat chicken or tilapia and mixed veggies before I want something different. Even if you're trying to eat 'clean' or whatever, such a low calorie count pretty much prevents eating an entire range of foods (those that are calorie dense...and yes there are plenty of calorie dense foods that people consider 'clean' or 'paleo' or insert_whatever_diet_paradigm_you_follow).

I like food, and I like calorie dense foods. I like being able to eat some of those calorie dense foods, even while cutting weight. In my case (and the case of many others), in order to do that and still meet my base level nutritional needs as well, 1200 calories a day just isn't enough. If it's enough (taking into account the points that I mentioned above) for you that's great, good luck to you. Making the argument, however, that you feel full or that you're perfectly healthy or that 'well your diary has mcdonald's so you're clearly unhealthier than me!', isn't enough to prove that you're following the right diet.

Similarly, stop jumping in with 'you're going to gain weight and/or be skinny fat and/or die!!!!!1!' on low intake without knowing the person's stats beforehand...it just makes people defensive and is counter productive to the discussion.


TL;DR

*sigh...I don't even know why I bother.

For those of us who appreciate logic and awesomeness? Thanks for the link! I am going to read it when I have some time. Yay education!

*sigh...I don't even know why I bother.

Simple question... Why would anyone in their right mind eat below or at their BMR? BASAL METABOLIC RATE. This is the the number of calories you need if you are in a freaking coma. How the heck do you expect your body to properly function if you are eating that amount.


#science.getsome.

Your body uses it's fat stores!

Not for nutrients. Your body will eat muscle mass for nutrients you won't feed it. Only fat for energy.

You can pack plenty of nutrients into 1200 cals. I'm eating better than I ever have before.

No offense but your ticker tells us 1200 calories isn't working.

Simple question... Why would anyone in their right mind eat below or at their BMR? BASAL METABOLIC RATE. This is the the number of calories you need if you are in a freaking coma. How the heck do you expect your body to properly function if you are eating that amount.


#science.getsome.

Your body uses it's fat stores!

Not for nutrients. Your body will eat muscle mass for nutrients you won't feed it. Only fat for energy.

You can pack plenty of nutrients into 1200 cals. I'm eating better than I ever have before.

No offense but your ticker tells us 1200 calories isn't working.

Check her profile she's lost 6 lbs in just under 3 weeks.

Simple question... Why would anyone in their right mind eat below or at their BMR? BASAL METABOLIC RATE. This is the the number of calories you need if you are in a freaking coma. How the heck do you expect your body to properly function if you are eating that amount.


#science.getsome.

Your body uses it's fat stores!

Not for nutrients. Your body will eat muscle mass for nutrients you won't feed it. Only fat for energy.

You can pack plenty of nutrients into 1200 cals. I'm eating better than I ever have before.

No offense but your ticker tells us 1200 calories isn't working.

Check her profile she's lost 6 lbs in just under 3 weeks.

I have the 1200 calorie a day plan also. There's one thing it seems no one is taking into consideration - age. I'm 66 years old and I am losing an average of 1 lb a week. When I was 26 I went on a diet and lost 12 lbs in 3 weeks and didn't gain it back for 20 years. Well the metabolism and lifestyle have both changed since then. I really am pretty sedimentary but I am working out hard with Leslie Sansone 6 days a week from 30 - 60 minutes with stretchy bands as well as jumping on a mini trampoline. Still it is slow going. Oh I am not starving, in fact I eat way too many treats. I have lost 16 lbs so far and want to lose 22 more. Anyway, when you consider calories take into consideration the age you are. The older and less active you are the less the calories you can eat. If you did the questionaire when you joined they came up with the amount of calories for a reason and one was your age and another your activity level. To all of you who can eat 1700 or 1800 calories - You lucky dogs. I couldn't have cheesecake today but you could have.

UUURRRGG here we go...'you're starving at 1200'. What a load of cr**. I have tons of energy, I'm losing weight, my periods haven't stopped, I've not suddenly gained weight and you know what, I enjoy not eating f*** loads of food.

I'll see you at the finish line (I'll be there before you)!

I actually didn't say you were going to lose your period, and you obviously have a bad relationship with food if you thinking eating what your body NEEDS to simply maintain it's functioning level is "loads of food." Also it is starving yourself, the average body needs at least 1700 calories to function every day, anything less than that is starving it.

Do you expect your car to run without gas? Do you use your cell phone without charging it? Stop thinking of your body as a number on a scale, and start thinking of it as a machine that needs energy to function. The bottom line is losing weight at 1200 calories is not healthy because a) you aren't feeding it properly b) it's not ideal to live on 1200 calories for the rest of your life. The damage it does to your metabolism, and yes the potential harm it can do if your body goes into starvation mode and starts to consume it's own muscle. (Also your period doesn't need to stop for your body to be doing this, I was anorexic and my period never stopped not even when I was 115lbs so that's a mute point.) Also talking about muscle and starvation, guess what's a muscle in your body? YOUR HEART

1200 is sort of hilarious as a magic number. It's like people think it doesn't matter if they're 5' even or 6'2, 1.2K will magically expand or contract for you.

If you are tiny 1200 may be just what the doctor ordered. If you are tall it probably isn't. You might as well ask for 'looking for success stories of women who are five-foot three!'

I'm just about five-foot three...and it's been very successful for me. Yay, me! Five-foot-three works for me. It really really does.

I'm a 5'3" girl and my BMR is actually 1249 so 1200 REALLY IS my magic number.